Omegle Alternative: RoleChat

Omegle Alternative: RoleChat

RoleChat.org

Similarities

Anonymous chatting

Ability to match by and save tags

Same chat page layout

Online users counter

Free to use

Easy navigation and layout

Differences

Ability to change your name

Limited to 30 tags

Ability to block and/or report chats and users

Ability to save names and cache tags to easily switch

Ability to use a starter prompt without having to constantly copy/paste (Type your prompt into the box. You or the other user can then send or view it by clicking the '/starter' button.)

Ability to use bold text, italics and underlined text

Ability to roleplay in either the 18+ or >18 chats

Current daily users averages at 350 at any given time. Active with multiple fandoms including Marvel, Genshin Impact, DC, animes, RPF, The Witcher, Teen Wolf and many more.

I've browsed multiple fandoms and so far haven't come across any of the issues that began cropping up with Omegle with the racist and homophobic copypasta bots. I'm not sure what if any infrastructure the site has in place for that if it happens, but so far in the fandom tags there doesn't seem to be any bots or spam at all for the ones I've browsed.

No issues with the site itself forcibly dropping your connection after a certain amount of time, either.

All in all, a 10/10 alternative and actually far better than Omegle itself.

By the way, censorship won't stop at extreme smut and icky kinks and big bad gays.

Because, that's the problem in kicking a few rocks down the mountainside. Once you trigger a landslide, you can't stop it.

My favorite thing is when I say something like;

"You do not owe people justifying why you consume a certain type of media."

And inevitably I'll get a hundred pissed off antis in the comments launching into accusations about defending pedophilia or defending 'beating it to kiddie porn.'

And its like. 90% of the time I'm thinking about about interspecies relationships or gory Hannigram murder fucking or omegaverse.

Since it is literally a fireable offence to attempt to coerce, force, bribe or bully your patient into adopting your own values and views beyond the scope of law and ethics. Which, most ethics are covered by law regardless.

And on the basis of 'normal' and corrections, again, that depends on scope and how you are defining both.

E.g; if my client is unhealthily fixated on, say, BDSM as a means of self harm, my goal is not to try to 'normalify' them by villainising BDSM and attempting to steer them away from it and toward vanilla sex only.

My goal is to harmonise their relationship with BDSM and steer them towards healthier ways of engaging with it and using it as a means of safe outlet and catharsis over self harm. My goal is to get them to understand how and why they were using BDSM to self-harm and help them fix the root problem.

You just read my post and immediately launched into a bad faith misinterpretation of it that completely disregards the actual purpose of therapy and my post.

You don't become a therapist to force your patients to have the same individual views as you do or the same values or the same beliefs. You don't become a therapist because you have a very specific approach to something that you believe is the Only/Right one and you want to force them to comply.

Also; antis getting into specific professions with the at least partial intent of such activity is not a new thing. I'll have to dig around for the post but one such anti did brag on Tumblr years ago about trying to convert her patients into adopting her views and mindset and she rightfully got ripped to shreds over it.

So I'll repeat. Anyone and especially antis who declare they are going into a profession specifically with the intent of causing harm to or manipulating people into adopting their views need a serious reality check and possibly also a prison cell.

It is unethical. It is dangerous.

Antis who proudly proclaim they're going to become a therapist so they can shut down and manipulate and unethically target all the 'nasty proshippers' make me laugh because they're going to get two months into any sort of qualifying course and be slapped in the face by the reality that therapists are obligated to remain objective and impartial and will lose their license if they're found to be using their position to be unfairly bias or negatively target clients based on their own personal beliefs and values.

"Objectivity helps counsellors avoid personal biases and allows them to focus on the client's needs without imposing their own beliefs or values." - American Counselling Association

"Therapy should feel like an inclusive and safe place for clients. Clients need to feel safe and supported in their work. And while all therapists have inherent biases and personal preferences, it is never appropriate for them to engage in discrimination, racism, sexism, or other forms of prejudice with clients." - Medcircle

You do not get into therapy to correct people. You get into therapy to help them. Therapy is not about the therapist.

Is there a difference between someone that writes rpf and someone else that has a parasocial relationship?

I really wanted to know, because I throught that they were the same

Well, yes, because you could write RPF about someone you know absolutely nothing about aside from a quick googling. A parasocial relationship is not intrinsically linked to writing RPF.

Parasocial relationships are just a state of relationship and existence. They are, by definition, one-sided relationships where one part is totally unaware or only peripherally aware of the other's existence.

In all honesty parasocial relationships are often being painted in a bad light by the media. They're often referred to when talking about obsessive fans, the inherent lack of privacy in the celebrity world, ect.

But, in reality, every single person who is a fan of a celebrity no matter how in-depth that goes, has a parasocial relationship with them.

For example, I am very much a fan of Henry Cavill. I don't actively try to seek out information on him—I follow his Instagram and I passively obtain information about his life from scrolling past some posts or articles here and there, but aside from admiring his talent and wanting to climb him like a tree, he and I exist on very separate planes of existence.

And yet, our relationship is parasocial. Because while I admire him and respect him and lust for him, he has literally no idea I exist. Absolutely buttfuck none.

In countries like China and Korea, parasocial relationships are often used to refer to stalkers and obsessive fans.

While writing fanfiction, particularly RPF, can certainly be a contributor to how you engage with your parasocial relationship and foster it, its entirely plausible to have a parasocial relationship and not write RPF.

Its also entirely possible for the reverse. Of course, in specific situations. Its not common, but its not impossible. That said, typically the people writing RPF are part of a parasocial relationship. They're writing the RPF because of their interest and investment in that person/those people.

"Proshippers shouldn't be around children." If antis were on the internet as much when I was growing up I would be a lot more bruised by being hounded into thinking my natural dark imagination made me gross and awful...

"Proshippers shouldn't be around children."

Buddy. My bro. My dude.

The children are the proshippers.

When I was as young as eight I would've been classed by modern antis as a proshipper because of my views on fiction, which boiled down to;

Its not real. Reading or writing about murder doesn't make me a murderer. I don't care if someone writes about murder because I know it doesn't make them a murderer either.

As a child I can promise you I did not give a single fuck about the kinds of things antis cry about. Because I was a child. And even as a child I knew the difference between fiction and reality.

Children need to be protected from predators. From overexposure. From exploitation. From damaging societal standards. Children need to be protected from the real life things that are causing them harm. Not from literature.