Selective readers who are “hate follows” invade my personal blog, demand that they have the right to dictate what is posted here and ignore anything that will impede their confirmation bias of my "inherent" anger (hi racist stereotype) or derail their selective reading and general assholery. The truth is there are now 3,430 posts on my blog since May 2012 of so many topics/types of content, and the screen cap below the tweet above is from my archive of just February thus far.
What these people really mean is: "When I chose to invade your personal blog and pretend like it is The New York Times that I pay a subscription for, it made me uncomfortable to have to confront my own privilege—privilege such that I could actually ignore your blog and continue having that same privilege but also privilege in that I feel entitled to your space in the first place and thereby will only acknowledge posts that confirm my bias. Nevermind that your actual archive reflects the diversity in content type that you share or that I am not your intended audience or that you don’t owe me shit. I was also bothered by your personal experiences shared because it forces me to consider you as a human being, which I refuse to do of course, and that internal conflict of mine means that I will reblog your posts and derail them or just add slurs upon reblog."
Yanno…I’ve seen this before, actually.
And if the trolling and slurs are only in response to “anger” on my blog, why do Black women that I know who only post images, fashion or natural hair still get hate mail daily? What is that based on? Right.
Finally, not all critical posts are “negative.” Rejecting bigotry and deconstructing oppression while asserting my humanity or the humanity of other Black women/people who face oppression is positive.