#anti puritan

[feralsapientia]

I know there's a lot of people following this account whose kinks come from traumatic events, either when you were young or when you grew up.

I wanted to remind yall that none of us are evil for coping with our trauma in this way. We are not evil for getting turned on by certain situations. As long as everything we do doesn't hurt anyone and it's consensual we do NOT owe anyone anything. You don't have to feel guilty for it.

Doms who have a cnc kink and get off on the thought of raping someone? Not evil. Ageres who enjoy fantasizing about older people taking advantage of them? Not disgusting. Sadomasochists that enjoy causing or receiving harm? Not degenerates.

Hell, even if your kink doesn't come from trauma, unless you harm someone for real without their consent, no one has the right to judge you. Thought crime doesn't exist.

[mistress-of-vos]

I'd make a longer post (and maybe one day I will) but since Lore Olympus, the story that introduced me to webtoons is coming to an end I'd like to say something:

I can't believe it is considered problematic. It has to be one of the sweetest, fluffiest, simplest stories I have read (hence why I still like it, it's a relaxing read before bed) and somehow it got too "kinky" for mainstream. It's laughable.

Everytime I dare to click on their tag or look for the # on Twitter or FB I see people clutching their pearls as if Lore Olympus were brainwashing teenagers into marrying a non existent God of the dead and have babies with him. What the hell?

The fact that people think LO is too dark makes me laugh. A single episode of Rick&Morty, BoJack Horseman or HQS has way more explicit content and dialogue. In fact!!! If it were up to me LO would have gotten genuinely kinky!!! All it does is have some surface spicy tropes that get sugar coated to not make puritans awkward and tbh that's sad. LO and the author get terribly hated anyway for daring to portray the most common female fantasy.

And this all makes me laugh but also mad because you'd think LO at least has some genuine dark themes but no? At most we have Persephone's trauma due to Apollo's abuse and yet that topic is treated as a therapy pamphlet because people couldn't handle an imperfect victim. Hades is a wife guy who shows little to no anger. Hera was re written to be sort of a feminist so that people stopped being annoying about women having emotions.

LO is a sweet, simple story with tiny spicy things here and there that were eventually pushed aside because people couldn't handle it. I wonder how Rachel feels about this, because at the beginning the story was extremely spicy and the only crime was being published in a platform as webtoon, full of people who can't differentiate reality from fiction.

Is LO a masterpiece? Idk! I enjoy the story, it's very self indulgent for me, but I won't go and analyze every detail to see how it should be labeled as it's not meant to be a perfect media. It's meant to be an entertaining, nice story of romance and it does that job very well. This need to demand perfect writing while also crucifying authors over "dark" themes is ridiculous and contradictory.

And I keep wondering, if these people loathe LO so much, why dedicate all that time to the infinte posts they make about how they would have told the story? And all those re tellings are boring! It's always "So Persephone and Hades won't ever kiss here because she's a lesbian. Also he doesn't appear at all. And Demeter isn't an abusive mom! Oh and everyone is ugly because gods shouldn't be beautiful! And Apollo isn't evil he's uwu baby. And no toxic relationships here, Zeus is a good husband!"

Sweet Gaia, you guys wouldn't handle Saint Seiya having Athena in the body of a teenage girl with big tits and who's constantly in the edge of breaking her virginity vows. This attitude screams of jealousy and puritanism and both are disgusting.

TLDR: LO being too problematic for people is both funny and annoying. I wished it actually were as kinky and dark as people insist it is. I'd pay for a toxic romance, but that being said, I LOVE it very much as it is and it's nice to have a re telling that, while not pretending to be loyal to mythology, didn't go for a route of sanitizing all the myths. I hope that once it ends haters will move on and let real fans and the author alone. 🙏

[ceoandslutler]

the way antis will agree with most proship ideas until it clicks in their brain that it's associated with "proshipping" is the same as how self proclaimed conservatives/right wingers will agree with left/socialist/communist ideas until they realise what those ideas fall under

[honey-flustered]

I just saw a post on the x reader tag complaining about smut writers and I just have to go off on a little rant.

That poster complains that if you can only read or write smut then you have a porn addiction which is an absurd and hyperbolic claim to make in itself but the vitriol that people have for those who have actual porn addictions is sad. Porn addiction is addiction. Addiction affects people’s life to the point where it is detrimental to that individual’s life to the point where it’s hardly functional. There are people with actual addictions struggling with that shit. Writing and reading smut on motherfucking tumblr.com isn’t a fucking addiction. No one’s hurting anyone. Not even you annoying fuckers who read posts that clearly aren’t meant for you.

People like this make it hard for writers on tumblr to write anything because purity culture and the morality police wants to dictate what people write as if the smut genre isn’t a whole industry in itself (literal smut novelists out there making money off this shit). Don’t fucking come into a smut tag if you are going to complain about smut, don’t complain about smut when a post boldly specifies smut and has all its warning. It’s so fucking weird to complain about something you do not wish to see only to voluntarily expose yourself to it. It’s giving miserable and i hope you find happiness.

I write what I want and I am a horny ass bitch and I don’t have to be ashamed of it because women can have agency over their own sexuality, on their own terms. Feel free to block me if you can’t handle that.

Rant done.

[whereserpentswalk]

There's something so aggressively American about the fact that batman's penis being shown in a completely nonsexual context, in an adults only issue, was considered extremely controversial, while batman has regularly been allowed to commit extreme acts of violence that basically ruin his characterization to the point where the hyperviolent version of him is now his mainstream character. Like, this is a character people are fixated on making more mature and edgy, but the one time someone drew a penis on him, a body part roughly 49% of humans have, that was too far somehow. Like, I get that it's an old controversy but it's so revealing about our culture, if you're ok with batman branding someone in a mainstream depiction you should be ok with him being depicted with a penis (something we were always lead to assume he had).

[thevillainsfangirl]

We should stop calling then "Antis." We're all anti-something, we all strongly dislike or hate something, but those people are something else entirely.

Let's stop calling them "Antis" and start calling them what they are: Fandom Puritans. (Maybe "FPs" or "Fanpurs" for short, Idk.)

[tommyssupercoolblog]

Vent about Antis

obvs this convo would never happen they would be blocked already but. aguhgh.

[deus-sema]

Why is the existence of a 'protagonist' who isn't error free or has their mistakes validated by the narrative and that of an 'antagonist' who has plausible reasons and motivations influencing their behaviour and actions considered that grave a threat within fiction which, in itself, in a boundless world with infinite possibilities that allows all kinds of stories to co exist?

If someone wants to write fallible heroes, let them. If someone wants to glamourize/romanticize/sexualize/whatever-it-isize the bad guys, let them. On one hand, dudebros can't stop whining about the lack of well written media but the moment someone tries to experiment with new concepts, they collectively lose their minds and try to nip it in the bud.

I just think that one's principles and real life moral compass shouldn't be so fragile that it feels threatened by a nonexistent entity on paper or the screen.

[theshadowsingersraven]

there's something so satisfying about going completely anti purity culture in writing for Azriel & my OC because I think it genuinely benefits him as a character more to have this type of love interest.

No, she's not a sweet, young, innocent creature that's "too good for him." She's kind, yes, but foul-mouthed and stubborn. She's two hundred years old and has taken just as many lives as he has. Loving her helps him realize that the things he hated about himself were just excuses to punish himself. Because she's not a monster when she kills. She's not a monster when she threatens foes, attacks them, or has to wash blood off her hands at the end of the day. So maybe he isn't either. And maybe he needs to stop treating himself like he is.

No, she's not "pure" or still learning to expand her sexual experiences. She's been around for two centuries and was a pirate. She's fucked a lot, actually. And at the end of the day, she'll always want him. Every person she'd been with before falls short of him in her eyes. And I'll be damned if it doesn't feel at least a little good to know that someone after hundreds of years, dozens (potentially hundreds!) of romances, and hook-ups now only wants you. Forever.

No, she's not a gentle bringer of life. She's a lovely-faced reaper sending departed souls, many she's killed, to her Matron's domain. A goddess of death and fate. She is Death, and you should be afraid. But seeing someone who embraces the darkness of death and bindings of fate is a way for Azriel to know that his own darkness wouldn't have to be hidden. Neither have ever feared one another. And he'd know that they both bear the same weight on their souls after hundreds of years of fighting. But she's open, feisty, passionate, and brave. And maybe Azriel could learn how to be a bit more open from her, knowing that she carries similar trauma.

No, she's not in the process of finding her true identity. She's her own woman, well into her years, and confident that she knows who she is, what she wants, and what she stands for. Having someone unafraid, feisty, and independent pushing back against Azriel’s overprotective nature helps keep him in check. There's not a man alive that can tell her what to do, station be damned--including Azriel. She's aggressive, at times downright disrespectful, and absolutely laughed in Cassian’s face when she accidentally broke his nose in a sparring match.

Oh, and bonus points: they're mates!

just a note: this isn't an attack against a character in particular, nor are these character qualities inherently bad. they are just bad for Azriel and I like showing what I think is better with ✨examples.✨

[roomwithavoid]

a handy guide on the appropriate way to discuss the issue of purity culture

✅ “purity culture sucks because i shouldn’t have to feel shame over harmless fantasies i have, and i’m sick of people getting involved in what i’m allowed to do with other consenting adults that they aren’t even invited to”

❌ “all these TENDERQUEERS throwing a fit in my comments! if you don’t like it why did you look at it?”

✅ “i understand why this topic might make a minor uncomfortable, but frankly minors shouldn’t be in this space to begin with. for your own safety i am going to block you and i encourage others in this space to do the same.”

❌ “lmao help me ratio this stupid PURITEEN.”

✅ “i wish people would use their block and mute features instead of ruining our fun and shaming us all of the time. i get this stuff might be triggering to some people but it’s your responsibility to cater your own online experience to your needs.”

❌ “cry about it. also the only way you would possibly see this is if you were looking for it so really it’s your fault you got triggered!”

✅ “puritanical thought policing is a dangerous tactic used by religious fundamentalists to enforce a feeling of shame so they can better control their victims, and is not something we should be welcoming/normalizing in any context. thought crime doesn’t exist.”

❌ “ANTIS ARE A CULT!”

and before you accuse me of straw manning these are all things i’ve personally seen said about this topic. if you aren’t saying the bad things, then congrats! this post is NOT ABOUT YOU!

also, when in doubt, just block! you don’t have to engage at all! you can always just SAY NOTHING!

[the-proest-shipper]

I am the nasty proshitter your parents warned you about!!

[kinjedl]

"Hi, I'm Mark Zuckerberg. I'm going to steal and amass massive amounts of preference data on literal billions of people. I'm then going to sell it to people, but because you, kinjedl, aren't a big enough capitalistic entity, I won't even acknowledge the fact that I have some of that data for sale. I 1000% do have that data, and I would totally sell it to the right person for the right price, but I won't admit either of those things here and now, because this other group of people are courting a different market. Admitting to you that I could take your money (and I totally would), would maybe potentially sully the image of their product, so they told me that I wasn't allowed to. And that they would take away all of their money if I did. They have more money than you, so I'm going to play a game of pretend and tell you that I don't have the information you're looking for and you're just going to have to play along, or you don't get to play at all."

I really hate Facebook. And Capitalism. And Puritanism.

In case that wasn't sufficiently clear.

[forget-me-not-automaton]

It’s so hard out here for the “corn” artists right now,,,, Like not only is every website in existence kicking you out, but also everyone is acting like what you choose to draw is morally bad somehow. (I even had to say the fucking vegetable because Tumblr wouldn’t show this to anyone otherwise)

[the-leech-lord]

When drawing anime women make sure to give them massive boobs to piss off people

[alixanderkrex]

I need to address something in academia that I've noticed... censorship. I can't stand the hypocrisy going on in these spheres about the arts being reflective of the "most high" and ultimate beauty. If that's the case, then why demonize and make the creation deemed filthy, needing alteration and purification? This, for instance, touches on it too:

It’s a great example of what I'm talking about. I'm not coming for the first video fully, I understand YT will demonetize if you use some words, which... in and of itself is also part of my issue here on free speech, and the embracing of art.

But I got really excited when I saw he was going to use, of all poems, "Howl" by ALLEN GINSBERG with the included Footnote to Howl but sadly, disappointed in this altered version.

I get it needing to be shortened for a lesson video. But, really, how can we actually truly embrace and enrich ourselves and pride ourselves on being conservers of art and history when we keep trying to sensor and purify it? I'm absolutely over the purification of art while also harping on about "Nature" and "God" being in art and all things.

I don't believe in God and yet I do believe that whatever is, if there is something higher, does live fully and entirely in art. The expression of the human life in its most vulnerable, wrenching, “ugly and beautiful” in such a dance of synchronicity, duality, mirroring all, one can’t exist without the other. So, no, it cannot be wrong, it cannot be disgusting or unholy, case in point, THIS POEM.

Stop trying to police what just is. If you believe in God, or something or nothing, it is all present in art, in humans, in animals, it is everywhere and it deserves to be seen and appreciated, fully inspected and respected in its ultimate raw and honest truth, however that comes out, palatable to you or not. It's true form in that it is as it is.

There is no divide. There is no bad or good body, that sentiment extends to art.

[divisionofsimilarities]

Purity Culture is not Antisexual

Purity Culture is the idea that people must be sexually abstinent before marriage. This unfortunately affects women far more than men due to misogyny and male entitlement.

Despite this, it is commonly conflated with antisexualism despite the fact that antisexuals oppose sex completely and therefore would never want to give up their celibate lifestyle. If anything, purity culture is no different from raising animals to be killed for their meat or growing trees to be cut down for their wood in that people are raised to be pure virgins only to have their innocence taken away from them by entitled hypocrites who believe that access to the other person's body is their right.

As a result, purity culture is incompatible with an antisexual lifestyle because it goes against antisexual beliefs, is anti-woman and is but another example of the hypocrisy of religious sexuals who condemn others for their sexual behavior yet have sex themselves. Purity Culture therefore must rejected because of these points and also the damage it has done to society as a whole.