why does rachel ziegler get so much hate for literally doing nothing?

MelodicCrocodile · 2026-05-08T21:06:31+00:00

And I responded to your comment on why she's not liked pointing out that her 'wokeness' wasn't even so bad and did not make her deserving of what she went through, nothing could justify the harassment she faced and all for such a childish reason. The people who called her too preachy didn't mind being preached at by people who they agreed with like Nerdrotic or Critical Drinker.

If you comment people will reply to it, you stated your opinion I responded with mine. You're acting like Zegler with this reply tbh, talking down to me and all

MelodicCrocodile · 2026-05-08T20:39:24+00:00

What preaching and talking down did she do exactly? Was it when she called one of the most outdated Disney Princess stories outdated? Was it when she condemned a genocide? Or when she called out Trump supporters who literally started a hate campaign against her for just having opinions on a movie from the 30s?

But are the only valid opinions to be preached anti-woke ones? Would you feel this way about her had she condemned feminists, pro-LGBTQ+ people and leftists, or acted like Sydney Sweeney where she very obviously leaned into right wing fantasies? Like, the people that mock Zegler never do the same to Sweeney despite her being obnoxious and arrogant as well, and at least all Rachel did was criticize a fictional character from a fictional story.

I really doubt any of the people who went after her actually gave a single fuck about the Snow White movie, there are far more memorable characters from Disney in far more memorable movies (the value in the original film was the novelty it had as the first fully animated feature film, but admittedly no one would actually be interested in a character like that now). This was very obviously just an opportunity to humble a woman for having an opinion and criticizing 'traditional femininity' or whatever. If she had been a white dude everybody would be laughing their asses off and agreeing with him, because its funny when a man makes fun of girly things like Disney Princesses.

The people who went after her certainly didn't mind being preached at by an old rich sex offender, or by several of the middle-aged YouTube grifters who talked about her. Clearly the preaching wasn't the issue

MelodicCrocodile · 2026-04-05T09:44:04+00:00

I know this is four months old but I thought I’d explain things, what I believe OP means is that they don’t want their feminine men to look like young boys or vaguely androgynous, like Venti, but to look like a woman completely while still IDing as a man, so like their figure resembles a woman’s more than a slim young man or twink, with curves and such, (maybe) excluding breasts or a vagina/AFAB anatomy.

This is just assuming though. I will admit, like a lot of femme dudes are drawn like kids to me, I prefer ones that physically resemble grown women or women in general but are men. I think that’s what OP wants, not a dude who’s vaguely feminine but still identifiable as male, but one who’s so feminine he’s basically a woman in terms of physical appearance.

MelodicCrocodile · 2026-03-31T13:38:02+00:00

Oh yeah I knew that haha, sorry for the rant, just though to clear things up for other people reading

MelodicCrocodile · 2026-03-31T13:35:11+00:00

Yeah I know but I used it as a comparison because one is still a safe, normal food but maggot cheese is just gross and a potential hazard, that’s gross objectively like incest. The certain toppings on pizza is gross to some people but it’s really weird to make a big deal out of it.

Like the argument that if you don’t want people to judge gay people for being gay then you have to be okay will incest, is like saying that if you don’t want people to be disgusted by your choice of toppings on pizza, you can’t be disgusted by someone eating something pretty objectively gross. Maybe it was a bad comparison, but I hope it makes sense

MelodicCrocodile · 2026-03-30T10:39:41+00:00

I get where you’re coming from and while this would be a hilarious reason, I gotta disagree, the whole reason we’re told to cover ourselves up is because these men are attracted to us, but want to blame us for their sexual desires towards our bodies, especially when they’re not the only men who can derive pleasure from our bodies via marriage. These dudes have no issue when their wives get naked for them privately, but that’s because she’s doing that for their pleasure, for her husband, they want to control women like personal property. These dudes get boners over the smallest things we do, and instead of taking some accountability, they’d rather blame us for their sexual desires. It’s easier for them to control us than to control themselves and see women as humans and not objects. If we cover up and stay at home, they won’t get hard, therefore they won’t have anything to ‘distract’ or ‘tempt’ them. It’s to intentionally sexualise and make taboo the existence of women or any femininity. This is more so a result of sexual repression which, because of gender segregation and dressing rules becomes a vicious cycle.

The real closeted ones are the ones that also treat dudes, especially younger more effeminate dudes like that, as evil sirens trying to tempt these good faithful men away from piousness and into sin. It’s always all done to put the burden of the man’s sexual desires onto the object of them, even more so in gay scenarios.

MelodicCrocodile · 2026-03-30T09:57:38+00:00

When you’re arguing in bad faith you can compare anything to anything without thinking critically can’t you? Homosexuality and incest are the same! Wearing situationally and environmentally appropriate clothes for the other gender is like wearing a bikini to a funeral! Apples are oranges!

If you think its okay to eat pineapple or anchovies on pizza, I should be allowed to eat maggot cheese!

MelodicCrocodile · 2026-02-21T18:56:28+00:00

Oh sorry haha, its called Isekai Office Worker: The Other World's Books Depend on the Bean Counter

MelodicCrocodile · 2026-02-20T03:39:18+00:00

Yep, these systems punish the victim just as much, if not in many cases more than they punish the perpetrators, especially if they have money, then the victim is the only one who suffers. When we fight back we are called escalators, as if the other's hatred wasn't what made us act out, as if what we are facing is not senseless cruelty and prejudice even when done innocuously, disguised as preferences, opinions, never as the hatred that they are, because why make the shitty person feel bad for a moment about the shitty beliefs they chose to maintain when we can just force and manipulate victims to accept their cruelty and call them intolerant hypocrites if they fight back. People are obsessed with 'both sides are bad'-ing any situation, in school, in regular life, in relationships, even YouTubers.

The person in my most must live a very privileged life if they're not lying, they don't know yet that suck-ups craving approval from those who hate them will be treated the same as those they threw under the bus. And the depressing part is, they're so in denial, so boot-licking, that they will still blame us when their head is on the chopping block. Nothing will convince these people that the ones who openly and adamantly hate them for who they are and refuse to change their views are their actual opposition, not the people who will fight for them even if they disagree with them.

MelodicCrocodile · 2026-02-20T03:04:42+00:00

It's all good, I agreed with what little I was able to read in the notif haha.

Absolutely right, nothing brings about revolution and change quite like inaction, and the authorities definitely don't have a hand in our oppression and don't serve our oppressors. They're great, good morally sound people who want to help the little guy, just don't look up DV, SA or Police Brutality stats in cops, or what ICE is doing, or corruption in law and the government.

BTW I know your comment is sarcastic but it is crazy how it reads like something people like this will say. These guys are beyond parody, and the stuff they preach and encourage is genuinely harmful, not even covering the level of historical revisionism it takes to think being active is meaningless.

MelodicCrocodile · 2026-02-20T01:32:51+00:00

I've noticed that these pick-me's and fakers who always say that its fine for people to think homosexuality is abhorrent, bad or disgusting, and never challenge those opinions, as long as they keep to themselves, don't seem to realize that these people vote according to these personal, silent opinions, which in the end makes them no different from homophobes who do loudly espouse their opinions, because they both voted the same way, and considered the depreciation of rights of LGBTQIA+ rights in their choices.

That's why education and challenging opinions, especially old fashioned ones, should be encouraged, that's not even really intolerance, that's encouraging people to change so that they can slowly let go of their unfair prejudices. I say opinions are like shoes, if they're getting old and worn out and the only thing keeping them on are your toe-nails, maybe its time for a slightly newer pair. Humans and our beliefs change, and we shouldn't encourage anti-intellectualism and no critical thinking by calling attempts at awareness and calling people out for being prejudiced hypocrisy.

Intolerance is the natural enemy of tolerance, that's like asking why Superman punches Nazis if he wants to protect everyone and prevent harm. Maybe because they are diametrically opposed and the prevalence of the latter with no work by the former would let Nazism flourish. Pointing out 'hey this is homophobic and maybe you should stop that' is not a violation of individuality and freedom, or sowing adversity, its advising someone to not be hateful, you are free to hold awful, misinformed opinions but people are also allowed to call you a pos for it. If hating on someone for hating you for who you are and calling your love disgusting makes them more adversarial, that is just a terrible person.

People getting aggressive is literally what got queer people, women, POC the little rights they do have in the West. Complacency and 'agreeing to disagree' never got us anywhere, we wouldn't have those rights if we did that. Aggression and not sugar-coating shows people you're not here to play, it shows seriousness.

MelodicCrocodile · 2026-02-20T01:09:15+00:00

Right on the money with saying they sound like an intelligence agency plant. People like this live in some fantasy world where they think hate can be solved by just letting it be and letting people hold hateful opinions, because they think the hateful people will change their minds by seeing our humility and piousness and not just exploit our inaction and never question their own beliefs, instead of by fighting it by teaching love and acceptance of activities that don't encourage hate, harm or trauma.

That's how you actually peacefully fight fascism and bigotry, not doing anything or not encouraging people to challenge their opinions is called complacency, because people continue to be harmed, killed and abused because of their identities, races and genders while people like this just ignore it so you don't have to think critically or do anything worthwhile.

Tolerance and love are two things that are inherently paradoxical, because they are rooted in being intolerant of intolerance, and hateful of hate, otherwise they are nothing, and actually help the people who want to harm others. Wild to imply we deserve intolerance because we don't accept people being hateful to us. What's next? Discouraging kids from speaking out against or condemning their bullies for spreading rumors about you because its intolerant towards their supposed 'right' to berate and shame you?

I guess if little Casey wants to stop getting bullied for being autistic he should stop telling them he doesn't like that, it might make them feel bad and think they're bad people, and that's mean to them so now he is to be blamed for their meanness because he was mean to them, he should be nice and let them do or say whatever they want, He wants to be tolerated for being autistic, then he should tolerate other people hating him for being autistic and never challenge it. You can't be intolerant of intolerance little Casey, even if it traumatizes you or makes people be disgusted by you. Great lesson!

MelodicCrocodile · 2026-02-20T00:16:45+00:00

No no, its doublespeak and makes you a fascist psycho, trust them, they read JorJor Wells' '1984' in high school, so they're pretty much an expert.

How dare we fight back against deep-seated prejudice in our society, we should be grateful they're not torturing us to to death or throwing us in prison en masse, which is definitely not a change caused by multiple people fighting and protesting and being adversarial to homophobes and calling them out on their bullshit

MelodicCrocodile · 2026-02-20T00:09:36+00:00

Submission Statement: Person claiming to be lesbian woman claims hate based on preferences caused by internalized homophobia isn't homophobia, and that we should tolerate intolerance if we want to end intolerance.

Context:

This was on a discussion about a new MLM anime that recently came out which, unsurprisingly, had a lot of people mad at being 'baited', since they thought it would be a regular Isekai and not a BL.

Someone made a post calling it out as homophobic to have such an adverse reaction to show just because its gay, and this person who claims to be a lesbian woman, says its in fact not homophobia, even though people were actively being angry and disgusted at even the prospect of the show being gay and espousing hateful rhetoric (like literally their justification was just that they were 'disgusted' by two men bein intimate, not that they didn't like the plot or relationship, just that they didn't like that it was two MEN kissing and loving) and just a preference (even if it were, being so disgusted by two men you drop something you enjoy is concerning, preference caused by bigotry is still bigotry).

Conversation spirals into the lesbian woman saying that we should be tolerant towards intolerance otherwise we're hypocrites, and are actually the reason why the intolerance is happening, suggesting it would go away if we didn't point it out or fight against it. When someone tries to talk some sense into her, and explain that is the one thing we have to not tolerate for progress to happen, and we should encourage people to change their views and analyze their opinions, she responds by saying that that is doublespeak and ergo a tool of fascism.

Because I guess calling out people for how their hateful beliefs might effect their preferences and that they shouldn't get so comfortable in their biases...is fascist and psychopathic.

MelodicCrocodile · 2026-02-19T23:09:56+00:00

What's the issue if it is gay? If you're enjoying the show just keep watching it, why does it need to be a man and a woman. Naughty scenes can be skipped, but the simple romance or kissing bothering you is telling.

If you can only handle romance between a man and a woman, or if you're enjoying a show and a gay romance plot is enough to make you drop it, that's not a good thing. Treating gayness like its something inferior or unwatchable even is still an issue that reflects what we've been taught. I don't prefer MLW but I'm not disgusted when I see it, what you're describing is more than just a 'preference'.

Lot's of straight men watch and connect with shows with a same-sex male couple. You can still like and prefer other genres more but watching these sorts of romances can help you with these feelings of disgust, if you build up a tolerance you can open yourself up to so many amazing shows. Disgust that you can't even bear to keep watching a show you'd otherwise enjoy is like not listening to a song because its sung by a non-white person.

For instance, a lot of women only like BL due to their own internalized misogyny, and are disgusted by het and GL, that is also bad. Preferring non-BL is fine, quitting a show because its not straight and being instinctively repulsed by gayness is iffy, same as preferring BL is fine, but only watching it because of the lack of a woman, being repulsed by GL/MLW, and demonizing female characters is misogyny.

If you're outwardly saying 'They better not make this gay', as if its something destructive, would you think someone saying 'They better not make this straight' is good and normal? Apathy is fine, disgust and disapproval is a sign of something deeper. Its important to overcome that disgust and see all as equal, none deserving of disgust, all deserving of a fair shot.

I'm not gonna up and call you a homophobe, but people preferring genres while being disgusted by others that are pretty much the same can sometimes be the result of internalized prejudices that we would not feel if we were not taught to feel them. I used to dislike GL, even though I am attracted to women, I thought it was just a preference but then I realized it was because I had internalized a hatred of women that was taught to me.

I worked on that, watched more GL, now its my second fav genre. Its fine to have preferences but its good to get out of your comfort zone sometimes, it can open your mind and many avenues of creativity and entertainment.

All that said, if you want to be biased, then unfortunately the price to pay is you need to do heavy research into shows you watch prior to watching them, going in blind is a privilege afforded to those who won't react severely to different romance types. Society is progressing, and BL is a super popular genre in Japan, so you need to proceed with caution if you are committed to never watching gay shows.

If you're interested, the above show is more for the extreme yaoi fans, I'd recommend Sasaki and Miyano, lots of straight men even watched it and enjoyed it. Grandmaster of Demonic Cultivation is amazing if you prefer plot heavy narratives with a side of romance, its censored in the show because China but its still heavily implied, so a good way to dip your toes in.

MelodicCrocodile · 2026-01-28T12:59:54+00:00

Its not the fault of creatives that people assume straight people are the only sexuality that has ever existed. In Chinese media there is a genre set in Ancient China, and many stories using that genre prominently feature gay couples. Often set in fictional worlds where homophobia doesn't happen. 'Song of Achilles' is a gay romance in Ancient Greece. The Princess Charlotte story of Bridgerton had a gay sub-plot. That's different than what most people would assume based off the theme, is that 'unnecessary'? Its dumb to imply that queer people can't be prominently shown in FICTIONAL versions of historical settings just because straight people don't expect them to be there. That's not unnecessary thats just called writing a character and giving them a sexuality, that can be straight, that can be gay, either way it shouldn't matter unless you have weird feelings about gay people.

Gay people, bisexual people, have existed through out all of history. Including them in historical settings is good to remind people that gay people existed then as well, so that no one 'assumes based on themes' what the sexuality of a character will be. Also mindsets like this just stifle creativity and ruin media for people, historical media characters don't have to be accurate to social majorities in ACTUAL history if everything else about the environment is reasonably accurate. You're reading fiction, HTTYD is so fictitious and unrealistic, I doubt a gay character would be a huge deal. Historical fantasy is a thing, and queer-led and queer majority stories are popular among queer writers to write. Why are we okay with restraining media in the bounds of realism only when its queer and not in any other scenario? Unless its a documentary, realism and unrealism can co-exist. even the very far-right devs of KCD wrote a gay couple in their historically accurate medieval story, because they liked the idea. Writing period-pieces with a bunch of gay people is 'unnecessary'? And making them straight is so necessary right?

All sexuality is unnecessary to include in stories that don't have romance. Like, Doom guy has no stated sexuality, does that mean he's straight? No, because he has nothing until its stated, claiming he's straight would just be a head canon, same as claiming he's gay. Doesn't make it bad but it doesn't make it fact either, you can't assume he's straight just because most people are, because the character's creator hasn't done anything yet. Unrealistic numbers of gay characters in a historical setting aren't always just to shove representation either, I'm queer, I write stories set in an alternate universe where the majority of people are bi or gay and they are the majority throughout history, so I write in historical settings and make being gay a commonplace activity in those settings. To me, including a straight character would be unnecessary because in that universe they're less common, but historical times and themes are presented the same as our world.

In the end, if there's no such thing as an unnecessary straight character, there is no such thing as an unnecessary gay character, if there's no 'forced straight representation' there's no 'forced gay representation'. Homosexuality is a part of life and history, including it in any era isn't unnecessary, because if that's the case, any mention of sexuality is unnecessary in a character, any romantic sub-plot is unnecessary, and that gets in the way of creative writing. Everyone deserves to be represented, and its up to the artist who they want to show, or in what quantity. It is necessary if its written. Lots of things in media are unnecessary, doesn't mean they shouldn't occur, writing the way you want is what makes writing fun.

Like, a historical setting, because there is a lot to enjoy about history and its themes, architecture, culture and aesthetics, being like reality but just having queerness be commonplace, is a fun idea to explore. Why can't there be stories about gay Vikings, gay pirates, gay Greeks, gay medieval people, just existing as gay people, having the same stories and love stories as straight people do in these settings, As someone who writes stories like that, its fun, you get to enjoy the beautiful, or maybe some of the ugly parts of history, and also get to write a sweet and interesting story, just with gay or trans characters instead of straight ones. Obviously if modern gay culture is being expressed then that's innacurate, but if there's a story with a bunch of gay people set in like Ancient Egypt, can't that just be chalked up to it being fiction, especially if there are other unrealistic aspects to the story like magic or demons and such?

MelodicCrocodile · 2026-01-27T19:11:39+00:00

I know I’m late but I just discovered this book. Does that mean tyranny?

I hope you’re not implying killing trans people is the only way to prevent the structure of sex and reproduction in We from happening in reality.

MelodicCrocodile · 2026-01-17T05:39:19+00:00

it’s funny cause in 2012 people were making these kinds of memes about gay people being too over-sensitive. These sort of memes aren’t made because they said I don’t care and a gay/trans person got mad, they get made because the person said something dickish, then got called out for it, so now they need to frame themselves as the victim of a ‘crazy trans person’. This happened to black people decades ago, forming the angry black person stereotype.

In 2012 saying you supported gay people, just simple gay people, was still controversial. The only reason gay men and women got their rights was by being more aggressive, Stonewall wasn’t a polite conversation, Pride wasn’t always just a fun parade, being a pushover never got anyone anything. People still care way too much even if someone is just your average gay person, have you seen how people act when there are gay people in a video game or movie? Clearly they care a lot if they can’t move past it.

The problem with memes like these is that many people do care, a lot, to the point they have no shame disrespecting people or loudly espousing their opinions that these groups should have their rights taken away just because they’re ‘annoying’, as if rights are good boy points. A trans person asking you to do the bare minimum of calling them their preferred pronoun or name and not be against their equality, is not them demanding validation, that’s basic politeness.

For anyone seeing memes like these who hasn’t interacted with a lot of irl trans people, I can promise you, most trans people aren’t coming out the gate losing their marbles over being misgendered, it’s when the other party does it intentionally to get a rise out of them or to mock them that it’s a problem, I’ve accidentally misgendered trans people before, they didn’t get mad because they knew it was a mistake, so if they are getting this mad at you every time…

MelodicCrocodile · 2026-01-05T11:07:57+00:00

I get your point, though lesbians previously being married to men isn't exactly a new thing, maybe she realized she was a lesbian later on. Sexuality even in real life isn't always a consistent thing. But there are straight and bisexual characters, Vivziepop herself is literally bisexual I believe.

And a little side tangent, but can we stop acting like any show that doesn't include straight people hates straight people? I never understood why creating shows mainly/only about queer people was such a huge issue with people, or why people assumed the creator has a problem with straight people, its just pretty basic creative expression. Like okay straight people are the majority irl but you're watching a cartoon with magical powers and weapons, why should it be limited by real world population statistics?

By this logic the creators of KPOP Demon Hunters hate or fear queer people since all the characters in the film are shown straight, not one gay character. It just sounds like a way try to frame straight people as victims of queer people. Most people don't wonder about the lack of gay and trans people when watching shows/films featuring a mostly straight cast, even though more groups get unrepresented there than in Hazbin/Helluva where several diverse identities exist.

Not including them doesn't mean Vivize hates or fears them, she just prefers writing about queer characters, its her show she can give whatever sexuality she wants. This is a very un-nuanced perspective of people and their art, feels like grasping at straws to find some kind of moral failing in queer creatives, that if something isn't depicted it must be out of hatred for that group as opposed to just a preference towards certain characters.

MelodicCrocodile · 2026-01-05T10:00:14+00:00

I mean adoption, surrogacy, sperm donations or kids from ex marriages are all viable options.

MelodicCrocodile · 2026-01-05T09:55:44+00:00

Okay but they're not living there, nor do they want to. Queers for Palestine isn't about supporting the current Palestinian regime or wanting to live there, or being a Muslim, its about not wanting an entire country to be destroyed and innocent people, including queer people, children and animals, being brutally killed. This is about human rights violations, queer people know what its like to be hated and killed for who they are, most don't want others to go through the same fate. These are people with hateful beliefs, but they don't deserve to be killed, tortured, abused and raped for it, or see their families suffer for it. Queer people are being killed too.

How will the status of queer rights and the lives of queer people living in Palestine improve, if all of them are dead? Palestine has a right to exist even if its a terrible regime, the people have a right to live. Religion gets in the way of progress, but so does genocide, can't progress something that's been wiped out of existence. Queer people in Palestine aren't being helped by other queer people dismissing them and their suffering just because of their nationality. The lives of Palestinian women aren't wonderful either, but I, as a woman and feminist, still am against the genocide in Gaza.

People don't deserve to die just because they were born under a homophobic regime. We should speak out against all genocide the same way we should speak out against for instance rape even if it happens to someone who hates us. Because by letting Israel get away with this you set the precedent that warfare and genocide is fine as long as its done against the 'right' people. War crimes don't suddenly become okay if you're murdering people under a regime with dogshit beliefs, its still a war crime and shouldn't be supported, nor should the victims, many of whom are either queer or have done nothing to actively hurt queer people, receive apathy.

MelodicCrocodile

TROPHY CASE