#(just as I'm sure they say about our fan reblogs and discourse!)

[eeveecraft]

Guess Who's Back

That's right. It's us, the Dragonheart System. We're fucking back.

[Rylazide] Hi, everyone, I hope everyone is okay and is having a good day!

Anyway, to cut a long story short, our blog got terminated without warning:

Just... out of the blue, no warning, no reason given. As you can imagine, I was kinda freaked out, but I calmed down and contacted support.

We were stuck, waiting for Tumblr to do something for multiple days, and as you can imagine, it wasn't fun, not knowing whether or not 4+ years of our system's history, informative posts, and more were just... gone for good! Well, they're not.

And from some people who were looking out for us (you know who you are, thank you for being thoughtful towards us) basically let us know that sh!t kind of hit the fan in the Plurality space on Tumblr because of it. This is because the timing of our account termination was just... too suspicious. Literally soon before our blog got fucked, I reblogged a reblog from Sophie about that one system who said some pretty sh!tty things about us in an attempt to counter this post, and all my addition to the post was was just asking Sophie if she could provide evidence for her claims. Because what she was saying about that system would explain a lot of their behavior in the "tulpa = appropriation" discourse and would basically out them as a fake endogenic-supporter, but then... our account was nuked after that reblog was made.

Look, I'm going to be straight with every system here:

Tumblr Trust and Safety never stated WHY our account got terminated. Not when our account was initially terminated, nor when it was reinstated. In posts on both our Youtube and Plural.Cafe accounts, I said it could've been possible that we were mass-reported by sysmeds. I said this because that's exactly what happened to @sophieinwonderland over a year ago, and given the timing, it's not a crazy assumption to make because of the circumstances and history preceding it.

It just seemed a little odd for our account out of the 4+ years we've had it to be nuked during the height of what can metaphorically be described as a war in the #tulpa tags. Especially after we criticized the 'counter' to our original post, or the post by that one syscourse blog we have blocked to name-drop us could've absolutely stirred a bunch of sysmeds to witch-hunt us. It's happened before, it absolutely can happen again.

But, I can't say for sure because Tumblr decided to be frustratingly vague. However, I think a good way to know for sure is to see if these sysmed fucks try that sh!t again, then we'll know for sure. Because again, when Sophie's account was brought back the first time, sysmeds got it taken down a second time. It was so bad that Sophie had to personally ask Tumblr Trust and Safety to whitelist her account from mass-flagging. If we get terminated a second time, we're going to do the same thing Sophie did.

Also, please, please do NOT go after the system who originally criticized my post. After Sophie called them out for potentially being the reason our account got terminated and for spreading disinformation, they were apparently so stressed that they got hospitalized because they have trauma over having disinformation spread about them (you'd think they wouldn't do that if they personally know how harmful it is, but sadly, the abused are more likely than the average person to continue the cycle of abuse and become abusers themselves. It's really sad.).

Does it excuse them saying blatantly false things, spreading harmful disinformation about several users, and potentially (cannot confirm) encouraging sysmeds to mass-report our blog by name-dropping us and saying things that would absolutely encourage sysmeds to mass-report and silence us? Nope. There's no excuse. I don't care how traumatized they are, being traumatized is NO excuse to turn around and do the same to others. Plain and simple.

But still, it sucks that this happened to them, and I hope they're okay. Like, sure, I fucking hate sysmeds, anti-endos, whatever the fuck, I hate the harm they've done to not only us, but so many other people, and how they actively tear the community apart when we need to stick together and look out for each other. However, I don't wish any harm on sysmeds, only that they eventually let go of that bitterness and learn that what they did was wrong and stop doing it. We don't need to stoop to their level; they're just a loud minority that doesn't have any actual footing to stand on besides pure emotion and bigotry.

Anyway, I'm rambling and am going to shut up now. I'm sorry our account getting fucked caused such a stir in the community. Let's just hope it doesn't happen again.

7-31-2023

#tulpamancy #plurality #actuallyplural #endogenic #tulpa #long post #cultural appropriation #sysmed mention #sysmed tw

[iliveforyouilongforyouvesuvia]

Hi. I'm just curious. Maybe You can explain it or telle.how it works!? I have no idea...

There is a thing with new blogs or blogs that are not 100% arcana related that make really nice fan arts or headcanons or memes that are totally lacking in likes and reblogs and then some posts just randomly hit 200 hearts in one day. Does it have something to do withcreator past on Tumblr or there are some unwritten rules or it's just magic of followers and users not checking the arcana tag in main searching bar ? Because sometimes I see good content (or something that looks nice for me) and I don't know if I should like or reblog it because there moght be a secret thing a untold story of person x being problematic in past or something and no one tell others or it's just accidental lottery of what will be enjoyed by mass or what will stay in shadows? Please I'm sometimes literally afraid of liking something if main popular blogs don't attest it before me as nice or safe.

An Arcana Brainrot Essay

Hiya friend!

I get where you're coming from, and to be completely honest, this is something I struggle with a lot in fandom spaces too. I'm going to go ahead and write my little (700 word) essay response in hopes that you find something useful here. I don't have all the answers, but I do have a few tips that have helped me. :)

(You can skip straight to the bold part for my older sibling thoughts on toxic fandom spaces)

About the random posts blowing up, tumblr as a platform works differently from other social medias in that it doesn't really have an algorithm. You encounter new content mostly through what the blogs you follow post/reblog and through the tags you follow. Don't feel weird about checking the tags too often, I scroll through the Arcana's tag at least four times a day because I like to obsess like that. ^.^

Newer blogs also won't have their posts show up until they've been posting regularly for some time (I think it took mine two weeks), and then there's factors like blaze and different posting times to consider. It's not weird to engage with something that has very few likes. It most probably just means that other people haven't had the chance to see it.

About problematic creators and the toxic side of fandoms:

One of the special things about being part of a fandom is sharing an emotional investment in the same content with a whole group of people. Fictional characters, situations, and stories have a capacity to speak to us from inside our imaginations and emotions in a way that most real people can't. It's what fuels such a deep attachment to the content we enjoy together.

It's also why seeing content that you find problematic or maybe just don't vibe with can feel so upsetting. It's easy for creators to say "if you don't like it, scroll past," but that can be hard to do when it concerns a character you're deeply invested in. It takes a decent amount of emotional maturity to agree to disagree with someone's opinions or viewpoints when it's about something that's personally impactful.

The way people follow through on that really ranges. Some people like characters that make them feel safe or comforted, so they stick to the parts of the fandom that focus on canon-typical things and don't delve too much into personal opinions and interpretations. Other people really benefit from using characters and dynamics they relate to to unpack certain things, and that's where you'll find a lot more opinionated discourse. And where you find opinions, you'll find disagreement, and when that disagreement concerns emotionally charged subjects, things can get heated and hurtful.

My point is that different types of content engage different types of conversations. Feeling fear or anxiety around which conversations you find yourself in is completely valid, especially when you're not sure who you're listening or talking to. I have two pieces of advice for this:

First, choose wisdom over fear. Make wise choices. If you see something you really like, don't engage with it mindlessly. Think about what you're looking at and recognize what it means to you, and then any engagement that comes of that is a decision you can grow from. If someone asks you later, "why did you like this?" you'll have a good reason, even if it wasn't well informed.

Second, know what you're looking for. All fandoms have toxic and problematic sides, just like how all people have toxic and problematic sides. What makes a difference is what you choose to do with it.

When you want to know if something is good but you're not in a position to judge it, take a look at the space around it. Take a look at the effect it has on other people. Who would feel welcome on this page? Who wouldn't? Who would feel respected by this creator? Who wouldn't? Why is that?

This sounds like a lot of work to do when all you want is to enjoy something you love with other people who love it too. For what it's worth, it gets easier as your brain builds these thought habits. You'll find your space and your people in good time. That's what fandom is really all about in the first place!

If you can't find a logical reason but something or someone just gives you the ick, trust your gut.

Even when you see something that hurts your connection to a character or story you're invested in, learn how to step away.

If you find something new and you're not sure what to think, keep your mind open and engaged.

And finally, be ready to make mistakes. Be ready for the creators you admire to make mistakes. Learn how to forgive yourself, and you'll find that forgiving others comes a little bit more easily too.

Cheers friend, and may you find every good thing you're looking for!

- brainrot

#ask arcana brainrot #the arcana #fandom #fandom culture #fandom essay

[viscountessevie]

I’m sorry and some of your tumblr mutuals are dealing with insanity the last couple days. I wonder if it’s one person who is aggressively going after three of you simultaneously. I wish people would leave our corner of the fandom in peace.

Thank you two for your support and messages. That being said, I do not want to dismiss my last anon’s experience and feelings.

[@ My First Anon: You most likely didn't mean it maliciously but doesn't negate the fact that it was used. I want to let you know that using the word "aggressive" is not the right choice of words given the negative connotation it has and being a part of the history of language used against Black people tied to it.]

I am very conscious of my last anon's fandom experience because I understand where they are coming from because of what I went through with S2. I constantly had and saw non-Desi fans - hell even some Desi fans themselves - talking over me and my fellow Desi friends/fans' experiences and feelings over how the Sharmas were portrayed as well as Kate's portrayal (and lack of screentime) as well as how she was fetishised all through S2 and even now post-S2.

In direct responses to my two anons above: it doesn't matter if they are trolling because this is still their lived experience in the fandom and I am not going to negate or invalidate that. I will still respond in kind and listen to their POV with care and consideration.

As for leaving our side of the fandom alone (and I'll talk about my friends getting anons in bit), I've always been open about race conversations on this blog and so if I have said anything out of turn that wasn't related to my personal experience with S2 and seeing how Simone was mistreated as a fellow Indian person, then I take full responsibility for that. So I personally don't want to be left alone in terms of these discussions because I want to learn from what I've said and done, do better to improve and provide a safer space for anyone who comes on this blog, especially in this case, Black fans of the show.

~

That being said, while I understand on some level where my previous anon was coming from, sending my friends leading and loaded asks is not okay at all. I'm not sure if it's the same person or their friends doing it on their behalf. These asks especially this one is not cool:

Stalking Chloe’s Twitter

Who does this? Why would you go stalk someone and find their Twitter to dig up "dirt" and insult them like this? That's extremely creepy. Especially since this someone was not involved in this discussion at all and all she did was like a post that was in support of Black fans and their community!

While I understand this anon’s sentiment but like Chloe said in her reply, it was confusing and came out of left field. 

Another friend got asks as well, they are busy with their work irl hence taking their time to answer so I’m giving them the space to do so before commenting on all of it directly. However, there was one ask they got which confused us. It was essentially gatekeeping them from interacting with any post that mentioned the Black characters on the show,,, which was odd to say the least because how are non-black fans supposed to support and hype up their favourite characters who happen to be black? Not to mention we still want to reblog and share content created by Black fans of the show. So that ask felt like a slippery slope to me.

In summary, about these asks sent to my mutuals: All I ask is my friends be left out of this discussion as they only liked a post, which again was in support of Black fans and keeping this dialogue open for them. However, *I* made my choice to defend my friend and then that discourse escalated to bringing up while important - but still unrelated to the original discourse at hand - conversations about race. *I* made the choice to open my blog up to that and am still keeping the dialogue going. On the other hand, my friends did not make this choice so please just keep directing your asks at me. 

After all this is said and done, my offer to continue these conversations in my asks (off anon is better since it is private and I'll know who I'm talking to directly) or in DM (it's faster), still stands. This blog and space will always be and continue to be a safe space for any of my Black mutuals/followers/anons and anyone else from any background who wish to make this blog a safe space for them.

#Bridgerton Fandom #Fandom Racism #Bridgerton Asks

[deewithani]

Bit of a long post ahead. It's discourse and fandom discussion, so scroll on by if that's not your thing.

I see drama, but I usually don't comment on it.

I will, however, just say this: If there are things you don't want to see, people who interact with content you don't like or actually creates that content (the absolute nerve of them, I know), or content/blogs that just don't flow with the mood you want for your blog...

Block them. Unfollow them. Blacklist tags. Purity in fandom is impossible. You won't get it. What is acceptable to you is unacceptable to someone else. The best thing you can do is use the tools available to you to chuck those things right over the wall that surrounds your blog. You are responsible for what you let inside your walls, no one else can make those decisions for you.

Regarding DNIs, I think if you have one other people should take that into consideration. It's not perfect, but it's one of the tools you can use. Regarding the most recent drama (it's mostly on Twitter, and a week old at this point), if you have DNI'd something and now you're removing that because some big name artists are blocking certain DNIs, I don't know what to tell you. They've done as was asked of them and this makes it harder for those accounts that you actually don't want to interact with you to stay over in their area and not bother you.

Some time ago I put in my bio that I didn't have a DNI. It wasn't in response to any particular fandom thing or discourse, just what I talked about above. I think most of us are doing our best to curate our blogs, stay in our lanes, and have fun here. I would bet, though, that somewhere in the blog of probably every person that follows me, and every person that I follow, there is a post (or several) that hit a very specific DNI for someone, even if you think you're being as careful and mindful as you can. If your blog has a pink theme I guarantee there is someone out there who has a DNI made specifically for you because they hate the color pink.

I check DNIs before I follow anyone, and I block tags that are specific to the things that I don't want to see. That's it. I know it's probably not the "acceptable" way to be in fandom anymore, but I don't have the time, energy, or desire to interact with things I don't like, particularly to tell other people how they're wrong.

If you've followed my blog long enough, you've probably noticed a lack of certain ships, even though I haven't posted a DNI warning away followers that do post those ships. I don't really even have to mention which ships they are. We all know what ships they are. I blocked the relevant tags. I hardly ever see that one sequel ship, or that popular Mando ship that I absolutely despise, because artists and writers are generally very good at tagging, and fandom is really good at creating ship names that are easy to block.

I try my best to be mindful of the things that I post and reblog. I didn't create this blog to upset anyone, I created it to share my love for Star Wars. I think most of us created our blogs for much the same reason. I have not always done the best in how I wanted to curate my blog, and I'm sure that I'll fall short in the future, too. I'm not perfect, and because of that I don't insist on perfection in others.

Anyway, tomorrow is going to be a good day to be a Star Wars fan. We will love some things, and we will hate some things, but we're all in the same fandom. The only thing I can guarantee anyone is that there will not be 100% consensus with how the fandom feels about either show tomorrow, but there will probably be someone updating their DNI to "DNI if you support Bo-Katan as Mand'alor".

#fandom discourse

[laf-outloud]

"Just a note to all the people sending in asks defending Jensen and saying you'd do the same for Jared; ask yourself, would you even be on our blogs if we were speaking critically of Jared? And before you send in an ask telling me you would, I'm going to want receipts of you actually doing it, because there have certainly been enough people over the years criticizing Jared that you'll have had multiple opportunities to defend him."___ Don't know if it makes any sense, but is it too hard to believe that people can have different perspectives over certain people and certain incidents and even if they don't match with you that might not mean they are wrong? They might be biased in your eyes, your opinion might look biased in certain peoples eyes that you can't understand, so what is the problem in a proper healthy discussion? What is the problem if some people find it is worth to defend Jensen over certain aspect? Why someone have to be a jared hater if they defend Jensen? Why it will be so hard to believe they would do the same for Jared if the table was turned?

I consider myself as a fairly unbiased viewer. I have called out multiple times on Jensen very recently where I found his actions questionable, but at the same time I defend him whenever I think he is wrongly being judged or being scrutinized over silliest things just to make him look like a douche. Maybe I am not right always with my logics, but that doesn't mean I am an AA. And yes I would do the same for Jared. Or for anyone. It's about being logical, it's not about whose fave is better than whose fave for me.

You would ask for receipt for me defending Jared on hellers or AAs blogs I know... But ask yourself, do you think they are equal to you guys? I know Jared gets the worst hates, most of them based on imaginations and nonsense, no truth in them. It's waste of energy to have healthy discussion with the people who writes those thing because they don't know how to interact, it's better to ignore them because their motive is clear to everyone. I don't follow them, don't take them seriously and think that nobody should. But you people are sane, like-minded people whom we follow, whose blog we read and reblog, we are happy to agree with you.. Aren't we allowed to express our disagreements with you guys without being tagged as secret Jared haters?

I don't go to anti blogs to find posts against my fave and defend them to increase my toxicity level- I scroll through the posts from the people followed by me, and I defend or agree wherever I think I need to. I am sure a lot of people do the same thing. So if anyone says they would defend Jared the same way they did for Jensen that can be a like-minded Jared fan who just finds your post not agreeing with them.

I don't know if I would be called an disguised AA after this long rant, but I needed to let it out. Sorry for wasting your time anyways.

I read it, so you didn't waste my time, and I am perfectly fine with people wanting to defend Jensen, but they do it telling me my opinions are wrong. If you want to defend him, share what you love about him (without turning him into a god). I recently had wonderful conversations with people who don't like Gen, but they outlined why they didn't like her and gave their reasons. They didn't try to dictate what I should or shouldn't feel, they didn't try to denigrate me or anyone else in their asks. There's a big difference between defending and simply being rude. AA's, as a whole, tend to fall on the rude side. Just take a look at these recent asks that have come in to me and others "defending" Jensen (which is why I wrote that post in the first place):

Insulting because that's not what I said.

Just plain insulting.

Calling my opinions (not facts, opinions) imaginary, bad-faith, ludicrous, baseless, etc.

Again, calling my opinion not real. It's an opinion, I never said it was fact.

These are not reasonable discourse. These are not defending Jensen, they're rude.

You ask: "what is the problem in a proper healthy discussion?" Do any of these look like a proper healthy discussion to you? If so, maybe you ought to take a look at my recent #anti gen hate posts to see what healthy discussion and respectful asks look like.

#fandom issues #reasonable discourse #what it looks like and what it doesn't #the jensen defense squad has not sent in reasonable discourse #ask box

[cognitiveinequality]

I’ve curated my Tumblr experience so carefully over the [*coughcough*] years I’ve been on this website, that it’s easy to forget this side of tumblr too. But every once in a while I find a comment that makes me go down a rabbit hole of reblogs, and it’s just MAGA patriots all the way down and a bunch of new accounts get added to my blocklist. sheesh.

#just tumblr things #personally would love to not have them here at all #but they don't break containment much #(just as I'm sure they say about our fan reblogs and discourse!) #and I do try to report the ones who are BLATANTLY breaking T&Cs #literally saw one the other day that had the n-slur in the handle #but mostly it's a bunch of dopey dick-measuring gun nuts #with a profile pic of either them in wraparound oakleys #an eagle/flag combo #a pic of a truck #or some kind of sepia-toned take on the constitution/bill of rights #reposting terribad FB political memes #putting facts about their cars and motorcycles in their bio #and liking a whole bunch of shitty pin-up clickbait #(LMAO none of them bother to hide their likes are you kidding me #that would require curiosity about how the site works #and there's nothing on earth #more fundamentally intellectually lazy and incurious about the world around them #than a conservative white dude) #cog gets personal

[qqueenofhades]

Hi. You made a post a couple of days ago about how queer historical fiction doesnt need to be defined only by homophobia. Can you expand on that a bit maybe? Because it seems interesting and important, but I'm a little confused as to whether that is responsible to the past and showing how things have changed over time. Anyway this probably isn't very clear, but I hope its not insulting. Have a good day :)

Hiya. I assume you're referring to this post, yes? I think the main parameters of my argument were set out pretty clearly there, but sure, I'm happy to expand on it. Because I'm a little curious as to why you think that writing a queer narrative (especially a queer fictional narrative) that doesn't make much reference to or even incorporate explicit homophobia is (implicitly) not being "responsible to the past." I've certainly made several posts on this topic before, but as ever, my thoughts and research materials change over time. So, okay.

(Note: I am a professional historian with a PhD, a book contract for an academic monograph on medieval/early modern queer history, and soon-to-be-several peer-reviewed publications on medieval queer history. In other words, I'm not just talking out of my ass here.)

As I noted in that post, first of all, the growing emphasis on "accuracy" in historical fiction and historically based media is... a mixed bag. Not least because it only seems to be applied in the Game of Thrones fashion, where the only "accurate" history is that which is misogynistic, bloody, filthy, rampantly intolerant of competing beliefs, and has no room for women, people of color, sexual minorities, or anyone else who has become subject to hot-button social discourse today. (I wrote a critical post awhile ago about the Netflix show Cursed, ripping into it for even trying to pretend that a show based on the Arthurian legends was "historically accurate" and for doing so in the most simplistic and reductive way possible.) This says far more about our own ideas of the past, rather than what it was actually like, but oh boy will you get pushback if you try to question that basic premise. As other people have noted, you can mix up the archaeological/social/linguistic/cultural/material stuff all you like, but the instant you challenge the ingrained social ideas about The Bad Medieval Era, cue the screaming.

I've been a longtime ASOIAF fan, but I do genuinely deplore the effect that it (and the show, which was by far the worst offender) has had on popular culture and widespread perceptions of medieval history. When it comes to queer history specifically, we actually do not know that much, either positive or negative, about how ordinary medieval people regarded these individuals, proto-communities, and practices. Where we do have evidence that isn't just clerical moralists fulminating against sodomy (and trying to extrapolate a society-wide attitude toward homosexuality from those sources is exactly like reading extreme right-wing anti-gay preachers today and basing your conclusions about queer life in 2021 only on those), it is genuinely mixed and contradictory. See this discussion post I likewise wrote a while ago. Queerness, queer behavior, queer-behaving individuals have always existed in history, and labeling them "queer" is only an analytical conceit that represents their strangeness to us here in the 21st century, when these categories of exclusion and difference have been stringently constructed and applied, in a way that is very far from what supposedly "always" existed in the past.

Basically, we need to get rid of the idea that there was only one empirical and factual past, and that historians are "rewriting" or "changing" or "misrepresenting" it when they produce narratives that challenge hegemonic perspectives. This is why producing good historical analysis is a skill that takes genuine training (and why it's so undervalued in a late-capitalist society that would prefer you did anything but reflect on the past). As I also said in the post to which you refer, "homophobia" as a structural conceit can't exist prior to its invention as an analytical term, if we're treating queerness as some kind of modern aberration that can't be reliably talked about until "homosexual" gained currency in the late 19th century. If there's no pre-19th century "homosexuality," then ipso facto, there can be no pre-19th-century "homophobia" either. Which one is it? Spoiler alert: there are still both things, because people are people, but just as the behavior itself is complicated in the premodern past, so too is the reaction to it, and it is certainly not automatic rejection at all times.

Hence when it comes to fiction, queer authors have no responsibility (and in my case, certainly no desire) to uncritically replicate (demonstrably false!) narratives insisting that we were always miserable, oppressed, ostracised, murdered, or simply forgotten about in the premodern world. Queer characters, especially historical queer characters, do not have to constantly function as a political mouthpiece for us to claim that things are so much better today (true in some cases, not at all in the others) and that modernity "automatically" evolved to a more "enlightened" stance (definitely not true). As we have seen with the recent resurgence of fascism, authoritarianism, nationalism, and xenophobia around the world, along with the desperate battle by the right wing to re-litigate abortion, gay rights, etc., social attitudes do not form in a vacuum and do not just automatically become more progressive. They move backward, forward, and side to side, depending on the needs of the societies that produce them, and periods of instability, violence, sickness, and poverty lead to more regressive and hardline attitudes, as people act out of fear and insularity. It is a bad human habit that we have not been able to break over thousands of years, but "[social] things in the past were Bad but now have become Good" just... isn't true.

After all, nobody feels the need to constantly add subtextual disclaimers or "don't worry, I personally don't support this attitude/action" implied authorial notes in modern romances, despite the cornucopia of social problems we have today, and despite the complicated attitude of the modern world toward LGBTQ people. If an author's only reason for including "period typical homophobia" (and as we've discussed, there's no such thing before the 19th century) is that they think it should be there, that is an attitude that needs to be challenged and examined more closely. We are not obliged to only produce works that represent a downtrodden past, even if the end message is triumphal. It's the same way we got so tired of rape scenes being used to make a female character "stronger." Just because those things existed (and do exist!), doesn't mean you have to submit every single character to those humiliations in some twisted name of accuracy.

Yes, as I have always said, prejudices have existed throughout history, sometimes violently so. But that is not the whole story, and writing things that center only on the imagined or perceived oppression is not, at this point, accurate OR helpful. Once again, I note that this is specifically talking about fiction. If real-life queer people are writing about their own experiences, which are oftentimes complex, that's not a question of "representation," it's a question of factual memoir and personal history. You can't attack someone for being "problematic" when they are writing about their own lived experience, which is something a younger generation of queer people doesn't really seem to get. They also often don't realise how drastically things have changed even in my own lifetime, per the tags on my reblog about Brokeback Mountain, and especially in media/TV.

However, if you are writing fiction about queer people, especially pre-20th century queer people, and you feel like you have to make them miserable just to be "responsible to the past," I would kindly suggest that is not actually true at all, and feeds into a dangerous narrative that suggests everything "back then" was bad and now it's fine. There are more stories to tell than just suffering, queer characters do not have to exist solely as a corollary for (inaccurate) political/social commentary on the premodern past, and they can and should be depicted as living their lives relatively how they wanted to, despite the expected difficulties and roadblocks. That is just as accurate, if sometimes not more so, than "they suffered, the end," and it's something that we all need to be more willing to embrace.

#history #medieval history #queer history #meta #long post #anonymous #ask

[outrunningthedark]

I've been wanting 2 say something for awhile now but wasn't sure if it'd b appropriate. But then I saw the ask you got. But I just wanted to thank you for opening my eyes and making us aware. I really appreciate the perspective you bring to the 9-1-1 fandom and I think it's important. I wasn't the biggest Shannon or Anna fans but couldn't really put my finger on it. I sort of felt obligate to think they were okay. But your discourse on anna has helped me be more aware of my own views and see mor

Hey, sweetie! Thank you for this! 😍😘 Your last point - "be more aware of my own views" - is exactly what I hope for anytime I have to remind people why both Shannon and Ana's deliberate personas should not be dismissed or downplayed just because "it's a show" or "in this house we respect all the female characters". I can't force anybody not to like either woman. I have mutuals who openly say they enjoyed seeing at least one on screen at some point and I just cringe and keep it moving because I'm aware they don't internalize things the same way. What matters to me is that even if someone "likes" a certain character they have the capacity to acknowledge faults in their behavior rather than make excuses for why "it's not a big deal" or "they were done dirty". What matters to me is that ableism is acknowledged as a REAL problem that deserves just as much attention and energy as every other social justice movement. I think people here have it twisted and believe I'm angry they don't discuss/reblog posts about ableism. If you (general you) come here to crack jokes and talk to your friends, that's perfectly acceptable and I support you 100%. What *bothers* me is seeing members of our fandom spread awareness about how real life issues bleed into fandom, how real life issues are reflected in the show, yet ableism is somehow left out of the conversation. To some folks "it's not worth the trouble" because of trolls/anon hate or whatever, and that speaks volumes about what they ARE *willing* to take heat for - we all see the in-fighting when it comes to things like racism and misogyny. It's true that we're watching a "silly little firefighter show", but some of the storylines have absolutely been a reflection of reality. It's important that we absorb the message being sent out so we can apply it to our everyday lives and work to better both ourselves and those around us.

#anonymous #there are good people in this world #tv: 911 #tv: 9-1-1 #tina speaks

[flying-elliska]

It's not specifically about Skam France, it's more of a general thought, so I hope you can answer it but I admit I was taken aback by the post you rebloged. I love the fact that minorities' voices are being listened to, and it's really important to not shut down the criticism. But this person basically wrote "it doesn't matter if a black man wrote it, it doesn't matter if "some" PoC liked it, if other PoC say it's racist, it's racist". And of course not everyone is gonna agree on everything, and it's good to have this dialogue, but I'm a bit confused. So it's not okay to silenced people who didn't like something, but it's okay to do it for those who did like it? I'm not even being sarcastic, it's a real question. Because I believe a lot of anons who defended the season were black, and some who screamed "racism" were white (I believe an anon PoC even said it to you). So I don't know, it's a bit confusing to me. It seems important to also not silenced those who think something is a good representation, right? Because I've just seen this with the new Shadow and Bone show, there was a lot of talks about disability. Many people were saying "it's not good rep" and a lot of disabled people who actually liked the actor's answers in a interview were silenced, because those who didn't agree were louder. And I don't really have an opinion on any of those situations, but something just doesn't feel right to me and I just thought it would be interesting to have your opinion on it.

i think if you were taken aback by that post, it’s maybe a sign that this is something you need to think about a bit more. because that’s not what the post said. (or at least, not what i understood when i reblogged it.)

to me the point was that, as white fans, we need to avoid arriving with a pre-made opinion about these matters and then cherry-pick whichever POC’s words we can use to defend this opinion. instead we need to take a seat back, and listen about the actual content of the discussion in all of its nuance (instead of immediately thinking ‘so how can i make this about me and what i think of this show’ and ‘i like this show so it has to not be racist” or “i don’t like this show so it has to be racist.” our opinion of the show is not what what should lead the way here.)

it’s not about silencing people who did like the show ; it’s about making sure that their opinions are not used against the people who felt hurt by it. it’s about creating a space that is respectful and thoughtful so that all the voices that really matter can be heard, no matter what their stances are about the show.

and it’s about putting the needs of actual real people above our little opinions of a fictional bunch of characters. and actively learning something about the dynamics of racism instead of just wanting to be told by POC what the Correct Opinion is so we can perform being Unproblematic for brownie points without actually having to think about it or doing any work ; because wanting to reduce fans of color’s opinions to a single easy to digest thing is dehumanizing.

what you are saying about these disability discussions around Shadow and Bone, I think, actually goes in the same direction. it reminds me of discussions I have had with some D/deaf fans around s5 of Skam France ; about how the fandom’s anger and virulent criticism of things like the love triangle completely obscured the enjoyment they had of feeling represented for the first time in forever. and like they felt like the fandom was much more interested in having discourse wars and weaponizing the topic of representation than actually learning something.

so. the argument here i’m getting at is not Criticism is Good or Criticism is Bad actually. what we’re getting at is that there is a nasty tendency in fandom, of non-marginalized fans using arguments about representation as a club to beat each other over the head with how much more Enlightened and Correct they are, and in doing so talking over marginalized fans, and screwing up the possibility of having an actual nuanced conversation because everything needs to be brought back to Show Good or Show Bad. and putting people in one of these boxes so you can praise or attack them.

i’ve talked before about how a too narrow idea of what Good Representation is is actually very dangerous. reality is complex and people’s representation needs and experiences are different and there are a lot of interlocking cultural dynamics involved. not everybody is going to agree on everything. because they’re people, not Diversity Representation Props ! there needs to be a discussion !!!!! that recognizes the humanity at play !!!!!

you can’t reduce this stuff to a series of talking points. but of course, narrow rigid conceptions of representation are great for internet clout, feeling morally righteous and superior to others, and attacking people who are threatening a fictional thing you have fused your identity into. so of course people for whom this is just a story do that, and they completely bulldoze over the humanity of people whose actual lived experiences are being discussed. which is deeply shit.

(also thinking about the absolute horror that was the conversation around mental illness during s6 because as it turns out a lot of people only care about that when they can romanticize it. but let’s not get into that again.)

so. i think there is a reason why you feel uncomfortable about this topic. uncomfortable is good when the situation sucks ! it means we are getting somewhere. but also maybe ask yourself why your brain jumped to conclusions. it’s possible that you’re actually gotten into the habit of seeing this as a contest of opinion instead of an opportunity to learn. this is a thing the internet does a lot to our brains. but that’s not an excuse not to try and do better.

#skam france #representation #racism #fandom

[lillupon]

So, I've got a very long rant/opinion here and Idk really know how to say this without coming off kinda bad but I'm gonna say it anyways. I agree with the fact that the seventeen tag has been kinda dry lately on most fanfic places, but it's really only in the smut area. It's the sane way with other groups too I feel like. All of the nice little innocent tags are boomin to this day and thats completely fine. I think the smut tag is dry tho bc lately I feel like a few social issues (like sexualizing people and disrespecting them and their identity) have crossed over into kpop and have been ?blown out of proportion? Lately there's been a rampage of people who like to say that writing smut about someone is disgusting and is dehumanizing because people want to assume that it would make the idols uncomfortable which could equate to some morality issues on how you are reducing someone only to their body without their consent and a bunch of stuff like that. It kind of pisses me off bc this is fiction. About grown adults. Clamping down on horny people who simp over hot asian men isn't going to solve the issues we face in real life. I think a shit ton is wrong with the world we currently live in, and deciding to come after something that isn't even real bothers me. Like what does that actually accomplish. But yeah, I think thats a reason why smut has been dying down. I mean, on youtube almost every video about unpopular opinions, or things they dont like about kpop will include something about shipping idols in fanfics. And then everyone in the comment section will talk about how its all fine and dandy in moderation, but once people start writing smut it's crossing the idols personal boundaries. It's something I've been seeing a lot more often and I think people who are interested in writing smut are being turned away from it bc we've gotten to a point where people are being called disgusting for having fantasies.

Hi Anon, thank you for sending in this Ask. 

I want to preface this by saying: when I write or talk about Mingyu and Wonwoo fucking on my blog, it is a fantasy. I am not speculating about what the real Mingyu and Wonwoo might be like in bed. I am imagining the versions of Mingyu and Wonwoo that I have created in my head, that exist only in my stories. None of it is real. I understand that this can be a blurry boundary for some people. But for me, the separation between fantasy and reality is well-defined. Now, on to your Ask!

You’ve hit the nail on the head with this one. You’ve also touched on many of the issues I have been struggling with myself as of late. It’s difficult to argue about morals since everyone has a different set of values, as well as different comfort levels. Some people think real person fiction (RPF) is a gross invasion of privacy. Others are fine with it. And others don’t care one way or another. There is no single answer; I can only offer my answer. Which means, of course, people are welcome to disagree with it, or parts of it. 

In this essay (LOL But forreal: this is an essay), I will be sharing my experience in the k-pop fanfic community from 2014 to present, the etiquette I personally abide by as a reader and writer of RPF, as well as my stance on RPF in general.

I started reading and posting fanfics back in 2014/2015 on a website called AsianFanfics (AFF). Obviously, no one on that site had a problem with RPF, since AFF is a platform made specifically for sharing stories about Asian celebrities. For many years, I read and enjoyed RPF with zero guilt. I scribbled away by myself in my own corner of fandom and curated my own content. I didn’t interact much with other fans, readers, or writers. I didn’t have a Twitter, and I only used tumblr to reblog memes. As a result, I’ve been able to avoid a lot of anti-shipping discourse, as well as purity and cancel culture. I had no idea there were so many negative opinions about RPF. It wasn’t until I became active on the subreddit r/Fanfiction last year that I learned about all the discourse surrounding RPF. 

This newfound ‘awareness’ does make me feel guilty at times—but only because after mulling this over, I still don’t think this is something to feel guilty about.

Here’s what I remember, first and foremost, when I create and consume RPF: fanfics and my favourite ships are fictional, and fiction is fantasy. This is basic etiquette when it comes to RPF, and most people in the k-pop fandom understand this. Delusional fans exist, of course, but they are not representative of the entire k-pop community. 

Another point of etiquette is to keep fanfics within fandom spaces. I would never push my fics into celebrities’ faces, or go around claiming that my fanfics are accurate representations of a k-idol’s life or personality, in any way, shape, or form. I would also discourage directing ship-related questions to official accounts, or bringing them up during fansigns or other face-to-face interactions; I believe that in these instances, shipping does have the potential to strain real-life relationships.

So with basic etiquette out of the way, let me share my approach to RPF in general.

As much as we like to think we know our favourite celebrities, we really don’t. All we see is their public persona. And this public persona is intentionally controlled, managed, and curated by a team of people: directors, tabloids, editors, makeup artists, publicists, etc. How “real” are these celebrities? We are so distanced from them that they may as well be fictional.

I draw from the public persona that idols project, and I work them into my own writing. But at the end of the day, these personalities are my own interpretation. My interpretation is probably nothing like an idol’s actual personality. I just use the “public persona/character” that idols portray as inspiration for my own stories, which are set in wildly different universes.

More than anything, I think of k-pop idols as “actors” in my fic. You know how when you write an original novel, you scroll through Google images, looking for the perfect person to portray your original character? RPF is literally that, except you might build upon pre-existing dynamics and personalities.

When it comes to explicit fanfiction, two main concerns are prevalent: one of consent, and one of sexualisation.

If we argue against explicit RPF due to lack of consent, we should be willing to apply the same lens to all explicit works. How do we know that the creator of a movie, book, series, etc., is okay with us using their characters in our stories, explicit or not? We don’t. Perhaps some creators encourage fanfiction, but don’t want their lovingly crafted characters engaging in sexual acts or experiencing trauma. We just don’t know. I feel this line is even more blurred when we talk about characters from movies or TV series.

Let’s take Steve Rogers and Bucky Barnes, as portrayed by Chris Evans and Sebastian Stan, from the Captain America movies as an example. I am willing to bet that when people consume and create explicit fanfiction about Steve and Bucky, they are imagining Chris Evans and Sebastian Stan in their heads. I doubt many people are imagining the 2D cartoon versions of Steve and Bucky, even though they’re technically the exact same characters. Why? Well, it could be because movies are more readily and easily consumed than comics, and so people are unfamiliar with comic book Steve and Bucky. But it might also be because fans find Chris Evans and Sebastian Stan attractive. Is this really any different from RPF, where fic authors make up everything about a celebrity’s life?  

When readers and writers of fanfic talk about how hot Steve Rogers or Bucky Barnes is, those comments are about Chris Evans and Sebastian Stan’s bodies. When reading explicit stories, fans are going to picture Chris and Sebastian’s bodies in their head, doing sexual things. Can we say, “Well, it’s not really you, Chris/Sebastian”, when in a way, it is?

The reality is, people are going to thirst over celebrities, regardless of whether or not explicit fanfiction exists. They’re going to post thirst tweets on Twitter. They’re going to talk to friends and strangers online about how hot [insert celebrity name here] is. They’re going to fantasize about dating and having sex with their favourite celebrity. Or, as it is in my case, they’re going to make up stories in their heads about their favourite idols dating and banging each other. People are going to do all of this without ‘getting consent’ from the celebrity. Cracking down upon and shaming writers of RPF isn’t going to change any of that.

To be honest, I’m not sure why people think it is disgusting to imagine sexual scenarios about real people. It is okay and normal to have these kinds of fantasies. I suppose the alternative is to fantasise about having sex with cartoon characters instead? It’s a very binary way of thinking to say that if you imagine/write real people in explicit scenarios, you are immediately sexualising, dehumanising, or objectifying them. There is more to dehumanisation than writing smut about our favourite celebrities. For one thing, you can love someone and appreciate all parts of them, and still want to fuck their brains out. And generally, fanfics come from a place of love—love that is not only sexual in nature.

Is it the sharing aspect inherent to fanfiction? The possibility that a celebrity might stumble upon explicit works about them? The chances are very low, I think, of the k-pop idols I enjoy writing about coming across my English fics. But I also believe in curating your own content, and that applies to celebrities too. Perhaps a celebrity should not go searching for fanfics about themselves. And of course, people should not show celebrities their fanfics, unless invited.

Another argument I hear against (explicit) RPF is, “How would you feel if someone wrote fanfiction about you?” First off, I don’t like this argument because there’s a difference between someone who decides to be a public figure versus someone who decides to remain a regular private citizen. Celebrities should and do know what they’re getting into when they choose their occupation. (This is not to say, “They are celebrities; sexualise them all you want because that’s what they signed up for.” Here, I am only acknowledging that people might have sexual fantasies about celebrities they are attracted to. Presumably, celebrities are cognizant of this.)  

If someone (whose existence I am not even aware of, mind you) decides they want to write explicit fanfiction of me in some tiny corner of the Internet, I wouldn’t care so long as: (1) they don’t shove it into my face, and (2) they don’t harass me and ask invasive questions about my personal life and relationships. It’s not hurting me or negatively affecting my life, so it wouldn’t even register as a blip on my radar. When fanfiction remains within its appropriate spaces, it is largely harmless. 

Now, if a k-pop idol were to ask their fans to stop writing fanfiction about them, would I? Yes, I would. However, I can’t imagine that happening. Judging by the number of ‘sexy’ concepts, fanservice moments, and variety shows such as ‘We Got Married’, I am certain that k-pop idols realise they are the stars of many fantasies—some of which are explicit in nature. Considering the prevalence of shipping in the k-pop industry, I would argue that shipping is subtly encouraged.

It’s sad that so many talented writers are shamed out of fandom, or feel that k-pop cannot be the medium through which they tell their stories, or explore their sexuality, or cope with trauma, or simply have fun. Professional works and Hollywood love their RPF—readers and writers of fanfics should be able to, as well. 

As you said Anon, “clamping down on horny people who simp over hot asian men isn't going to solve the issues we face in real life” (this is a lovely sentence, by the way). The kind of person who dehumanises another and reduces them to a sexual object will do so some other way, if not via fanfiction. I don’t think the issue of fetishisation can be fixed simply by telling people not to write explicit RPF. In my experience, people who read and write RPF are more respectful and thoughtful about these things than the general public. We’ve all seen the general public say highly sexual things about celebrities in the media and to their faces, or tag celebrities in their thirst tweets. Are these things less invasive than fanfiction? Personally, I don’t think so. And in my opinion, there are more pressing and damaging issues in stan culture than fanfic.

In conclusion, I don’t think there is anything wrong with creating and consuming RPF, both explicit and non-explicit so long as we:

Remember we are writing fiction

Keep RPF within its appropriate space, and

Do not harass celebrities about their personal lives and relationships

RPF is not for everyone. There may be people who enjoy RPF, but draw the line at explicit stories. This is fine. Everyone has their own personal preferences. What is not fine, however, is attacking people for creating things you don’t like. I’m not sure what kind of moral crusade people are on and what they hope to achieve by shaming writers of RPF, explicit or otherwise. Ultimately, fic authors are writing a fantasy. It’s not real; no one is being hurt. I think it’s important for people to curate their own content, and AO3 makes it very easy to filter out explicit works and unwanted tags. 

Maybe this is me trying to justify my own participation in explicit RPF—I don’t know. What I do know is that I love k-pop, and fandom is an important part of my media and entertainment experience. I adore the k-pop idols I write about, and I just want to imagine them being happy and getting lots of love and orgasms. Let a bitch be horny, goddamn… 

Some bonus fun facts!

At the time I am writing this, on AO3:

26.2% of Stray Kids fanfics are rated M or E

26.3% of Seventeen fanfics are rated M or E

29.0% of Merlin fanfics are rated M or E

34.9% of Captain America (Movies) fanfics are rated M or E

40.1% of BTS fanfics are rated M or E ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

Coincidentally, I saw this post on Reddit this morning: Can we have a RPF positivity post?

#asks #my writing #fic & fandom #I keep coming back to fiddle and add things to this answer #but I think I've said all I wanted to now...

[striddums]

I'm mostly concerned on you reblogging posts that silence abuse victims and overlook how they feel just because you guys want to ship your yaois. Please reread the one post you reblogged. I understand your happiness for bakudeku (idc for bnha so idk the discourse behind it) but a post telling people to get over their personal feelings as abuse victims JUST so they can leave u guys to ship ur yaoiz alone is. So Fucked Up. Also OP of that post is a fujoshi who says "antis" unironically

are you talking about this post?

i’m not sure if you are but if so i don’t really get where u got the ‘silencing’ part from…? they seem very respectful towards abuse victims, telling them their feelings are valid and important. saying they’re definitely never obliged to forgive their past abusers and stuff like that, and absolutely NOT telling people to “get over their personal feelings”! the only point they’re trying to make is that it’s not right for someone to attack others for liking a ship that they project their past on… cause those characters are not them

and that’s the thing - no one is saying people can’t be uncomfortable with the ship for their own personal reasons. heck, no one is even saying u can’t outright hate it for whatever reason u have! the problem lies with how vicious some people can truly act towards others in this fandom for liking a certain ship… outright attacking them and stuff. it’s not nice

that’s what the OP meant and what my reasoning behind reblogging it was - sorry if it came off as wrong. i never want to make light of or belittle the feelings of people who have suffered from abuse, or still are. their feelings & problems are so much more important than an anime; a work of fiction. all we’re saying is that those two things aren’t directly linked, so we’d prefer if people stopped acting as if they are.it’s not about diminishing a persons feelings and past experiences so we can “ship our yaoiz”, it’s pointing out that those two things should be kept separate.

katsudeku is a very controversional and delicate ship so there’s a LOT of discourse around it. like a lot a lot - i’ve never been a fan of a couple that made me feel like walking on egg shells quite as much as this one, haha! so i understand if you saw that one post as an outsider it might rub you the wrong way, wondering why people would throw abuse victims into this, but it’s all part of a very long debate that’s been going on on tumblr since before i even joined the bnha fandom. people who dislike the ship were the first to mention ‘abuse’.

though i… slightly… doubt you truly don’t care about bnha and the discourse, since you called them “bakudeku” while on my blog i’ve only been calling them “katsudeku” as of late, and to use that other shipname i kinda feel u know more about the matter… since that’s what all the people who hate the couple & find them abusive call it… but i shouldn’t jump to conclusions. i’m so sorry if i’m wrong.

also again - katsudeku isn’t yaoi.

it feels kinda dirty to pull this card but… please stop reducing m/m couples (including from anime) to yaoi

also yeah when people use “antis” unironically it makes my toes curl too, but doing that doesn’t automatically make them a fujoshi either. listen i know there’s some people in this fandom who ship the couple but are basically only interested in a hot, sexual relationship between them - and i steer as clear away from those people as possible. they make up about only 2% of all the shippers

#hope i cleared stuff up...? i'm really not trying to sound mean or anything like that #i understand why it could've rubbed u the wrong way #ask #Anonymous #personal #katsudeku #bnha

[freedom-of-fanfic]

I'm pretty sure most "anti-anti" discourse will ultimately just be used as a tool to deflect any and all criticism, or to accuse critics of being terrible people themselves. Especially with you all patting yourselves on the back about how morally superior you are.

deflect criticism of what? fanworks?

Hm. I can see how it might be easy to conclude that, depending on your previous fandom experiences, but I have to disagree on the whole.

To be perfectly honest, my gut reaction to this ask was ‘this sounds like projection’ because this ask is a list of things anti-shippers do.  Anti-shippers regularly deflect any and all criticism of their behavior and harassing tactics by exercising logical debate fallacies, accuse critics of being terrible people by accusing them of supporting or participating in rape/pedophilia/incest/abuse irl, and pat each other on the back for how morally superior they are to those nasty [insert nasty name-of-the-week for bad shippers here].  And maybe you’re referring to ‘anti-antis’ who go after antis with the same intimidation and harassment tactics that anti-shippers use, purposely retaliating with similar behavior. (I don’t condone that shit, or people who send nasty anons to antis (suicide bait tw), or anything else that involves abusing another person.)

What is ‘anti-anti discourse’ in this instance? I’m going to guess you mean ‘telling people it’s okay to ship what they like, write what they like, and do fandom how they like, even if others find their ships and fanworks to be uncomfortable’.  In other words, advocating for fandom to stop weighing content on its moral value or kid-friendliness.

If you come from the school of thought that fandom must be made across-the-board ‘safe’* by no longer allowing fans to create or share headcanons, theories, or fanworks that contain amoral, dark, or nsfw content, I can see why the ‘ship what you like/your kink is not my kink and that’s okay/just tag your shit and do whatever’ attitude towards fandom feels like it’s setting up for all criticism to be ignored.  If your frame of reference for fandom is evaluating everything on how safe and moral it is, saying ‘actually, everything is permissible in fiction’ means there’s nothing you can possibly criticize. 

But fandom didn’t wait for morality and social justice to become the centerpiece to criticize fanworks and fan spaces; we used the original canon and liberal values as our ammunition instead of purity points.  We wrote long meta about why slashfic was bad, then about why slashfic was good, then about why mlm fic was so much more popular and common than wlw fic, then about how to write mlm fic in realistic/respectful ways. We’ve debated repeatedly on what’s appropriate to write about and what isn’t, and if we need to cross decency lines, how do we protect people who don’t want to see it?  We’ve had massive ship wars over which ship was more canon (instead of which ship was more moral, and thus most deserves to be canon).  Nor did we wait for current minors to complain about adults to figure out ways to make fandom spaces safer for people to navigate. We created tagging systems to help people avoid content that disgusted or harmed them.  We then criticized each other’s tag usage and demanded more and more specific tags to help us weed out fics that would squick us (or find fics that hit the right kinks).  We created 18+ only spaces on our geocities websites and mailing lists, and locked 18+ content on our Livejournals so that underage people who wanted to get access had to lie about their ages, knowing that what they were about to encounter was not intended for them.  (figuring out how to make this work on web 2.0, designed to bring us all the content no matter what, has been very difficult.)

But mainly, we just assumed everybody was on the same page about real world morals: incest irl was bad, dating a minor irl if you were an adult was bad, abuse of any kind irl was bad. We might debate about how to respect the online spaces of others, but we didn’t doubt that everyone knew these things were shitty.**

You’ll notice some of these debate points aren’t that different from what antis and shippers ‘debate’ today. But when we debated these things without assuming that the morals of people with opposing views were fundamentally fucked up, it allowed a much more open, nuanced dialogue because people weren’t on their guard, waiting to be personally attacked. When we stopped treating ships and kinks as personal preferences but rather as personal value statements, we lost the ability to have nuanced conversations about the underlying reasons these ship types and kink types were so prevalent.

I can never reply without writing a novel, can I? But my point is this: ‘Anti-anti discourse’ doesn’t stop people from critiquing fanworks, or figuring out ways to make fandom safer for both teens and adults, or talking about the potential harm that dark content can cause. By asserting that deeply personal things like what kind of romantic dynamic pings you or what sexual kinks you have are personal, and you are free to indulge that (and others are free to avoid/ignore it), it actually makes fandom criticism less loaded, more nuanced, and more enriching, letting everyone think for themselves instead of being scared into silence.

PS - I’m so curious why you say anti-antis are ‘patting each other on the back for moral superiority’. Do you think I feel morally superior because I don’t direct personal attacks at anti-shippers? Is ‘patting each other on the back’ the act of reblogging from others because you agree with them? Or is it something else?

Cause I’ll tell you what: I don’t really care about the moral superiority of anybody.   All I care about is people taking the time to be just and kind to one another. And I’m trying to do that myself (though who knows how much I succeed).

*’safe’ in scare quotes here because I so entirely disagree with the concept of a heavily censored space being ‘safe’ that I have to point out this is really, really not safe by using scare quotes.

**And maybe that assumption was a bit of a blind spot - a generation gap between fans who grew up without the internet and fans who grew up with it.

#have some thoughts on the 'shippers shipping gross stuff made me think it was okay irl' thing #which i only hear from minors #b/c i'm starting to think maybe it inadvertently did contribute to confusing teens irl #anyway #anti-shipping #anti culture #anti-antis #freedom vs censorship #minors vs adults #idk i'm tired #Anonymous