Plagued Consoomers / Consoomer Culture - Because if it has a recogniseable brand on it, I’d buy it!

i assume simple, morbid curiosity played a large role in it
maybe wish a light peppering of feelings of depth and enlightenment over reading something so dark

did any of them hold up as good fiction books, or was their appeal 100% reliant on being true stories?

I don't know myself, I didn't read any. Most of them got savaged by critics at the time, apparently A Million Little Pieces bordered on unreadable, so I guess it was the misery porn that was the appeal, and the idea that it was real increased the voyeuristic thrill.

Apparently, according to the Wiki article on "Misery Porn", 80-90% of these books were bought by women. I'm guessing they're the same women who are into "true crime" stuff now for the same reasons.
 
They were mostly bought by middle-aged women, I think; true crime skews younger (or at least the type of true crime - serial killers / procedural or analysis focused stuff skews younger, drama-based 'dirty john' type stuff for older women, also again stuff with kids).

A Child Called It & Angela's Ashes were american so they weren't so huge over here, but they did spark a (still existing) subgenre of like east end victorian / WW2 hard times community pulls together to survive type stories, which seem a bit less dark than the alternative. But also slightly later, Philomena (which I believe is mostly true with some fudged details) and the Magdalene Laundries.

That said now that I know how many of the million pitiers are older women ... who knows.

There was a similar wave of books post-WW2 of holocaust narratives of which many were fake, probably inspired by the Anne Frank diary: a famous one was of a woman who said her parents were deported to the camps, but she escaped the warsaw ghetto to be raised by a pack of wolves. She wrote a book, was guest of honor at a variety of memorial events, and was due to appear on Oprah before it came out that it was all fake. Misha DeFonseca.

She was the daughter of (non-jewish) parents who had been members of the belgian resistance, but who were captured and her father sold out the rest of their cell / branch under torture. She was sent to live with her grandparents, who abused her for being the 'daughter of a traitor' and she did eventually run away from them. She now claims to be mentally ill and unable to tell fantasy from reality, but netflix did a documentary on her which is skeptical - after she went to the US she really leaned into the 'communed with wolves' stuff and was going full native american about it. The documentary is Misha and the Wolves.

I think we still have people like that - many cows are, many people on the internet are like that, troons are like that - but we're not going to see it in media until a big actual tragedy becomes plausible, like maybe from China with the Uighur muslims. Or being an immigrant boat child. Both would be very difficult to confirm and easy to make sound plausible, particularly 10 to 20 years from now.

The 1995/6 child tragedy books were between the sinead o'connor incident and john paul finally acknowledging the church sexual abuse in 2001, where it was being discussed, children being neglected enough to be that vulnerable or parents allowing it to happen, but not 'confirmed' yet.
 
I don't know myself, I didn't read any. Most of them got savaged by critics at the time, apparently A Million Little Pieces bordered on unreadable, so I guess it was the misery porn that was the appeal, and the idea that it was real increased the voyeuristic thrill.

Apparently, according to the Wiki article on "Misery Porn", 80-90% of these books were bought by women. I'm guessing they're the same women who are into "true crime" stuff now for the same reasons.
what is it about true crime that attracts a very particular type of women? looking it up it seems every second video tumbnail i see has the woman mugging the camera, as if the video is more about her presence, some of them are discussing this stuff while doing their makeup or something, and they all have some form of.... aesthetic... happening in the background, from witchy creepy tumblrcrap to 2good4you long nails starbuck sipping yassqueens, to manic-pixie-dream-girl esque tapestries, fairylights or garfieldxtravaganzas
it almost seems like true crime enjoyers would fit this thread, not directly but just coincidentally

this is also how i learned kim kardashian has a true crime podcast
and frankly i think that sums everything up very well
 
Drinking tea is the #1 personality trait of pseudo intellectuals and "I love books" people.
theres something to be said about individuals who enjoy creating a character for themselves and performing certain behaviors, rather than simply doing them
as in, you dont just WANT to drink some tea while you cozy up in a blanket by the window reading a book, you dont just desire that expirience
you wanna be SEEN as someone who PERFORMS drinking tea while cozying up in a blanket by the window reading a book- even if its only in your own head, even if no one sees you do it, you wanna LARP as that kind of person... but when you see it that way, isnt that kinda boring in and of itself? to know youre simply performing, but instead of LARPing as something big and extravagant like a warrior or a wizard, you wanna be.... a person who reads books... by windows... in big blankets with some tea
 
Drinking tea is the #1 personality trait of pseudo intellectuals and "I love books" people.
You can always tell by whether they discuss loving books or discuss the information and knowledge they've gained through reading books. And so many "I love books uwu" types are snobbish about how they read instead of watching TV or movies, despite only reading low quality YA that's barely more intellectually stimulating than watching reality TV. Being a snob about the medium through which you get your information rather than the quality of and understanding you glean from that information is tedious.
 
Drinking tea is the #1 personality trait of pseudo intellectuals and "I love books" people.
I fucking love tea. I fucking love books. I consoom vast quantities of both because I enjoy them. Combining them doubles the enjoyment so I do this frequently, although this does run the risk of me forgetting the tea if the book is absorbing enough. There are few things more tragic than a forgotten, half finished mug of cold tea.

You can always tell by whether they discuss loving books or discuss the information and knowledge they've gained through reading books. And so many "I love books uwu" types are snobbish about how they read instead of watching TV or movies, despite only reading low quality YA that's barely more intellectually stimulating than watching reality TV. Being a snob about the medium through which you get your information rather than the quality of and understanding you glean from that information is tedious.

I've only honestly coped this attitude a few times, and it was from professional 'intellectuals'.

EDIT: deleted a mass of unnecessary PL, but the gist is that there is a difference between people who read and study literature for the love of literature, and people who do it because it shows how much smarter they are than everyone else. Someone with a love of Shakespeare will happily talk Shakespeare with a ten year old. Someone who studies Shakespeare because it's one of the few things worthy of them, will refuse to talk about it to normies because normies are too stupid to understand.

Passionate people always want to talk about their passion. Engineers will sit down with three year olds and show them how to build with legos.
 
Last edited:
That's true and I genearlly agree (Looking at you Elsevier fuckers, selling a single chapter of a book for $60), but in this case I was talking about a translation of the book into my language and sold second hand on sites like craigslist or leboncoin or ebay. I just checked on ebay and you can get the english version, new, for $25 which is much more sensible price. Which is why I guess I will be reading the PDF (because it's the english version) for now, and once I'm done, I will not need the book anymore.
A few years ago I bought an eink reader secondhand and I haven't paid for a book since. I highly recommend it if you don't mind dealing with digital formats.
 
Let me know when the Chuck Tingle loot box drops y'all.
Just wait for Bad Dragon to have their yearly stocktake sale, it amounts to the same thing.

I've got very mixed feelings about book based loot boxes. I've certainly consoomed more than my share of media based merchandise over the years. And I've also exchanged many individual books for sturdier or prettier editions over the years. I desperately wish more people would make artworks or merch based on some of my more obscure favourite authors. There are a dozen full books analysing the work of Angela Carter, can't someone whack some quotes on a bookmark or something? It's great that some publishers really throw themselves behind their authors, but a lot the time, as has been remarked, it's meant not to publicise the book, it's to play on people's fear of missing out, and maybe even drum up enough interest that movie or television companies take note. Publishing is an incredibly dirty industry, though many people like to believe otherwise.
 
Because of the overlap between make-up & true crime, every so often there is a scandal where some idiots decide to make a make-up shade named after a famous murder or tragedy.

in 2010, Rodarte and MAC were going to release a make-up line with different shades inspired by the mass rapes and murders of female factory workers by drug cartels in the town of Juarez, Mexico, which was the world's deadliest city at the time. The shades were called factory, bordertown, juarez, del norte and quinceanera.

Tom Ford and Obsessive Compulsive Cosmetics both have 'Black Dahlia' as a lipstick shade.

Jefree Star did a greyscale makeup line during the pandemic called the 'cremated collection' with names like casket ready, pallbearer and death certificate.

There's more that I don't remember right now.

It's the obvious end point and even though there's always initial backlash nothing actually happens. I admit I like my make-up (in moderation) and I like true crime, but the connection has never been obvious to me. I like the analytical stuff, to start with.

have any 'makeup destruction' or 'mixing every single shade together' videos been posted here before? literally the point of them is taking insanely expensive palettes and ruining them.
 
Because of the overlap between make-up & true crime
it seems like "drama" follows every community that has a connection with the makeup folk
its the same reason the ASMR or mukbang communities seem to full of it. you wouldnt think theres a correlation between eating food or listening to people scratch their microphone, and catty infighting, but i guess its just a result of a random set of events that lead to the formation of such a community
or maybe theres some kinda observable psychological explanation that connects the kinda individuals who are more likely to be makeup loving, tea spilling fashionistas with stuff like criminal history and eating large amounts of food on camera
 
have any 'makeup destruction' or 'mixing every single shade together' videos been posted here before? literally the point of them is taking insanely expensive palettes and ruining them.
That genre of videos was made popular by a YouTube channel called Beauty News and they started doing it to see if things were good value for money. They used to do things like scrape the eyeshadows out of palettes and weigh the contents to make sure they contained the advertised amount, or count how many swipes it took to finish a lipstick to see how long it it would take the average person to finish.
People seemed to like watching the destruction more than anything so after a while they stopped being careful about how they being careful and trying to fix the makeup afterwards so it could still be used, and other makeup destruction channels sprung up that didn’t even pretend to have a good reason.
 
That genre of videos was made popular by a YouTube channel called Beauty News and they started doing it to see if things were good value for money. They used to do things like scrape the eyeshadows out of palettes and weigh the contents to make sure they contained the advertised amount, or count how many swipes it took to finish a lipstick to see how long it it would take the average person to finish.
People seemed to like watching the destruction more than anything so after a while they stopped being careful about how they being careful and trying to fix the makeup afterwards so it could still be used, and other makeup destruction channels sprung up that didn’t even pretend to have a good reason.
interesting, especially since the original intent behind it could be argued to be more critical and less consumerist in nature

my question is, can this really be considered a form of consumerism? sure, someones buying the product to destroy it, but destruction videos arent rare on youtube and it doesnt sound like the viewers are as interested in the brand or the acquision of the item as much as they simply want plain ol cathartic fun
its human nature to wanna see whatd happen if something gets wrecked
 
it seems like "drama" follows every community that has a connection with the makeup folk
its the same reason the ASMR or mukbang communities seem to full of it. you wouldnt think theres a correlation between eating food or listening to people scratch their microphone, and catty infighting, but i guess its just a result of a random set of events that lead to the formation of such a community
or maybe theres some kinda observable psychological explanation that connects the kinda individuals who are more likely to be makeup loving, tea spilling fashionistas with stuff like criminal history and eating large amounts of food on camera
I have honestly never understood how mukbang even has a community.. I assume it was just fetishism but.. Seriously I would be interested to see some explanation of the subject.
 
I have honestly never understood how mukbang even has a community.. I assume it was just fetishism but.. Seriously I would be interested to see some explanation of the subject.

I don't know much about it but, as I understand, it began as a sort of companionship experience for Korean social recluses/introverts/NEET/hikkikomori (yes, I know the term is Japanese): a young person, usually a woman, would make small talk while eating so that the aforementioned NEETs wouldn't feel so lonely. Usually it involved a large variety of foods, but in small quantities, which were slowly consumed as the person in the video acted like a generic friend/relative/lover.

Someone, I'm assuming an American, saw this, and ran off with the wrong part of what made the genre popular in Worst Korea: consuming food. Instead of easing loneliness by "sharing" a meal, it became an exercise in eating inhumane amounts of (often low quality) food while blurting any bullshit that came to mind. It became a freak show, which attracted gawkers, which made it lucrative, which in turn brought in the gluttonous grifters. People watching Nikocado Avocado and other Western so-called mukbangers are no different from those who went to P. T. Barnum's circus in the 19th century: they're just there to point and laugh at the freaks.
 
So I recently got back into swimming (well, flopping around in a somewhat linear direction for 45 minutes) and all I've got is a bathing suit, cap, and goggles. All these other people have all this extra stuff. Fins, hand find, floaty things between their knees, tiny paddle boards, snorkels. It's obvious that like me, none of these people are competitive swimmers, so it's not like they've got some equipment that helps them train that I, not a pro, wouldn't understand. So maybe it's mobility issues? No, there's a regular here who looks like he's drowning while he swims, and obviously has some huge mobility issues, but like me, uses minimal equipment.
I enjoy weight training too, and similarly have minimal equipment. Yet I see these regular people completely kitted out with all of this stuff. For what?!?
I know somebody is going to "well actually" me in the flippers or something but you know what, I don't care. I'm 90% convinced most of the shit clogging the walkpath at the pool is because people like to aquire accoutrements.
 
what is it about true crime that attracts a very particular type of women? looking it up it seems every second video tumbnail i see has the woman mugging the camera, as if the video is more about her presence, some of them are discussing this stuff while doing their makeup or something, and they all have some form of.... aesthetic... happening in the background, from witchy creepy tumblrcrap to 2good4you long nails starbuck sipping yassqueens, to manic-pixie-dream-girl esque tapestries, fairylights or garfieldxtravaganzas
it almost seems like true crime enjoyers would fit this thread, not directly but just coincidentally

this is also how i learned kim kardashian has a true crime podcast
and frankly i think that sums everything up very well
eros and thanatos i guess
 
Back