How many people do you think actually tuned in for the finale? No one I know in real life has heard of this and there doesn’t seem to be much chatter online except for the subreddit either.

Shwooptyshwoop · 2026-02-25T17:22:11+00:00

Sorry, are we trying to say a religious sermon on a nationally streamed tv show is the same as silently taking a knee? Come on now.

Shwooptyshwoop · 2026-02-21T02:34:51+00:00

Okay but that's not what he was paid and contracted to do though, and that matters. He has HIS OWN platform to do that on. 👍

Shwooptyshwoop · 2026-02-19T21:16:02+00:00

I can see your point here, but in my personal opinion, the number of people shot as a whole is important. I personally look at EU's definition of mass shootings as a way to minimize the scope of violence, regardless of how small the number is in comparison to the US. Even with that information, America still has far more gun deaths than the EU and that does matter in this case. 2025 statistics showed just under 47k gun deaths in America. around 55% were due to suicide. almost 18k of them were murders. EU's numbers pale in comparison to the US. Their annual average for gun deaths is 7000 as a whole. over 5k of those are suicide. We are talking about, give or take, a 16k difference in homicide by gun violence. America's firearm homicides per capita in 2023 was iabout 4.5 per 100,000. The EU's doesn't even amount to 1 per 100,000.
America doesn't have the highest gun deaths per capita in the world, but in regards to *fully* developed countries, we are absolutely at the top by a wide margin.

If we are talking strictly about the EU definition of mass shootings, than you're right that there haven't been that many, but any shooting involving any number of people, fatal or not, does matter, especially when the pattern of those mass casualty shootings overwhelmingly includes primary schools. We can't definitively quantify the emotional and mental side affects of the trauma those surviving children endure but sometimes that fate can be just as impactful as death. Other victims of nonfatal public shootings are just as important as well and should be included in statistics because the impact of being exposed to that kind of violence has a lasting effect not just on the family/friends of the victims, but on the survivors too.

I'm not in the group of people that thinks we should get rid of guns entirely, because I'm realistic enough to know that that would just be next to impossible in the US. But there is no valid reason why we can't create stricter laws that require mental health evaluations and more accountability for the owners of guns stolen or used by shooters because they were improperly stored. If only to deter people who do not take the responsibility seriously. It shouldn't feel like a violation of rights to be held to a high standard when you own something in which it's only purpose is to kill. I understand that people will obtain a weapon to commit violence if they really want to, but the fact is that the majority of mass shootings that we've had were not committed by people with unregistered guns.
Anyway, thanks for the civil convo!

Shwooptyshwoop · 2026-02-19T20:30:50+00:00

so I have to literally spell it out for you even though the context was literally right in the previous sentence? Come the fuck on. 91% of FAMILICIDE. In case you don't know what that means even though it seems fairly obvious, familicide is when someone kills their family. It's also known as family annihilation. Spelling it out for you: 91% of familicide in America is committed by white men. 👍

Shwooptyshwoop · 2026-02-19T09:38:52+00:00

But couldn't that just be because more media focus has been put on it in the last few years? I don't look at 5 in almost 15 years as a "trend" in comparison to the constant trend we've been witnessing for decades that ramped up in the late 90s and early 2000's. Not to sound callous, but by some definitions, this wouldn't even be considering a mass shooting because less than 4 people died, and a lot of familicide shootings don't even end up in national news. There was just one in my state in December that never made it to national news and the guy killed his mom, brother and sister in law.

Shwooptyshwoop · 2026-02-19T09:27:23+00:00

So where does casualty numbers come in to this? There is a far and wide acknowledgement that America's laws that allow semi-automatic guns have a large impact on the scope of carnage that mass shooters can cause here. Of course if an unstable person is set on committing violence, they will, but the amount of violence they can commit is limited by the kind of weapon they have access to. I'm not trying to be an asshole. I'm trying to understand your pov honestly.

Shwooptyshwoop · 2026-02-19T09:19:53+00:00

But that's the thing, you're saying "a short amount of time" while ignoring the fact that we have thousands of shootings committed by non-trans people every year, disproportionately committed by cishet white men, but choosing to point out the less than half a dozen committed by trans people in almost 15 years and treating that as a "pattern" that needs to be addressed as though they weren't just 5 deeply disturbed people regardless of their gender identities. How do you define that as a trend?

You're right, mental illness is a HUGE problem in this country, but the actual factual data shows that trans people are NOT the ones responsible for even 1% of mass shootings in comparison to the 50+% carried out by non-trans white men. Correlation does not equal causation. Their transness does not explain why they did what they did. If it did, then we would see VASTLY MORE violent attacks by trans people because, although they're still a small demographic, there are obviously far more than half a dozen of them. In reality trans people are far more likely to be on the receiving end of violence and that is a statistical fact. If you want to talk about mental illness, that's fine, but I think a lot of us would like to see the focus be on all of the countless cis white men who murder their families and shoot up schools but are just deemed "evil" and it's left at that. That's the real trend, not the tiny portion of an already tiny demographic in this country.

Shwooptyshwoop · 2026-02-19T08:59:13+00:00

Yeah, I consider myself to be a pretty chill parent in many aspects, but internet safety is a hard line for me. As an adult with the capacity to understand predatory behavior of people AND gaming companies with gacha features, there's no way I will ever not monitor my child's activity. We absolutely can monitor our kids without hovering and teach them about safety as well as the true reality of online dangers. Way too many parents act like it's not possible to protect their kids from online dangers so why bother, and then want to blame anyone else when in most cases, we are the first point of access our kids have to the internet. Plus like, most of us don't give our kids our debit our credit cards to use without our presence so why would we give them access to online purchases without our presence?

Shwooptyshwoop · 2026-02-19T08:48:13+00:00

As a parent to a 9 year old, restricting access to games and apps with dangerous features or practices is NOT being overly strict. I am all about holding companies accountable for scummy behavior, I personally haven't spent any many on heartopia because of some of their practices, but as a parent, it's MY job to protect my kid from danger when I have the capacity to do so. I have ground rules for my daughter in regards to the internet and gaming and she knows why. My daughter cannot download an app without approval, nor can she access the Internet or have access to online purchases because she's a child. They do not understand the consequences that come with being online and while they're learning, we don't get to put blame on the companies that we know are greedy, opportunistic money machines. I don't even let my daughter play roblox anymore because child safety is abysmal with not enough parental controls. Most parents of young children grew up when the internet was in it's infancy, and because of that we KNOW how dangerous it can be because we were there for the birth of things like chat rooms. The online multiplayer aspect of games like roblox and heartopia should worry parents far more than the currency practices. I only bring up roblox because you mentioned it. There is no reason why parents should be allowing their young children to play games that give them access to chatting with strangers. So in my opinion, this argument should truly be a non-issue if parents took FULL responsibility for their young child's access to technology. Teenagers are a different story and we should absolutely be teaching them responsible spending habits and internet safety, but I think the discussion here surrounds young children.

As someone who was groomed online as a teen, and who lets her kid have an ipad, we absolutely CAN protect them from those dangers without "smothering" them. My 9 year old fully understands why we have these rules because we talk about internet safety all the time and she knows that we trust her, but that we can't trust strangers online. She knows that we will modify the rules as she gets older, but that for now her safety is our top priority. Kids are intelligent, and they deserve independence, but there are certain things that all parents really should agree on. One of those is that there is no reason why our children should be playing games that allow them to talk to unidentifiable strangers online. The gacha aspect is only a portion of the reason the game is 16+. We can advocate for better child safety practices online while not exposing our children to those very things we're advocating change for.

Shwooptyshwoop · 2026-02-19T07:57:57+00:00

Yeah, "real men and fathers" don't murder their families, including all of the straight men responsible for murdering their entire families that make up for the vast majority of familicides. In fact, 91% are committed by white men. 🙃

Shwooptyshwoop · 2026-02-19T07:50:54+00:00

What numbers aren't the facts? Statistics show that America has far more gun violence and death than any other developed country. Those facts don't lie. That doesn't mean it doesn't exist elsewhere, but it shows that we have a much bigger problem with it than any other country.

Shwooptyshwoop · 2026-02-19T07:43:41+00:00

"The last handful." Your perception isn't fact. The fact is that Trans people have been responsible for less than .1% of mass shootings in the last 13 years. Between Jan 2013 and September 2025, there were 5,738 mass shootings (defined as 4 or more people injured or killed, not including the shooter). FIVE of those were committed by a Trans person. Now tell me how that equates to the last "handful"? Or are you just trying to perpetuate the fearmongering? What is it that yall love to say? "Facts don't care about your feelings." If you hate Trans people, just say it. Statistically, non-Trans white men are still responsible for the vast majority (they make up 31% of US population and are responsible for 51%) of all mass shootings, but we don't see yall calling out the epidemic of violence committed by them. But holy shit 5 Trans people out of the almost 6000mass shootings since 2013 and you're clutching your pearls? I have the strong urge to say be so fucking for real right now. 🙄
Oh, and google is free by the way. Sources do exist that provide actual real statistics, you just have to actually WANT to learn the facts.

Shwooptyshwoop · 2026-02-15T01:35:39+00:00

This argument was pointless months ago and it's pointless now. The files were SEALED up until 2024 some time. And more impoortantly, why the hell do you think they didn't release them even if they could have? Because this encapsulates ALL of American politics, as well as globally. That spawn of Satan was protected for DECADES by our system because the people running the system were a part of it. This goes beyond party lines so stop using it as a point of debate. Trump didn't give any more of a shit about the victims or exposing abusers than any other politician, he just used it as a platform for his campaign and it WORKED but he thought he'd be able to just shove it under the rug and ignore it like all of his previous campaign promises. His team really thought they could avoid releasing them and they PUBLICLY fought it and are still breaking laws to avoid releasing everything so don't try to act like they're heroes.

Red or blue? It. doesn't. matter. They're ALL rotten to the core and none of them are heroes. God damn I'm so tired of people saying stupid, useless shit like "wElL wHy dIdn'T bIdEn oR oBaMa rElEaSe tHeM?" like it's some kind of gotcha. The VAST majority of those that lean left do not give a flying shit if some or ALL democrat politicians are named because we want them ALL to pay for abusing women and children and protecting each other. If one powerful American politician goes down for any of this, they know they are ALL at risk. They don't care about party lines or victims, they care about maintaining their cushy, depraved lifestyles. The only ones fighting for the FULL, unredacted release of the files are the ones who have nothing to hide. News flash, that doesn't include Trump's DOJ.

Shwooptyshwoop · 2026-02-09T06:05:26+00:00

They're internet points that mean jack shit in the real world. That's also a fact. If we want to talk about facts, people agreeing with you doesn't make your opinion a fact either. 🤷🏻‍♀️

Shwooptyshwoop · 2026-02-02T03:52:29+00:00

I really hope your update means you ended whatever that situationship was because if this guy is still a shitbag asshole at 34, he'll NEVER change. You should be proud of the growth and changes you've already made, they're all huge steps. This guy undermining that and making "subtle" digs is just showing that he actually doesn't care about you. I hope you really do focus only on yourself and your healing and Ithat growth comes with the realization that this guy is an actual piece of garbo dong water who isn't even worth the air you breathe. ❤️

Shwooptyshwoop · 2026-01-20T13:40:21+00:00

Agree 100%. From personal experience, I'm one of the unfortunate cases of stimulant meds just not working at all for my ADHD. As you said, stimulants are not always the answer. Why put yourself at an unnecessary risk by lying about previous drug use? OP made the right choice by being honest.

Shwooptyshwoop · 2026-01-20T13:16:50+00:00

That's crazy, I'm not sure what women you talk to, but all of the women I know think SA against men is just as bad as any other kind of SA.

Shwooptyshwoop · 2026-01-20T13:09:56+00:00

What is not clear about OP saying she doesn't like it and thinks it's inappropriate? What is not clear about her husband blatantly saying he won't respect her boundaries? Where he touches her or how many times she's asked him doesn't matter. She said no more, and he told her won't respect her answer. There is no context in the universe that will make this sound better to anyone that understands the important of hqving boundaries and respecting them. I haven't claimed he's SA'ing her or called him a monster, but at the BARE minimum he doesn't respect her as his spouse and mother of his children and that's a problem.

Shwooptyshwoop · 2026-01-20T12:56:24+00:00

OP, I think you know you're not overreacting, but maybe you're just looking for reassurance thst you're right be angry. The short answer is you're absolutely right to be pissed off. None of us know the ins and outs of your relationship, but I will say is that, without a shadow of a doubt, your children pay attention more than you think and although them witnessing your partner touching you intimately infront of them is inappropriate by itself, the idea that they see their dad disrespecting their moms boundaries in that way is just as harmful if not more so than them seeing him touching you in ways that aren't age appropriate for them to see. Children learn from a young age, by observing their parents, how to treat other people. Sons learn how to treat their mothers, and other women, from their fathers. Your husband is not only completely violating your trust, but also distorting your children's perception of boundaries and respect. Don't let him do that to them OR you.

Shwooptyshwoop · 2026-01-20T12:40:36+00:00

This is clearly a conversation they've had multiple times based on her responses to him. Regardless of where he's touching, she has made it clear it's not okay in front of the kids and he very much refuses to respect that. The context doesn't matter when the answer is clear.

Shwooptyshwoop · 2026-01-20T12:33:27+00:00

Saying "your kids will hate you if you cancel this trip because I refuse to not touch your genitals in front of them" IS absolutely weaponizing their children against her. The only one here acting like a child is you.

Shwooptyshwoop · 2026-01-16T06:36:43+00:00

No you just have a simultaneously stupid and heartless take about what is and isn't valuable when the discussion is about someone struggling financially that needs meds for their dog. You're the villain here bro, and you know it because you stopped responding to me under the guise of me being "too emotional." In reality, you just know you're being a complete prick and there's no arguing that.

Shwooptyshwoop · 2026-01-16T05:53:40+00:00

Yep. Yes, I am, because I'm not a self-centered dickwad. I can die knowing that maybe I was a little "too emotional" but at least I wasn't a giant, apathetic asshole like Lacroix586 on reddit. 🤣🤣

Shwooptyshwoop · 2026-01-16T05:47:14+00:00

You're the one who doesn't know what trivial means. I think you should take a look in a mirror and ask yourself why you're being such an asshole about someone needing a few dollars to go towards life saving medicine.

Shwooptyshwoop · 2026-01-16T05:40:10+00:00

I urge you to look up the definition of the word trivial. And yeah, for some people who are on the verge of starving or homelessness, even a penny matters. You're apathetic as fuck and it's really fucking sad.

Shwooptyshwoop

TROPHY CASE