#<- they are deliberately attempting to censor the media

[planetkiimchi]

"Last Wednesday, the Israeli Supreme Court held a hearing in response to a petition brought forward by Israeli rights group, HaMoked, to reveal the location of a Palestinian X-Ray technician detained from Nasser Hospital in southern Gaza in February. It was the first court session of its kind since October 7."

if people in israel can speak up against this genocide, as someone who will not be subject the legal repercussions they are likely to face, how can you stay silent?

Concentration camp.

They built a concentration camp.

I don't think words can describe what this other than genocide.

[literaryvein-reblogs]

From the Slang Dictionary

part 2

Algospeak - coded language that people use (“speak”) to avoid being censored or moderated by AI algorithms. It combines algo- from the word "algorithm" with the word speak. The word was used as early as 2016 on social media. Many websites, especially social media sites, use AI algorithms to moderate the large amount of content posted on their platforms. These algorithms often automatically flag or delete content that contains or mentions words or phrases that the algorithm has been programmed to recognize as being unacceptable. However, this often causes algorithms to flag or remove permitted content that discusses sensitive issues or content that uses the “unacceptable” words without breaking any rules. Being aware of this, many communities on social media use coded language, emoji, or euphemisms to avoid having their content removed by algorithms. The term algospeak refers to this language. For example, people used terms like panoramic, panini, and panda express to refer to the COVID-19 pandemic after platforms began removing content that mentioned the pandemic to attempt to halt the spread of misinformation. Some other examples of algospeak include using the word seggs instead of sex, the word accountants to refer to sex workers, the word unalive to refer to death or suicide, the corn emoji to refer to pornography, and the phrase leg booty to refer to the LGBTQ+ community.

Birb - also spelled as berb, is a deliberate misspelling of bird used in internet slang such as DoggoLingo. It’s used as a playful way to refer to cute birds, particularly pet birds.

Bye Felicia - a slang way of dismissing someone. Sometimes formatted as bye, Felicia and based on a movie character whose name is spelled Felisha, it often appears in memes, GIFs, and hashtags online to express disregard or indifference to someone. The term has been popular in Black culture since the 1990s when the film was released, although the original spelling of the name “Felisha” has changed to the more common (and, some would point out, more “white”) spelling, Felicia. Bye Felicia is considered by some to be an example of white culture appropriating Black culture, often with little knowledge of the original source material. The phrase enjoyed renewed popularity around 2009 thanks to its frequent use on the reality TV show RuPaul’s Drag Race. It got another bump in December 2018, when former First Lady of the United States, Michelle Obama, used it as a guest on The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon to describe what was going through her head as she and President Obama waved goodbye to the White House at the end of Obama’s presidency in January 2017. Bye Felicia is most often used humorously or as a way to throw shade at someone, suggesting the speaker couldn’t be bothered with another person’s presence or is surprised they haven’t left yet. While humor is almost always part of the intention in using the term, the tone in which it is said has changed somewhat over time. Initially, bye Felicia was said coolly or nonchalantly, as in the movie Friday; now, it’s just as often used in a more aggressive or melodramatic way.

Doggo - this and pupper are affectionate terms for dog and puppy used in the internet slang called DoggoLingo. This emerged in the 2010s and drew on existing online culture, such as lolspeak, the snek meme, and Doge.

Left on read - in internet slang, a person is left on read when a recipient has read, but not responded to, a sender’s message. The expression is often used to express feeling ignored. A read receipt lets the sender know a digital message has been opened or seen (i.e., read) by the recipient. Microsoft Outlook, for instance, allows read receipts for email. Apple has enabled read receipts for text messages since 2011.

Receipts - slang for “proof��� or “evidence,” often used to call out someone for lying or to show someone is being genuine. In popular culture, such receipts may come in the form of screenshots, images, or videos. They also often concern things done by famous people. One of the first prominent uses of receipts came in a 2002 interview of singer Whitney Houston by Diane Sawyer for ABC. Sawyer brought up the topic of recent tabloid headlines that accused Houston of buying large amounts of crack cocaine. Houston denied these accusations and demanded proof: “I want to see the receipts.”

Shelfie - a picture of a shelf, especially a bookshelf that shows off someone’s books, movies, art, collectibles, special belongings, etc. It can also be a proper selfie if you are in the picture with the shelves. On social media, the hashtag #shelfie is often posted alongside pictures of various shelves where a person lives or works.

Snacc - internet slang for an extremely attractive or sexy person (i.e., you want to gobble them up like a snack). It’s also internet slang used when cute animals are seeking or enjoying a snack. Snacc, with two Cs, emerges on Black Twitter in 2009, the deliberate misspelling is consistent with other black slang terms, such as phat, thicc, and succ. Early uses of this term refer to actual snacks. Sexual senses of snacc do begin to appear around this time in wordplay, but it doesn’t take off in earnest until around 2017.

Spirit animal - In certain spiritual traditions or cultures, this refers to a spirit which helps guide or protect a person on a journey and whose characteristics that person shares or embodies. It is also metaphor, often humorous, for someone or something a person relates to or admires. The ancient concept of animal guides, particularly prominent in some indigenous, especially Native American, religions and cultures, was adopted in Pagan and Wiccan spirituality in the 1990s. In these contexts, spirit animals are meant literally, referring to spiritual guides or totems that take the form of animals. Earnest quizzes began to emerge in the mid-2000s to help you find your spirit animal. Spirit animal has increasingly been used to indicate, ironically, a strong appreciation or identification for someone or something.

Tea - best served piping hot, tea is slang for “gossip,” a juicy scoop, or other personal information. As far as we can tell, it was steeped in black drag culture. One theory connects tea to the celebrated drag performer The Lady Chablis, who is quoted in the 1994 bestseller Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil: “Yeah, my T. My thing, my business, what’s goin’ on in my life.” T, here, is short for truth.

Source ⚜ More: Word Lists ⚜ Writing Resources PDFs ⚜ Part 1

[rogha]

‘there are terrible things happening in the world and the media is not covering them if you even give a shit’ is actually a bad way to deliver news. i am not a bad person for falling for deliberate attempts by governments to both ignore and censor civil unrest in their countries. I am busy trying not to fall for deliberate attempts by my government to both ignore and censor civil unrest in my country. like there is a lot going on everywhere all the time.

[cipheramnesia]

Today I am asking myself why do I like Terrifier and Terrifier 2. There doesn't have to be a reason for it, and I struggle to find any merit to them other than the dubious quality, inventiveness, and excess of the gore and violence. Maybe that's it, and probably that is literally all there is to the movies - fans all say as much. And if your only thoughts on Terrifier are "I hate that shitty movie," honestly that's fair, more than reasonable, but this post isn't for you so kindly skip along by.

But also the movies don't hit for me in the same way as a bloody rollercoaster ride movie does. For some reason I am unable to comprehend, my mind is insisting the movies are good on an artistic level - my brain insists there is artistic merit, although it steadfastly refuses to disclose what that might be. This isn't an endorsement, by the by, the Terrifier movies are extreme in a way apart from even the French Extremity movement or the whole torture trap Saw era from the USA.

Although in some ways that may be a part of what makes the movies something more than graphic violence alone. They are unpleasant in a way that is malicious - a naked cruelty which in a perverse way is a form of open honesty speaking to truth. There is no detachment from the violence, no easy way to disconnect from it as some sort of mechanical function or take it in as a part of a story. Art the Clown embodies such a totality of unrelenting and unchecked cruelty that it comes around as confusingly refreshing, because it is so rare for any media to be so graphically violent without attempting some framing of the harm - even if only as a plot point. It's masochistic to watch but in a more literal kink way. The Terrifier movies are a safe space to engage with senseless violence and cruelty, to experience the emotional impact of the idea of an uncaring world design only to cause pain, and then to be able to safely leave this mental space physically intact, better equipped for the real world which by nature is not nearly so malicious as Terrifier. Cathartic in the same way as it can be to get whipped or beaten, followed by care and caressing. Maybe.

All that under consideration, a throwaway line from a review has raised a second consideration for me: Are these movies camp? They are wildly exaggerated performances which incorporate large amounts of generally discarded pop culture on purpose. They deliberately incorporate the cheap aesthetics of low budget video nasties, grindhouse movies, and direct to video 80s horror. Everything about Art the Clown and his violent acts is severely over the top from his facial features to his makeup to his mannerisms which are those of a mime rather than a clown. I think it's arguable that the Terrifier movies go beyond simply utilizing a retro aesthetic into performing a kind of horror drag - dressing up in the clothes of the 70s-80s but elevating the content into a hyper-grotesque persona that's almost like everything the film censors and critics from that era thought such movies actually were. It's a movie that purposefully becomes the kind of monster conservatives always imagine about horror, just to throw that right in their face. It is, I think, very arguably camp in how much it is purposefully over the top and self-indulgent about what the vast majority of people would (often rightly) dismiss as artless trash.

Which leads me back around to asking myself if I truly believe what I've written, or if I'm merely trying to find an internal and artistic justification for liking violent and misogynistic horror flicks with nothing of else of substance.

[buttercuparry]

not confirming or denying what tumblr is or is not doing re shadowbanning palestinian users but i made a new blog a while back maybe a year ago by now made a gag post and got a big blogger to reblog it needless to say i went from newbie 0-5 notes in my activity feed to 100+ notes a day that lasted for about 2 days if so much before i got shadowbanned i made a public post about it tagging humans and they responded and i got it sorted out. the valid issue may be something on tumblr's wonky end that equates a ton of new activity for new blogs with being spam so they 'shadowban' the blogs. if some palestinian bloggers are new and making accounts to seek donations and getting a lot of activity on their posts this is likely to happen them. maybe knowing the stupid 'intricacies' of this site with avoiding these situations. it's a stupid mechanism but also considering how many scammers make accounts to solicit money wrongfully it also makes sense as a way of attempting to mitigate that. also if someone's blog 'got deactivated' they did it themselves that's fully on them tumblr terminates blogs and then you dont see the -deactivated[date] at the end of it.

The thing is anon, I too have one post with a few thousand notes. But I till now did not get shadowbanned...so yeah maybe it is all in the defective way a site works.

Now we may continue to argue about the finer points and speculate what might have gone wrong on tumblr blogging, but it has been brought to attention countless times that tumblr does in fact deactivate blogs they find to be "troublesome". Did they not deactivate a popular trans woman's blog? And even (chrisdonnersomething's ) blog? They are trans and an anti Zionist voice popular on tumblr. I remember their partner posting about how tumblr deemed the blog not appropriate after manually checking up on it. So tell me what should we do in this situation?

If I were smarter, I would have typed in paragraphs after paragraphs about censorship and what is thought to be in need of censoring, while letting white supremacists and terfs run free on this blogging site.

And since we are talking about censorship, you must know that throughout social media, Palestinian voices are getting suppressed and even American government was talking about bringing in some bill to ban Tiktok because how overwhelmingly supportive the platform is to the Palestinian cause...so keeping all this in mind, should we not look into what tumblr is doing? A site that is just soooo american? Should we not look into every other platform? Should we not think about how macklemore's song has a content warning while Israeli rap on wiping out Gaza has none?

And no I have talked to Haneen, I have come across multiple posts from other Palestinians who have said that tumblr nuked their blog overnight. It is not a deliberate choice of the blogger to delete their blogs and then to come onto tumblr and complain about deleted blogs amidst a genocide.

And if it is scammers who are a problem, and it is a bug in the system then tumblr should in fact look into it- should upgrade their process of deactivating scam blogs so that Palestinians don't get the burnt of it. Amidst a genocide...I think that much can be expected of a corporation. That much a corporation can be held accountable for.

[xxxjarchiexxx]

https://mondoweiss.net/2023/12/operation-al-aqsa-flood-day-76-extrajudicial-killings-of-men-in-front-of-their-families-in-gaza/

Casualties 

19,650+ killed* and at least 53,000 wounded in the Gaza Strip.

303 Palestinians killed in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem

Israel revises its estimated October 7 death toll down from 1,400 to 1,147.

469 Israeli soldiers killed since October 7, and at least 1,831 injured.

*This figure was confirmed by Gaza’s Ministry of Health. Due to breakdowns in communication networks within the Gaza Strip, the Ministry of Health in Gaza has not been able to regularly and accurately update its tolls since mid-November. Some rights groups put the death toll number closer to 26,000.

Key Developments 

UNOCHA: Israeli forces allegedly executed at least 11 unarmed Palestinian men in front of family members in Gaza’s Remal neighborhood

Palestinian Ministry of Health: Hundreds of wounded die as a result of the lack of health services in Al-Shifa Hospital.

Israeli forces kill 16-year-old boy near Bethlehem in occupied West Bank. 

OCHA: Over 360,000 cases of infectious diseases recorded in UNRWA shelters

WHO: About 14 healthcare workers of al-Ahli Arab Hospital arrested by Israeli forces and held in unknown locations.

Al-Haq: Israeli forces deliberately destroyed access to health services in Gaza since October 7 through patterns of intimidation, direct targeting, siege, and occupation, “resulting in a humanitarian disaster.”

WFP: first aid convoy from Jordan, including 46 trucks, reaches Gaza on Wednesday. 

Human Rights Watch: Meta systematically censoring content about Palestine on Instagram and Facebook.

Israeli media: Muhammad Deif, leader of Hamas’s Qassam Brigades who survived seven assassination attempts by Israel, alive and in better condition than previously believed.

Australian Defence Minister: Australia to send “up to six additional” troops, but no warships, to support U.S.-led Red Sea operation.

Lebanese Civil Defense: civilian woman killed by Israeli shelling in Lebanese border village of Maroun al-Ras.

[moodymeangirl]

mmg daily lisdex essay: porn isn't evil but Pornhub is bad (like how Meta is, ie capitalism overall especially unregulated)

seeing a lot of debate abt whether porn is good or bad within my communities lately and just wanna add my nuanced 2 cents which is:

not inherently, inherently it's neutral.

but like anything under capitalism (esp which employs a majority of either women or queer men ie people within demographics marginalised by white supremacist patriarchy) the most mainstream access points are billion dollar businesses which significantly harm human society, both thru unethical business practices and thru their neglect of the cultural health of the people who are their customers and users.

like Meta, Twitter, and Tiktok all do. not necessarily moreso than the social media giants either. id say less so. but in the same ways, largely: ethical neglect, lack of moderation, choosing to make money from societal marginalisation, never making an effort to combat it, and cruxially fighting hard to ensure children can access their sites - bc as that shitcunt Mr Beast showed us so clearly, predatory marketing towards children is how the social and content media industry primarily survives. internat business 101 is selling to kids first, then keep the lifetime customer, while youth communities themselves keep ur cultural relevance alive. then repeat to infinity.

my opinion is basically, no porn isn't bad but the tube site business model representing a majority of the market share Is.

frequently at this point the debate turns into censorship and its like yes obviously governmental moves towards censorship of free expression, especially surrounding highly shamed yet fundamentally human and important topics such as adult sexual pleasure is awful and should be protested vehemently. there should not be porn bans. yes sexual media banning does lead to facism.

but capitalism should be dismantled and in the meantime there should be ethics regulations imposed upon porn sharing websites.

just like there should be ethics regulations imposed on social media websites. just like there should be ethics regulations imposed on all large companies. not even different, porn specfic ones either. literally just regulate the fuckers please

atm people r blaming sex positivity for untapped capitalism (which does this with everything not just fuck videos) or they're viewing attempts at regulation as inherently facist/censoring. and it's like yes sometimes sex positivity causes some forms of toxicity to thrive in community. (especially because as capitalism advances toward facism our communities are being deliberately weakened and so cultural changes we could otherwise work thru r much bigger obstacles)

and yes frequently political leaders disguise facism as regulation. (esp bc having made our communities weaker the right is now taking advantage of our fears of vulnerability to recruit and to advance facist ideology under the guise of protection). even if u personally hate porn as content, and are disgusted by kinky sex u should be loudly and proudly organising against this type of facism.

but neither of those truths, changes the fact pornography is a moral neutral.

nor that that the solution to ethics problems within the pornography industry is short term regulation, long term dismantling of capitalism.

so fight the censors. fight the capitalists. fight the facists. (theyre the same people). and jerk off accordingly (read: however u personally like to)

[fact-nova]

The Controversy Surrounding Ram Gopal Varma: An Analysis of His Legal Challenges

Ram Gopal Varma, a name synonymous with controversial filmmaking and outspoken opinions, has once again found himself at the center of a heated legal and political debate. Known for his audacious tweets and unconventional approach to controversies, Varma has often dismissed legal notices and arrest warrants with an almost cavalier attitude. However, recent developments suggest that the situation this time is significantly more serious. As of November 25th, Varma appears to be avoiding direct confrontation with the authorities. The police from Prakasam district, Andhra Pradesh, have made attempts to reach him at his residence, only to find him absent. Teams have been dispatched to Mumbai and Coimbatore to locate him. This escalation raises questions about the gravity of the charges against him and his response to them. The Origin of the Legal Battle The issue stems from a social media post by Varma that promoted his pre-election film Vyuham. In this post, Varma used morphed images of prominent leaders like Nara Chandrababu Naidu, Pawan Kalyan, and Nara Lokesh, placing their faces onto female characters. The post sparked outrage and led to a complaint by Ramalingam, a TDP Mandal Secretary from Maddipadu village in Prakasam district. An FIR was registered on November 12th, and the police subsequently summoned Varma for questioning on November 19th. Varma, citing prior commitments and a packed schedule, failed to appear, requesting an extension to November 24th. As the situation escalated, Varma and his legal team filed a quash petition and an anticipatory bail plea in the Andhra Pradesh High Court. Legal Proceedings and Responses Varma’s advocate, Balayya, has made the following arguments in his client’s defense: - Cooperation with Authorities: Varma has responded to the police notices and expressed willingness to cooperate. His absence, they argue, is due to genuine professional commitments. - Virtual Meetings as a Solution: Given concerns about potential arrest during in-person questioning, Varma’s team proposed a virtual meeting. - Media Speculations: Balayya emphasized that rumors of third-degree treatment against Varma are baseless and only serve to sensationalize the issue. Despite these assurances, the police remain firm. Prakasam SP A.R. Damodhar has made it clear that the choice between virtual and in-person questioning lies with the authorities, not Varma. He criticized Varma’s perceived lack of respect for the process, stating that such requests should have been made earlier. The Political Angle The controversy has also drawn comments from political figures. Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy recently condemned what he called “revenge politics.” He questioned the legitimacy of targeting Varma when his films, including Vyuham, have passed the scrutiny of the censor board. Reddy highlighted the importance of free speech and the risks of stifling dissent through legal intimidation. Analyzing the Larger Picture The situation presents a complex interplay of legal, political, and social factors. On one hand, the police are acting on a complaint that falls under the purview of defamation and potential misuse of social media platforms. On the other, Varma’s supporters argue that his actions fall under creative freedom and political satire. This case also raises broader questions about the fine line between free speech and defamation. Should filmmakers and public figures be held to stricter standards when commenting on sensitive political issues? Or does this signify an attempt to curtail dissenting voices under the guise of legal enforcement? Conclusion The saga surrounding Ram Gopal Varma’s legal challenges is far from over. As the courts deliberate on his petitions and the police intensify their efforts, the outcome will likely have implications beyond this individual case. It will touch on issues of creative expression, political satire, and the boundaries of law enforcement in a democratic society. Whether Varma’s actions are seen as provocative but harmless satire or as a calculated attempt to defame political figures, one thing is clear: this controversy will continue to spark debates in the public sphere. Only time will reveal which side of the story resonates more strongly with the public and the judiciary. What are your thoughts on this issue? Is this a necessary correction to unchecked behavior, or does it pose a threat to free speech? Let’s discuss in the comments below! Read the full article

[xtruss]

Digital Warfare: US 🇺🇸 And China 🇨🇳 Go Head To Head In Cyberspace

— Mariam Amini

As the start of the new year sees Israel’s war on Gaza rage on, the US faces an ongoing battle in the cyber realm back home.

According to one survey by Gallup and Knight Foundation, trust in US media is so low that half of Americans believe national news outlets deliberately mislead them.

This rise in distrust is a common global pattern, with the UK having the second lowest levels of media trust according to a study of 24 countries by King’s College London. Held as part of the World Values Survey, just 13% of British respondents expressed confidence in the press.

Meanwhile, news consumption on social media is only growing, with data showing a third of Americans under the age of 30 now get their news on TikTok.

2023 saw the White House ramp up its efforts to manage the Chinese-owned tech giant, which has over 150 million users in the States, the highest of any country globally.

In March, platform CEO Shou Zi Chew even appeared before Congress, in an attempt to dispel allegations over the app’s collection of sensitive user data, as well as censorship of any content that goes against China’s Communist Party.

It’s all slightly ironic, considering the intense regulatory crackdown on domestic tech companies by Chinese authorities in 2020, which even saw e-commerce site Alibaba fined $2.8 billion in a landmark antitrust case in 2021.

US government and European Union's parliament ban TikTok From staff mobile devices

The Asian nation’s technology sector has since conformed to new regulations, much like the control US officials perhaps wish to instill over TikTok.

In December, US presidential primary Nikki Haley publicly condemned the platform. She says: “We really do need to ban TikTok once and for all. For every 30 minutes that someone watches TikTok every day, they become 17% more antisemitic, more pro-Hamas.”

Her statements have since been debunked by Generation Lab, the data company behind the survey she references. However, it does beg the question of why TikTok faces greater reprimand when, for instance, Silicon Valley-owned Meta has already been proven to systematically censor Palestinian content in a review by Human Rights Watch.

So then, one must ask, is the real concern about data protection or threats to Silicon Valley business interests, or maybe even anti-Israeli sentiment in general?

While Instagram saw a decent growth of 47.8% between 2020 to 2022, TikTok doubled its user base. According to polling data shared by Axios, the majority of these users express pro-Palestinian sentiment. This is especially frequent among young people on the platform.

The tech giant has confirmed this natural trend, emphasising a need to listen to users: “This is a really difficult time for millions of people around the world and in our TikTok community.”

“We feel it’s important to meet with and listen to creators, human rights experts, civil society and other stakeholders to help guide our ongoing work to keep our global community safe.”

U.S. President Joe Biden participates in a virtual meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping

So, would the North American giant really ban TikTok? And if they did, would more countries follow suit? TikTok was banned in India in 2020 over claims of illegal data collection. This occurred shortly after geopolitical tensions at the border between India and China.

The video-sharing app was also slapped with a $368 million fine by the European Union for data beaches in the same year.

However, the company has since taken steps on advancing data security in partnership with Oracle Cloud Infrastructure. According to TikTok U.S. Data Security, as of June 2022, 100% of US user traffic is now routed to the US-based computer software company.

As for the question of censorship, visiting fellow Michael Kwet at Yale Law School’s Information Society Project believes: “There’s no reason to believe TikTok will offer substantially more diverse views across the global media landscape”.

In an interview with Al Jazeera, he says: “When confronted with content moderation decisions, TikTok will do what all big social media companies do: remove content at the request of entities with power, so long as it becomes too costly to disobey.”

In the midst of Israel's ongoing aggression in the besieged Gaza Strip, alongside rampant misinformation and media bias - one thing is clear: access to honest, independent journalism centred on human values, not corporate, is needed like never before.

[aenor-llelo]

Okay my Discord server asked me to make a post about orp!wilbur’s extensive crime list and how/why some of them are crimes in the first place, because most/all of them are actual offenses irl Somewhere, or at least were at some point.

-Disrespectful behavior towards the Noble Houses and agents of the Crown. (Multiple counts) -Attempts to incite political criticism, dissent, and debate towards the Noble Houses and agents of the Crown. (Multiple counts)

This is kind of a given, but just for the record, there are countries that have censorship laws about the government, and attempting to open critical discussion of politics can fall under that kind of criminalization. 

It may or may not also be a joke about the trial of Socrates.

-Causing distress of uncertain origin to animals belonging to the Crown.

This mostly falls under tampering with royal/government property.

-The promotion and reproduction of banned media.

This right here is related to censorship laws again. Specific books and music can and have been banned from distribution and production for discussing taboo or censored topics.

-Arson. (directed towards own property)

This is specifically illegal in urban and city areas. Burning trash is a pretty common thing in rural areas but very illegal in building dense places due to risk of fire spread.

-Inciting physical altercations. (Multiple counts)

That’s just a pretty ubiquitous law, don’t start fights with people in public.

-One instance of attempting to fight a nautilus in the Community House public aquarium.

Same reason as the royal animals offense, but also falls under public disruption and disorderly conduct.

-Street vending in unpermitted areas.

Street vending tends to actually have a lot of laws attached to it in terms of what/how/where you can sell.

-Using a shotgun in a residential area.

Like arson on private property, this is another urban v rural legal distinction. In many countries, gun usage and possession, especially outside the Americas, is heavily regulated (I understand the US is different but The World Is Not America).

-Handling fish in a suspicious manner.

This is a very poorly worded IRL law about handling illegally obtained fish.

-Busking.

If I recall correctly, this is one of those regional laws that are deliberately hostile to homeless people, because busking is often associated with street begging.

-Parkour.

Yep! Parkour is very illegal on anywhere considered private property in many places, because the owners of private property don’t want to be liable for parkour injuries.

-One count of public indecency. -Vandalizing public spaces by placing unpermitted photography.

Another “generally illegal everywhere” law, though what counts as public indecency or vandalism will vary by region.

-Causing distress by consuming inedible/hazardous materials in public view. (Multiple counts) -Threatening (though not provably committing) bestiality as a form of verbal harassment.

Causing distress can file under harassment/disorderly conduct, and in some places actions that could be taken as self harming/suicidal behavior are criminalized.

orp!wilbur has committed so many crimes over fundy’s lifetime.

[feministmetalgreymon]

@maradigma​

You claim to be against harassment. Yet your willing to lie in order to make Anti’s seem innocent. Yeah no. SessRinners didn’t start anything. We don’t care that you don’t like our ship. We minded our own business. Then Anti’s started harassing us. Spamming death and rape threats in the Yashahime tags. Calling people pedophiles. Stalking and spying on us. That was all started by anti’s. It’s also telling that your only example of shippers behaving poorly. Is stating the fact that SessRin is cannon in a rude manner. That’s really just as bad as anti’s posting rape threats /s.

Many SessRin shippers including my self are also victims of childhood sexual abuse. And we find it offensive when you exploit our experience for a ship war. My trauma is not a weapon for you to use in your ship war. Also stop spreading the lie that Sesshomaru groomed Rin. Child grooming is gaining a childs trust in order to abuse them. Sesshomaru married Rin when she was a full grown adult capable of making decisions for herself. And he has never done anything to harm her. So claiming that he “groomed” her is a bold face lie. And makes a mockery of the experiences of real life child abuse victims. I know what it’s like to be taken advantage of as a child and SessRin isn’t it.

 Anti’s have also spammed the SessRin tags with drawings of Sesshomaru abusing Rin. In a deliberate attempt to triggers trauma victims. So how any of you can claim to care about trauma victims when you take actions to harm us is beyond me.

Finally victims of sexual trauma all deal with trauma in different ways. Some of us cope by avoiding anything that reminds us of our trauma. While others cope by interacting with media that deals with our trauma in a safe manner. Exposure therapy is a medically recognized method of dealing with trauma.

Anti’s only respect abuse victims when we cope in the ways they find “appropriate”. Even though those methods don’t work for all of us. They only care about us when we can serve as perfect victims. That they can use to justify censoring things that make them feel uncomfortable. But when were messy and don’t behave like obedient tools they throw us under the bus. I refuse to be anyone's perfect victim.

[ultramaga]

You expect the mainstream media to report that Hamas and Leftists are in an alliance?

We saw what happened under BLM.

The media played defence for them. If you want evidence Leftists promote antisemitism, up to violence, just look around on Tumblr. They are not hiding it. Heck, unless tumblr finally cracked down, and I just checked, they didn't, the old slogan calling for genocide was mostly populated by Leftists.

It was found by the scammers and they parasitised it thoroughly, which is delicious irony. But if you peel it back, you get the whole "I love communism and I am queer and hate Israel and think Hamas is really hot!1!111" Youtube suppresses it too. Search on left wing antisemitism, without logging in. The algorithm points you to white supremacists. Which is the only group the media reports on. Hell, Hamas supporters openly attack jews, and it is still blamed on de narzeees.

Only if you are lucky enough to have bookmarked left wing antisemitism discussions will you find them. Youtube hasn't outright censored them, but it doesn't want them to be known, and for most people, they won't be. Most people trust the media and search engines. They have no idea how deeply they are manipulated.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/12/09/anti-semitism-is-being-normalised-in-british-life/

Yes, there are still dissenting voices, but they are deliberately buried. I'm taking one example. One country in particular. I know Britain pretty well, and I watched it fall with the ascendancy of Leftism. Antisemitism used to be regarded as one of the reasons fascism was reviled, and by the seventies, it was past history in Britain, a spent force.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/11/09/antisemitism-israel-palestine-hamas-keir-starmer/

The media explained the Leftists actions as those of white supremacists.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/05/06/second-green-councillor-criticised-after-denouncing-israel/

Because the Leftists allied with those who allied with Hitler.

(Not that I expect that alliance to end any better than last time)

Antisemitism from Leftists is normal. It is present at the top.

The obvious connection is always submerged. These are, according to media reports, white men, they play computer games, they have no sex and hate women, yadda yadda yadda. Media and State have merged into one, and the narrative is "blame the narzees", and who are the natzeeesss? The opponents of Leftism. Everyone who stands for Western Values. Hell, even saying that it is ok to be white can get you arrested in countries like the UK and Australia. How much longer do you think it will be until the same applies to jews?

"Despite the FBI’s attempt to downplay Akram’s anti-Semitism, he was clearly motivated by anti-Jewish sentiment. He targeted a synagogue. He used anti-Semitic language. And he was reported to the UK police a year ago for threatening to bomb and kill Jews. How did we get here? How has it come to pass that a British Islamist anti-Semite has carried out an act of terror at an American synagogue? And how should we respond to it?"

If you so much as report that attacks are being done by Muslims, you can be arrested here for Islamophobia, and so in compliance with the law, I'd like to say they are definitely not Islamic, they are good boys who didnadoo nuffin.

Have a look at Amnesty International - how does it react to the attacks on Jews?

"Acts of Islamophobia, antisemitism and anti-Palestinian and anti-Arab racism prevent Muslim, Jewish, Arab and Palestinian people from being able to freely practice their religion and culture"

It says you are not allowed to oppose Islam, that's Islamophobia, that if you say this religion is bad, that is a crime, you must praise it because Islam is a race. It also weirdly distinguishes between Arabs and Palestinians. Because the Leftist rewriting of history holds that the two groups have no connection and the Palestinians sprung into existence at that location at the dawn of history and only a Narzee would question it.

The government of Britain ignored Muslim men armed with machetes, despite British law outlawing everything sharper than a rubber ball. It arrested anyone who criticised them instead.

I noticed most videos critical of Ricky Jones were yanked. He called for the death of jews, and was applauded by the representative of Amnesty International. (around 40s)

When I reported on Quora that a member of the British government did such things, it was denied overwhelmingly by Leftists, who claimed that he was not a member of the government. I pointed to the government website which said that he was. They ignored that and launched a massive attack on my person and all other posts I had made. They didn't want it to be recognised that Leftism and antisemitism couldn't be separated. Or that it wasn't the Narzees doing the damage. "Ricky Jones, 57, was filmed telling a crowd on August 7: “They are disgusting fascists and we need to cut all their throats and get rid of them all.""

If he is ever to stand trial, it will be with a jury that has been indoctrinated by the media to think he is a good boy who didnadoo nuffin, and I am required by law to agree.

So how do the British Muslims react to the demands for genocide by their members?

They blame trump, they blame musk, they blame climate change and computer gamers, they blame everything and everyone but themselves for their actions. And by laws I must agree. I do not want to be arrested for Islamophobia. All hail Leftism, which lets us be so free to say anything ... that the government wants us to say.

Leftists burn synagogues as they march in blackshirts, screaming for the annihilation of all outside their movement.

Then when we object, they call us "fascist".

[rollerwavegallery]

The Point (1971)

Harry Nilsson’s 1971 animated TV special “The Point” is an unassuming thing- a cartoon which upon closer inspection is one of the most indicative examples of the Rollerwave aesthetic possible. 

It resembles a segment from an early episode of Sesame Street or Schoolhouse Rock, which makes sense when you consider that it was animated by Fred Wolf, creator of the famous Tootsie Pop commercial with the owl. His sensibilities in bringing Nilsson’s album to life are fitting in that they convey a surreal, extremely colorful world with no fixed rules. 

The story is rare in that it will appeal to both children and adults, far more than any segment from Schoolhouse Rock or Sesame Street. This is mainly due to the film’s theme of deliberate absurdity- that is, it is not designed to educate as much as it is to make the viewer think. These are two very different approaches. The Point is philosophical rather than methodical, it does not hammer any one particular idea into the audience’s head, and at times it is intentionally confusing, which is something you would not expect from a cartoon of this period. 

The work most readily comparable to The Point is, of course, Norton Juster’s 1961 masterpiece The Phantom Tollbooth, in that, like The Point, its settings and characters are entirely allegorical. This method of storytelling seems especially popular around the 1960s and 1970s, rejecting the straightforward methods of the 1950s. The Phantom Tollbooth also contains vivid illustrations, particularly similar in their cross-hatching, messy ink style. Fans of Jules Feiffer will, I think, appreciate the style of Fred Wolf to an equal extent. 

Some parts of this film draw attention to just how much we’ve changed as a society since the 1970s, and how much we’ve altered what is considered “acceptable” for children. During one abstract musical number, for instance, a dead whale is depicted, slowly rotting away, frame by frame. A modern viewer would see morbid imagery like this as only fitting in a Don’t Hug Me I’m Scared-type parody. In the 1970s, however, this was seen as not only acceptable to show children, but important, in that it adequately conveys the grim yet natural reality of death, and the cyclical system of nutrients in the ocean’s ecosystem. Other examples of children’s media being deliberately censored with the misconception that it would be deemed offensive include the infamous lost Sesame Street segment, “Cracks,” which was obfuscated during the 1980s cocaine epidemic despite having nothing to do with cocaine. 

The Point, as I mentioned, is a philosophical fable with the key theme of societal acceptance and dehumanization. On the other hand, its title serves as wordplay, in that it asks what it means for something to have a point. By the end, the viewer is left asking themselves whether the cartoon had any sort of point. This element is aided by dialogue which is obtuse by design, and a meandering plot which attempts to defy the well-documented “Hero’s Journey” structure in favor of an episodic series.

The frame surrounding the tale is equally abstract, featuring a father who reads a bedtime story to his son, all the while sarcastically commenting about how “kids these days just want to watch TV” and his son views the story, presumably as the film itself, on the TV next to his bed. The father was voiced by four people across The Point’s broadcast history, two of which were Dustin Hoffman and Ringo Starr, and watching each version provides a somewhat different experience, given the varying inflections of the narrators.

This may very well be the ultimate animated Rollerwave film, ideal for anyone wanting to know more about the visually artistic side of the aesthetic, departed from live-action. It is inspiring for anyone looking to enter the realm of 2D animation, with its detailed landscapes and vibrant color. One can only long for this period, when animating a full album and bringing an hour-long narrative to life using nothing but pens, paper, and watercolor paint was considered routine. The result is well worth your while.  

[supermoviemaniac]

WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT MOVIE SPOILERS...

Don't worry, there's no spoilers in this post - just a rant about people's insatiable need to spoil things.

If you're reading this, it's probably because you're a fellow movie enthusiast. Entertainment by any means has the ability to bring people together. We can anticipate and experience things, then discuss and share said experiences. Sometimes we have to wait an agonizing amount of time - often seemingly forever... but when it finally arrives, we're happy we waited, and most often than not, it's usually worth waiting for too.

As a kid, spoilers were never really a risk I encountered, partly due to the internet being not as, let's just say, socially collosal and expansive as it is today. I was able to enjoy movies, games, TV shows and comics from start to finish and get surprised along the way. The duration between a piece of media being announced/confirmed, and the time it took for it to release and be ingested was never a spoiler minefield, partly because such a minefield didn't exist.

Flashforward to present day, and we all have the same social media apps installed. We use these apps to discover content and stay updated with friends and family, though for some reason, in the last few years, all I seem to encounter on a daily basis are just spoilers for things I care about. The argument could be made that the algorithms are attempting to tailor content to me for convenience. I'm not denying that this is a beneficial system in theory, but when I'm forced to see spoilers against my will purley due to it relating to something I'm interested in, it gets a little annoying.

Another argument could be made that I don't have to use these apps, which is certainly true, but I shouldn't have to deprive myself of near-infinite entertainment that I do care about, just because a portion of people/organisations make it their mission to recklessly splurge out exclusive content for the sake of views.

These spoilers range from rakishly explicit images, to implicit news headlines trying their hardest to be allusive, though fail to realise most people aren't stupid and will probably know what a cryptic headline is implying, without needing to read the actual article. I've seen screenshots from upcoming movies that I would've rather not seen, I've seen people posting pictures of merch and figurines for things before we've even seen a trailer. Yes, merch/toys aren't always accurate, but they still give you a good idea of what's in store.

I miss being able to just sit and wait for a trailer, enjoy the hell out of it, wait in anticipation for the movie to release, and then just be able to f**king enjoy it when it's out! Now, everyday just feels like I have to dodge spoilers no matter what I'm doing. If I get a whiff of a spoiler, I have to double down on my vigilance to ensure it remains unspoilt. I have to make sure that remains the case right up until release day, and then let out a sigh of relief when I finally rest my cheeks on the cinema seat. If you're excited about something, why the hell has it become an obstacle course to make sure that remains the case?

I understand that some people are okay with spoilers, and I understand that some outlets try to share spoilers with some sort of security attached, for people that don't want to inadvertently see things, which I definitely appreciate... but to some degree, you have to acknowledge that there is nothing stopping a fellow reader taking that spoilery information and passing it along without the same degree of care.

Posting spoilers is easy content. It comes with an element of exclusively that is bound to pull in a larger audience, but I dislike this severely. If you have encountered a spoiler deliberately or accidentally, it is your responsibility to make sure others aren't forced to learn about them. If everyone else around you is posting spoilers for views, don't worry, it doesn't suddenly make you uncool for not taking part. If anything, I find it admirable if you're making the conscious effort not to participate in sharing spoilers.

At the end of the day, seeing spoilers isn't life or death, and in the grand scheme of things, this issue seems petty, but when you're passionate about something, you want to be able to enjoy it properly. If you bought a new book, you'd be annoyed if the person next to you skips to the last page and bellows out the ending. If you're queuing up to watch the final of a football tournament, you'd be annoyed if a time traveller teleported in front of you and spoiled the outcome. The irony of these over the top examples is that we're actually encountering this for movies/shows, however they're in the form of mundane social media posts.

This issue is just getting worse by the day, and I imagine every new movie that's set to release will just breed more and more spoiler content. I think there needs to be greater consequences for the initial leakers, and more of a deterrent for the people/outlets that are itching to share them. I'm not a tech whiz of any kind, but why can't we have something similar to an AdBlocker which censors potential spoilers? Silly, I know - ideally though, it would be nice to not have to suggest desperate ideas to avoid things I don't want to see. These are first world problems for sure, and I'm not denying that in the slightest, but it still sucks. It shouldn't have to be like this. Why is there such a need to declare you know something before other people? I honestly don't remember the last piece of content I experienced that hadn't had an aspect of it spoilt. I watch the trailers, featurettes and interviews as it's the quantity the content makers want me to see prior to the movie. I look at the poster because they want me to visualise what's in store. It should stop there. This is what we should discuss, speculate on and get hyped about and nothing more.

What are everyone else's opinions?

[passionate-reply]

This week on Great Albums, we talk about something a little more recent, but still old enough to be a classic. Can you believe that John Maus’s We Must Become the Pitiless Censors of Ourselves, is turning ten years old already? Yes, 2011 was that long ago...and so were my high school years. Come check out this lo-fi synthwave masterpiece! Transcript below the break.

Welcome to Passionate Reply, and welcome to Great Albums! So far in this series, we’ve looked at a lot of older albums, and that’s by design. While I listen to, and love, plenty of more recent music and younger artists, I’ve decided to focus Great Albums on works that are at least ten years old. That’s partly because I think that having some distance from when albums were released lets us situate them in fuller context, and take their legacy into consideration. It’s also partly because so much of the music criticism that’s out there is focused, somewhat myopically, on only the newest and hottest releases, when there’s so much amazing music to be discovered outside of that purview.

Now that that’s out of the way, let’s get on to discussing today’s album: John Maus’s We Must Become the Pitiless Censors of Ourselves, which was released in 2011, one decade prior to this video. It’s an album that was very significant to me as a teenager, when it was new, and one that I think will go on to be seen as one of the most important electronic albums of this decade.

Before releasing his arguable magnum opus, John Maus had two LPs under his belt, Songs and Love Is Real. They earned him some cult followers, but also attracted substantial derision and disdain. While many elements of Maus’s signature sound are present, such as lo-fi production, atmospheric washes of synth, and lyrics that straddle the line between pithy and biting, I’d characterize these releases as being very...rough around the edges.

Music: “Too Much Money”

“Too Much Money,” off of Love Is Real, is tantalizingly close to a pop song, but its truly shocking bridge seems almost deliberately crafted to shatter our ability to enjoy it as such. Maus had initially set out to be an experimental, outsider musician, but he soon became more interested in the tradition of pop, particularly after meeting his longtime friend and artistic collaborator, Ariel Pink. It was in that pop spirit that Maus created We Must Become the Pitiless Censors of Ourselves, and the resultant increase in accessibility is what made his third album so different--and so much more successful. There’s a certain charm that only comes from an outsider attempting to do pop, a fusion of intuitive mass appeal, and an intuitive, unschooled process of creation. This album has that in abundance.

Music: “Hey Moon”

While “Hey Moon” is one of Maus’s best-known tracks, it’s actually a cover, and was originally penned by singer-songwriter Molly Nilsson. It’s a very simple, and very pop, composition, and it’s easy to see how it embodies the sort of straightforward songwriting Maus had in the back of his mind while creating the album. But it fundamentally lacks the signature oddness of Maus, and I think that leaves it as the least interesting track here. With everything else going on, “Hey Moon” feels all the more plain and banal in comparison.

Music: “...And the Rain”

Listening to “...And the Rain,” it’s easy to hear how strongly Maus was also influenced by Classical and Medieval composers. Besides those organ-like synth textures, Maus is also inspired by the Medieval modes, and pre-tonal ideas about melody. Whenever contemporary music uses slightly older synthesiser technology, and/or that lo-fi production, many people become preoccupied with using ideas of 80s nostalgia and retro chic to understand it. I think this album has less to do with “old school cool” and more to do with the spectre of the past as something faded and ineffable, accessible only through the dim consolations of memory. Consider “Quantum Leap,” which presents us with a hazy dream of time travel, contrasted with the “dead zone” of the present.

Music: “Quantum Leap”

In “Quantum Leap”’s more strident moments, I like to think that a whiff of the in-your-face abrasiveness of “Too Much Money” remains. But rather than scornful and vitriolic, it comes across as the overwhelming splendour of divine mystery, thanks to its appropriation of Medieval church music. There are many antecedents of what Maus is doing with it, from the tradition of goth to the work of other electronic musicians like John Foxx, but what Maus really excels at is weaving together the sacred and the profane, and getting us to forget which is supposed to be which. For a more splendid example of that, look no further than “Matter of Fact”:

Music: “Matter of Fact”

Yes, you heard that correctly--this song’s only lyrics are, “pussy is not a matter of fact.” I’m tempted to compare this laconic number to some of Maus’s earlier pieces that seem to satirize easily spouted slogans of social change, such as “Rights For Gays.” The core assertion here could be interpreted as a rebuttal of essentialism with regards to gender and sex, or perhaps of toxic masculinity, and the idea of a man feeling entitled to a woman’s body and sexuality. But its ambiguity, and possible meaninglessness, are, I think, part of what makes it so effective. Still, as far as transgressive lyricism goes, the use of the term “pussy” here pales in comparison to the preceding track, “Cop Killer.”  

Music: “Cop Killer”

Maus has described himself as extremely left-wing, but he’s also consistently maintained that his music isn’t meant to be interpreted through a strictly political lens. But however much Maus insists that “Cop Killer” is “really” about metaphorical cops, its seemingly blatant call for violence feels obscene. Ten years ago, “Cop Killer” was shock art, and an expression of the unsayable. But in the past year, more and more people have opened up to criticism of police brutality, and police as an institution. “Cop Killer” has been re-evaluated and re-contextualized, and interest in the track has surged. It’s had a degree of vindication that most provocative and challenging art will never see, no matter how powerful.

Given Maus’s frequent emphasis on ideas of criminality, justice, and the punitive arm of the government, I’m tempted to interpret the lighthouse featured on the cover of We Must Become the Pitiless Censors of Ourselves as a reference to the “panopticon” prisons designed by the Enlightenment thinker Jeremy Bentham. Bentham proposed prisons, and other state buildings, in which a single observation tower stood watch over people to be controlled. Prisoners cannot tell when, and if, they are being observed, and thus are forced to live as though they are under constant surveillance, and internalize the structures of social control. The panopticon has often been used as a symbol of how structures of discipline and punishment affect the psyche of those who live within them, most famously by the 20th Century philosopher Michel Foucault.

But this is, of course, me using political theory to try and pin Maus down! We can also set this aside and appreciate the cover design for its aesthetic ambiance. Its fog and tumultuous sea evoke the wild or unrefined qualities of the music, but the bright and piercing light of the lighthouse suggest a firm and directed focus, not unlike Maus’s stated goal of creating bona fide pop.

The album’s ponderous title doesn’t actually appear on the associated artwork. This isn’t so uncommon nowadays, but when physical media was more central to music consumption, it was a self-sabotaging move that few but New Order ever got away with. Maus was one of the first artists I became aware of who chose to omit text from album art, and it struck me as a very bold and forward-thinking adaptation to an increasingly digital world. Maus nicked the title “We Must Become the Pitiless Censors of Ourselves” from the work of the philosopher Alain Badou, under whom he studied at university. Like that piercing ray of light, it seems to suggest a pruning away of impurities, and a recalibration or refocusing of one’s energies. It applies equally well to the idea of becoming sanctified or purified in the presence of the holy, or, more prosaically, to Maus’s newly pop-oriented artistic direction.

After the success of We Must Become the Pitiless Censors of Ourselves, Maus’s follow-up was, essentially, the 2012 compilation, A Collection of Rarities and Previously Unreleased Material, which featured assorted tracks he had written throughout the preceding decade. Over the next few years, Maus chose to isolate himself from the public eye, claiming to not see himself continuing a career in music, and instead pursuing a Ph.D. in political science. He eventually returned, however, and released a fourth LP in 2017, entitled Screen Memories. Screen Memories would continue the focus on hooky and accessible melodies, while also increasing the use of guitar and bass to bring Maus’s sound a bit closer to rock.

Music: “Touchdown”

While Maus hasn’t put down any new material since Screen Memories, he has made himself substantially more notorious quite recently, by having been present at the attempted coup at the United States Capitol Building in January of 2021. Given Maus’s aforementioned radical leftism, and his cryptic, but seemingly anti-fascist oriented tweets afterward, it seems unlikely that Maus actually supported the insurrection, but the incident continues to cast a shadow over his reputation, at least for the time being. Whether Maus is ever truly rehabilitated or not, and wherever his true intentions and sympathies lay, his music has certainly left an indelible mark. We Must Become the Pitiless Censors of Ourselves was a watershed moment for this idea of lo-fi, electronic pop, with a gothic and mysterious aura to it, and I don’t think this sound would be so commonplace in today’s musical landscape without what John Maus had accomplished, ten years ago.

My favourite track on We Must Become the Pitiless Censors of Ourselves is “Head For the Country.” Its stirring and anthemic refrain is one of the most emotionally powerful moments on the album, particularly when juxtaposed with its lyrical themes of feeling confined by society’s rules, and its return to the idea of criminality or deviance. It's probably too intense and overbearing to ever pass for an ordinary pop hit...but who’s keeping score? That’s everything for today--thanks for listening!

Music: “Head For the Country”

[bigskydreaming]

You’re a disgusting, abuse-survivor-shaming cunt. I hope you choke, I truly do.

So I get way more of these kinds of messages than I could possibly ever count. Have been for years. I don’t generally reply to them the way I mock some other hate messages I can at least have fun with, because like, what’s there to say about this kinda thing, y’know?

I don’t know how to get people to understand that there is NOTHING hypothetical about my anger about the things in fandom I get angry about. My rants about dark fic are PERSONAL, they have NOTHING to do with some arbitrary moral superiority stance. I don’t make assumptions as to others’ survivor status or motivations for writing various things because I don’t HAVE to, my anger and frustration are with the OUTPUT, not the inciting reasons. 

My hostility towards fandom comes directly from the hostility fandom shows me every time people try to convince me that I have no reason to have the reactions I do to the way they interact with the extremely combustible topics that define my own trauma and that of others. And the fact that fandom at large has decided that the ONLY acceptable reactions from survivors upon seeing others engaging with these sensitive topics in any way they choose, is either to be silent, or to take part in it. 

I don’t have to know which writers of which fics are or aren’t actually survivors attempting coping mechanisms of their own to be fucking furious at the way fandom has literally commodified these traumas, made them exploitable by making the catchphrase “some people write dark fic to cope” all-inclusive, utilized by anyone. With no shame or self-scrutiny as to the fact that YOU at least know if you are or aren’t a survivor, and if you aren’t one, you have ZERO business offering this particular line up as a defense to any survivor taking issue with the ways you embrace particular topics in particular ways.

The only things I have any interest in shaming people for is their choices, the fucking CHOICE to turn on any survivor who dares say “I have issues with this take” and this goes for abuse as much as it does rape. I’ve lost count of the number of authors over the years who HAVE spoken of being rape survivors specifically but then turn around and treat childhood physical abuse as their personal playground, with none of the care they put into crafting rape storylines on display when they casually have male abuse survivors punching each other in every other argument and just citing ‘boys will be boys.’ I can have sympathy for their status and experiences as rape survivors while still being upset at how they simultaneously perpetuate so many of the untruths that make it so hard for abuse survivors to affirm that they have actually been abused rather than call it something that its not, something that they’ve seen writers call it because the writers simply don’t want to inspect the fact that they’ve casually and without awareness written their characters abusing another.

It’s not a zero sum game.

I get angry not because I feel powerless in my own life (I don’t, actually, thanks, I’ve taken actionable steps every single day to fix what’s wrong in my own life and lol that’s power baby), and not because I’m fixated on my own trauma and unwilling to move past it (lol yeah I have no money to spend on anything BUT therapy because I’m committing to the highly specialized and expensive therapy I only arrived at after years of trial and error with other forms because I just don’t want to move past any of this, okay sure).

Nah, I get angry because of the galaxy brain intellects who smarmingly just decide on this view of me for themselves, condescension dripping from every ‘well-meaning’ expression of contempt sympathy, with zero examination of the fact that like.....idk guys, its a little hard to move past my trauma when everyone ELSE seems more fixated on it than I do! LOL, so we’re just gonna skip merrily on by the fact that the only reason its an ISSUE for me in fandom is because its EVERYWHERE in fandom, huh? ‘Mind the tags’ people parrot mindlessly, as though its not like tags HAVE to be created with self-awareness for what people are supposed to mind, or like I haven’t had people literally try to trigger me with tags aimed specifically at getting under my skin as ‘payback’ for something I wrote (out of moral superiority, naturally, not a visceral display of emotion, never that). As though the tags have anything to do with the fact that even outside of Ao3, there are incest-themed shipping weeks every single month of the year, that every major discord server and fic exchange and other fandom wide event demands participants be ‘ship-friendly’ which might as well be code for ‘not friendly to anyone who doesn’t prioritize ships over survivors,’ like fandom hasn’t created a culture in which people are more inclined to be defensive over how people make writers FEEL about stuff they’ve written than they are to be defensive over how certain writing makes various survivors feel.

I’ll never get over how a fandom that universally expressed disdain for Devin Grayson’s disrespectful handling of the sensitive topic of rape has obliviously embraced every form of euphemism under the sun for their own content, and just flat out REFUSES to concede that there is ANY room for criticism in ANY handling of even the most sensitive of topics. Because there’s no sensitivity allowed when it comes to any topic in fandom....unless its the writer’s sensitivity, that must be respected at all costs.

Does that not really strike you as....odd? Aren’t there lines out there about how no society or culture or environment that truly embraces free speech can simultaneously embrace freedom from criticism? And yet time and time again, its anyone who dares criticize - in ANY fashion - the HOW of what someone wrote, not even the WHY, they’re the ones termed authoritarian, censor, the one attempting to SHUT DOWN conversation rather than expand upon it. Tell me, what conversation was THIS anon and similar ilk attempting to invite? Every criticism I write of fandom invites people to engage with it. I fucking BEG people to engage with it. You’re the ones who choose not to. At least not in good faith. Because its only when I refuse to let you move the goalposts from anything other than this being about me reacting to what you wrote, no aim at doing anything other than being a reaction to an action, not an attempt to tell you what to do, just an attempt to get you to tell me WHY, if it really is as defensible as you loftily claim it is - then why is it you just can’t tell me, straight to my face, that it doesn’t matter what negative reaction your writing evokes, you don’t actually have to care? Cuz you don’t, of course. But if you’re that content with your own motivations, your own impact, why so uncomfortable just saying that?

The funny thing is, I truly don’t make any assumptions as to the why of anyone writing dark fic. I have a lot to say about the fact that we all know damn well that at least some of the people offering up the ‘some survivors use dark fic to cope’ aren’t speaking of themselves when they do so, but I have ZERO interest in imagining who that is and why. I’ve spoken of the fact that its willful naivete to assume that even if your own motivations for writing certain content are innocent in your own mind, you can’t assume the same of EVERYONE. That its nothing but willfulness to pretend that actual predators don’t peruse the same content. That the very same factors that make Dick Grayson so appealing to survivors, for example, as a strong heroic character who neverthless has been victimized and violated more than once - the flip side of this coin is this of course makes him EQUALLY appealing to people on the other end of things....a strong heroic character who nevertheless can be victimized and violated more than once.

And yet I honestly, truly have no interest in figuring out who might be whom, when it comes to writers, and I don’t assume everyone who writes or reads certain content in certain ways is in the latter camp. IT DOES ME NO GOOD, to go through life assuming that many people are all potential rapists or inclined to side with my own rapists’ or abusers’ side of things. I CHOOSE to give people the benefit of the doubt there, I assume perhaps they ARE survivors trying in good faith to cope with their own trauma and defensive about hearing that butts up against with other survivors trying to move on in other ways, or that they’re simply people who grew up in fandom being told there is nothing they can write that can be termed wrong, and have trouble with such a deeply held conviction being contested. Or perhaps only got into shipping incest because the ‘fandom elders’ of various fandoms like SPN deliberately and with full intent once upon a time pitched incest as being the same kind of taboo relationship that the same kind of people who forced gay men into secretive relationships were against....that incest ships and closeted gay ships were basically the same, and so as the latter became less of a thing as media showed more open gay relationships, incest ships became more of a thing among fans who were really compelled by the secretive/’society’s against them’ aspect of forbidden love.

I don’t assume any of that on a ONE TO ONE basis with any single writer or reader because I don’t KNOW their personal story and I’m not TRYING to. It makes no difference when I’m not talking about or arguing against the WHY of someone doing a thing, but the HOW. The end result, and the interactions it creates in the environment in which their output is published, shared, celebrated.

All at the expense of any survivor who doesn’t enjoy seeing things they’ve struggled with getting taken seriously about, maybe all their lives....not taken seriously, and offered up as just a themed week on the latest fantasy porn prompt generator. The problem with incest shippers isn’t even just ‘you ship incest, why do you do that,’ its that you can’t seem to manage to do it without assuming anyone who objects is only doing so out of a place of moral superiority. You try and make it a hypothetical argument “well what about when you do this” as opposed to something rooted in the here and now of the personal. We’re not talking about what ifs, we’re talking about what is. Deal with that before you try raising something else, instead of always raising something else so you never have to deal with that. 

The problem is people condescendingly assuming we have ZERO basis for any objection, or any negative reaction at all. Its our own fault, you see, for being too stupid to get that fiction doesn’t affect reality (even though we’ve debunked that time and time again). Its our own fault, you see, for not getting that its not really incest BECAUSE (a claim that is never actually as universal as it tries to pretend to be, and thus is never more than a distraction for the specific argument that prompted it). Its our own fault, you see, for not getting that this isn’t really a big deal, there are bigger problems, and its awfully sad if we’re so fragile and delicate we can’t handle someone enjoying something that has nothing to do with us (even though its never your call whether or not it has anything to do with us, just as its never our call what your specific motivations for writing specific content might be).

The problem is the same thing I’ve been dealing with all my life, and all the more exhausting for it being front and center in fandoms that claim to be escapism and catharsis for survivors....as long as those survivors perform in the manner fandom is comfortable with....aka the manner fandom has exploited and commodified in order to make certain manners of enjoying certain topics possible and defensible for ALL fans, regardless of their own connection to such topics, or motivations surrounding them.

Denial, avoidance, and abdication of responsibility. There’s no problem if YOU don’t see a problem, after all. There can’t be a problem if you just refuse to acknowledge a problem. A problem has nothing to do with you if you simply have nothing to do with it.

And all the while, you continue engaging in the same behaviors that provoke the same reactions that you refuse to ever actually engage with or address, relying on gaslighting to try and sell people and everyone around them that THEY’RE the real problem....its us that have no respect for freedom of speech, creativity or the creative process, other peoples’ traumas, the difference between fantasy and reality, etc etc ad nauseam.

We see people waving away instances of physical abuse with textbook abuse apologism, and we’re told we don’t know what we’re talking about. We see people offering up wording and phrasing in the comment sections of fics that are literally textbook grooming techniques we recognize from our own experiences and we’re told we’re imagining things. We see characters raping others without it being described as rape and we’re told we didn’t mind the tags, even though oddly enough, none of the tags actually said ‘rape’ but rather other euphemisms and if they aren’t in place to tell readers not to expect actual rape in the actual fic, then, what purpose is it they actually serve, again?

But sure.

Talk to me some more about survivor-shaming.