Chandler Ainsley

[likeaphrodite]

lmaoooo she just put up some stories asking for diverse Hades and Persephone retellings. and she made a POINT that she wanted them to be DIVERSE. not WHITE or STRAIGHT.

lmao WHAT. she's read over 200 books this year and maybe (and i'm being generous!) 15 of them have been by POC or LGBT people. she's probably read 100 m/m romances by straight women though lol.

like we all know that she's performative but the fact that she makes it so obvious is ... fascinating. and embarrassing.

lmao the obsession she has with m/m romances when either earlier this year or last year she was shouting out Chick Fil A... mess. Not surprised she of all people is obsessed with the genre of m/m romance since it does nothing but fetishize queer men and that is basically right up her alley.

I agree with all your points re: Chandler, including her reading preferences, but I think that's a reductive take on the entire m/m romance genre. There are a number of cis and trans men and nonbinary people writing m/m, it's not just straight women. I wouldn't say it does nothing but fetishize queer men. It definitely CAN, but it isn't inherent in a book being considered 'm/m romance.' There are also queer men who read and like the genre. I've seen queer men speak up against women writing m/m, but I've also seen a good number of queer men speak out in support. I'm a queer woman, not a man, and I wouldn't tell anyone how they should feel about their representation, but I also would say it's not so open and shut.
That said, respectful and informed representation is key.

that's true! however those are definitely NOT the ones chandler is recommending/reading. m/m is a whole complex conversation but bottom line she rarely talks about own voices gay romance, it's always a very obviously fetishy smutty book with some truly awful representation written for and by straight women. not all m/m romances are created equal, i agree that there's a lot of great stuff out there (Alexis Hall ftw!) but it's not what Chandler chooses to highlight :/ not to mention she never reads f/f. i'd be surprised if she read 3 sapphic books all year tbh. it's definitely icky.

[dasboob]

lmaoooo she just put up some stories asking for diverse Hades and Persephone retellings. and she made a POINT that she wanted them to be DIVERSE. not WHITE or STRAIGHT.

lmao WHAT. she's read over 200 books this year and maybe (and i'm being generous!) 15 of them have been by POC or LGBT people. she's probably read 100 m/m romances by straight women though lol.

like we all know that she's performative but the fact that she makes it so obvious is ... fascinating. and embarrassing.

lmao the obsession she has with m/m romances when either earlier this year or last year she was shouting out Chick Fil A... mess. Not surprised she of all people is obsessed with the genre of m/m romance since it does nothing but fetishize queer men and that is basically right up her alley.

I agree with all your points re: Chandler, including her reading preferences, but I think that's a reductive take on the entire m/m romance genre. There are a number of cis and trans men and nonbinary people writing m/m, it's not just straight women. I wouldn't say it does nothing but fetishize queer men. It definitely CAN, but it isn't inherent in a book being considered 'm/m romance.' There are also queer men who read and like the genre. I've seen queer men speak up against women writing m/m, but I've also seen a good number of queer men speak out in support. I'm a queer woman, not a man, and I wouldn't tell anyone how they should feel about their representation, but I also would say it's not so open and shut.
That said, respectful and informed representation is key.

that's true! however those are definitely NOT the ones chandler is recommending/reading. m/m is a whole complex conversation but bottom line she rarely talks about own voices gay romance, it's always a very obviously fetishy smutty book with some truly awful representation written for and by straight women. not all m/m romances are created equal, i agree that there's a lot of great stuff out there (Alexis Hall ftw!) but it's not what Chandler chooses to highlight :/ not to mention she never reads f/f. i'd be surprised if she read 3 sapphic books all year tbh. it's definitely icky.

Yeah for sure! Fair enough, and I definitely agree with your points re: Chandler. One of my long-time internet friends is a queer trans man who has had some success writing m/m romance and who I know has received some backlash for it, so I get defensive of the genre.

[TinyBaby]

Will any of her criticism be mentioned? I bet no way

[potatopeeler92]

I saw she posted her "comeback" video. Hasn't she still not directly apologized to any of the POC and queer people she blocked and fought with? It's pretty vapid for her to think she's genuinely addressing any criticisms and growing while conveniently ignoring all of that.

[DeathArcana]

I saw she posted her "comeback" video. Hasn't she still not directly apologized to any of the POC and queer people she blocked and fought with? It's pretty vapid for her to think she's genuinely addressing any criticisms and growing while conveniently ignoring all of that.

well she's a white woman

and yeah her only "apology" was that paragraph she posted while she was on private on Twitter, and even that was half-assed

[blikeboy]

I just watched the entire video and I'm actually pretty shocked. I think it could have been better, but she was pretty upfront with how she was an absolutely shitty person. She mentioned how she was supporting BLM while praising that disgusting nonsense Captive Prince. Also brought up supporting Chic-Fil-A while reading M/M books. She did mention how she had a huge ego and how she blocked everyone instead of answering people. She also goes on to talk about how she's not diverse at all in her reading and she wants to be. And she even mentions how her "taste test" videos were all white content creators and how she needs to fix it (she even admits she chose those content creators bc she knew it would get her the most views).

That aside, she mentions how she was a shitty person and she subtweeted people; that person was Cindy. Apologize to Cindy. She deserves an apology for the wild shit Chandler's subtweeting started. She also, as it's been pointed out, didn't actually directly apologize to the people she blocked and hurt. Or that person on twitter who called her out for liking Chic-Fil-A. I'm willing to be lenient and say maybe she forgot their usernames, but she wouldn't have forgotten Cindy.

Overall, I hope she has changed. Genuinely. I don't like Chandler, and I probably never will, but seeing people try and better themselves is always nice. If she ACTUALLY does...

[potatopeeler92]

I just watched the entire video and I'm actually pretty shocked. I think it could have been better, but she was pretty upfront with how she was an absolutely shitty person. She mentioned how she was supporting BLM while praising that disgusting nonsense Captive Prince. Also brought up supporting Chic-Fil-A while reading M/M books. She did mention how she had a huge ego and how she blocked everyone instead of answering people. She also goes on to talk about how she's not diverse at all in her reading and she wants to be. And she even mentions how her "taste test" videos were all white content creators and how she needs to fix it (she even admits she chose those content creators bc she knew it would get her the most views).

That aside, she mentions how she was a shitty person and she subtweeted people; that person was Cindy. Apologize to Cindy. She deserves an apology for the wild shit Chandler's subtweeting started. She also, as it's been pointed out, didn't actually directly apologize to the people she blocked and hurt. Or that person on twitter who called her out for liking Chic-Fil-A. I'm willing to be lenient and say maybe she forgot their usernames, but she wouldn't have forgotten Cindy.

Overall, I hope she has changed. Genuinely. I don't like Chandler, and I probably never will, but seeing people try and better themselves is always nice. If she ACTUALLY does...

I find it hard to believe her change is genuine because everything she says and puts out is still only curated for her audience. It feels like a checklist of criticisms she's been monitoring from this forum so that she can make sure she owns the narrative. She's only being upfront and apologetic to her audience who already dote on her and will praise her even more for "being real", not the people she has actually wronged. If she actually wanted to make things right by her actions we would have heard from at least ONE person (out of who knows how many she's blocked or subtweeted or been catty to) that she's made up with them or apologized directly to them. But nope, haven't heard anything beyond her bubble of supporters.

[blikeboy]

I just watched the entire video and I'm actually pretty shocked. I think it could have been better, but she was pretty upfront with how she was an absolutely shitty person. She mentioned how she was supporting BLM while praising that disgusting nonsense Captive Prince. Also brought up supporting Chic-Fil-A while reading M/M books. She did mention how she had a huge ego and how she blocked everyone instead of answering people. She also goes on to talk about how she's not diverse at all in her reading and she wants to be. And she even mentions how her "taste test" videos were all white content creators and how she needs to fix it (she even admits she chose those content creators bc she knew it would get her the most views).

That aside, she mentions how she was a shitty person and she subtweeted people; that person was Cindy. Apologize to Cindy. She deserves an apology for the wild shit Chandler's subtweeting started. She also, as it's been pointed out, didn't actually directly apologize to the people she blocked and hurt. Or that person on twitter who called her out for liking Chic-Fil-A. I'm willing to be lenient and say maybe she forgot their usernames, but she wouldn't have forgotten Cindy.

Overall, I hope she has changed. Genuinely. I don't like Chandler, and I probably never will, but seeing people try and better themselves is always nice. If she ACTUALLY does...

I find it hard to believe her change is genuine because everything she says and puts out is still only curated for her audience. It feels like a checklist of criticisms she's been monitoring from this forum so that she can make sure she owns the narrative. She's only being upfront and apologetic to her audience who already dote on her and will praise her even more for "being real", not the people she has actually wronged. If she actually wanted to make things right by her actions we would have heard from at least ONE person (out of who knows how many she's blocked or subtweeted or been catty to) that she's made up with them or apologized directly to them. But nope, haven't heard anything beyond her bubble of supporters.

This is actually a really good point, of course people still subbed to her are going to be more accepting/eager to see her come back. I think that's why it rubbed me the wrong way that she didn't directly apologize for what she'd done by mentioning the specifics. She dances around it a lot. I didn't take into consideration that she is essentially just going back to what is already very accepting of her.

[audiobooks]

I thought her video was really well done, way better than anything I was expecting. Acknowledging her own shitty behaviour (and actually going into detail about it) on her YouTube platform is a pretty big step. She even has an action plan to do better! From these alone I think she has shown growth.

I do agree with the above that she needs to personally apologize, but then again we don't know that she hasn't? If a creator who hurt me apologized to me privately, I wouldn't think to broadcast it to the public, especially if I just wanted to move on.

[likeaphrodite]

her point about taste tests felt so... white saviour-ey.

i mentioned it before, but the way she interacts with her poc fans is weird and it feels insincere. it's like she deliberately picks her friends for diversity points, she picks people who have less power than her, look up to her and don't hold her accountable. instead of actually lifting up POC, she lifts herself up by making herself look good. these four months she was out of the "spotlight", she picked up books almost exclusively by white people, and now that she's on youtube again, she's suddenly picking up books by poc lol. she separates books by poc and by white authors, like books by poc are their own unrelated category in a way, she never picks up poc books organically, it's always a statement. it's literally what she did in june, she did a thread sharing videos by poc and that's when she got called for actually being racist.

same thing with booktubers, especially this girl she's doing a taste test on. she's in high school, also mostly reads books by white people and at some point this year chandler decided she was her new project. it's clear this girl is a fan of chandler and would never criticize her for anything...

but who knows, maybe i'm being too prejudiced and looking too much into it.

[bookishpiscesx]

Am I the only who thinks it’s odd that some booktubers only read diversely when they get into drama about them not reading it? Like if she was never called out about it she would still be reading the books she has always read. And when booktubers get called out for it they then will start to read diversely because they don’t want to be in drama again. So it just feels really forced and not genuine because they’re doing it just to avoid being attacked again.

[pennywife]

About Chandler’s “I’m back” video:
1. She keeps saying things like “books that are diverse” and “diverse smaller booktubers.” She also said her next taste test will have a “diverse small creator.” This just felt super off to me? “Diverse” isn’t a quality in an individual. If she wants to feature booktubers of different backgrounds rather than just prominent white American booktubers, that’s great. If she wants to read books by authors of varying backgrounds, that’s also great. But I think she should be more careful with the way she expresses this.
2. Going along with that: I hope her reading “diversely” will including more than just black and queer authors, but also authors of other ethnic/cultural backgrounds and maybe even some translated books. I just personally find it annoying when booktubers pledge to read more diversely but don’t actually diversify the kinds of authors they read from beyond a narrow scope.
3. The bigger white booktubers in her comment section saying how glad they are that she’s back is a little weird to me, because they are not the ones who should be accepting her apology.

[DeathArcana]

About Chandler’s “I’m back” video:
1. She keeps saying things like “books that are diverse” and “diverse smaller booktubers.” She also said her next taste test will have a “diverse small creator.” This just felt super off to me? “Diverse” isn’t a quality in an individual. If she wants to feature booktubers of different backgrounds rather than just prominent white American booktubers, that’s great. If she wants to read books by authors of varying backgrounds, that’s also great. But I think she should be more careful with the way she expresses this.
2. Going along with that: I hope her reading “diversely” will including more than just black and queer authors, but also authors of other ethnic/cultural backgrounds and maybe even some translated books. I just personally find it annoying when booktubers pledge to read more diversely but don’t actually diversify the kinds of authors they read from beyond a narrow scope.
3. The bigger white booktubers in her comment section saying how glad they are that she’s back is a little weird to me, because they are not the ones who should be accepting her apology.

!!! it definitely feels like she's using "diverse" to basically 'show' she will change by doing the bare minimum.
and yes on the "I support diveristy!" *only reads YA books by Black women* thing, translated fiction RARELY makes an appearance on Booktube. Let alone books by writers that aren't Black women writing Black women (which is important! But you shouldn't be ignoring... literally everyone else, including Black men, who also historically have not been represented fairly at all).

[blikeboy]

I'm watching her newest video about reading the 10 best romances from Goodreads and does anyone else feel weird about how much she seems to NEED sex scenes/smut in her romances to enjoy them? All these traditionally published romances are focused on plot and have romance involved (so like contemporary romance, I guess) and she's disappointed by them. She even nitpicks one because it has fade to black, and she thinks sex scenes are a romance genre staple. Are they? Even if they are, can't you enjoy a romance that doesn't have on page sex?

(I will say Chandler's one of the only booktubers I don't set to 1.5x speed lol)

[Eyechikn08]

I'm watching her newest video about reading the 10 best romances from Goodreads and does anyone else feel weird about how much she seems to NEED sex scenes/smut in her romances to enjoy them? All these traditionally published romances are focused on plot and have romance involved (so like contemporary romance, I guess) and she's disappointed by them. She even nitpicks one because it has fade to black, and she thinks sex scenes are a romance genre staple. Are they? Even if they are, can't you enjoy a romance that doesn't have on page sex?

(I will say Chandler's one of the only booktubers I don't set to 1.5x speed lol)

Haven't watched the video so I don't know how she phrased it. Saying that sex is a staple tho... Is completely false, what does that mean for people that don't feel comfortable reading sex or characters that are asexual???

I will say though, I prefer romance with sex. That's why I personally read so much indie adult romance, there's a great balance of emotional connections and hardships and also explicit sex.

[bookish_lurker]

I'm watching her newest video about reading the 10 best romances from Goodreads and does anyone else feel weird about how much she seems to NEED sex scenes/smut in her romances to enjoy them? All these traditionally published romances are focused on plot and have romance involved (so like contemporary romance, I guess) and she's disappointed by them. She even nitpicks one because it has fade to black, and she thinks sex scenes are a romance genre staple. Are they? Even if they are, can't you enjoy a romance that doesn't have on page sex?

(I will say Chandler's one of the only booktubers I don't set to 1.5x speed lol)

This is something that is very dependent upon the reader's preferences. For instance I'm like Chandler in that I prefer my romances to be more explicit and I enjoy them less when they don't have sex scenes. But there are also people who are the exact opposite and prefer their books without them, there's even an entire subset of romances called sweet romances (or clean romance but I dislike that term) that are fade to black or simply don't have sex scenes. Wanting the scenes or not wanting them is just like any other reader preference.

[jabba13]

I have issues with how goodreads chooses the books and I also like more explicit romance but I can read a romance with very little smut in it as well and be perfectly fine I think Chandler needs to realize that they are most likely never going to have someone like Penelope Douglass on a mainstream top ten lists. Like, taboo pseudo-incest and huge age gaps just aren't something you are going to see on a Goodreads list probably.

[beautyblenderhohoho]

my fave thing is after trying to say she's going to read more diversely she calls the one m/m book on the goodreads thing a knock off of another popular m/m book - really trying to break away from that m/m fetishist former call out huh

[potatopeeler92]

I just find it funny how she would rather leave twitter entirely than ever unblock a POC or queer person who gives her valid criticism or even follow up to actually apologize to them

[getinmymachine]

I haven't really followed all of the Chandler drama, what happened with Cindy?