Tumgik
#Sure okay: take this garbage back to 4chan where it belongs Ben
convoy914 · 2 years
Note
Here's what the anti-censorship, pro-filtering crowd are actually worried about:
Minorities are going to write stories with racist villains, and those villains might use slurs. Should that be banned from AO3?
Child sexual assault survivors might want to tell their own stories to process their trauma. They aren't going to hurt real children while doing it and might not pull any punches to avoid diluting the horror of what happened to them. Should those stories be banned?
Transgender writers are going to write stories where their protagonists suffer from transphobic hate crimes and microaggressions. Should those stories be banned?
Figure out a solution that won't get innocent people caught in the crossfire because the far right wants to shut those perspectives down, and THEN we'll listen.
But sure, keep parroting Far Right Propaganda about how sinful and evil AO3 is! I'm sure that won't backfire when homophobes push to have queer coming of age stories labelled as child porn!
OOOO, lots of whataboutisms. You seem to be under the impression that it’s one or the other. That it’s necessary to keep things as they are in order to prevent The Dark Ages. That the Holy A03 is tho only bastion against the Evil Puritans. That people won’t be able to tell. Why is that, exactly? Why do you assume that it has to be one or the other?
But sure, let’s play this game: If we ban white people for saying the N-Slur on Twitter, then what about black people who say it? If we ban pedophiles from Twitter, will that mean banning people who talk about their experiences? And as for the commonly repeated “it’s actually survivors” thing, okay sure. Why do they need to SHARE it? Why is that part necessary? I have never gotten an answer there. Do you have an answer? Depiction is NOT automatically endorsement but in the cases where it clearly IS, or will in fact cause harm because, guess what, tagging doesn’t magically solve all problems, putting it out there for everyone to see won’t actually help and has more risk of harm than anything else, then it’s absurd to suggest that we NEED to keep ALL of it. ESPECIALLY, might I add, when it’s porn or REAL CHILDREN that they refuse to take down.
Frankly, the idea that being against CHILD PORN is “far right homophobia” is insulting. It is fucking deranged that we’re at the point where people are using right wing arguments about censorship to whine about even the slightest amount of moderation and then acting like the people who call out this hypocritical nonsense are the “real” conservatives. Because that’s all this is: The same exact arguments I hear against moderation on Twitter, the same “it’s just fiction” excuse I hear from lolicons, the same hypocrites that calls themselves “anti-harassment” and then harass the hell out of actual children. WE’RE the ones using “far right” arguments? YOU’RE the one fearmongering about what will happen if we try to introduce even the slightest amount of moderation. If we even TRY to sift through what’s endorsement and what isn’t, because clearly that’s impossible. To even TRY to improve A03 somewhat, because if we do that then it’s the second age of homophobia
Look, I’m not going to deny that things were hard and this website was founded for a reason. Mostly, it’s incredibly helpful. But it’s gotten to the point where people react violently to the suggestion that their precious anarchist website might have some flaws, that maybe a LITTLE moderation would be helpful, and to the point where they’re defending ANY depiction of child porn or anything else because it’s either that or the homophobes win. How do you COME to that conclusion? How do you tell yourself, with a straight face, that leaving ALL of that up there is somehow “protecting” people? There comes a point where the reaction to something is just as bad as the thing it was reacting against, and this cult-like devotion to a website and all the hoops you’ll jump through to pretend like there’s no other way is definitely one of those cases.
Anyways, when I call this “cult-like”, I’m not being facetious. I know how this works: Feed people stuff that sounds reasonable while hiding the true intent, slowly normalize to that idea, and then we get what you’ve just done: Defending leaving ANY depiction of these things up because there’s definitely no other way, using the exact same “it’s just fiction” excuse that lolicons and their ilk use, acting like it HAS to be a “one or the other” based on what you IMAGINE Conservative Christianity to be like (which, might I add, is the exact same thing exclusionists do to justify why asexuals aren’t “oppressed enough”). WE don’t provide the alternative? YOU’RE not willing to hear any alternatives out. Because no matter how much they may protest to the contrary, it really does come down to “any moderation = bad” just like conservatives love with absolutely no sense of irony.
My advice: Take a step back and analyze what you’ve said, just…look at what that collection of words put together means. You ARE better than this, I know that. And the fact that you ARE against pointless censorship is a point in your favor. But that’s exactly how they get their hooks into people, convincing them that censorship and moderation are the same thing. And the damndest thing is, I’m not even sure it’s intentional on THEIR part, either. I think they’ve genuinely deluded themselves into thinking this is necessary, because they can’t see the irony. You want a real life example of “going too far in the other direction”, well here it is. It’s a real damn shame that it’s devolved into this “all or nothing” thing, but that’s just how it is. And I’m just responding appropriately.
3 notes · View notes