Lg nontonin mas-mas ini, terus mau pergi krn udh sore.. tiba-tiba lewat kumpulan cowo cowo wibu julid "waahh, goyang-goyang"
Like???? :)))))
Gtw mau misuh aja emg kenapa mereka suka jg ga nyakitin kamu kenapa digituin kalian ga laku kah
Let them have fun napa jir
@mimiraraden@crepuscutelar i do agree fans punya power tsb, tapi objectively speaking power yang dipegang oshi lebih reliable dibanding fans yang harus viral dulu, dan gak sekali dua kali ada talent yang problematik tapi fansnya masih sangat belain mereka. youre welcome btw!
udah bikin masalah segede itu tapi cara lu minta maaf gak proper sama sekali. address yang jelas salah lu dimana dan pihak mana yang dirugikan. kalau bilang maaf gak mikir doang mah semua orang juga tau ketikan lu kayak orang gak ngotak. masa harus diajarin juga cara minta maaf?
@mimiraraden@crepuscutelar sepertinya yang jadi concern lebih ke power imbalance-nya kak. oshi jelas punya audiens dan orang-orang yang stan mereka, yang jelas nempatin si fans ini dalam posisi yang lebih rentan di skala sosial. makanya oshi selalu diwanti untuk jaga sikap
i think it is fair to ban that person from accessing your contents. that type of fan deserves an actual consequences. pihak talent dan staff sampe minta maaf while that mf does nothing when they were the one making a problem at the first place
which could mean nothing lmao. gak pernah liat klarifikasi se-vague posting ini. so you aren’t siding with the queer community and aren’t willing to ensure their safety in your fandom but you’d like to have the advantage and the clout from their community? got it.
as a newbie dalam hal per-vtuberan, tbh aku kadang kurang suka kalo nonton freetalk, bukan karena vtubernya melainkan viewersnya. ada banyak bgt yg terlalu oversharing sampe membuat suasanya ngga nyaman dgn bawa-bawa drama percintaan, pertemanan, keluarga, dll ke tako/trakteer-
@jjk_fess pro-ship = berpihak sama semua ship selama itu dalam ranah fiksi. bukan kependekan dari problematic ya. boleh dm kalau mau tanya-tanya, sender, daripada salah arti
ini dimana gooningnya dah? atau jangan-jangan lu gak bisa bahasa inggris jadi gak paham si karakternya ngomong apaan dan langsung asumsi itu sex related?
@MOONlLETTERS Ya bayangin bila prinsip tidak kawin dianut mayoritas wanita atau semuanya. Mo bikin generasi masyarakatnya gimana plus kebetulan laki-lakinya mikir mending colok bebas aja drpd ribet ngurus wanita. Setiap kita punya tgjawab individu dn kolektif lha, gedek bgt.
traveler’s inheritance makes sense bcs they actually earned it while tb inheriting phainon’s fate is hollow bcs they didn’t carry the weight that comes with phainon’s title. they just walked on the red carpet phainon painstakingly laid down for them.
OK bro take a seat. I will give a long ass shit bout this. Nangis dlu soalnya katanya you don't dare. 😭😭😭 Here we go:
Quoting "Menimbang...." doesn’t prove your point Kak, it actually weakens it. Yes, point (b) mentions ‘orang miskin’. But "Menimbang" is only the 'philosophical background', not the operational rule. In legal hierarchy, what matters is the "Pasal", implementation rules, and judicial practice.
Now let’s talk substance:
Pasal 5 UU 16/2011 defines ‘miskin’ as people who "cannot independently and adequately fulfill basic rights". That’s "structural vulnerability", not just low income. Victims of sexual violence clearly fall into this category because of trauma, stigma, power imbalance, and legal barriers.
You also conveniently ignore:
> PERMA No. 3/2017 - obliges judges to protect women facing the law and ensure access to justice, regardless of economic status.
> UU No. 12/2022 (UU TPKS) - guarantees victims’ rights to legal assistance and recovery, with no “must be poor” requirement.
So no, legal aid today is not limited to “poor people only.” It prioritizes "vulnerable groups", especially survivors of gender-based violence.
About Articles 1 and 14? Here we go~
Article 1 defines legal aid providers. Article 14 regulates state funding. Neither article says: “Non-poor victims are forbidden from using LBH.” So pretending they support your argument is just… wishful reading. 😭😭😭
The real issue here isn’t that, I ‘don’t dare’ to explain the law. It’s that you’re selectively quoting parts that fit your narrative while ignoring:
>PERMA,
> UU TPKS,
>court practice,
>and how LBH actually works.
That’s not legal analysis. That’s cherry-picking. 🔥🔥🔥
And yes being wrong is painful. 😭😭😭 But doubling down while ignoring updated regulations is worse. 😭😭😭😭😭