TGWTG Nostalgia Chick / Lindsay Ellis / TheDudette - aka Hotdogs in face girl

[Erwin Rotten]

VidCon is in association with TikTok this year, so the audience may well be more 10 year olds than middle aged trannies. It'll be interesting to see if the majority of the attendees even know who she is, because the featured creator list is heavily skewed towards TikTokers, not YouTubers. Lindsay, Jenny, Olly and Kat Blaque will really only appeal to the olds in the audience (and by old, I mean over 20).

As to the lack of humor in her book, I'm not convinced she's all that witty unless someone else is writing for her. In interviews and panels she doesn't come across as terribly clever or engaging; outside the strictly controlled bounds of heavily scripted and edited videos, without the reliance on sarcasm or condescending body language, she's not all that funny. Even less so since going full wokescold.

It's more like a question to put her on the spot, rather than justify any possible humor that she holds. I mean, maybe she was funny. Maybe. Hot dogs and white goo thrown at her face. Gives the kids a nice chuckle because weiners and cum is funny. Negro-lipped alligator moment. Maybe that was Doug's idea, but she might have noticed the negro lip part thanks to her heritage.

When it comes to women, even the bi tomboys, it's less that they are funny and more that they try to at least say a joke, but usually are afraid of failing, so they don't bother. It's really why our best female comedians talk about being a slut or being a mom. It's not that they think of anything funny, they are the punchline just how a fat guy jokes about their urge to eat a chocolate bar from a urinal because they figured the urinal cake would make it taste like a peppermint patty.

I know we all do a "Lindsay is a drunk" joke, but it's amazing how she can't even really do one for herself, and when she does, it's a drinking game for her list of sins with a little bell to ding. She didn't even say something witty like "sorry liver" or "my turds are going to come out like charcoal tonight".

Nothing. It's a disappointment. And I guess that's why it would be so enjoyable to put her on the spot like that.

RIP Chez Apocalypse. You died so Lindsay Ellis could stew in mediocrity in your next incarnation.

So you want a Sargon of Akkad to show up? I’m just banking on using VidCon to announce her third book so she can have some spotlight on her.

Aw man, I would totally dress up as a diet Nazi just to piss her off. If a Sargon did that it would be better. Have a grey uniform with the Pepsi logo on the red armband. And on the helmet, it's the Chez Apocalypse radiation symbol. Sit there in the front row with a big British grin as Lindsay screams from the podium about how toxic he is and how dangerous he is as he just sits there laughing.

But, of course, she'll make it all about her and how she was attacked, just like her good friend Anita.

 

[Ninon42]

More retconning of Lindsay temporarily abandoning the interwebs: Jourdain Searles bullied her into suicide watch!

Boy, this is a mangled rehashing. I won't go back over the whole story but JS made some snide vague comments about Lindsay during the Raya debacle (as she had done off and on for years). In response, Todd posted a longass Google doc about his recollection of the whole situation. Dany Roth/Lina Morgan posted one too. They made Jourdain look pretty bad, she cried about being a Strong Disabled Queer Black Woman tokenized and abused by former friends, Kyle and Jourdain broke up. Most of the Lindsayverse was completely unaware of the entire situation and while Jourdain is toxic af, she didn't lead any brigading. Attributing Lindsay's breakdown to Jourdain Searles is giving her waaaay more credit than is due.

So according to Reddit, Lindsay's alcoholic blackout from the net was due to: "diet Nazis", bad faith actors, Jourdain Searles, Mara Wilson, the patriarchy and society.

 

[Random Internet Person]

More retconning of Lindsay temporarily abandoning the interwebs: Jourdain Searles bullied her into suicide watch!
View attachment 3263558
Boy, this is a mangled rehashing. I won't go back over the whole story but JS made some snide vague comments about Lindsay during the Raya debacle (as she had done off and on for years). In response, Todd posted a longass Google doc about his recollection of the whole situation. Dany Roth/Lina Morgan posted one too. They made Jourdain look pretty bad, she cried about being a Strong Disabled Queer Black Woman tokenized and abused by former friends, Kyle and Jourdain broke up. Most of the Lindsayverse was completely unaware of the entire situation and while Jourdain is toxic af, she didn't lead any brigading. Attributing Lindsay's breakdown to Jourdain Searles is giving her waaaay more credit than is due.

So according to Reddit, Lindsay's alcoholic blackout from the net was due to: "diet Nazis", bad faith actors, Jourdain Searles, Mara Wilson, the patriarchy and society.

Making Google docs to explain your circle of friends. Who needs enemies am I right?

 

[Jumbo Gay Threat]

To be fair, she isn't going to be talking about her book. Hell fucking no. Even she knows her books have horrible first chapters.

Instead, she's going to be talking about books SHE was hooked by, because we're to assume a woman who can't write for beans or read anything properly will be a good authority on what are good books due to the fact that she has a book club and over a million subs, so she's bound to know something, right...

I sort of want to go to all of her panels, just to see who goes to such a speaker and in hopes we can ask questions. I wouldn't mind waiting in a stinky line full of bronies and she-males to ask her very simply: why in the name of all that is holy did you remove all humor from your novels and replace it with racism and suicide?

This just sounds like a glorified book club. Kinda sounds like vidcon has hit rock bottom.

 

[Random Internet Person]

This just sounds like a glorified book club. Kinda sounds like vidcon has hit rock bottom.

Was VidCon ever good to begin with?

 

[T_Holygrail_Jesuschrist 2]

Linkara

No i think linkara would be Chas Newby. Because noone fucking cared about Chas

 

[Jumbo Gay Threat]

Was VidCon ever good to begin with?

Probably not But I’ve never felt the desire to travel to such a place. I assume it’s still in LA, and the target audience is tweens.

 

[maguyver16]

Was VidCon ever good to begin with?

Any place or event Quinton Reviews feels the need to make a video on is usually pretty nix to begin with

 

[Arthur Morgan]

This just sounds like a glorified book club. Kinda sounds like vidcon has hit rock bottom.

Tanacon wouldn't give her a panel.

 

[Erwin Rotten]

Probably not But I’ve never felt the desire to travel to such a place. I assume it’s still in LA, and the target audience is tweens.

It's going to be in Anaheim, which is where Disneyland is. I assume you're right about the audience being all tweens, so at least the breadtubers will smash a few groupies between panels since we all know they like their meat young and rambunctious.

 

[Jumbo Gay Threat]

It's going to be in Anaheim, which is where Disneyland is. I assume you're right about the audience being all tweens, so at least the breadtubers will smash a few groupies between panels since we all know they like their meat young and rambunctious.

Just realized Lindsay used to take drunken vacations to Disneyland. Lol now I can kinda see why she is going to vidcon.

 

[Arthur Morgan]

Just realized Lindsay used to take drunken vacations to Disneyland. Lol now I can kinda see why she is going to vidcon.

Used to implies she stopped. As soon as Disney re-opened their gates she was probably first in line for the bars.

 

[Bob Loblaw Law Blog]

now that both parks are flowing with alcohol, that boozy bitch is in heaven

 

[Open Window Maniac]

What if Lindsay's third book she reveals all the previous events in her novel were just an alcohol fueled hallucination? Do you think it would make the books any better?

 

[Erwin Rotten]

What is Lindsay's third book she reveals all the previous events in her novel were just an alcohol fueled hallucination? Do you think it would make the books any better?

If the third book began with Lindsay waking up to 3 channel awesome people watching her sleep and she starts naming off all the events like Dorothy from Wizard of Oz, then the adventure changes to where Doug drove his house into the plot hole and now she has to drive her house into it to save him, I'm not going to lie... That would be pretty freaking sweet.

 

[Ninon42]

Cross-post from the Philosophy Tube thread about Lindsay's intellectual dishonesty, or carelessness if you're feeling more generous. From a longer unquoteable post by @LemongrassLighthouse :

Lindsay Ellis did a video about Death of the Author a while back, and it’s a favorite for amateur “intellectuals” and media analysis people online because it’s a pretty easy concept to understand as far as literary theory goes, even though it’s a very small part of Roland Barthes's body of work. If you’re not familiar, all Death of the Author argues is that authorial intent should not be relevant doing the academic or social work of interpreting a work of art. Treating the author as the be-and-end-all authority of what their work “means” limits interpretive freedom for readers. It does not mean a creator’s experiences or background shouldn’t be taken into consideration. Barthes is also talking about the capital-A “Author”, The Author as a social/artistic concept, not like individual creators.

In the video, Ellis completely conflates the Author as interpretive authority with the Author’s personal identity, saying that Death of the Author argues individual authors are removed from their work, which is not what Barthes was talking about. I could let that slide considering it’s from a silly video that seemed more like a set-up for showing off Ellis’s friendship with John Green than about Death of the Author, but where it gets extra funny is when Ellis gets to Foucault. I’m not going to get into it too deeply here since this is long enough and I don’t want to get into anything about Foucault’s merits one way or another.

The quotes from him she used in the video to make her argument (already flawed due to her fundamental misunderstanding of Death of the Author) sounded off to me even with my passing familiarity with his work. Ellis quoted Foucault (and Barthes) to refute him, but there are places where I thought she would agree with Foucault even, from what I knew on a basic level. I looked into it out of curiosity and found that Ellis omitted chunks from her citation that appear in the paragraph right before the quote and she omitted sentences from within the cited paragraph itself where he’s making the opposite argument of what Ellis says he’s making.

So, to the point finally, either A) Ellis (or her team who helps research her shit for her) have no idea what Foucault was talking about and made no effort ensure they were reading it correctly. B) Ellis and/or her team purposely and willfully cherrypicked quotes to mislead her audience in order to serve her own weird, meandering arguments for her own ends. C) Some combination of A and B.

My point is that Breadtubers love to misread, misquote and cite their sources improperly overall. I don’t think it’s a grand conspiracy, rather they know they can get away with being lazy so long as it serves their content. I’m sure it happens far more frequently than I know of, especially with The Tube. It’d be kinda insulting if the academic laziness of it all wasn’t so funny.

For more specifics about the Ellis video, here’s an article from a fan of Ellis that expands on what I said and explains it more in depth. I don’t agree with everything this person says and it does get into a bit of higher-level theory stuff, but it does demonstrate Ellis’s intellectual dishonesty pretty clearly: https://medium.com/@MyntMarsellus_6...eory-and-the-death-of-the-author-7d1879f773d1

She's still working with the Kardashians while raking in her Patreon for nothing money btw.

 

[Newman's Lovechild]

all Death of the Author argues is that authorial intent should not be relevant doing the academic or social work of interpreting a work of art. Treating the author as the be-and-end-all authority of what their work “means” limits interpretive freedom for readers.

And so we get Tolkien Society talks about transgenderism in Gondor.

Also, Lindsay Ellis tries to 'improve' on a french pederasts quotes and still fails, lol.

 

[Duine In Cudromach]

So, to the point finally, either A) Ellis (or her team who helps research her shit for her) have no idea what Foucault was talking about and made no effort ensure they were reading it correctly. B) Ellis and/or her team purposely and willfully cherrypicked quotes to mislead her audience in order to serve her own weird, meandering arguments for her own ends. C) Some combination of A and B.

It's hard to say whether it's intentional or incompetence, although the distinction isn't particularly meaningful. I've enjoyed listening to her video essays in the past but once you peel away the veneer of confidence that she cloaks a lot of her points in you start to realize that either she doesn't know what she's talking about or she very intentionally makes sure YOU don't know what she's talking about.

That's the fun of academia, honestly-- making whatever point you want by using elevated language that convinces people who aren't already mired in the jargon that you're better educated than them and know what you're talking about. You can, with sufficient spin, make any point out of any thing, and because the people you're talking to are usually not as well educated in that specific field, you can get away with faking it (and, sadly, spreading your own bad opinions and ideas to people who take you as a voice of authority).

Her misinterpretation (malicious or otherwise) is like that phenomenon of the newspaper-- you read the paper and nod along with the stories until you find one that you actually know about and realize hey, this is completely wrong, this is either misinformed or lying. And then you flip the page and go on reading without questioning, well, if they were wrong about something you actually KNOW about, how can you trust they aren't wrong about everything else?

 

[Open Window Maniac]

So, to the point finally, either A) Ellis (or her team who helps research her shit for her) have no idea what Foucault was talking about and made no effort ensure they were reading it correctly. B) Ellis and/or her team purposely and willfully cherrypicked quotes to mislead her audience in order to serve her own weird, meandering arguments for her own ends. C) Some combination of A and B.

If Lindsay put the effort into proper research, she wouldn't have enough time to get brick-faced while making videos about how Disney movies from the mid-90s are all about why her brand of Twitter leftism is correct.

 

[PeriodicTrouble]

If Lindsay put the effort into proper research, she wouldn't have enough time to get brick-faced while making videos about how Disney movies from the mid-90s are all about why her brand of Twitter leftism is correct.

Another thing that makes this situation is that it's not like Lindsay puts out a lot of videos. She makes 1 video every 2 months on average so her botched research can't be excused on lack of time. She and her staff either decided to stake the statement out of context to fit that argument/video or She and her staff are not that smart and just didn't understand it. What's worse: Intentional Dishonesty or Incompetence?