others. The phenomenon raises questions about the ethics of engaging with LOLCows and the impact of digital harassment.
When you enter “LOLCow” into Google, a term that is gaining traction on **TikTok**, the initial result links to an old blog, its purpose captured in Google’s archived summary: “Anonymously share juicy gossip and candid opinions about foolish and bizarre people, also known as lolcows. Freedom of speech friendly.”
Per **Urban Dictionary**, the phrase “LOLCow” carries multiple interpretations, all revolving around a similar idea. One depiction indicates that a LOLCow is “a person who is easy/safe for the majority of people to mock. It’s a cash cow but you instead milk ‘lols’ from it.” Another illustrates it as “a person you derive extensive laughter from, unaware they are the butt of the joke. They often believe they are celebrated for their actions, but in reality, they face continual ridicule.” A third definition mentions, “Someone who repeatedly embarrasses themselves online. Usually influenced by drugs.” For sports enthusiasts, it might also denote “a consistent source of disappointment in sports.”
Despite the term’s recent popularity on TikTok, it is far from novel. It dates back to the internet’s nascent days when anonymous participants on forums like 4Chan would openly mock and harass others. One of the most infamous examples of a LOLCow is **Christine Chandler**, a previous blogger who has endured relentless trolling and faced allegations of illicit and immoral conduct.
What has evolved since the early days of digital trolling is the broader audience’s access to LOLCows. Platforms such as TikTok have facilitated creators becoming overnight sensations, often propelled by an algorithm that elevates them into visibility. These individuals are no longer relegated to niche memes or minor online circles; they transform into the stars of everyone’s “For You Page” (FYP). Some are even invited to collaborate with prominent creators, secure brand partnerships, and convert their online personas—often rooted in mockery—into revenue streams. Nonetheless, TikTok complicates the distinction between fandom and cruelty, as certain users assert they are forming a “community” around these creators, while others are plainly ridiculing them.
### ‘Milking’ LOLCows: Contemporary Bullying or Innocuous Entertainment?
In a 7-minute TikTok clip by **@PinkBinz**, the new-age LOLCow is characterized as the object of “middle school bully” tactics, where a creator is falsely supported through insincere engagement. The video contends that the LOLCow trend frequently masks cruelty, and in some instances, ableism. “LOLCows are nearly always chosen by the internet because they essentially have disabilities,” the creator states, referencing the rise of **Shawty Bae**, who has not labeled herself as having a disability. According to @PinkBinz, “Ninety-nine percent of the time, if these individuals weren’t part of the internet scene, their lives would look entirely different. Much of what happens to them in their everyday lives is due to the influence of internet users bullying them.”
One participant, whose comment garnered over 13,000 likes, remarked, “lolcows are right-wing pipelines attempting to portray disabled individuals as threats to society. It’s light eugenics.”
Another TikTok user, **@GamerMagee**, shared a video in 2023 asserting that there should be heightened focus on those who provoke these creators. “The level of depravity of those who are tormenting them is simply astounding,” he mentioned. Commenters drew parallels between the emergence of LOLCows and the allure of reality shows on networks like TLC, which often showcase “unusual” behaviors or traumas for viewership.
However, not all observers perceive it this way. Some believe they connect with these creators or follow them out of sincere empathy. For instance, one YouTube commenter lauded Shawty Bae for being “genuine” and “humble despite her notoriety.”
The word “genuine” is often paired with less flattering labels such as “easy targets,” “gullible,” “vulnerable,” and “memeable.” Viewers on @PinkBinz’s video provided numerous illustrations of viral creators who fall into these categories, including **Tophia Chu**, trans creator **Elphaba Orion Doherty**, **Daniel Larson**, and **Joshua Block** of **World of Tshirts**. Block, who rose to fame during the pandemic, is recognized for his daily vlogs in New York City, which frequently showcase impulsive performances, vocal outbursts, and excessive drinking. His account, with 3.6 million followers, has evolved into a spectacle for those who obsessively consume his videos out of morbid intrigue.
Block and Chandler embody the sinister aspect of “LOL farming,” where incessant trolling drives creators into detrimental situations, occasionally resulting in self-abuse or harmful actions toward others. The situation prompts a reflection on the morality of interacting with LOLCows and the ramifications of online harassment.