Your gateway to endless inspiration
already watch most of them I just wanted to save this list to watch later :) (Ro’s probably my favorite essayist on the platform for sure)
Enjoy queer media on youtube? feeling disillusioned, but still want gay shit?
Behold, my list of youtubers doing pop culture commentary I enjoy, in addition to the ones mentioned in the Hbomb video. A couple have links to my favorite videos of theirs, and the rest are listed in honorable mentions.
Lily Alexandre
Princess Weekes
Kat Blaque
Ro Ramdin
Sophie from Mars
CJ the X
Honorable mentions:
Jessie Gender
Strange Aeons
Nick diRamio
Jammidodger
Council of Geeks
The Leftist Cooks
The craziest thing to me to come out of the Hbomber video is finding out the James’s co-writer DIDNT READ OR DO RESEARCH.
Like this guy basically said “woah woah, hang on there guys, I’m a writer, not a reader. Don’t get all upset, common misconception.”
What are your interests
- 🎸
I'll just list what I remember
In no particular order:
BBC ghosts
The cranberries
Hamilton
Dear Evan Hansen
Heathers
The front bottoms
Sodikken
Mr gum
Dancing at lughnasa
Art in general
Impractical jokers
Tattoos and piercings (again just in general)
Noahfinnce
Tomska
Kurtis Conner
Danny Gonzalez
Drew gooden
Hbomberguy
Sad boyz
Chad chad
Clowns
Basically every alternative subculture
Sewing
That's all I can think about so uh yeah
Feel free to talk to me about literally any of these I'm always open to talk to someone who has similar interests
finding out that James Somerton steals literally everything in his videos and the little things he actually writes in his videos are constantly degrading towards women is such a fucking let down
I went back through Harry's video, focused entirely on the sources James Somerton pulled from in the hopes of creating as much of a comprehensive list as I could--though my Google-Fu is not very strong. I did however find something I thought was forever lost and that made me very happy--specifically the magazine Midlands Zone containing the column by Steven Spinks that Harry poignantly used as an illustration of gay erasure... while Somerton uses it to sound like HE is waxing remorseful about the very subject.
This is not a complete list, I'm sure. For one thing, I was only able to attempt to pull sources that Harry himself mentioned in the video. Surely there's so very much more out there. I expect there to be a great deal more internet archeology to unearth just how much writing and culture Somerton has stolen like he's the British Museum of Natural History but for gay people.
- - - - -
Alexander Avila - https://www.youtube.com/@alexander_avila Matt Baume - https://www.youtube.com/@MattBaume Khadija Mbowe - https://www.youtube.com/@KhadijaMbowe Lady Emily - https://www.youtube.com/@LadyEmilyPresents Shanspeare - https://www.youtube.com/@Shanspeare RickiHirsch - https://www.youtube.com/@RickiHirsch VerilyBitchie - https://www.youtube.com/@verilybitchie
Harry created a convenient playlist of videos by these and other people he wants to bring to everyone's attention.
Please give them your support.
- - - - -
After a great deal of searching, I found an archive of the "Midlands Zone" magazine, where you can read through past issues dating all the way back to February 2014. I have also found the issue from which Somerton took Spinks' poignant discussion of gay erasure: Overall archive Specific Issue - Pages 16-17
It will not allow you to download it, but you can read it exactly as it appeared in print form.
- - - - -
Tinker Bells and Evil Queens By Sean Griffin
The Celluloid Closet By Vito Russo Wikipedia article about the book Wikipedia article about the documentary My weak google-fu could not find where you can access the book or documentary. Check your local municipal or university library for book or documentary, or if you know a good source for one or both, please reblog with it added
Camp and the Gay Sensibility By Jack Babuscio
The Groundbreaking Queerness of Disney's Mulan By Jes Tom Personal site with links to social media accounts
Why Rebel Without a Cause was a milestone for gay rights By Peter Howell
Why "The Craft" is still the best Halloween coming out movie By Andrew Park
Opinion: From facehuggers to phallic tails, is 'Alien' one of the queerest films ever? By Dani Leever
Women and Queerness in Horror: Jennifer's Body By Zoe Fortier
[Pride 2019] We Have Such Sights to Show You: Hellraiser and the Spectrum of Queerness By Alejandra Gonzalez
Revealing the Hellbound Heart of Clive Barker's 'Hellraiser' By Colin Arason
Queering James Cameron's Aliens (1986) By Bart Bishop
Demeter and Persephone in space: transformation, femininity, and myth in the 'Alien' films By David Greven
Fears of a millennial masculinity: Scream's queer killers By David Greven (Scholarly site, unable to access original work, offers a way to request a full copy of the text in PDF)
Queer Subtext in Stephen King's It - Part 1: 'Reddie' Character Analysis By Rachel Brands Rachel is the very unfortunate lady who found out she was being stolen from because she supported Somerton through Patreon and saw one of his videos early with her writing--lacking any form of citation or credit
How 'It: Chapter Two' Leaves Richie Tozier Behind By Joelle Monique
When Horror Becomes Strength: Queer Armor in Stephen King's 'IT' By Alex London
Why Queer People Love Witchcraft By Amanda Kohr
'The Favourite' Queers The Past And The Present By Giorgi Plys-Garzotto
(Wuko) Crush (Mako x Wu) By MoonFlower on YouTube
5 Terrible Movies With Awesome Hidden Meanings By J.F. Sargent
The Radicalization of Sexuality: The Queer Casae of Jeffrey Dahmer By Ian Barnard
Netflix's 'Dahmer' backlash highlights ethical issues in the platform's obsession with true crime By Shivani Dubey
The Possible Disturbing Dissonance Between Hajime Isayama's Beliefs and Attack on Titan's Themes Original Article by "Seldom Musings" (Author has made all posts not related to Attack On Titan private and has retired from the blog)
Everyone Loves Attack on Titan. So Why Does Everyone Hate Attack on Titan? By Gita Jackson
- - - - -
Darren Elliott-Smith Michaela Barton David Church Claire Sisco King Amanda Howell Jessica Roy
- - - - -
Telos announced and cancelled a film likely based on this book: The Final Girl Support Group - By Grady Hendrix
- - - - -
I refrained from including certain sources.
First off only focusing on Somerton's work.
Secondly not including anything that might be visible enough to not require amplifying their voice (I cannot speak for all of those I have found links to, but journalism is frequently a thankless job).
Thirdly any source that is of a nature that is antithetical to the very existence of the queer community, such as the right-leaning source that didn't make it into Somerton's video, but Harry was able to identify as a source he had considered using.
If you feel I have missed a mentioned source--or you know of a source from material that was not covered in Harry's video--please do not hesitate to reblog with added details.
- - - - -
All the drama and exposing aside Hbomberguy's video on plagerism really is insightful on the mentalities of people who plagerize
In school they always emphasized how plagerism is bad because you're stealing words and ideas and if you do it we will give you a severe punishment.
But Hbomberguy really opened my eyes to the disrespectful aspect of plagerism. That when someone plagerizes someone else's work they're basically saying "you are so insignificant I can get away with this" and that these ppl will not hesitate to spit in the face of those they stole from.
Plagerism isn't like stealing food. The risk of expulsion and or losing your integrity is far greater than the risk of failing a class or missing a deadline. It is always better to not to commit plagiarism.
I feel like the Hbomberguy plagiarism video has a lot of really good lessons about building an argument. Like, the thesis of the video isn't just "Plagiarism is rife on Youtube", although that point was certainly well made, it was specifically about James Somerton, who isn't mentioned until about halfway through the video. Before then, Hbomb goes through several creators who are already widely discredited as plagiarists, and in each section he introduces concepts that are later incorporated into the final takedown of Somerton, but each section also stands on it's own. Like, he starts with Filip, the game reviewer, which he uses to introduce the format of how he will discuss and expose plagiarists. Specifically, the graphic of displaying the source material while the plagiarist's voice plays, and marking up said source material every time the plagiarist changes some wording slightly. This is the method that Hbomb uses across the entire video. With Illuminaughtii, Hbomb introduces a few major concepts 1) The idea of Insufficient citation. Illuminaughtii "Cites" her sources by putting a plaintext pastebin link in her video descriptions with no indication of how each source was used. Technically, her source is CITED, but not in any relevant or useful way. She has a big list of stuff she read, and a random youtube link in there happens to be the source that she stole 90% of the video from. 2) He introduces the profit motive behind this approach. Putting out a lot of content very quickly is how one builds an audience, and therefore an income, out of making stuff on youtube. Plagiarism of this sort is a way to produce content very quickly and build a following. The Internet Historian section introduces two new concepts:
1) The behavior of an exposed plagiarist, taking down and reuploading videos with minor changes, awkwardly trying to insert credit without admitting guilt. 2) That the plagiarists are stealing not just research, but STYLE. Previous sections go over how the plagiarists are reusing the same words, but this section oozes over how much of the final product's quality was the result of how well the source material was written. TIH didn't just crib the notes from the Mentalfloss article, he created a video heavily dependent on the original author's skill as a writer. When TIH tried his own hand at presenting the same set of facts, it came out much worse. So that when the time comes for the Somerton takedown, Hbomb has already laid the groundwork to bring these concepts back. Somerton takes down and reuploads videos when he's caught, he declares this his video is "based on" work by somebody else without providing proper citation. He's not just stealing research done by somebody else, he's taking their insights and talent as a writer and regurgitating it as his own, and he's doing so to churn out a vast wall of content that he can financially benefit from, and he doesn't need to tell you why this is important, because he's already done so. He already convinced you that Illuminaughtii hiding a line in a pastebin didn't excuse her plagiarism, so you don't need to be told why Somerton saying his video is "Based On" somebody else's book doesn't excuse it.
if you’re wondering how it’s going, internet historian fans have resorted to making up qanon conspiracy theories about hbomb
His Patreon doesn't even have a tier for that much money! It's the easiest thing to fact check!
if you’re wondering how it’s going, internet historian fans have resorted to making up qanon conspiracy theories about hbomb
i know everyone’s dunking on james somerton but i think people are missing out on internet historian’s fans coping so badly that they aren’t finishing the video
Hbomberguy's latest video is the closest thing to watching an actual murder without anyone getting physically hurt. Criminals are very lucky Harry didn't get into law.
Okay for real though can we also talk about internet historian and illuminaughtii?? Cause both those channels also suck and deserve at least a little of the vitriol Mr. Somerton is currently receiving. Illuminaughtii positioned herself as like an expert on bad businesses and exposing mlms and stuff, and internet historian makes dreck that appeals mostly to edgy teenage boys who think saying slurs is funny. The fact that both of them were also just ripping off other people’s work to make such desperately mid content is a little funny ngl. I hope this video tanks both their YouTube careers too.
EDIT: yes I am now aware that Blair’s channel has already tanked as a result of the dramas that unfolded a few months ago while Hbomb was working on this video (1 mil subscriber count but averaging 20k views a video nowadays. Brutal), but let’s still hope internet historian’s follows suit. Everyone has latched onto the James Somerton centerpiece, but internet historian has a Huge platform (and also sucks).
It would be extremely lame if the guy who got his audience by posting 4chan edgelord bait and anti-sjw cringe and is now pretending to be a respectable channel has the only career that survives this exposé.
James Somerton and Internet Historian
Hbomberguy
They mightve stolen other people's writing but he stole their subscribers
Gay pride happens in June and gay wrath happens whenever hbomberguy drops a 3+ hour video essay about a specific topic
If Hbomberguy made this image about me I'd simply walk into the fucking ocean my time on Earth would be over
might have taken like 4 years but oh boy he sure made good on that promise lol
i think the thing that is specifically bothering me about the conversation about the new hbomberguy video ("live your life in a way so that hbomberguy doesn't tear into you for 3 hours", "hbomberguy has figured out how to death note someone through video essays", "oh new hbomberguy video [incredibly dense paragraphs of text] i now despise james somerton") is that it really feels like people aren't paying attention to what hbomberguy was actually saying. like, as much as he wanted to make people aware of the plagiarism issue, he also very explicitly did not like the fact that he might even remotely have a financial incentive to make those sorts of videos. and rather than the last video, which was a "get mad about this" call to action, hbomberguy spent this whole video sympathizing with the people who were directly out indirectly affected, and wanted the focus of people's attention to be on uplifting small queer creators
but also, negativity drives engagement so i guess it's to be expected.
The swiftness and brutality of Hbomberguy’s complete evisceration of James Somerton’s career cannot be overstated.
"internet historian's alt-right anyways" "great day to have never liked james somerton" "never even heard of illuminaughtii before this lol"
that's great buddy but don't go around thinking you're immune to this. if you're not looking for plagiarism, you likely won't notice it unless its egregiously obvious. hell, you've probably consumed plagiarized content without even realizing it. even hbomb pointed out that these people disguised what they presented pretty well as long as you didn't try and dig deeper. don't come away just thinking of this as a callout piece, take this as an important lesson about vetting your sources. if googling scripts in quotes was enough to expose the original, we should all start doing that shit!!
*putting the exact same sources from wikipedia into my little school project, sweating nervously*
“Okay but what if hbomberguy finds out”
Since we're all talking about plagiarism now, I'd like to share this video which came out last year about a paper accepted at the CVPR 2022:
For the people not in the know, the Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition conference is the biggest conference in computer science. Last year, in 2022, the paper featured in the video got accepted. A few days later, this video was posted. The first author, a PhD student, apologized and the paper was retracted and removed from the proceedings. Hilariously, the first reaction of the co-authors, including a professor at the Seoul National University, was to say that they had nothing to do with it.
My point here is that scientific papers are not rigorously checked for plagiarism, and a background in academia tells you absolutely nothing about whether or not someone will be diligent in avoiding plagiarism. The biggest difference is that there are consequences if you're caught.
I also don't want people to be too harsh on the first author of this paper, or to think the situation is equivalent to the whole Somerton debacle. For starters, you don't get paid for publishing papers, you (or more commonly your university) pay the publishers. But the phrase publish or perish exists for a reason, and everyone in the field wants to get published in the CVPR, because it's supposed to show that you're great at research. Additionally, the number of papers and the prestige of the venues they're published in criteria on which you will be evaluated as a researcher and a university employee.
The way I see it, there are basically two kinds of plagiarism that are shown in the video. The first one concerns sentences that are lifted completely unchanged from other papers. This is bad, and it is plagiarism, but I can see how this would happen. Most instances of this appear in the introduction and on background information, so if you're insecure about your mastery of English and it's not about your contribution anyway, I can understand how you would take the shortcut of copy-pasting and tell yourself that it's just so that the rest of the paper makes sense, and why waste time on phrasing things differently if others have done it already, and it's not like there are a million way to write these equations anyways.
Let me be clear. I don't approve, or condone. It's still erasing the work of the people who took the time and pain to phrase these things. It's still plagiarism. But I understand how you could get to that point.
The second kind of plagiarism is a way bigger deal in my opinion. At 0:37 , we can see that one of the contributions of the paper is also lifted from another paper. Egregiously, the passage includes "To the best of our knowledge, this is the first [...]" , which is a hell of a thing to copy-paste. So this is not only lazily passing other people's words as your own, it's also pretending that you're making a contribution you damn well know other people have already done. I also wasn't able to find a version of the plagiarized article that had been published in a peer-reviewed venue, which might mean that the authors submitted it, got rejected, and published it on arXiv (an website on which authors can put their papers so that they're accessible to the public, but doesn't "count" as a publication because it's not peer-reviewed. You can also put papers that are under review or have been published on there as long as you're careful with the copyrights and double-blind process). And then parts of it were published in the CVPR under someone else's name.
I think there's also a third kind of plagiarism going on here, one that is incredibly common in academia, but that is not shown in the video. That's the FIVE other authors, including a professor, who were apparently happy to add their name to the paper but obviously didn't do anything meaningful since they didn't notice how much plagiarism was going on.