What would a female eltingville club look like/if the main men themselves were women.. instead of men.
What would a female eltingville club look like/if the main men themselves were women.. instead of men.
What would a female eltingville club look like/if the main men themselves were women.. instead of men.
more sexist than their male counterparts surprisingly
Yeah for as often as men get pinned as the more violent of the two, women are much more callous to both their own kind and to the opposite sex.
>men get pinned
They're not pinned, they objectively are. Men are such fricking dindus about horrible shit they do and act like the petty shit women do is infinitely worse.
OP you already know the answer; Twitter.
Exhibit A, the female-dominated Harry Potter fandom.
What would the eltingville club say about JK Rowling and her twitter statements?
Would they support the death threats against her person for being a TERF, or would they agree with her because transwomen WNBW?
They always struck me as the "Harry Potter was never good and are laughing at the fandom eating itself alive" types.
They would only care to the extent that any controversy prevents more content from being made which they would b***h about relentlessly anyway. Then again if we're going by a consistent timeline rather than a sliding one they'd probably would have been out of the age range where Harry Potter was really influential and thus would see all of this as baby shit for a lesser fandom. All the shitflinging would be fodder for them to gloat about how this new generation of superficial "fake" fans are destroying themselves over slop while patting themselves on the back for being true connoisseurs of "real" fantasy. Meanwhile Bill and Josh would be crafting their next death threat to someone for their minor role in the latest remake they complained about but still went to watch anyway.
>any controversy prevents more content from being made
Yeah but this would be less content made by women. Who complains about that?
>women are biggest obstacle to content made by women
Sad.
Harry Potter is even a fun children's series. I wouldn't be against my middle school aged kid reading it. Women are destroying even works which are perfectly alright with their demented takes.
>women are biggest obstacle to content made by women
Ironically enough JK knew this herself back in the day and tried to hide her identity as a woman so boys wouldn't turn away from buying her books but sadly it grew a large woman fanbase anyway.
The thing about being a woman writing for women is that you quickly end up having a more volatile fanbase, men won't care if you get caught saying "I hate trannies" but women certainly will, and sadly for JK by the time she might have realized going public and reaffirming her left wing woman fanbase was a mistake it was too late.
Never ever appeal to women, it ends in disaster.
The sad thing is that Rowling wasn't ever even writing for women. She was always writing for children, even now, her Ickabog books are literally for elementary school children. Harry Potter has a target audience of 10 and above, literal middle school kids. For a children's series, it's perfectly fine.
It's the fanbase that never matured.
>The thing about being a woman writing for women is that you quickly end up having a more volatile fanbase
So like most fandoms nowadays? Because one of the reasons why fandoms as general rule become so shit is because they get feminized
But also the female-dominated Twilight fandom.
A girl in my class was a Twilight fan. She was bullied so hard for liking Twilight that she disavowed it completely and became a rabid Twilight hater. She would mock people online for liking Twilight.
Over the years she got fat and started identifying as non-binary. Now she spends her time declaring transwomen are women and defending Netflix casting choices over twitter.
Why do women cave in so easily?
>She was bullied so hard for liking Twilight that she disavowed it completely and became a rabid Twilight hater
What's wrong with women?
Women are herd creatures, anon. Literal sheeple. They are incapable of rational thought.
See all the "Are we dating the same guy" groups on facebook. One particularly vile or jealous woman starts shit, the rest of the group starts bleating. They don't bother to check for themselves.
Women are incapable of feeling genuine love or even interest for something. They follow the herd, and that's it.
I take it you happen to be of the Celibate persuasion, mayhap involuntarily?
>someone points out women are dumb idiots who act against their own professed interests
>I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-INCEL!!1!
like clockwork lmao
Ok incel
No but seriously, why are women so incapable of defending what they profess to love? Why can't a girl defend her interests even in the face of bullying? Should I be worried about my wife divorcing me if her female coworkers suddenly started talking shit about me?
I get regular sex and I agree with him
They’re women, they don’t want to kill you because then you can’t suffer more for their amusement.
>cross
>troony flag
still, I think anti-troony women are funny, it's women who supported them
Yep, it was all fun and games until transpeople started to beat women in women's sports and jump above them on the oppression ladder. They responded by either becoming TERFs or declaring themselves "nonbinary" or whatever the frick so they too could have their own special flag and declare themselves part of LGBT, just like the trannies.
stupid games
Egocom too
I think the funniest thing about this shit is she wasn't even a fricking TERF she just said "Gosh biological women have biological women specific problems and I feel it's silly to think otherwise." she wasn't even against transwomen until they went fricking insane and attacked her repeatedly until she just said "Okay actually you know what frick you."
>LGBT Movment: "Trans people experience struggles unique to their lives."
>Jk Rowling: "Cis women and Trans women experience unique struggles".
Apparently these are different things?
there's no difference between the "two"
Most of those attacking her are biological males.
Transwomen are more violent than both men and women, as they have both the aggression of males and the lack of social inhibition of females
The whole JK Rowling fiasco is always baffling to me, she goes from being a rock star for unfrickable millennial twittertards for her braindead british lefty takes for years to being public enemy number one to them for some random tweet she made that expressed an opinion most of them agree with anyway but worded in a way that confused them.
How many men want to smell their feet it's disturbing
I am not part of the Eizouken fandom, so I wouldn't know if you're serious about there being a insane amount of foot porn for them, but in the wild I have not seen a single piece of foot porn for any of them.
No, actually, we know that whenever women get power they generally tend to be more violent than men in the same positions.
>No, actually, we know that whenever women get power they generally tend to be more violent than men in the same positions.
I do not think this is true, anon
Obviously, thinking is not your strong trait
That is not an argument
Please explain how you came to 'know' that
why don't they want to smell mine?
Because you're a man.
Look up war statistics of women rulers and childhood maltreatment statistics.
Women are almost always more violent by some or a large margin than men when in the same position of power.
Men are characterized as more violent because of perception, men have the physicality to unleash violence and even then most hold back, domestic abuse is usually a slap not a murder, women when unleashing violence go all out they just can't as often but when they have the power to, oh boy.
>women when unleashing violence go all out they just can't as often but when they have the power to, oh boy
This, from what I've noticed it's almost entirely a lack of ability, not desire.
>ancient female monarchs represent the average woman
>waging war is the same thing as petty violence and aggression
Anon
>childhood maltreatment
Misconstrued data. Single mothers are five times as numerous as single fathers, and if you were to compare the abuse by percentage rather than saying "women hurt their kids more", child abuse is still much much more likely to come from men.
>No you don't get it only the forms of violence with an over representation of men count as REAL violence!
Not even incels have stooped this low to frame women of doing bad shit.
Pic related, never reply to my posts ever again if you're just going to throw out entire forms of abuse just because you need to convince yourself men are evil, if you're just going to do that go to /lgbt/ or /cm/ if you're one of thsoe "heteropessimist" women who hates herself for not being able to force herself to dyke out, but don't come over here to get into arguments to rationalize your hatred of men.
Anon
If you compared automobile deaths to 'drinking poison' deaths you would find that cars kill way more people than poison
It would be tremendously stupid to pretend that cars are "more dangerous" than drinking poison
It's all about population. How many people actually drank poison?
How many single men have kids to beat?
You literally just do not understand how to interpret statistics anon
You're using rhetorical devices and false equivalency in an attempt to deflect from the fact that statistically in any cases where women have power over others they have always been proven to be more violent, the question isn't
>Are men or women more dangerous
That's moving the goal post, the question is clearly, which is more violent?
Women clearly are and that is a undeniable fact. Stop playing around.
We're done here.
Are you fricking baiting me
How are you this stupid
I'll lay it all out for you
Argument is
>when women get power
Okay, 'women'. All women. So we are in fact talking about "the average woman" attaining power.
>female monarchs are not a good example of the average woman who "got power"
>war is rarely a result of personal aggression and has much more to do with politics
So the queen war shit is worthless, moving on
>women abuse their kids more than men
No, there are more woman who have the opportunity
Men in the same 'position of power' are known to abuse their children more, not just more violently. More.
>Men in the same 'position of power' are known to abuse their children more, not just more violently. More
Statistics disagree with you.
>No, there are more woman who have the opportunity
Not necessarily, these stats got taken from the OJJ a US gov department. 77% were parents, they're fairly evenly distributed.
>So the queen war shit is worthless, moving on
It isn't, it's a good indicator of how women in power behave.
>How are you this stupid
I'm not the one in open denial.
Just say you hate men and frick off, it's ok to blindly hate a group for any reason but stop trying to justify it with a pointless tangent, more over if you just admit men are more dangerous but women are more violent we can both end things right now and no one loses.
Just take the L dude.
>statistics disagree
Link them then.
Queens are not a good example of an average woman attaining power anymore than kings are representative of men. It's all about how they get the power and why. Being born of a select group of noble families is not fricking average moron
I love men, and if there really was a 'gender war' I would defend my own fricking gender, moron. I don't see why I have to pin shit on women to do it. It's not like I would beat my fricking kids
>I love men, and if there really was a 'gender war' I would defend my own fricking gender, moron. I don't see why I have to pin shit on women to do it. It's not like I would beat my fricking kids
Because reality is not about what is best, but indisputable truth.
>I love men
Maybe in the way incels love women, only when they can find ten seconds to fantasize about their idolized image before going into a rage over women not meeting those standards.
>Link them then.
OJJDP Statistical Briefing Book on 2020 studies of perpetrators. Released on 4/18/2022
For 2021 in which women committed TWICE as many abuses towards children as men see Statistas collection on it.
Where the frick are you getting twice. I only see 52% women.
77% were parents
Meaning 23% were not parents, but teachers or relatives or other. Not that 23% were single parents.
The study doesn't seem to tell you what relationships were additionally correlated to the gender of the perpetrator, meaning it's impossible to actually tell whether single moms account for a large proportion of that number.
Something around 30% of all children live with single parents. Single mothers account for most of that.
Considering as well that single parents are known to be more abusive than married couples, it leaves just how much of that 77% are single parents completely unanswered.
>52%
2021.
If I could write that in all caps I would. The 52% is in 2020.
>The study doesn't seem to tell you what relationships were additionally correlated to the gender of the perpetrator, meaning it's impossible to actually tell whether single moms account for a large proportion of that number.
I would not say that is an excuse, you're right, that statistic is a dead end in so far as your need to see if single parent households contribute to things, but even assuming that it is single mother households that cannot just discredit things, single mothers are not inherently going to abuse their children, and to just go "It has to be socio economic factors from personal conditions" is not an excuse, only 21% were black, a larger number were white, although there are less black people in the USA at only 13%, but that isn't the point the point is that just going "The household is unstable" does not feign having to be an abusive parent to the point of ending up contributing to a statistic.
2021 says 51.7% women
Which one are you looking at, I'm looking at the 2021 one published in 2023
"Child maltreatment 2021"
The one that is also by the Office of the Administration for Children & Families? That is the first one that pops up on Google for me.
Cause that one is even worse, it confirms the Statista numbers that I wasn't certain of the source for, but it openly states
>Mothers
>210,746
>Fathers
>132,363
That is a rate of twice as much child abuse as men.
Actually it's only about 60% more.
https://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/documents/cb/cm2021.pdf
this one.
Also, read this
https://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1825&context=honorsprojects#:~:text=In%20terms%20of%20perpetrators%2C%20females,convicted%20of%20CSA%20than%20females.
>However, this pattern of mothers appearing to show higher rates of abuse may be a
methodological anomaly, since when accounting to the absence of fathers in the home, fathers
are equally likely, or even more likely, to be the perpetrators of CPA (Nobes & Smith, 2000). In
fact, Nobes and Smith demonstrated that children were less likely to live in homes with their
fathers, and after controlling for father absence, children living with both parents were 50% more
likely to receive physical abuse from their father (Nobes & Smith, 2000). Hence, the lower rate
of CPA from fathers may reflect their absence from the home as opposed to an actual decreased
risk for CPA perpetration.
>https://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/documents/cb/cm2021.pdf
Thats the same one I just posted.
Where are you getting the 60% more from, is it from the whole "123 is 58% of 210?" Thing?
Because arbitrary numbers aside, the whole thing shows women still push out men by far in regards to being child abusers.
>Hence, the lower rate of CPA from fathers may reflect their absence from the home as opposed to an actual decreased risk for CPA perpetration.
You're telling me that these fathers chose to walk out on their kids in place of beating them--
And that doesn't show self control compared to women?
Don't get me wrong I'm not saying they clearly aren't shitty fathers they are, but going
>Well if men had stayed there they'd be bad parents.
Is a cope when dealing with material reality.
I would also point you to the constant "Parents of both sexes" in multiple statistics wherein it stays at a similar number to the men, meaning that the men who are compliant in the abuse with the mothers stays at 100k, similar to the hovering at 100k figures for men only.
the 51.7 refers to the same statistic that was 52 the previous year.
Look in the same spot. It's total abuse done by that gender, as opposed to gender of the parent of the child.
60% was just basic math
132000 * 1.6 = 208000
>self control
Who the hell mentioned that
Accounting for the amount of fathers in positions of power (I.E. making note that some leave and that there are far fewer single ones), it is likely that men will abuse that power more.
We are talking about the average woman being more likely to abuse positions of power, which is just not supported by this kind of data. In fact, it might suggest otherwise.
We are both men
>We are talking about the average woman being more likely to abuse positions of power, which is just not supported by this kind of data. In fact, it might suggest otherwise.
How exactly is a maternal figure not a position of power?
It is. Were you even reading the thread?
women don't love men
>automobile deaths
Are you seriously calling accidents acts of violence?
Male fantasy.
In what fricking way?
This would drastically change the ending of the story. How could you even do a women’s version of bills rant at the end?
something something transwomen are women men bad casting black people for white roles is perfectly fine and only orange man racists disagree
Eltingville was a critique of nerd culture
Exactly, just like twitter rants. "END THE MALE GAZE" "Your fave is PROBLEMATIC" "Netflix director WANTED to cast ugly people on purpose in her adaptation to SUBVERT EXPECTATIONS" aren't critiques of nerd culture? Something being a "critique" doesn't mean it's correct or valid.
Idk there’s definitely a more clever way to do than that
>"YOU'RE ALL AGAINST ME, ALL OF YOU! YOU TRANNIES!"
Didn’t someone already make designs for them? I remember a thread from a few weeks ago. They were pretty good.
>ALL MEN BAD!
>I love men
Nothing in this thread lends to that idea. I just came in here because I was bored and you two are RPing the characters
They kill each other over Hetalia porn or something. I don't know.
In advance:
2022 statistics, published in 2024 by the Office of the Administration for Children & Families.
At 125k(M) and 191k(F), it is vaguely close to the 100k and 200k stat of Statista for 2021.
Why are we still here arguing about this frick
I thought we got the data on this years ago.
Men are more physically aggressive, women more socially. I.e. guys are more likely to punch each other in the face, girls are more likely to try to character assassinate one another.
Petty physical violence where men are the highest perpetrators is the only violence that counts as real violence chud, read the thread.
no idea why you buttholes are still arguing, neither of you will reproduce. You're acting as if random data has any bearing on what YOU do.
Oh you don't get it this conversation isn't about having children or how to treat them properly and creating a better world for it, that would actually be productive, no, we're arguing over whether or not reducing these children to statistics and using their trauma for our advantage can help our personal sexes seem like the better person and prove the opposite sex is subhuman.
Hopefully something like this;
Hell yea
they look like they'd suck the skin off your dick.
They would probably want to but each are probably too busying flicking it to BL to probably do anything about their desires. Each probably flicks it differently based on personality, I reckon.
desu, they all look like their pussies be stanking
That good pussy stank be kino af tho bro, nothing gets that test pumping to your cum factory like pussy stank.
Anal stank though no.
bro pussy stank is fricking rank as shit.
This one asian chick i was fricking with had her shit stinking up. i had to soldier through that shit and even then i only lasted 3 minutes down there before i said "I'm so fricking turned on by you, i just wanna frick you" to get out of being down there any longer
what is this? Is there more on these characters?
There's some stuff.
who draws theses
some anon. the same who writes the catgirl comic, I think.
that anon needs to expose their identity so i can read more
Aggie runs a semi-popular fan account on Twitter. She's single-handedly responsible for making over 30 callout posts on other K-pop accounts. Eventually she receives backlash due to her fanfics containing extremely lewd yaoi of underage anime boys. This leads to someone leaking screenshots of her saying various slurs on her discord account, causing her to delete all social media.
Billie has an alternate NSFW account featuring her weird fetishes (which are also present in her SFW stuff, though masked under the guise of the horror genre). She enjoys the success but wishes people cared more about her non-porn work more.
Liz starts out small, but eventually manages to find a company willing to sponsor her. She somehow gains a following of right-wing anime fans, which she starts to pander to more. This leads to the company dropping her, causing her to pivot into marketing herself as a "cancelled vtuber." This lasts for about 2 years until she's forced to get a real job.
Gwen, despite her age, has been online way longer any of her other friends. Her parents were either busy or absent for most of her childhood, causing her to crave attention from others on the internet. She ends up starting a cosplay OnlyFans
"She ends up starting a cosplay OnlyFans"
that shit probably only got like 4 subscribers
Billi a cute! CUTE!
>addicted to energy drinks
She also seems like she’d be the type to wonder why her stomach hurts all the time but not reflect on her diet.
>female eltingville club
STAHP!
I want to believe that she cosplayed as Mr. Popo
>tfw the blondie's into some dark dude
Ruined this whole thing for me somehow. That being said the brown girl's still my fave of the bunch.
HELL YEAH!
That's what the frick i'm talking about
I think the artist drew a few things of the blonde chick on /aco/? Like, one I think the blonde girl is going to town on herself and the other is of her with like a kinda sleezy looking guy.
I want that white b***h.
i like'em short and blonde.
I'd have to go digging, but what kind of sleazy? Like grimey hair and a leather jacket sleazy or fat nerd sleazy?
Like this guy, I think
>mean
Hey now, sleazy is hot to many, many people. One man's trash is another woman's pleasure
just remembered the comic is called Dashr U. searching the archive for that will probably help you find the old threads and what you're looking for.
Found the jilling pic and some bonuses, really great stuff.
Oh hey it's me minus some excess flab. About as much of a stache as I can grow though.
>Found the jilling pic
nice, love a good jilling pic.
>some bonuses
anything worth sharing/able to be posted on a blue board?
No kek, one's basically the same but with undie huffing while the other's a pic of
from the creator herself.
>a kinda sleezy looking guy
mean
i want her so bad.
real raw, no condom, i'd pay for the child support and college fund.
let the tomboy get her associates degree before putting an unplanned baby in her, anon.