DailyDesperateDumps (Daily Bumps) - Part 106

[Cgl33]

No reason to worry parents! Missy Hollister has deemed MOMO as a HOAX.

She’s not the only one who thinks it’s a hoax. Phil DeFranco did a show about it.

[onbreak]

I think snapchat should have a momo face

Sent from my LG-M257 using Tapatalk

[Theirmom]

No reason to worry parents! Missy Hollister has deemed MOMO as a HOAX.

It is a hoax.

I’m actually somewhat convinced that it was a deliberate hoax to show how gullible and media-illiterate the vast majority of adults are. Apparently fact checking and critical thinking skills are rare traits.
I want to believe that everyone who fell for the hoax is ashamed of their gullibility and will learn from this. I want to believe that that they will be embarrassed at being duped, and that it will inspire people to be more skeptical and discerning. I want to believe that maybe now people will fact check before spreading obvious fake news. But I won’t hold my breath on that.

[lmmomSD]

No reason to worry parents! Missy Hollister has deemed MOMO as a HOAX.

It is a hoax.

I’m actually somewhat convinced that it was a deliberate hoax to show how gullible and media-illiterate the vast majority of adults are. Apparently fact checking and critical thinking skills are rare traits.
I want to believe that everyone who fell for the hoax is ashamed of their gullibility and will learn from this. I want to believe that that they will be embarrassed at being duped, and that it will inspire people to be more skeptical and discerning. I want to believe that maybe now people will fact check before spreading obvious fake news. But I won’t hold my breath on that.

I am SO with you on the lack of critical thinking skills in so many people! People who take vloggers at face value and believe the "happy family" are high on my list of those lacking that skill.
But even being a hoax, if it got more parents to pay attention to what their kids are watching on YouTube, it served a purpose as far as I am concerned. One news story about it my daughter showed me had a little boy who apparently had free rein watching YT alone in his room, and he couldn't have been more than 6.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

[lmmomSD]

Does he really think he looks good? [IMG]//uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201903 ... d0c8e5.jpg[/IMG]

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

[melihey]

Bryan and Missy answering Instagram questions be like... "nah we're not having anymore kids until the ones we already have are able to sleep on their own in their bed for the whole night without bothering us"

Yeah well breaking news, dear Bryan and Missy: that's called parenting! Kids come with responsibilities and therefore having to meet your kids needs. You two shouldn't be parents at all if you don't want to be bothered by your children

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

That’s bullshit. At three and a half and almost six, they absolutely SHOULD be in their own beds and sleeping through the night.
Every once in a while is fine, but if my kids were crawling into my bed every night at that age I’d be annoyed too.

But, they’re allowing it to happen at this point. It won’t happen magically. They’ll have to actually walk them back to their room every time they try to get in their bed. And at some point, they’ll have to discipline and give consequences for getting out of bed for anything other than using the bathroom, being legitimately ill or an emergency.
I get the feeling that the only “discipline” those boys get is being chastised in the moment, but absolutely zero follow through on consequences. If they want them to respect the boundary of their bed being just for mum and dad, they first have to teach them respect and boundaries.

That's what I meant by "parenting", taking their responsibilities to get their kids to sleep in their own bed But I also think that Missy & Bryan don't want to be bothered to go through that and teaching their kids to stay in bed... takes too much efforts I guess

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

[lmmomSD]

Oh-- and another thing about that picture. YouTube is currently dealing with pedophiles commenting on vlogs with children.
So what does Bryan do? Post pictures of his sons half naked on a public account. F*cking selfish, self-centered and self-seeking moron.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

[honeybear]

why would she buy a new helmet with a visor? she never wears a helmet when riding anyways.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Theirmom]

Oh-- and another thing about that picture. YouTube is currently dealing with pedophiles commenting on vlogs with children.
So what does Bryan do? Post pictures of his sons half naked on a public account. F*cking selfish, self-centered and self-seeking moron.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

This just rubs me the wrong way.
He posted a normal, sweet photo of himself and his kids. There’s nothing inappropriate about the photo.

It’s pretty shitty to parent-shame someone for posting a completely innocent picture of their kids because pervs exist.
Really no different at all to saying women should dress modestly if they don’t want to be assaulted.

Also, pedos don’t care if kids are half naked or fully clothed. They are sexually attracted to children. The same way normal people experience sexual and romantic attraction. So, just like you or I or most normal people can be attracted to someone, fully clothed in a 3-piece-suit, stripped down and oiled up, or lounging in sweats, pedos feel that same sick attraction to kids.

It’s gross to victim and parent shame people because they don’t live their lives hiding from sickos.

[lmmomSD]

Oh-- and another thing about that picture. YouTube is currently dealing with pedophiles commenting on vlogs with children.
So what does Bryan do? Post pictures of his sons half naked on a public account. F*cking selfish, self-centered and self-seeking moron.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

This just rubs me the wrong way.
He posted a normal, sweet photo of himself and his kids. There’s nothing inappropriate about the photo.

It’s pretty shitty to parent-shame someone for posting a completely innocent picture of their kids because pervs exist.
Really no different at all to saying women should dress modestly if they don’t want to be assaulted.

Also, pedos don’t care if kids are half naked or fully clothed. They are sexually attracted to children. The same way normal people experience sexual and romantic attraction. So, just like you or I or most normal people can be attracted to someone, fully clothed in a 3-piece-suit, stripped down and oiled up, or lounging in sweats, pedos feel that same sick attraction to kids.

It’s gross to victim and parent shame people because they don’t live their lives hiding from sickos.

I see your point, but it was the timing that rubbed me the wrong way. And honestly, I don't see any reason anyone needs to post pictures of their kids on public accounts. Maybe that means "hiding from sickos". But that's what the internet is. And they know it. And yet they are still exploiting their kids for a living. And when YouTube was demonetizing videos, they went in and changed titles, and then when the scare was over they changed them right back. So it wasn't about protecting the kids for them. It was about protecting the income. Ellie and Jared are scrambling to get their kids Instagram accounts "secured", but not to protect the boys. It's to protect the money.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

[lmmomSD]

why would she buy a new helmet with a visor? she never wears a helmet when riding anyways.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

She got thrown big time the other day. I think it finally put some fear of what could happen into her.

And it's too late to edit my last post, but I wanted to say that it is not the same as victim shaming a woman who dresses provocatively (which I agree isn't an ok thing to do) Because Ollie and Finn are not consenting to this. They can't. They don't understand how many people are seeing their picture. None of these kids have any idea how much of their lives are out there for public consumption.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

[emilyrose26]

Oh-- and another thing about that picture. YouTube is currently dealing with pedophiles commenting on vlogs with children.
So what does Bryan do? Post pictures of his sons half naked on a public account. F*cking selfish, self-centered and self-seeking moron.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

This just rubs me the wrong way.
He posted a normal, sweet photo of himself and his kids. There’s nothing inappropriate about the photo.

It’s pretty shitty to parent-shame someone for posting a completely innocent picture of their kids because pervs exist.
Really no different at all to saying women should dress modestly if they don’t want to be assaulted.

Also, pedos don’t care if kids are half naked or fully clothed. They are sexually attracted to children. The same way normal people experience sexual and romantic attraction. So, just like you or I or most normal people can be attracted to someone, fully clothed in a 3-piece-suit, stripped down and oiled up, or lounging in sweats, pedos feel that same sick attraction to kids.

It’s gross to victim and parent shame people because they don’t live their lives hiding from sickos.

A sweet photo? Nah that's him trying to show off his "guns". Such an awesome role model for those kids(!)

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

[mrsglittersparkles]

Mithy’s listhp dwives me insthane.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Theirmom]

Oh-- and another thing about that picture. YouTube is currently dealing with pedophiles commenting on vlogs with children.
So what does Bryan do? Post pictures of his sons half naked on a public account. F*cking selfish, self-centered and self-seeking moron.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

This just rubs me the wrong way.
He posted a normal, sweet photo of himself and his kids. There’s nothing inappropriate about the photo.

It’s pretty shitty to parent-shame someone for posting a completely innocent picture of their kids because pervs exist.
Really no different at all to saying women should dress modestly if they don’t want to be assaulted.

Also, pedos don’t care if kids are half naked or fully clothed. They are sexually attracted to children. The same way normal people experience sexual and romantic attraction. So, just like you or I or most normal people can be attracted to someone, fully clothed in a 3-piece-suit, stripped down and oiled up, or lounging in sweats, pedos feel that same sick attraction to kids.

It’s gross to victim and parent shame people because they don’t live their lives hiding from sickos.

A sweet photo? Nah that's him trying to show off his "guns". Such an awesome role model for those kids(!)

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

You only think that because of who it is. If it were any other family you’d have no problem with it.

It’s a cute pose, and both boys look happy. Not everyone here has a hate on for this family. The point of this site is to gossip and snark. It’s not a competition of who can prove they dislike them the most.

[emilyrose26]

This just rubs me the wrong way.
He posted a normal, sweet photo of himself and his kids. There’s nothing inappropriate about the photo.

It’s pretty shitty to parent-shame someone for posting a completely innocent picture of their kids because pervs exist.
Really no different at all to saying women should dress modestly if they don’t want to be assaulted.

Also, pedos don’t care if kids are half naked or fully clothed. They are sexually attracted to children. The same way normal people experience sexual and romantic attraction. So, just like you or I or most normal people can be attracted to someone, fully clothed in a 3-piece-suit, stripped down and oiled up, or lounging in sweats, pedos feel that same sick attraction to kids.

It’s gross to victim and parent shame people because they don’t live their lives hiding from sickos.

A sweet photo? Nah that's him trying to show off his "guns". Such an awesome role model for those kids(!)

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

You only think that because of who it is. If it were any other family you’d have no problem with it.

It’s a cute pose, and both boys look happy. Not everyone here has a hate on for this family. The point of this site is to gossip and snark. It’s not a competition of who can prove they dislike them the most.

Excuse you? Don't you dare presume to tell me why I think something.

I could say so much more, but I won't stoop to your level.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

[onbreak]

He's come a long way

w5tfp.jpeg

Sent from my LG-M257 using Tapatalk

[Theirmom]

Excuse you? Don't you dare presume to tell me why I think something.

I could say so much more, but I won't stoop to your level.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

Stoop to my level? Lol

Okay muffin.

[Cgl33]

If they know there’s a pedophile problem with youtube kids and they are posting shirtless pictures of their kids to a public account, then they are part of the problem.

[Theirmom]

If they know there’s a pedophile problem with youtube kids and they are posting shirtless pictures of their kids to a public account, then they are part of the problem.

I disagree entirely.
You could literally say the same thing about any parent who ever posts a photo on social media.

Or any parent who takes their kid to a public pool/splash pad/beach.

Or any parent who leaves their kids with adults from organizations that have been historically surrounded by abuse controversy. IE- Catholic Church, scouts, gymnastics, figure skating, football, swim team, etc

Parents who choose not to live their life hiding their children are NOT “part of the problem”. Pedophiles are the problem. Systems that protect abusers are the problem.

[melihey]

If they know there’s a pedophile problem with youtube kids and they are posting shirtless pictures of their kids to a public account, then they are part of the problem.

I disagree entirely.
You could literally say the same thing about any parent who ever posts a photo on social media.

Or any parent who takes their kid to a public pool/splash pad/beach.

Or any parent who leaves their kids with adults from organizations that have been historically surrounded by abuse controversy. IE- Catholic Church, scouts, gymnastics, figure skating, football, swim team, etc

Parents who choose not to live their life hiding their children are NOT “part of the problem”. Pedophiles are the problem. Systems that protect abusers are the problem.

Yes but there is a difference posting a picture on social media when you know you have x amount of public viewers vs. posting it on your facebook in a private album for the grandparents and aunts/oncles to see...

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk