The Downfall of Bhaalspawn (contains possible SJW discussions)



I do not know. All I do know is Peet whines about Bayonetta because she doesn't dress practical for battle and

even goes so far to whine about video game and anime women not dressed for battle practically and yet she has her

OC dressed sexy looking. I know someone could say but the second drawing was the only one in a battle but still

at the same time Peet just shows that she is a "do as I say, not as I do" type of person.

Also, Take a look at how Lizzy approaches someone feeling the unhealthy amount of Tumblr White Guilt.

Such a stark difference.
Friendship, Art, and Magic (2019) - Celebrated Derpibooru's seventh year anniversary with friends.

Y'all are stupid!
I think the main reason i like starlight is that she reminds me a lot of S1 twilight. You guys remember how irresponsible she was and used magic to solve the problems. That's because she was learning just like starlight is now.

And yeah, i agree that turning her good was a bit odd but hey, it's mlp, what would you expect?

Too bad peet can't seem to listen to nobody else. Talk about being 'open-minded' (she's the real nazi, i'm telling ya)

Here have some old and slightly new Lizzy related links and copy and paste.


Hi there, sorry for the late response.

Ok, so first of all, the wage gap is totally a myth. You’ve probably heard that before, but it’s true. It is literally against the law (has been since the 60s) to pay someone less for the same job because of gender. Also, if companies COULD pay women less and get away with it, why the hell hire men at all? If they hired women, then they wouldn’t have to pay employees as much! But because the wage gap does not exist, we do not see an influx of women being hired rather then men.

The perceived wage gap is due to the choices of women, we are simply not as confrontational as men in terms of trying to ask for raises/bonuses. We also do not usually work as many hours. Here are some good videos/articles on this subject:

As for your second point, I can see why you think this may be considered oppression, however, I have a different view on the subject. After all, the legging rule was abolished, was it not? That means the school agreed with you and had tis rule changed. You see, dress code rules are usually buried deep within the district’s policies. It can take a long time and a lot of fighting to get them changed. The fact that it was changed at all means the staff of your school really cared!

As for the dances, while I agree that the chaperones should have done something, but I would offer a counterpoint. Is this really oppression? I understand that grinding is disgusting if done without consent, but I would say the best choice of action in the situation was to simply refuse to dance. If it was making several other girls uncomfortable, they had the rights to leave/stop dancing whenever they pleased. (That is my understanding of the situation)

Also, if the boys were allowed to do it, that means the girls were likely able to as well. The chaperones likely didn’t do anything because they really didn’t want to have to bother trying to herd the boys. Still a problem, but not oppression in my opinion. This is a very small problem.

Thank you for your time!


I’ll be honest, I got pretty angry reading this, but I’m going to make a firm effort to avoid being rude or personalizing. I think this argument is heavily flawed and misogynistic, but I have always believed in discrediting the argument, not the arguer.

For starters, the wage gap absolutely does exist; it’s just never put on public display until exposed. Yes, it is illegal in the United States to alter payments out of discrimination, but big companies have never let the law stop them from being unethical. Wage discrepancies are either never discovered (as discussing finances with others, especially coworkers, is a social faux pas) or never addressed.

People who are oppressed in the workplace are usually in a position where they cannot afford to confront their employers about it. They could be threatened with job termination or even worse working conditions, especially if the worker cannot afford to be unemployed. The wage gap does exist; it’s just that companies know how to hide their shady business practices to save public image, especially if they are powerful enough to ignore trifles like equal pay.

Also (and here’s where I’m really trying to be non-personal here), it is pretty insulting to say that career women trying to compete with men in male-dominated industries are held back from climbing the corporate ladder by “their choice.” There is nothing in a woman’s psyche that makes us less confrontational than men. Women facing the glass ceiling are ruthless badasses, and they don’t care about the feminine stereotype of submissiveness when it gets in the way of their upward stride.

Personally, I think if one told a female lawyer that the unfair treatment in her career field was the fault of her being too hesitant to ask for anything or because she naturally doesn’t work as hard as the men in her firm, one would be very surprised by that woman’s impassioned response.

As for the part of women not getting hired more because their pay is lower, the interesting thing is that has already happened. I know this has probably come up in your history classes, but during WWII, women were finally able to step into the work force en masse because all the men were off fighting. It was a massive leap in modern feminism, even with the wage gap, because men ere floored to come home and find that women were holding up society and the economy and actually getting stuff done without their help. Not only that, it was actually difficult for men to get their jobs back and resume their “rightful place” as the breadwinners of the household precisely because women were working as hard as them but for less pay.

(This is actually my favorite piece of US history, because of how vital is was for women being taken seriously and becoming financially independent.)

But, of course, men did find their way back into dominating most professions, as we can see by the gender discrimination in the work force today. It akes a long time for laws and attitudes to change, and one of those attitudes was the belief that men were stronger, more capable and more diligent than women. This is why this historic influx of women workers has not persisted to the modern day. Sexist beliefs found a way, as they are wont to do.

As for the dress code issue, for the most part, I do agree with you. The rule was changed, and that’s a positive thing. The only thing I would say is that it’s likely the boys’ dress code wouldn’t be this hotly debated. But yes: the stupid rule was abolished, and that says something.

I do take an issue with your take on the dance situation, however: there should not be so much emphasis on the girls’ ability to refuse to dance or leave. For starters, their refusals could be left unheard or outright ignored by the guilty party. It might also be hard to worm out of a crowded space. But here’s the more important issue: they should not feel the need to leave.

If the situation is presented or enforced as having only two options: get groped (which is sexual assault) or needing to leave, then that is oppression. A dance should be enjoyable and safe for everyone, and so the girls feeling that they have to leave to feel safe and secure is misogynistic treatment. We shouldn’t emphasize on their choice to leave, but rather on making it so that they don’t feel that is their only choice. Their right a safe environment is infinitely more important.

The chaperones need to enforce more control over sexual assault. Not wanting to “herd in the boys” is negligent and lazy behavior, and those were probably not the best people to put in charge, if that’s how they’re going to respond. Leaving should be the last resort and never the best option. Telling the girls to go home is putting consequences on the wrong party.

And again, none of this is meant to start shit. I think your argument that oppression against women not existing in America is wrong, and as a feminist I couldn’t turn a blind eye to this, but the last thing I want to do is start the hate train.

the-sonicjester asked:
What you think on people who just Shit on all Christens like Marlen Manson who calls it a religion for the blind, to Dimmu Borgir who has stated he is a Satanist in real life and has said that Satan is the true good god and the Christian god "Is a vile evil monster and all his Christen followers are either very stupid or just as evil as he is" and has called Jesus a con man, To the guy who wrote the Satanic Bible in the 1960s who blames all the worlds Racism Sexism and Bigotry on Christianity

lily-peet answered:

I want to make it clear that the following is an explanation. NOT a justification. Please read to the end, and then feel free to yell at me if I’ve touched a nerve. At that point I will have thoroughly deserved it.

Historical precedent.

As much as I appreciate biblical lore, and generally find it fascinating to examine, there’s no denying that Christianity is the religion with the bloodiest history. The Crusades, The Inquisition, The Holocaust, everything the Klu Klux Klan has ever done, the colonial genocide, the Witch Hunts, the current softball-terrorism of the GOP and the Tories, the hardball-terrorism of the Alt-Right and similar groups, the list goes on.

Additionally, in the modern era, when a Christian goes on a rampage and kills a shitload of people, it’s a lone wolf. When a Muslim goes on a rampage and kills a shitload of people, it’s the onset of ISIS and Sharia Law. That double-standard and hand-waving is made by, surprise surprise, the American Christian Right.

Now, as anyone with even the barest amount of knowledge regarding mythology will know: Christ preached tolerance, kindness, empathy, generosity, feeding the poor, healing the sick, and all manner of things that today’s Christian Right loves to call “Cultural Marxist, SJW Propaganda.” And I have been very vocal recently regarding the fact that the Crusades, the Inquisition, the Nazis and American Conservatives are complete, total liars when they call themselves “Christian” because they practice none of it’s values and behave like sanctimonious dipshits and are proudly smug about their own ignorance.

Similar to the way ISIS doesn’t have an ounce of actual Islam in their bodies and actively try to eradicate people who actually practice Islam, your average neo-nazi or Republican doesn’t have an ounce of actual Christianity in them.

But, much like ISIS, the actions of neo-nazis and Republicans color the perception of people who don’t know much about Christianity and it isn’t a positive coloring. However, while actual Muslims are actively fighting groups like ISIS, the Taliban or similar groups in the Middle East and trying very hard to prevent them gaining any ground, a lot of American “Christians” seem content to turn a blind eye to creeping neo-nazis and do whatever they can to distance themselves and assert that it’s “Nothing to do with me.”

I suppose this comes down to the fact that so few people actually practice it’s values, but many American “Christians” will always complain that people have a bad opinion about their religion, but seem to not want to actually DO anything about it. They want people to ignore those “radicals” while they immediately turn around and start declaring Islam as a whole a cult of genocide when some vaguely middle-eastern person snaps and kills someone.

9/11 has been used time and time again as a “WE’RE STILL HERE” rallying cry despite the reality that the United States as a whole had shrugged off the effects of 9/11 within a few months and killed far more people in the resulting 15-year long war. The World Trade Center itself has been completely rebuilt.

Less than 3,000 people died on 9/11. Approximately 1.3 Million have been killed in the following revenge war.

So when another conservative pundit is banging his fist about how Islamic terrorism is a scourge on humanity that must be eradicated no matter the cost, kindly remind him of a very important line from his own religion he barely practices: Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

Real Christians know where the problem comes from, and that’s where they direct their anger and their ire. As they should be. Follow their example and don’t give fundamentalists any ground.


Stop referring to Christ as a “mythological” figure. It’s insulting, not only to Him, but to everyone who believes He actually came to Earth (including me). To us, Jesus Christ was a historical figure.

If you still want to make a distinction between your beliefs and ours, then at least call it “religious history.”


Jerry talks about Ink Rose and how she is “wrong thinking”.


Originally posted by welcometoyouredoom

I do so love when I’m told I have to be a feminist. That sounds just like modern feminism to try to force a woman to have a political belief she doesn’t want to have.

“Freedom of choice for everyone! Oh, unless you’re a woman who chooses to be conservative, then you need to die.” (And yes, Lily has called for the deaths of all Conservatives multiple times. It’s almost like a drinking game at this point. Would have died by now if I drank, and I’m not even really exaggerating all that much).

But anyway, this kind of stuff is why the block button is a beautiful thing.


Anya, feminism means a multitude of different things to a lot of different people. My psychology teacher in senior year told the class that while she did support equality for all genders (and no, not just men and woman), she didn’t consider herself a “feminist” because she considered them to be people who actively participate in the promotion of those ideals and not just people who supported them in their daily lives. I honestly don’t care whether you would label yourself a feminist or not. I know you often support basic feminist ideals such as women being portrayed positively in movies (see your reblog about the many muscular, beautiful women in Wonder Woman, with their practical armor), and that’s great. You see equality as something that should be natural and expected.

But you know what’s a real problem? And it’s something I see every time I browse your blog. There are a lot of things that you reblog that are extremely misogynistic and occasionally transphobic, and I don’t see them having anything to do with being conservative.

For example, as a conservative, you very clearly hold that abortion is morally wrong. Everyone’s uncomfortable with it; and no one would fight you on having such a strong opinion about it. That’s a conservative belief, and that’s fine. What’s not fine are the posts on your blog demonizing Planned Parenthood and everyone it serves (I’m referring to the post of everyone saying they’d never date a person who’d had an abortion), and crying out for it to be criminizalized. You’re harshly judging women (and trans-men) who get abortions, and I will remind you from one Christian to another that judgement is God’s job, not ours. You are also saying your personal beliefs should affect the law and therefore everyone else. Abortion is a necessity, especially with poor sex education, poor access to birth control and high rates of sexual assault. This is not inherently conservative, but it is inherently misogynistic.

Also, saying that the wage gap or women’s oppression in America is wrong is just factually wrong. There is such an overwhelming amount of evidence against this viewpoint that you’d really need to reach to find even one semi-credible source to counter all of it. It’s comparable to anti-vaxxers to cling to such a paltry amount of evidence to uphold your beliefs. Oppression (and by extension the wage gap) simply do exist, and saying otherwise, especially to a large audience, is actually harmful.

Oh, and your reblogged post comparing trans and non-binary genders to fingers is both transphobic and factually incorrect. The concept of there being more than two genders is widespread and extends to many cultures for farther back than perhaps you would believe. LGBT+ people simply do exist, and yes — they like to ship a lot of LGBT+ couple on Tumblr. If you think that they are imposing anything onto you, you really need to remember how much heteronormativity has been imposed on them for ages and just let them have their fun in one of the few spaces they reliably can.

My point, Anya, is that while I still believe you to be a smart, reasonable human being — and neither Lily or myself consider you to be “evil” — you exhibit some pretty poor behavior in regards to women, reproductive rights and especially the LGBT+. And all of that equates to misogyny. I, a woman, am telling you, another woman, that you are being a misogynist when you do these things. It’s hateful, harmful and insensitive to the lives and struggles of real-life people, and you would do well to reflect on all of this the next time you reblog anything similar to the small handful of posts I’ve used as examples.

Feminism is not about imposing anything — not beliefs, lifestyles or defiance of conventional femininity — but it does involve taking a stand against things that are wrong and damaging to society as a whole. And third-wave feminism does have its flaws, as this is the time where we’re trying to iron out the wrinkles in society as the more blatant sexism in the world has (for the most part) been taken care of. But while I can’t nor wouldn’t force you to do or be anything, I am telling you as strongly as I can that you need to really think about what I’ve said here. Do your reblogs only reflect your views as a conservative, or are they harmful to other people.

Edit: Oh, and side note for the original poster. You know what Lily’s fucking name is.

You know, people give Lily a lot of shit for “hating different opinions” and “creating an echo chamber,” and so those same people tend to expect me to be exactly that: blindly agreeing with everything she says or, worse, at risk of her leaving me if I tell her she’s wrong about anything. But here’s the reality: I disagree with Lily A LOT. And that’s okay with her.

I mean, I’m a Christian with staunch views about morality, whereas Lily is an atheist who sees morality as a social construct rather than some cosmic truth. You’d think that that fact alone would clue people in that we have to differ somewhere, but apparently not.

Also, if I’m being truly honest here, I really didn’t like Lily’s most recent GoW. In fact, it’s even surpassed Sympathy Pains as my least favourite. I think it makes some good points here and there — I also think the internet has some skewed ideas about the balance of opinions, and she did set the record straight debunking more “echo chamber” complaints — but through most of the video I found myself having a lot of “Excuse me?” moments or seeing what Lily was trying to get across but failing to do so.

The big one was one I overheard as Lily was editing the video while I was in the room: that disagreeing with a differing opinion while still respecting one was an oxymoron. I actually stopped what I was doing and asked to read the entire script because…what???

Disagreement does not equate to disrespect. Example: Lily disagrees with my religious beliefs on the simple basis that she believes there is no God so therefore I am wrong to believe there is one, but she would never disrespect my beliefs. She would never try to tell me I’m wrong or forsake my religion, or even make me feel stupid for having those beliefs. And no, that’s not just her respect for me as a person talking; she has that same respect for all religions because that’s what the right to religious freedom is: respecting those opinions even if you disagree with them.

Now, there are many cases where the actual opinions in question imply disrespect. If you disagree with someone’s opinion that gay marriage is a crime, then of course you won’t have any respect for it because their opinion means they’re homophobic and want people’s basic rights taken away. My point is that you can absolutely respect an opinion without agreeing with it, and if you don’t, then the reason why is important to consider before criticizing someone for “hating different opinions.”

That’s why it really bothered me when Lily said that certain people only held to that philosophy because it “sounds correct.” Now, saying that specific people (in general, not just those mentioned in the video) only preach that saying without actually practicing it is fine, but in reality respect without agreement is a perfectly fine way to approach another opinion (but again, with discretion).

And that brings me to another point in the video I didn’t like: Lily treating discussions like a debate in which there is a clear right and wrong. All communication, be it casual conversation or serious discourse, is all about coming to a shared understanding, even though that in and of itself is impossible because everyone interprets information differently. A lot of opinions don’t fall into strict right or wrong categories (though a lot still do), and the object of a discussion is often not to be right or convince the other person that they’re wrong but rather for everyone to appreciate other opinions’ merits and either factor them into your own opinions or use them as a basis for a rebuttal.

Discussion is about understanding; an argument is about right and wrong. If you approach the former as if it’s the latter, then of course people are going to be frustrated or offended when their opinions are dismissed or disrespected. People are sharing their thoughts to join into a conversation, and they expect a response, even a critical one, to be met in the same fashion. If you approach it like an argument, where everyone understands that they’re trying to prove the other person wrong and that there’s likely a conclusion somewhere, then you’ve essentially shut down the conversation and no one else is going to want to engage.

I could go on, but I feel like the topic’s gotten away from me enough already. My point is that I, the person closest to Lily, disagree with her a lot, and the fact that she’s okay with that and welcomes the chance to have thoughtful discussions with me when the chance arises should be a massive signal that maybe Lily’s echo chamber doesn’t actually exist?

And regardless of what you think of her, that doesn’t give you the right to misgender or deadname her. If you think respect for trans people is given out on an individual basis, then that speaks more negatively about yourself than about her.

No one who has ever accused Lily of abusing them or me has ever sincerely come to me about anything. Josh didn’t, even when I was in his Skype contacts at the time. Sega tries to warn me “to get out while I can,” but quickly ignores me correcting her that nothing she says is actually happening. Finger sent me and email (getting my email address without permission, mind you), but it was a clear attempt at getting me to spill dirt on Lily for him to use.

They all assume they’re right. They don’t ask me what’s going on, if I’m fine or anything. None of the assertions that I’m being abused have actual evidence or confirmation.

And the fact that they don’t even try for it, and even deliberately ignore me when I prove them wrong, proves how full of shit those assertions are.

They don’t care about my “situation.”

They don’t care about “abuse,” real or imagined.

All they care about is trying to make Lily look bad. That’s it.


yeah she really is so willing to defend someone who even she scolded for treating Jesus who at least has some

sort of evidence that he was a real person as a mythical figure. Now that I think about it wasn't the second post

the reason people started to get even more worried that Peet might be abusing Lizzy?

Stupid wop dago
We have Brittney, josh, and Blake as good examples of how peet treats people. But she's not gonna listen, only make excuses. Might actually make a segment on her on the Peet series.


yeah I am aware of those three after all can't talk about Peet with out remembering those three and how they helped

expose Peet. I know I said this before but a part of me still pities Lizzy.


yeah just look at me throwing Peet's logic back at her.

Peet's logic: drawing questionable things means you support it.

Also Peet's logic: uses her fanfic with pedo and incest themes as a way to say she doesn't support pedo's.
Bizarre Tibetan Sand Fox
Wallet After Summer Sale -


Okay everyone I have a serious question and it like tots has nothing to do with the fact I am trying to rewatch all

of Linkara's review of ASBAR but would Peet be able to tell that Dick Grayson age 12 can fly and that Vikki Vale is

on a date with Bruce Wayen? XD


So what on earth did Silver Quill do to have Peet say this.

anonymous asked:
What do you think of Dr Wolf as a person?

I’m going to keep my mouth shut about Dr Wolf as a person, because every time I praise a member of the Analysis Community for being either smart, reasonable, nuanced, or just nice, they ALWAYS make me eat those words less than a week later.

It’s the one thing I am consistently wrong about.

I have a feeling that I know who Peet is just lying about. Since I have a feeling Peet is talking about Josh and

Ink Rose…….Now that I think about it what on earth KP do to have her say something like that?
Interested in advertising on Derpibooru? Click here for information!
Wukrii - A Fantasy Adventure Comic

Derpibooru costs over $25 a day to operate - help support us financially!

Syntax quick reference: *bold* _italic_ [spoiler]hide text[/spoiler] @code@ +underline+ -strike- ^sup^ ~sub~