#but that doesnt mean the OP of every post i reblog is

[tallymali]

idk who needs to hear this but consensual kink also applies to online interactions which means maybe dont add your little kinky monologues to random peoples posts because they didnt consent to that!!!!!!

[trannydykes]

Y'all need to SHUT UP about "transandrophobia/transmisandry". I saw a post the other day I haven't stopped thinking about, about transmisogyny, and like most the comments were going "Isn't that just transphobia?" (Which is already wild, 'cause it isn't. Since transmisogyny is the overlap of two very real oppressions: Transphobia & Misogyny)

But one was like "Sees post abt transmisogyny, checks blog, transandrophobe. like clockwork." When literally there was no posts on OPs blog that were hateful toward transmascs/men... just posts talking abt OPs experience with transmisogyny. (even if there were it wouldn't be "transandrophobia" cuz its not real, it would just be either transphobia or bullying/harassment depending on if their transness was attacked)

If you see people talking abt women's issues and think "This means they HATE men!!" (trans or no) you need to stop an think for a moment. Women on this site can't make ANY exclusive post (Transmisogyny, Lesbianism, or just talking abt being women) without guys coming along and going "How can I make this about me?".

And I know it's mostly trans men who are suffering through dysphoria and thinking about women makes them ick. But consider for a moment that you don't need to verbalize those thoughts, especially under posts that aren't about you/your experiences.

Please refrain at least from doing it under other ppls posts, I'm begging.

OPs note: I'm not being hostile/trying to start shit. Im just upset and wanna talk abt it. I'm transmasc myself (tho not a man).

[gremlingirlsmell]

trans woman: we should talk about transmisogyny in queer spaces

a dozen he/they's with "terfs fuck off" in bio, who've been waiting for this moment in the limelight for their entire lives: this but trans men. actually this affects trans men more. everyone is affected by transmisogyny. wow why are you dividing the community. we should be kissing and sucking and fucking instead. you're too online, this "discourse" is so online. it's not real. it doesnt exist irl. touch grass. in REAL communities trans women never complain. what, you actually meant irl communities? well I don't believe you, you make this all up. youre erasing us. I'll just willfully misunderstand everything you say in the worst way possible. why do you hate trans men? youre being misandrist. you're such a transradfem. baeddel. feminazi. everyone should know op is a terf and probably also into some problematic stuff. callout post: be aware of op they're a tirf infiltrator seperatist problematic kink haver. reblogs* popular thinkpiece: these transwomen reclaimed a medieval transmisogynistic slur 10 years ago, here is 200 links of terfs and nazis badmouthing them uh i mean sources, i think we should be able to call every transwoman we dont like this slur and also theyre dangerous if they reclaim it again. love trans women before it's too late #transandrophobia

[txttletale]

roadhogsbigbelly is doubling down. genuinely incredible (yes i am aware how deeply funny it is to start a serious post with that sentence. it is my one allotment of levity)

oh okay you just assumed that "loliporn" was involved and something that i deserved to be associated with defending and accused of making "integral to the queer identity" because of stuff that the OP (who i cannot stress enough i never followed or talked to or knew in any fucking way!) did that got called out months after i made my addition?

the rest of his post is just a very lengthy way of saying "umm if you didn't want to be called a pedophile because you were mean about stardew valley maybe you should be more careful about how you reblog from". yeah buddy im sure you apply that standard to yourself too huh. im sure you pull out your Bad Person detector every time you reblog a fucking post and beam OP with it. you literally screenshot my post about how as a trans women i get this standard uniquely applied to me and went "um its a good standard though. answer for the actions of every fucking person youve ever reblogged a post by".

and all this whole fucking schtick where he's like "ummmm im not calling you a pedophile :) i just assumed you thought 'loliporn was integral to the queer identity' based on source: i made it up and am going out of my way to repeatedly say you're agreeing with pedophiles and not being wary enough about pedophiles and that 99% of people who make the type of post im accusing you of making are pedophiles" is so fucking pathetic and if you fall for it you are a blatant transmisogynist like come the fuck on man.

i am no longer having a nice time on the computer, i am pretty fucking angry. and all this because he "doesnt have much skin in the game" but he doesn't like my stardew valley takes! yeah man real proportionate response.

not to mention the aside he makes to say 'wah wah someone told me to kill myself' amiguito do you have any fucking idea what my inbox has looked like since this entire transmisogynistic harassment campaign began a week ago? i delete those asks because i'm not into flaunting every piece of online abuse i get to make myself look like the victim in computer arguments but it has been constant and graphic! breaking news, women are people too, some of the most cutting-edge research suggests they might even have feelings!

"oh i censored her identity i dont know how she even found it" oh okay so you were anonymously pedojacketing me to your thousands of followers while vaguing about a post i made that had thousands of notes and using the same screenshot that an uncensored version of was passed around with thousands of notes as part of a transmisogynistic harassment campaign last fucking week?

how could anyone possibly have guessed it was me! it's a real mystery man it was basically witness protection. "oh but i didn't know, i didn't know she was trans", maybe he'll also say he didn't know about the harassment campaign, hey fucker, maybe apply some of the constant scrutiny you're reserving for women who are mean about farming game and apply it to yourself and consider looking into these things before baselessly making pedo accusations against someone!

this transmisogynistic crybully shit is absolutely fucking insufferable and i am absolutely sick of it and anyone who buys into it. i'm done assuming good faith or ignorance. i am not going to be a good placid little bullying target and acquiesce to this vile shit. it's truly fucking incredible that a tme guy can be found out as an actual pedophile and guys like mr. belly can immediately jump into action to use this as an opportunity to denounce a trans woman who had one interaction with him ever that consisted of five minutes spent typing an addition to a post and hitting ''reblog''. & if you don't find that sickening then straight up you are not safe for trans women to be around.

[hasarjunadoneanythingwrong]

so i've seen a post that says that you can't say that karna gets treated better than arjuna, and that karna is haunted by arjuna in the narrative. I can't reblog the post but I respectfully disagree with it and I'm going to explain why.

the first point is fate/apocrypha. in this, karna compares siegfried to an opponent he once knew during their duel. in the post, it's argued that he projected siegfried onto arjuna and that's now his main interest throughout the series. however, karna's main interest in the series isn't just seigfried (although he did want to fight him again, which is why he fights sieg) but rather to have strong battles in general. it's also ignoring his confrontations with vlad, his decision to stay with the red faction and why (to protect the master he is no longer contracted to) and his interactions with Semiramis and Amakusa. his comparison of siegfried with arjuna, while significant, is not so massive that you can accurately say that it negates every other aspect of his characterization in the story. the most important thing it achieved is that it makes him very interested in fighting him, and when he decides he wants siegfried as a rival and the saber dies he later challenges sieg as he can channel the warrior. its disingenuous to say that arjuna is haunting karna's narrative when he doesnt appear at all beyond a single offhand remark.

the next point is that arjuna gets the costumes. this one is just wrong? karna has two costumes, although i hesitate to call the second one a proper costume. Burning Garment of Three Gods is in fact the first free story costume you receive in fgo, unlike most other costumes which you receive through limited time events, and the glasses costume is from an event where he again gets a (minor) role. while both arjuna's alts have a costume each that doesnt negate karna having costumes?

the next thing is a bit rough. 'arjuna gets the character arcs in fgo.' this one is true. its also because arjuna is the fgo original and karna had 2 previous fate entries to receive characterization in, so him receiving it was less of an required focus than it was for a brand new character who had nothing. at the same time, i do agree that karna needs to have more done with him in the game.

the next one is also very rough. in it, the op mentions that arjuna got a lostbelt that karna received poor treatment in. I do agree that how karna was treated, namely being dead for most of the chapter and only brought back for one big battle before being killed again was very poor handling. however....arjuna alter was also really poorly handled? he was offscreen for most of the lostbelt, his motivations were both incredibly unclear and required you to have played the interlude of another ssr, he was given no depth of character or internal consistency, and they didnt give you any greater understanding of who he was or why he behaved the way he did. he is generally agreed among most fate fans to be the most weakly written of the lostbelt kings, and its in part because rather than tell us anything about arjuna's life, indian history or mythology, or the mahabharata, they once again retrod the karna vs arjuna plotline. just because he's the lostbelt king doesnt mean he was done better than karna-if anything, his treatment was potentially worse because while karna's one dimensional handling set him up as a noble hero, arjuna alter's set him up as an unreasonable villain. saying that karna is used as a crutch for arjuna requires also acknowledging how arjuna is constantly and consistently used to enhance karna since the minute he was added to fgo, which is how you get titles he was never called by like 'the endowned hero' (it may be a poor translation of one of his actual names, Dhanañjaya, which means one who conquered wealth and gold but i doubt it) and why one of the first things that's mentioned whenever arjuna shows up is that he killed karna, when thats only one of his achievements and not even the most notable one.

which brings me to my next point: karna is handled one dimensionally in fgo. but it is always as a misunderstood hero, and arjuna is primarily handled as his supporting cast, whether as a jealous villan or long suffering straightman. if you are going to show frustration at people who are glad arjuna got content independently of karna, you need to acknowledge that out of the 23 odd events and story chapters arjuna has showed up in, only around 5 have not also included karna and out of the 8 that arjuna alter has been in, only 4 have not had karna in them. karna has been in 27 events, and 9 have not included arjuna-its not a large amount, but its still the same amount that arjuna and his alter have put together without him. Arjuna in fate, especially at the time of his creation, existed as a supplementary unit to further enhance karna's story as a hero who was oppressed by others, which is how you get things like this

while both their profiles have a heavy focus on the other, karna's talks about his actual life and history to a far higher degree than arjuna's does, while arjuna's fully devolves into his resentment and dislike of karna. he was first as foremost written as 'karna's obsessive rival' to further expand karna and karna specifically, and the later focus on trying to give him more depth was because he was popular and they wanted to do more with him. there was no consideration for who he was historically or his real personality or feats, there was no consideration for what he actually was- they wrote him as a person who would, in his own words 'become the darkness' to karna's light simply for the sake of it

THAT is why fans of arjuna want more content of him independently of karna. is it true that karna has his own issues with his writing? yes! but that doesnt change the fact that for a very long time, arjuna has been twisted from his mythogical origins in fate to make him someone that he simply isnt, and thats what people want to see less of. no amount of poorly executed ssrs or events they both get shortchanged in to emphasis them hitting each other with sticks will change the base issue with arjuna's writing until fate acknowledges this.

and to be clear, i dont think its wrong to be upset that karna doesnt get a lot of in depth expansion in fgo. but that isn't the fault of arjuna, and it's really unfair to try and say that with how often arjuna has been used as a plot device to show how unfairly biased people are at karna

[realsafari]

just a lil note >.<

please dont do this. this isnt fucking tiktok or twitter. likes are saves. they are the save button. unless you are trying to save every single one of my posts (which you shouldn't, there are over 800), you shouldn't be liking them all in a row like this.

please reblog my shit instead of liking it. likes are not a motivator. they do not mean you actually enjoy my stuff, they mean you want to save it to see it later.

i dont want to be added to the hundreds to thousands of posts in your saved folder that you will never look at again.

this is not a call out to this person in the screenshots, you likely just didn't know.

likes are not post boosters. they do not ensure more people see the post. the only post boosters are reblogs. without reblogs, a post will die. from then, blazes are the only way to revive them, which are costly.

please reblog, not like. only like the stuff you also reblog, the things that you want to see again. i like writing, motivational posts, and art. i like fundraisers that i want to revisit when i have more money. even though i like these, i also reblog them to make sure other people can see it, and the OP gets the recognition they deserve.

if you dont want to reblog things on your main blog because it doesnt fit your blog theme, make an alternate blog for your reblogs. it doesnt need followers to reach people. all you need is the reblog and the tags the OP added. feel free to add your own tags. add a comment to your reblog. it doesnt matter. just reblog instead of liking.

sorry for the two serious posts in a row, i just really wanted to address this.

[skunkes]

wrt last reblog I also saw something recently that resonated with me, adjacent to it.

OP of the video im talking about explained that making friends is hard as an adult, but what if you finally make a friend and after a few hangouts you realize you dont actually like them? She goes on to say that she doesn't want to be friends with people she only Kind Of likes, because she had to do that all through her teenage years (likely at school).

But meeting people you instantly click with and have foundations for a real friendship is rare, so what are you supposed to do? Friend-break-up with someone? That's just rude. But having to maintain friendship with someone you only sort of like is also exhausting...

I made a new, quickly very close friend recently and was talking about dis to them, I talked about how I struggle making friends but after seeing some people's online circles I'm okay with that. Because I don't know how people juggle having so many acquaintances/Not Actual Friends. I could never do that. I want my time to go to myself and others I love and not having to either find excuses for plans I don't actually want to partake in or feel like I have to hang out with acquaintances for "maintenance" or to "reset the required hangout timer."

Hoping that doesnt sound Evil...having to do that with acquaintances is just one of those Life things, its normal but I'd prefer not have to do it more than I have to...ykwim

And how do you tell someone "um well its not that i dont like you but I cant imagine our friendship ever deepening to a point where im super comfortable with you and actively want to spend lots of time with you sooo bye!"

Not every friendship needs to be like that btw, acquaintances are important but one would rather just have more time to spend with the people they DO connect with better.

Also acquaintance doesn't automatically mean bad! I have acquaintances that I enjoy talking to and hanging out with even though we wont ever be Besties, I guess this post was more focused on acquaintances where the feeling is more like. They like you way way way more than you like them...

Idk. Last post reminded me of that. Its hard to make friends and I also dont seek it out because Id rather not have to also forever juggle a sea of pushy acquaintances while searching for the deep connections (which I'm so lucky to have found more often, by chance. Guess I just have to keep waiting around to get lucky.)

Meeting people you can actually connect with DOES take so much energy and time. And its hard to just stop contacting the people you dont click with along the way sometimes. So much energy to maintain the same level of effort and emotional investment across multiple different relationships when I'd rather just be deepening bonds with the people I do have/finding more of those Exact Same Bonds. Idk!

Weird type of lonely. I dont want to be friends with people I only sort of like...

[boycannibal]

i really dont understand that thing of "jsyk op of a good post holds an unrelated bad opinion :(" and the response is always like aw man ill delete that. like um. you reblogged the post because you liked it? it doesnt mean you support that poster in every opinion they have. like i dont get it

[majorbaby]

you are literally trans. reblogging from a terf and agreeing with her definition of a women i have to laugh. by putting that post on your blog in what i assume is a queer space (for you) is infesting the waters of fandom tumblr with terf ideology. it doesnt matter if its "feminist" that post is not including trans women in it's definition of women. this is actually how terfs work they post innocuous "feminist" posts and that the majority of people will agree with and that will be reblogged onto tumblrs that are not terfs or terf adjacent and then onto feminist tumblrs that may agree but not be terfs and if they are lucky a big blog will reblog and then they will get followers it's how they recruit. they don't even hide that they do this, former terfs have posted and confessed this is what they do. it doesn't matter if you agree or not passing their posts around is contributing to poisoning the waters of fandom space and queer communities online. a disturbing amount of young queers online agree with terf ideology now because of this "i don't vet" "ops post don't reflect them" mentality. i seem to remember a time when queer tumblr blocked and removed terfs from their blogs and didn't give terfs a single inch on here because otherwise they will get see you reblogging terfs and see oh a terf let me follow. and suddenly you have a anti trans terf blog not a queer fandom blog. being accepting of all ideology also means being intolerant of hateful ideology as well. and i'm sorry to sound harsh. but if you ARE genuinely agreeing with terf ideology as elementary as that post was then you may have to take a few steps back and reassess why that is.

do you think if i reblog enough gifsets of trapper and hawkeye dancing together i can infest/poison the waters of fandom tumblr/queer communities online/young queer minds with visions of tender gay sex because i've been doing that like every single day for the past two years but there doesn't seem to a metric i can use to measure if i'm making a difference :(

like you, i consider this to be a distinct and achievable goal that i should be personally responsible for, especially if it's the case that i am literally trans as you say, so i'm going to take a few steps back and reassess how i can do better.

in all seriousness, i actually do not live in fear of being falsely labelled a terf or someone who condones the ever expanding collection of buzzwords and phrases that seem to qualify as "terf ideology" as defined by whoever is screaming the loudest at any particular moment.

i don't think you're sorry for shit, you're just parroting the same paranoid, hypothetical, presumptuous stuff being lobbed at anyone, trans or not, who doesn't performatively follow a set of arbitrary rules for online interaction that establishes them as being morally pure. it sure would be nice if we could only just think of the children and reliably cleanse "online queer communities" of transphobia just by doing that. but since you're of the belief that there was "a time when queer tumblr blocked and removed terfs from their blogs and didn't give terfs a single inch on here" and yet "anti trans terf blogs" have never gone away, then i have to wonder if your proposed solution actually does anything except make you feel like you've done something to tangibly combat transphobia.

[starkid256]

hey guys, i saw this in a post just now and i want to tell you something.

blogs are like festivals and each post is a stand. the ones that have the most notes are displayed front and center. your pinned post is the biggest of those stands. now imagine at every one of these stands, there is a jar and a rack of pamphlets. the jar has a bunch of hearts in it; those are the likes. the pamphlets let you instantly transfer this post to your blog. those are reblogs. now, if you leave a like on a post, it doesnt do anything except add to the jar. the amount of likes on a post really just means nothing. the only way a post can escapes the confines of it's op's blog is by reblogging it. so, if you read this, stop just liking posts! you need to reblog them for anything to actually happen!

LIKES MEAN NOTHING!!!

[lifeintheworldtocome]

Hey so uh what's up with the no likes if you don't reblog rule? You seem incredibly harsh about it and it kinda feels super rude, but maybe there's a genuine reason? Like I just added a rule to my blog asking people to interact before or shortly after following so I know they're real people, so maybe it's a similar situation? /gq /nm

this is the last ask im posting about this mark my words after this im fucking done. so anon if you have been on tumblr longer than like a week you know that theres no Algorithm here. this means that likes do nothing. if you like a post it will not show that post to anyone else. the only thing it does is save it to your likes page and show up in the notifications of the op and whoever put it on your dashboard unlike twitter where if you like a post it has a chance of putting it on one of your followers timelines. likes are functionally useless and literally were not implemented on tumblr until a full year after its creation and half the fucking userbase doesnt use them anyways. usually it would be fine if you just liked a post and didnt reblog it. i do it sometimes. some posts are meant to not be reblogged. thats fine. but with drawings and paintings and writing and every other form of art put on this goddamn site we can put hours into that shit and when someone likes it it does nothing but clog up ones notifications and (in the case of my stuff) annoy me. it doesnt get it anywhere. does that make sense now finally

[solar-cycle]

Yes this means "good luck" posts, too.

(cw for description of ocd spiral thought patterns)

[[text id: large text that says "Yes this means "good luck" posts, too." underneath it is smaller text that is still twice as default post size saying "(cw for description of ocd spiral thought patterns) End ID.]]

because ocd doesnt see the potential good luck. it sees that if you dont reblog, then you wont have good luck, which to ocd means "ill have such bad luck it will probably end up killing me." and i can say that pretty confidently because every time i see one im stuck between "do i reblog this and potentially harm my followers who might also have ocd" or "if i dont reblog this ill have awful luck and all my loved ones will die/ill get terminally ill." and yes those are real thoughts i have. yes i believe them, because im scared of them. tagging a good luck post as rb/reblog bait doesnt do any harm, at worst a few less people will see it, but all of the people that block rb bait tags have good, respectable reasons, and yes that means even if the reason is they think its annoying.

This is especially inportant to do if you dont have ocd. Sometimes when i get posts like that that are untagged I sit in a spiral so long i forget to tag it as reblog bait because im scared of something bad happening, but out of all the posts tagged rb/reblog bait, absolutely none of them have had that happen. Tagging reblog bait counts for ANY post that specifically is about reblogs, even those "reblog to get immunity from chain posts!" or "reblog this immunity pupper to protecr you from chain posts forever!" posts, because it still asks you to reblog, and with ocd its hard to believe those will keep you safe. This all goes doubly for some posts mentioned by op, very specifically posts about xurrent events and political issues that people tack on "if you dont reblog this you're [x]" either go bsck to a rebog where the comments werent added, or tag it as bait.

Lots of love to you all, and I hope you are all being safe, thank you.

i mean genuinely no hate to my mutuals but. please make your blogs ocd safe. please tag reblog bait (like: "please reblog this its important!!!" or "if you don't reblog this people will die!!!") and don't reblog things that say stuff like "if you dont do [x] you're [y] bad thing". i really don't want to go down a shame spiral all day over posts that were meant to spread awareness. "i don't care if it upsets you, it's important for [x] issue-" no! being upset is a temporary thing. ocd grabs onto your brain and makes you believe you are literally the worst person in the world for not reblogging things, and that you clearly don't care and don't support the issue. it's terrible. it can last all day or develop into even worse compulsions or obsessions. it's actively detrimental to healing. you don't spread social justice by triggering people's disorders and put them in danger. it's strange because this site is usually very mental health positive but when people with ocd say a post is triggering them they get told they don't care about the issue or are a terrible person?? like, that's directly reinforcing obsessive thought spirals. the hostility is really strange. anyways. i'm not sure where i'm going with this, just please tag your reblog bait and avoid reblogging ocd triggers if possible. and i promise no reblog bait on tumblr dot com defines your morality.

thank you!

[txttletale]

big fan not even particularly involvd i just wanted to say hi because i love a debate and i thought your last post was a little fallacious especially in the pesto analogy. because obviously your point is that pesto being good has nothing to do with sexual assault and neither do "problematic kinks" -- however, regardless of whether problematic kinks correlate sexual assault, discussion of whether problematic kinks make someone more likely to be a sexual predator obviously is a discussion inherently related to whether someone is a sexual predator, because what makes someone a sexual predator is one of the topics being discussed. i think it's worth checking ops in those scenarios because it can harm the ethos of your (very well thought out & presented) stance if it turns out that someone who you referenced as saying "liking bdsm doesn't make someone a sexual predator" was someone accused of being a sexual predator for other real reasons. imo it's more comparable to how i check blogs i reblog "stop dismissing feminism as terf rhetoric, being a feminist doesnt make you a terf" posts from to make sure that they are not actually transmisogynistic, because as much as i believe the post is objectively true, it's also something terfs like to use to try to delegitimize criticism and it makes my argument weaker if i rb that as support. or in the pesto analogy i think it would be more like if a post said "pesto is good and eating it doesn't mean you're an evil clown" and it turned out op was an evil clown who liked pesto. i agree with the post bc i like pesto and am not an evil clown but if someone wanted to disagree with me i gave them a pretty easy target, no matter how well reasoned my argument they can point behind me and say "evil clown! they're an evil clown apologist!" and internet users will believe them because there is demonstrably an evil clown behind me. so even if you don't check every blog you rb from (i don't), it is probably worth denouncing posts that turn out to be attempts at that kind of camouflage even if the content of the post is true and you didn't know the context at the time IF you're trying to be as persuasive as possible.

imo i think this angle holds much more water & is a pretty fair point i more or less agree with! thanks for providing this viewpoint, i appreciate it.

[my-gf-is-kazuichi-soda]

If anyone wonders how I find old Kazuichi fanart from like 5-10 years ago:

-if you see a reblog of some old art you like, go to the op's blog (if they're not deactivated) and search the tag for more of their art (btw most artists love it when people reblog their old work! Dont be afraid!)

-go to their blog from that reblog and search/scroll that tag. Sometimes tumblr glitches and says there's nothing there. Sometimes you can click on the tag from the reblogged art and find more there, sometimes it wont work? Tumblr is weird like that.

-I search "Kazuichi", if that doesnt work then "Souda", and then "Soda" (mixed bag of having posts with the drink soda popping up)

-look at the reblogs on a Danganronpa fanart, you'll have the best luck if it's Kazuichi-centered fanart, if it was reblogged years ago, and/or if the user tagged it with a specific tag they made for Kazuichi implying that they regularly reblog Kazuichi

-if you hit a dead end, repeat for another piece of fanart, the older the better bc then you find blogs that may not have touched this fandom in years (or have just been in the fandom for years lol)

-important: treat every piece of fanart like the poster could delete their blog and you are preserving their work (and also sharing it for other current fans to see!)

-that being said, try to avoid reblogging a post where the person stole/reposted someone's art (if it has a link at the bottom then it's usually not stolen, I just mean collages of fanart clearly from multiple artists that dont credit them. Dont sweat it if you didnt know or have trouble identifying stolen art, we all make mistakes, it's just something to note.)

[thekingscholar]

can i ask what pseudoproshipping is? /gen

ya sure! so, in my own definition/understanding of it, one cannot themselves be a "pseudoproshipper", it is solely referring to the types of posts. these posts are ways to implicitly or indirectly get other people to agree with proshippers. here's how it works:

the post will appear mostly innocent and simply state something along the lines of "media consumption, fanfiction, and shipping should not have to abide by perfect morals and is allowed to portray dark content without 100% openly condemning it, and people who consume this morally gray/dark content are not bad people in themselves."

this on its own isn't controversial and honestly on a website like Tumblr in this current understanding of content and the waves of cannibalism & covered in blood posts, it doesnt need to be stated. which should already raise your eyebrows.

the trick in these posts is that the op does not clarify what they consider to be morally gray content. sometimes the tags of proshipping and anti-anti will be in their original post, but most of the times they do not. the way to figure out that what theyre referring to is proship content (adult/minor ships, aging up minor characters just to write porn, incest, etc) is typically in OTHER posts of theirs, or within many of the replies of the post. if you can see multiple arguments between proshippers and Not in the replies and op has not directly picked a side, its usually because theyre a proshipper.

and a lot of people dont check to see what the ulterior motives of the post are and will reblog it with a simple "why yes of course! fanfiction and shipping can be problematic and thats not wrong at all!" without asking where op draws the line.

so obviously i dont blame people for falling into this trap, one cant expect someone to check the op of every single post of this sort, but i do see it occurring often with well-meaning unaware mutuals.

[nevershootamockingbird]

[ images 1-6: six screenshots of tumblr tags that read: 1. “#OP i am kissing you on the MOUTH #if jew know jew know”  2. “#Nonjews reblog this”  3. “#yeah this is kinda what weve been saying #glad this is going around”  4. “#we’ve been trying to tell y’all #but even now most people treat me like I’m paranoid when i bring this up #so please #just.. this”  5. “#every goy should be like OP #antisemitism”  6. #antisemitism tw #this is so succint. yeah they mean Jewish people” 

image 7: a comment on the post that reads: “A question for any Jewish folks who can give me a better way of thinking about this: does saying “the 1%” have the same implications are saying “the elites”? Because like, I absolutely see how easily “elite” talk turns into anti-Semitism, usually starting off with George Soros, but I’d be hard-pressed to argue that billionaires aren’t the ones causing all the world’s problems because of their greed and how easily they manipulate and buy politicians to puppet the system into fucking us all over.”

images 8-10: three screenshots of tumblr tags that read: 1. “#kinda make them sound like antisemites #it doesnt #it makes them sound like antisemites #bc one thing u need to learn while unlearning this is that saying that shit is just straight up antisemitic #meant it to be or not. it is”  2. “#reblog #oppression comes from our institutions and very rarely can it be blamed on one individual or group of individuals #i am not oppressed because one person or group wants me dead #i am oppressed because the general public lets people kill me”  3. “#it’s also behind a lot of their bigotries #black lives matter? that’s the jews #pride? that’s the jews #climate crisis? jews”  / end id ]

me a few years ago: its so weird how right wingers always wanna blame the "elite" given that alot of them are in the global 1% of wealth and therefore almost by definition the same "elite" they claim to hate. weird right? lol right wing logic makes no sense

me now: oh my god they mean Jewish people. its always been Jewish people. and the insistence of online leftists to use words like "elite" and "cabal" (to refer to a handful of ultra rich people who dictate a lot of how our lives are run) kinda makes them sound like antisemites too. maybe this whole idea that the world is run by a select few is a gross oversimplification which only serves to reinforce antisemitic stereotypes... oh no. maybe i have a lot of shit to unlearn. maybe i need to start vocally defending Jewish ppl. also local community building is the only way out of this