Transcription - Me seeing a 21 year old influencer buy her third house while I can't even afford a sunscreen
The woman in the image is Katrina Kaif, a British actor who primarily work in Bollywood films
Welcome to femcel memes. A place where anybody can post memes that fit the vibe.
Warning: We have a tendency to post things that may at times come from a self-deprecating perspective or things that are funny coming from another queer person. This space will always be a safe place for transfems, non-binary people, people with a feminine gender expression (GNC or otherwise) or anybody else in the LGBT Community to come together and share about our experiences but we truly feel that laughing about the sometimes silly and embarrassing parts the queer experience can help bring us together. We never mean offense or harm in anything posted but rather they are satirical takes coming from queer people.
A note about 'Egging': Our community is mostly made up of transfem individuals, and as such most memes posted will be posted with the intention of having a transfem perspective. However, regardless of gender identity, all feminine presenting individuals are welcome here. Whether that means you're NB, GNC, transmasc, or any other identity, you are welcome here. It is not our intention or goal to invalidate these identities. If something makes you uncomfortable, please feel free to report the post and I will address your concerns on an individual level. For more information regarding the problems with 'Egg-culture', please see Here.
Love Y'all and thank you for following this community
you think taking away the influencer would solve the problem? if it wasn't influencer A, it would be influencer B-- what's the difference? there are countless other things one can devote time and attention to. it's the consumer who chooses to look at influencer bullshit.
so pretty much, yea. we're really going to blame the consumer on this one.
laughs in specifically addictive design patterns.
would you blame an addict for being addicted?
the problem is corporations. always is. always has been.
if drug traffickers (aka corporations) were the only ones in control of anything, then we would ALL be addicted. we're not.
you can't escape the fact that at some point decisions are made by the people who then become victims. the question is what drives people to make that poor initial decision?
again (and again and again)--herd mentality, FOMO, whatever it is that drives people to eat shit
take away the addictive thing, people will find something else to become dependent on
And why do people seek the short term high of addictions? Bad shit in their lives they have no other way to cope with. There will always be some amount of bad shit in people's lives, but capitalism adds a whole lot of pain and suffering. Poverty is correlated with substance abuse for a reason. Even if you aren't poor, you need to deal with alienation from the results of your work, lack of free time, and a patriarchal culture that oppresses women directly and keeps men from working through their feelings safely.
It always comes back to capitalism and conservatism. Individual choices can certainly help, but blaming the individual is an idea that serves the status quo.
the question you have raised is about moral responsibility - who is more responsible for the shitty behavior of the influencer, the influencer doing their behavior, or the consumer who subscribes and consumes their content?
I don't think there is any question that the consumer's views and subscriptions provide the basis of the success or failure of an influencer - and in that sense, what consumers tend to view controls what influencers succeed and fail.
But consumers are not choosing to view content in a completely neutral context, i.e. they aren't looking at influencer A or B on their merits or behavior alone, instead there are all kinds of ways that consumers are directed to view some content and not other content: SEO manipulation, the algorithm, etc. all change what consumers even see and interact with.
So no, I don't think it's the consumer primarily responsible for driving traffic to one kind of influencer or another.
And regardless, I think it's the influencer who is most morally responsible for their behavior regardless of the audience that might motivate them.
Finally, I think you have ignored the most important factor in deciding who succeeds or fails: the corporate platform and how it prioritizes one kind of content over another. Neither the influencer nor the consumer are primarily in control of where attention is placed, the platform which manipulates and controls what content shows up in search and recommendation feeds are primarily in control.
of course the influencer (or whoever is paying/controlling them)is in control of their own content, actions, behavior--and yes the entire machine is designed to manipulate behavior
but are you looking at influencers, giving them traffic? i can tell you i'm not. so what happened?
we go back to my first comment-- herd mentality, FOMO, whatever it is that drives people to eat shit.
influencers are a symptom of a problem. taking them away doesn't solve the problem, which is societal. before influencers it was reality tv. before reality tv it was jerry springer. before that--shitty daytime soap operas. and on and on, all the way back to ancient greek drama. sorry, i don't have the solution, other than to say maybe the people perpetuating this shit deserve a little of that criticism, ridicule, mockery too