"you wouldn't like this relationship if it was your real life relationship" correct, and that's why I'm reading about it in fiction where it's all for fun and no-one is actually having to deal with falling in love with someone they know wants to kill them
"posting fics on ao3 and not expecting concrit is like inviting someone into your home and not expecting them to comment on the curtains" is a great analogy really, because if you comment on my curtains in my home unasked I'm not inviting you back
why does "fiction changes reality" discourse always come down to "here's a reasonable thing for people to believe that is referenced in fiction, ergo You Will Commit Rape if you Read Noncon Fiction!"
contrary to popular social media belief, it is in fact possible to get along with people who do not share your exact taste in ships or fiction, I promise
a reminder: proshipping started as a response to people using anti-[shipname] tags on tumblr, the pro- has always meant pro- as a prefix meaning "for", and the only people using "proship" as short for "problematic ship" are people who have bought into fanpol rhetoric.
"toxic yaoi is only toxic when there's no power imbalance!! if there's power imbalances it's abuse!!"
1) very, very few relationships are exactly equal when you get down to it
2) abuse is not "a power difference exists"
3) this is fiction and power imbalance fun
your periodic reminder that actually it's fine to post even the darkest, nastiest, filthiest fic you can write even if it's just for fun or a writing experiment
you are not obligated to have trauma to write dark smutfic
how to get the books you enjoy banned in 3 easy steps:
1) call every book you don't like "problematic" and/or "porn"
2) call for "porn" to be banned
3) be surprised when the people with actual power to ban shit call *your* favourite books porn.
"characters are just like real people"
characters are usually considered good if they have 4-5 fleshed out character traits, and those traits consistently tie into their motivations and actions within the story
real people are inconsistent as fuck
unfortunately, "fiction affects reality but that is not as simple as Read Fanfic Do Crime, does not justify harassing artists, must be weighed against freedom of artistic expression, and your arguments are incredibly disingenuous and/or poorly made" is not really very catchy
"pro-shippers are always talking about incest/pedo ships" hey do you wanna see the list of things I've seen antis call incest/pedo in order to drum up a moral panic about a fictional ship? because when somehow every ship is incest and/or pedo, it's gonna be talked about a lot
seeing some awkward takes about how 18 is too young to be an adult and like. as someone who moved out at 17 , I sure hope you realise what you're potentially opening up when it comes to medical and financial autonomy
crushing on entirely fictional characters is about the safest way anyone's gonna explore their sexuality so for the love of any deities listening
please stop telling teenagers to stop sexualising fictional characters
as always, the AO3 code is open source, and people are perfectly free to go open an archive more strictly regulated to their own tastes
this is what fandom did for years off ff dot net, with a whole bunch of single-fandom archives
when people realise "existing biases are carried into fiction by both the author and the reader and a large part of what you think is 'fiction affecting reality' is 'the authors subjective reality affecting fiction' and 'fiction not countering existing biases'" I can finally rest
seriously though, why is it always somehow the m/m shippers fault there's not enough f/f, like. "we just want to address the imbalance" there's ways to do that that aren't talking shit about other fans making things they love for the ships they love.
it still concerns me how much some people seem to think fiction is a uniquely powerful force that's capable of near-on brainwashing effects, so it better have A Good Moral so it can brainwash people the right way
there is a weirdness in the way slurs have come back into mass use as "ironic" jokes and "reclaimed" insults but talking about serious topics requires incredibly silly euphemisms lest someone be upset by the implications of sex or death.
if you were fine with the BL and didn't find it "fetishistic" before you found out the author's supposed gender, why is your first move to double down with "well now it's fetishising" instead of "maybe I was incorrect in my snap judgement of a whole group of real people"
sorry, "no pro-ship content" for a zine about an adaptation of a book with a 5yo vampire who kills one of her father figures because she's mad she'll never go through puberty and is obsessed with her other father figure?
I'm sorry, adult antis are encouraging minors to pedo-bait pro-shippers on the grounds that our tastes in fiction reveal we're clearly oh-so-dangerous people who will surely slip up and reveal how dangerous we are...
and *we're* the people the minors should be wary of?
one of my many peeves is when people have "proship DNI" in their header/name when they actively interact with pro-shippers, like. if you want that to be a boundary, you gotta keep it yourself, y'know?
one of my many personal fandom pet peeves, by the way, is people reducing everything to "abusive/not abusive" dichotomies, and forgetting that relationships can be unhealthy and/or toxic and still not be abusive.
"if you're coping write what you want but don't post it online!!" have you considered that having the shit that happened to you *accepted by other people* as something that doesn't render you tainted or shameful or unfit for human company might actually be useful for recovery
would *I* enjoy being in love with someone who wanted me dead? nope! but it sure makes for some compellingly messy emotions when I'm reading about fictional characters
sex is not inherently a bad thing, and it's really kind of terrifying to see people talk like it somehow is. "sure, I like dark content, but I don't get off to it" my dude sex is not uniquely corrupting
I do not understand how it helps to make callouts 60 pages long and have the first 30 devoted to what they do in fiction. like. for the love of god. start with the things that hurt *real people* *right now*.
some kpop fans being more worried about the fictional content their idols are reading than the working conditions of the kpop industry including for actual, real children sure does have a weirdly entitled vibe to it
people absolutely can and should make art other people hate. make ugly art, depraved art, art that speaks to approximately three people and is nonsense to everyone else
we did *not* have several hundred rounds of "anti-harassment and anti-censorship are just dogwhistles for pro-shipping" so antis could turn around and declare that anti-censorship and pro-shipping are not the same thing
"the leopards aren't eating my face, people who don't like me are using my art to imply I'm problematic!!" yeah that. that's the leopards I've been trying to warn people about.
actually I think the obsession with "cringe" and "normal" and disgust as basis for morality is incredibly easily weaponised, and as long as you work with the right langauge and within the framework of what Gen Z wants the status quo to be you can convince them of quite a lot
sometimes a ship is about a nice romantic relationship and sometimes a ship is about people who can't decide whether they want to destroy each other or destroy the bed with each other
it is genuinely quite alarming how some people seem to *want* every proshipper to be an evil child predator who has hurt kids, like. does it somehow make you feel safer to imagine a whole swath of people have been hurt?
I sorta wish people would understand that "people seeing Nemo and wanting a pet clown fish" is a very different kettle of fish to "reading a fic about a 17/21 pairing and becoming a child abuser"
call me controversial but even if shipping fictional characters in a toxic relationship is an indicator of ""wanting"" an abusive relationship, why would you yell at people for working through that in fiction where they are not being hurt.
I understand that we used to define asexual as "doesn't want sex" but PSA: that's not how we define it now.
Asexuality is the lack of attraction to people of any gender. Libido has nothing to do with it. you can, in fact, be ace and high libido.
gonna write "clean" fiction and the main character is a mafia boss who violently beats up, tortures, and/or murders everyone in his path and then complains about the blood on his sleeves, but he doesn't have sex so it's Clean
disappointing to see how many people who claim to be pro-ship are perfectly happy to call other shippers delusional or freaks in their ships tags, or go on antis threads to leave explicit messages, or tag antis into nsfw shit
anti harassment means anti *all* harassment, guys
Avenue Q is an adult parody of the muppets stage musical that started in 2003. It contains a song called "The Internet is for Porn", which became a bit of an early meme because yeah. there was. a lot of porn. do not try and pretend the Net Of Yesteryear was less sexual than today
nothing confuses me more than people trying to apply human age to obviously inhuman entity characters, especially ones who like. were created at their apparent age. or whose age is frozen. or who age at vastly different rates to humans.
the side that wants to casually murder real people by inducing seizures or hounding them into suicide, regardless of collateral damage, being somehow less dangerous/more normal than the side reading and writing dark or kinky fictional content for themselves is... a take, for sure
the funniest thing about "legal and moral" ships is that it doesn't matter, as soon as someone doesn't like your ship it *will* somehow be illegal and/or immoral.
people really wanna talk shit about what a fanfic with 100 readers will "normalise", and not what kind of violence, toxicity and unhealthy lack of boundaries 10k people can normalise on socmed.
why yes I am just going to sit here and be astounded by this person taking *pride* in literally ruining someone's online time over Weird Ships for a decidedly problematic canon
"people think rabbits eat carrots, cats drink milk, and clownfish and dalmatians make good pets because they saw it in a movie!" my dude those are not actually things that are unreasonable. if you give a rabbit carrot, it'll eat it. if you give a cat milk, it'll drink it.
I don't know which is the worse thought, that some people want *everything* problematic taken out of fiction, or that they may not consider violence problematic
gotta love the double standards for "it's satire/just a joke" like my dude, if you genuinely think it's illegal to depict a thing in fiction, then a joke about that thing is still illegal. like no other crime becomes less of a crime because it was done "as a joke"
""normal people"" do not make their coworkers and bosses uncomfortable by talking about their porn preferences at work, and it is super weird that people think suggesting it is some kind of gotcha
I gotta make that one complaint again- how come every time we come around to the "here's a thing that people generally believe that is also in fiction*" argument again, the examples they bring up are never about sexual taboos, and yet that's always the only thing they want to ban
hey there's that "fiction is magical brainwashing that takes away your choice and free will" take antis always seem to have underlying their arguements but made explicit
cw:// suicide talk
"people don't just commit suicide because someone online told them to" maybe not solely because of that
but it's a likely final straw for people already in a bad headspace, and it doesn't even take five seconds thought to see that.
why yes please tell me why your fictional blorbos in deeply toxic and manipulative fictional relationships are moral and just fiction, unlike my fictional blorbos in deeply toxic and manipulative fictional relationships that reveal Deep Hidden Secrets about my True Personality
if your stance is "you don't deserve to be attacked for a ship UNLESS YOU'RE PROSHIP" congrats you have absolutely failed at basic logic
either no-one deserves to be attacked or you are already allowing for exceptions that *will* be weaponised against you
the nature of discourse is that every now and again, someone just reinvents the good old "young ladies reading scandalous novels will ruin themselves for marriage!" take
"you should only read about romance you'll experience irl" well that isn't ridiculously exclusionary for no good reason at all and doesn't leave me with approximately Zero Allowable Romance Media.
I always love when people are like "no harmful ships" because at the end of the day you could make *any* ship ""harmful"". incest? make an AU. age gap? AU. abuse? half the time you just gotta exaggerate/extrapolate from like 1-2 canon traits a little.
"this obsession with ships is emblematic of the chronic loneliness most young people feel in their lives. They have no communities" have you considered shipping is community-building for many people, being a (theoretically) low-stakes hobby you can meet people through
"not all coping mechanisms are healthy! like shipping the wrong fictional people! instead take up healthy coping, like creative arts- but only the creative arts I personally think are okay and good for you!"
you *can* buy clownfish and dalmatians as pets. those are not things that are criminal, nor are rabbits, cats, clownfish and dalmatians capable of telling you you're wrong, nor is there a vast weight of social pressure and judgement on them
none of this explains why people will apparently read a story and then commit rape, despite the laws, social mores, personal ethics, and probable vocal complaint of the victim.
"I wish they'd take underage off AO3" I'm afraid I must inform you that one of the events that precipitated the founding of AO3 involved Harry Potter smut livejournal communities being deleted. the underage is part of the reason AO3 exists, guys. Sorry.
a) ...shipping has never inherently included "approval", that's your misunderstanding
b) the uses here of "engaging" and "enjoying" sure do imply a deeply boring world in which one only ever Consumes Content for Moral Reasons, No Fun Allowed.
still cannot believe there is a group of people whose core tactics include "hey guys have you seen this gross content you shouldn't see? maybe you should share this and harass the artists"
but people are still pulling a "but have you considered both sides bad?"
maybe it stains a character for me if they're never allowed to be hurt. maybe it hurts me to hear that a character being molested is "degrading", like I am degraded for being someone who has been molested.
the incest list includes "childhood friends", "mentor/mentee", "grew up in the same orphanage", "same species", "vaguely similar headcanoned surnames", "same friend group"...
do you ever feel like somewhere along the way a whole lot of fiction discourse got based on the assumption that the best kind of character is a relatable character and ever since that's half the unspoken argument
all this talk of raising the age of legal adulthood to 25 and you don't think people are gonna weaponise that to maintain controlling and/or abusive relationships with their kids for those extra 7 years?
1) there are as many queer experiences as there are queer people, expecting one story to represent them all is a bit silly
2) fiction does not have to be representational
3) BL is not a monolith and has a lot of variation
4) maybe some BL *does* represent some queer experiences
sometimes the "romanticisation" of a dark topic is, in fact, part of the experience- like, say, Lolita.
and sometimes it's a way of coping with the darkness, like sometimes when I read dubcon I want them to be in love and have a happy ending because I didn't get one
do you ever feel like somewhere along the way a whole lot of fiction discourse got based on the assumption that the best kind of character is a relatable character and ever since that's half the unspoken argument
my list of things that have been declared Underage according to fanpol: towels, cookies, oranges, vegetables, hamsters, ducks, turtles, hedgehogs, musical instruments, computer software, office stationary...
lord I get people can feel defensive about problematic ships in the current fandom environment but also some people really need to sit down and ask how the fuck it affects them if someone they don't even know ships sfw canon m/f fluff.
any form of violation of a person's physical autonomy and boundaries leading to lasting harm is A-OK in fiction, unless sex is involved! then it is bad to depict. I should and will never unpack why I consider it okay to depict torture but not mildly taboo sex scenes
reading people argue for vibes-based morality, like literally they do not seem to understand that disgust =/= harm or that there's any option other than basing your morals on gut instinct. and like. is the flip side of this not "things that don't disgust me aren't immoral"?
I love how much this reads like a corporate apology. no mention of sympathy for the victims in this first post, just the pressing need to divorce his brand from a vague unspecified situation
do we have to once again have the discussion that CSAM is images of *real children*. it has *victims*. I do not care how creepy you find cartoon smut of invader zim it does not, in fact, feature real people and no-one was victimised in its creation.
I will defend the existence of lolisho, and most of the fans, but it remains true that there's a very, very loud contingent of 4chan-poisoned lolicons who think "pronouns in bio" is the height of cutting remarks, and I retain the right to have nothing to do with them
part of the reason I don't really want "I have trauma" to become the key to being able to make or read the Bad Art is like. trauma's hard enough, my dude. people don't need it bringing up all the goddamn time.
psa: it is, in fact, really fucking weird to expect people to check follows like three layers deep before following anyone, and also creepy as heck to do so to other people.
so from the sounds of it, someone infiltrated a server of 14-16yos and saved and leaked their photos with a rather mocking background track via tiktok for the crime of being in a "pro-ship" server, whatever that covers? really protecting the teenagers there, huh.
the entire "I'm a safe adult" thing is just a problem waiting to happen, because you encourage people to assume that if someone tells you they're a safe adult, they are
and do you think dangerous adults aren't just gonna lie about that?
abusers are to blame for the abuse they choose to inflict on people, and *only* the abusers. wish people would stop giving them excuses like "well, it was the fiction they read".
tangentially, "make it don't share it" is a sentiment that pops up a lot in conversations around coping art
but I think that ignores a lot of people who would rather consume than create, whether because making it is too raw/personal or because finding other people is comforting
what is the "joke" in telling a complete stranger to end their life, when they have no way of knowing if you genuinely mean it and you have no way of knowing how it will affect them?
honestly one of the worst things about this discourse is how people treat human life like a joke. "oh, telling you to KYS is just a funny haha but also you should so we can laugh about it!" "oh, someone might have died, great! we can throw a party"
talking about what fictional characters "deserve" is hilarious because by definition, a character has no autonomy. they didn't *choose* to do wrong. someone picked them up and dropped them in a story where they acted according to someone else's whim