#but the people that get harassed are Real People

[crystalsword]

Absolutely! And just as often happens in real life, nothing happens to the “bad guy.” Potter is never found to have kept the money. He is still the richest person in the town, who will probably keep harassing the Baileys and the rest of Bedford Falls for the rest of his life. The only thing that we “know” will happen to him will happen off-screen, when he realizes that George was pulled out of it after all, by the very people Potter thought would abandon him. The thought of his rage and disappointment is nice for the audience to consider, but it’s not nearly as satisfying as the typical ending for those fluffy Hallmark type stories that end with a real punishment for the evil character. As in real life, you are left with the thought that the bad guy will only get the treatment he deserves after he dies and has to account himself to God. But the story is not about Potter. It’s about George Bailey and how, in his darkest moment, at the end of a series of sacrifices that seem to have amounted to nothing, he is pulled back into the joy of life precisely because of the love he gave and the love he inspired. It’s a beautiful story, and definitely one of the best movies ever made!

Pop culture reduces It's a Wonderful Life to that last half hour, and thinks the whole thing is about this guy traveling to an alternate universe where he doesn't exist and a little girl saying, "Every time a bell rings, an angel gets its wings." A hokey, sugary fantasy. A light and fluffy story fit for Hallmark movies.

But this reading completely glosses over the fact that George Bailey is actively suicidal. He's not just standing there moping about, "My friends don't like me," like some characters do in shows that try to adapt this conceit to other settings. George's life has been destroyed. He's bankrupt and facing prison. The lifetime of struggle we've been watching for the last two hours has accomplished nothing but this crushing defeat, and he honestly believes that the best thing he can do is kill himself because he's worth more dead than alive. He would have thrown himself from a bridge had an actual angel from heaven not intervened at the last possible moment.

That's dark. The banker villain that pop culture reduces to a cartoon purposely drove a man to the brink of suicide, which only a miracle pulled him back from. And then George Bailey goes even deeper into despair. He not only believes that his future's not worth living, but that his past wasn't worth living. He thinks that every suffering he endured, every piece of good that he tried to do was not only pointless, but actively harmful, and he and the world would be better off if he had never existed at all.

This is the context that leads to the famed alternate universe of a million pastiches, and it's absolutely vital to understanding the world that George finds. It's there to specifically show him that his despondent views about his effect on the universe are wrong. His bum ear kept him from serving his country in the war--but the act that gave him that injury was what allowed his brother to grow up to become a war hero. His fight against Potter's domination of the town felt like useless tiny battles in a war that could never be won--but it turns out that even the act of fighting was enough to save the town from falling into hopeless slavery. He thought that if it weren't for him, his wife would have married Sam Wainwright and had a life of ease and luxury as a millionaire's wife, instead of suffering a painful life of penny-pinching with him. Finding out that she'd have been a spinster isn't, "Ha ha, she'd have been pathetic without you." It's showing him that she never loved Wainwright enough to marry him, and that George's existence didn't stop her from having a happier life, but saved her from having a sadder one. Everywhere he turns, he finds out that his existence wasn't a mistake, that his struggles and sufferings did accomplish something, that his painful existence wasn't a tragedy but a gift to the people around him.

Only when he realizes this does he get to come back home in wild joy over the gift of his existence. The scenes of hope and joy and love only exist because of the two hours of struggle and despair that came before. Even Zuzu's saccharine line about bells and angel wings exists, not as a sugary proverb, but as a climax to Clarence's story--showing that even George's despair had good effect, and that his newfound thankfulness for life causes not only earthly, but heavenly joy.

If this movie has light and hope, it's not because it exists in some fantasy world where everything is sunshine and rainbows, but because it fights tooth and nail to scrape every bit of hope it can from our all too dark and painful world. The light here exists, not because it ignores the dark, but because the dark makes light more precious and meaningful. The light exists in defiance of the dark, the hope in defiance of despair, and there is nothing saccharine about that. It's just about as realistic as it gets.

[prettyboykatsuki]

tw for very very brief mentions of rape and incest and other taboo subject matter - only brought up for discussion.

i feel like it is kind of beating a dead horse when i bring up the relationship between fiction, reality, and the exploration of dark/taboo. given the nature of my blog and the change it's made over time—it's brought up repeatedly many times and in many context in which im forced to defend.

outside of that though, i have never really taken a moment to thoroughly break down the reason (or one of them) i find the it important which is the idea of fictional exploration as a sort of third space of processing and development.

there are many arguments surrounding the exploration of taboo relationships, ideas, and incidents in fiction built on the basis of morals. our greater, societal infrastructure relies on the idea of morality to justify any and all material violence. whether that violence be physical harm, systemic injustice, or psychological / verbal abuse etc.

there's a quote by frank bidart that goes "you can convince human beings to do anything if you convince them it is moral" that i think of often when we debate about what is moral and why. all people are equally capable of committing great material harm to other people if they are under the impression they are in the moral right.

so you examine morality as a mechanism for forming social contracts. it is largely debated whether or not morality is subjective or objective - but regardless of either thing, it is a fundamental part of creating a social circle. big or small.

human beings are also naturally social creatures. we want the approval and attention of our peers and we want community. and it will cause us to act in ways, whether that be conscious or unconscious, that are unsavory. whether that be passivitiy to maintain the status quo or othering another person in order to gain social status or favor.

a lot of the people who are staunchly against any forms of taboo in the exploration of fiction are people engaging with this kind of social behavior. at the core of there reasoning, they are seeking solace with peers over a sense of moral superiority all while not contributing anything materially—except often the verbal abuse and harassment of the opposite party.

none of this is very novel for me to point out. there are also plenty of other things that contribute to why this kind of debate happens online so frequently, particularly a strong taboo towards any all sexual content stemming from old-school religious conservatism and other fascist ideas etc.

but i bring it up because of how it relates to my feelings about the concept of fiction as a sort of third space in the same way the internet is a sort of third space.

engaging in this kind of moral crusading online is done by people who are seeking out social spaces that connect them to other people. this is especially true online as the internet has become a third space for people to interact with others that share similar interest and views. they do this to have a space to reaffirm themselves and their morality.

most importantly, they do this because the internet is an easily accessible space to like-mindedness and self-assurance. it's unreliability is overshadowed by the fact that young people engaging in this kind of critique can get ahold of their peers easily this way. humans are social. they seek companionship and our real life third spaces have become more and more sparse over the years.

so, online spaces have become a place for people to process their social development and their emotions with their peers.

now there's an understanding—that people need a way to process their internal world, concepts and ideas somehow.

but there are social contracts that can't be broken in these online spaces. though they are meant to be an escape from the constraints of real life, you are still subject to scrutiny and at risk of becoming a bad actor that is shunned by their own online community and circle of friends.

on top of that, if human beings are capable of committing horrific acts of violence, they are just as capable and if not more, of experiencing that violence in their lives. this also requires processing similar to the normal, everyday social processing people do online.

this much is obvious, even to many people who oppose the idea that fiction doesn't equal reality. you'll often hear them utter words about seeking counseling / therapy underneath posts involving dark subject matter.

but then, there are social contracts of acceptability and palatability. and more, there is inaccessibility.

all human beings are subject to some form of violence or some other type of struggle. whether that be in their class, race, or sexuality - the average person has material conditions and complex emotions that can't be neatly resolved nor shared comfortably with their peers.

everyone needs space to air these aspects of themselves out healthily. you are automatically going to experience a specific amount of negativity in your life that requires an outlet and there is no real way to find a universal solution to answering those feelings. unresolved, it can lead to substance abuse or suicidal thoughts/

and there is no universal, easy to access place for people to unilaterally express and process their feelings and thoughts.

but there is writing fiction.

this, to me, is the one argument that i think is important to bring it up but rarely does. because there are many angles to approach this discourse and this is just one of them.

writing is also a kind of third space. a place to communicate that isn't home or work. a third space in to connect with and break down these emotions—somewhere that can be shared to find camaraderie. it can also be shielded to hide away from the scrutiny of your peers. it is a place where you can inadvertently process these great, overbearing emotions that is neutral and welcome to all.

and it's not that fiction can't cause harm at all. because it certainly can and has

but the very presence of taboo is not the sole cause of harm in what makes something fictional hurtful. propaganda and insensitive messaging and all the ways fiction can hurt people exist with in a predefined context and social climate. that kind of harm spreads through massive scales of government and print and makes its way onto shelves.

more than that, human beings have a sense of morality. it is agreed upon that rape, incest, violence and murder are materially harmful. in the misplaced desire for censorship, it seems people are attempting to affirm this by monitoring works of fiction that have this subject matter at all.

but in that monitoring, you are taking away what makes these kinds of spaces comfortable - which is a lack of hostility.

if you believe this to be the most optimum solution, i implore you to critically examine whether or not you think it morally correct to take away from someone the means to process their emotions. and if you believe still, that it's the best thing to do for all parties i next ask, how will you then make space for them? what space will replace this one?

what are the other solutions have the same level of access to all? can you implement a space for someone with no other healthy outlets, to vent and untangle and smooth out these feelings, without requiring the hypothetical labor of someone else? can you promise you will be able to provide something that offers a similar catharsis for the often deeply complicated feelings being addressed (whether that be directly or indirectly) through the presence of themes like incest, rape, or abuse? can you provide another alternative to the repetitive behaviors of trauma that insist on recreating / imagining these harms in a controlled environment over and over again?

to be clear, it is unnecessary and against my beliefs that you must have experience those things directly to write about them. in fact my point is the opposite.

the thematic concepts that come along with the taboos are the catharsis themselves. a person with a disconnected trauma about neglect or abandonment finding healing in the themes of incest about forbidden love or love that goes against all. a person with no trauma at all, who longs to be free from the daily life stresses of work may find catharsis in the writing of rape which strips autonomy and choice.

human beings are complicated. these examples may feel extreme to you. you are welcome to view them that way. that is your right.

but for other people it is a good solution, one of the best solutions - to strip down these desires bare and explore them where no one is being hurt. where they do not hurt themselves materially or anyone else. art is one of the few spaces you have for yourself. you can argue that distribution is the problem—but if you are able to identify when it is wrong, does your moral superiority extend so far as to believe that that's something only you can do?

and most importantly - are you prepared to take that space from them and provide other outlets? do you think it fair to prevent people from safely having access to something that you, yourself, depend on heavily for social and emotional affirmation?

are you willing to hold space for them when no one else can or no one else will?

[jesncin]

With the recent Harley Quinn fart fetish comic announcement and subsequent harassment of the writer and artist involved, I want to make it clear that none of my metas, reviews, or criticism should ever be used to justify harassing any creatives involved. It shouldn't have to be said, but we live in an uncomfortable parasocial space where the accessibility of these creators that are just a tweet away means people don't know how to exercise boundaries. I've had at least one incident where someone absent-mindedly mentioned trying to get the MAWS voice actors to look at my MAWS criticisms. Don't. Do That.

While I've called out many comics or shows' portrayal of serious things like racism, ableism, misogyny, etc. in the past- at the end of the day these are fictional characters we're talking about. They're not real, but the writers are. Media criticism exists to encourage critical thinking and discussion. The stuff I write is for fans, friends, and other creatives to read. I'd hate for media criticism to be weaponized as a tool for harassment, because all it does is make us not want to talk openly about this stuff for fear of our words being appropriated.

[deathdetermineslife]

No one cares about how you think being ficto isn't harmful because you're an anti. Your opinion doesn't matter anyways. Antis have done a good job of invading this historically proshipping space. You sure did do a good job at ruining this community. You've only been in this community since July and you've done nothing but indoctrinate children into your fucking cult. There is no safe space for real selfshippers anymore because you've made this community harmful. You can act like you do good by making templates and inbox games and "spreading positivity" (Which, you can't do by wishing death to an entire harmless community, by the way. But you're too stupid to understand the gravity of you hurt.) but you do nothing but spread harm through your posts by gatekeeping. There's no safety in gatekeeping. You've spread more indirect hatred through this community than anyone else ever has. I hope you sleep well at night knowing these victims of abuse you pretend to care about are being hurt because of you. Continue lying about being a victim yourself for internet brownie points. We all just feel so bad for you, an anti with no common sense. We built this community by hand and you've destroyed it. I hope you feel good about yourself knowing you've made all of us feel unsafe.

Go ahead and block me, I don't care. Just know we all want you gone. And whine and cry about how this is harassment, I really don't care at this point. Someone needs to say it to you.

there's so much I could say about this, but since it's Christmas eve, I'm quite tired, and I don't feel like trying to refute all of this gobbledygook, instead I'll just say this;

I just got out of church with my family, and while I am pagan, I had a lovely time at Christmas Eve service. at the end we held candles and sang silent night (which has been my favorite Christmas song since I was a kid, fun fact about me :]), and had a nice time seeing people I havent seen since last year. whether or not you folks out there celebrate Christmas, I hope tomorrow is a good day for you! and if you do, I hope you get all the presents you could ever ask for !!!

do something kind for someone this holiday if you can :) go say something nice in someone's inbox, draw them their selfship, whatever. kindness gets you a long way in life, no matter what other people may think.

have a holly jolly Christmas teeehhehehehe >:D

(also I know I said yesterday I would get out more pride stamps but I didn't have time today to finish the rest of them so instead I'll probably get them out tomorrow as a Christmas treat! :3)

[maxdibert]

What a coincidence that this is a fandom “for everyone,” but only as long as the characters are rich and attractive. What a coincidence that the only canonically poor character, the one canonically outside of hegemonic beauty standards, the one canonically outside traditional concepts of masculinity (and who is mistreated in the narrative precisely because of his appearance and mannerisms that don’t align with traditional gender norms), and the one canonically socially marginalized, is the only one you continue to marginalize and mistreat. The only one you don’t punkwash like the other psychopaths you’ve turned into queer icons, even though they’re canonically ten times worse than Snape. But of course, Snape doesn’t count, because Snape was ugly and poor. What a coincidence.

It’s also quite the coincidence that you claim to be inclusive, yet the characters you defend are canonically hegemonic in every sense—privileged, wealthy, and above the socioeconomic average. What a coincidence that in your pinkwashed utopia of wannabes who’ve never actively fought for anything in their lives, making a character gay is all it takes to feel like the revolution is complete. Sorry, but no. You can’t sell the idea that you’re opposing Rowling when you’re pinkwashing the very characters she already glorified because she favored them. Do you think Rowling cares if James Potter is trans in your trashy fic? J.K. Rowling would love that you’re reinforcing her narrative that rich, attractive boys are good, and poor, ugly boys are bad, because that’s something she reproduces throughout her entire saga.

I don’t care where you were born or if you were bullied because that clearly didn’t teach you anything. It didn’t teach you class consciousness, nor did it help you understand how social dynamics work, inequality, or how power mechanisms operate between people from different socioeconomic backgrounds. It also didn’t help you understand that defending rich, aristocratic, abusive kids who harass and torment working-class, underprivileged kids isn’t the peak of the pinkwashed revolution you’ve built in your head just because you label them as gay or trans. That’s not how it works, my friend. You can’t fix everything by slapping a rainbow flag on it. Classism still exists within the LGBTQ+ community, just as abusive behavior and social inequalities do.

So excuse me if I don’t care about your ad hominem fallacy, but clearly, you didn’t get much out of university if your reading comprehension is abysmal and you’re utterly clueless when it comes to political and social culture. So take yourself and your TERF rhetoric elsewhere because the only one speaking like a classist TERF defending bourgeois interests with an elite-bootlicking mentality is you. The only one instrumentalizing an important movement like the LGBTQ+ cause (just as TERFs instrumentalize feminism) to justify your reactionary thoughts, internalized discrimination, and need to trample those in disadvantaged positions is also you.

Though, given your history, maybe the problem you have with Snape is that he reminds you, and other Marauders fans, that in real life, you wouldn’t have been the popular kids. You would’ve been the ones marginalized by people like James and Sirius, who would have made your life miserable. And that’s too unbearable because you want to feel like the protagonists, but you never would’ve been. You never would’ve belonged to the hegemonic, cool kids who ruled the school. In fact, kids like Sirius and James would’ve laughed at you. So instead, you turn them into pinkwashed icons, alter their personalities to your liking, and turn the one true character who fits your idea of a non-hegemonic person into a supervillain because that way, you can fantasize about being the popular ones. Accepting Severus breaks your narrative. In the end, all of this boils down to unresolved self-esteem issues.

I have no problem seeing this kind of stuff, nor do I block tags. If you don’t like being hit with a dose of reality and still think it’s a good idea to keep making a fool of yourself because you have zero arguments or basis to defend your point without coming across as a classist jerk, that’s your problem. Honestly, I couldn’t care less because I’ve said many times that I love debating, and frankly, you’re not going to change my opinion. It’s not for nothing that I pay my rent and bills working as a criminal lawyer and helping people in the process of social reintegration, only for some random person who thinks the revolution is about turning fictional rich bully kids into queer icons to come and try to lecture me about anything. Go on, get lost. Kisses.

okay, hold my drink *hands u cursed ancient goblet full of mead* i gotta talk my shit for a second.

ive been seeing a lot of severus snape love recently. and this is fine, obviously, y'all can love whomever you want. but. i need to rant or i will explode. if we're talking about canon. severus snape spends his adult years, seven books of it in fact, abusing children. and his excuse for this is the girl he loved (tho not enough not to join a group actively trying to exterminate her) fell for the hot jock instead of him (a tragedy indeed, i weep 4 him, i really do). and also she died, which, admittedly is very sad.

it is simply crazy 2 me 2 look at that and think *romance* or *genuine care and affection*. LIKE. fo real. snape calls her a slur in public, apologizes in private, hangs out with dudes who commit hate crimes against her friends (CANONICALLY, she says "you've been hanging out with that douchebag Mulciber, how could you do that after what he did to Mary???" this is not a direct quote but like, it's close enough). lame. loser behaviour.

"Oh but what about regulus" i can hear you say "he loves James potter but snape doesn't love lily???" well. idk. maybe. bit different tho, innit? due to james not being the demographic regulus is attacking (which doesn't make regulus a better person but does make the dynamic between him and james different). ALSO. Regulus chooses to turn against voldemort without hope for anything in return. snape doesn't seem to give a shit about voldemort, he's just sad he's not gonna get to bang lily evans. he switches sides for that reason alone. also doesn't care about what happens to her husband or her son which like. considering lily would be pretty fucking destroyed if they died. once again points to my whole, he doesn't really give a shit about her, theory. lame. loser. behaviour.

also. im sorry. I"M SORRY. but what snape does to neville? to hermione? to harry? gross. a grown ass man out here telling an eleven year old neville he's worthless or hermione she's ugly and annoying. or spilling harry's potion and refusing to grade him for it???????????????

reg and draco are children when we see them at peak suckage and therefore they feel like they can be redeemed much more compellingly (CAN be, not SHOULD be, not HAVE to be, just narratively i think they are easier to turn into interesting, sympathetic characters). but snape? snape grows up into a garbage adult. like he doesn't get better. and again, the only real excuse we're given is his obsession with lily. not very demure. not very cutesy.

ALSO. yall remember that time he got a destitute, struggling Remus Lupin fired from the best job he ever had just because he felt like it? remember that time snape weaponized Remus's lycanthropy and people's prejudice against him just cause. like. literally just cause??? his ego was bruised after the shrieking shack incident so he was like "get wrecked Lupin I'm going to tell everyone your secret so you will be forced back out onto the streets" DO YALL REMEMBER THAT BITCH ASS MOVE????????? THAT HE DID AS A FULL ADULT.

IN CONCLUSION, this is silly and, of course, like i said at the start, everyone can have their own thoughts and feelings about characters, but i simply needed to interject here on behalf of snape haters everywhere because i feel like so much of snape's shitty behaviour as an adult during a time when he was really under no duress and was very safe and cozy, is ignored. and my hater heart just cannot let that stand.

[gor3sigil]

My post about transphobia towards amab enbies who don't transition medically is getting traction so I'll make it clear once and I'm blocking on sight because I don't care if you disagree:

If you start saying shit like "cis men use he/they/pretend to be queer to prey on women and afab enbies/transmascs/pre T transmen" and generalise that to any non transitionning amab you meet, get the fuck out of my face.

I said it before, and I'll say it again: I've been harassed and assaulted by trans AND cis people. One of my worst abuser has pretty recently come out as transfem despite having been insanely transphobic towards me and it has been one tough pill to swallow, the "running to my psychiatrist with flashbacks" type of shit.

And as I said before, and I'll say it again: you can't use your trauma as an excuse to target people.

The way you treat non binary people is pushing people further into the closet, and it isn't protecting ANYONE. There was the exact same discourse about "men pretending to be gay or bi to prey on women/be accepted in women's spaces" and you need to remember that, whever you like it or not, this is one of the ROOT of queerphobia, transphobia, and TERF rhetoric.

"But we're not talking about queer men, we're talking about CIS men who PRETEND TO-" stfu. You know what you're doing.

Oh, and on the same topic: pre T trans men are not women. We know when you say "pre T trans men/transmascs" as a way to mean "women who say they aren't women." That doesn't mean that they aren't read and treated as women in public because a lot of them are, but there's a difference.

And since we're on that topic, can we stop with the "yeah but once trans men are on T they aren't preyed upon anymore by cis men because cis men don't find the effect of T attractive." ?

It's FALSE. Like hell we aren't preyed upon, fetishized, like hell men don't fantasize so hard about making us detransition, treating us as freaks and getting OFF to this idea ? What is the planet you live in where gender deviants aren't sexualized ? Are you for real ?

And as someone who's been on T for 2 years but presents adrogynous most of the time and is seen as younger as I am: you have no idea how disgusting people can be, and here I'm talking about cis MEN and WOMEN because I'm fetishized and sexualized by BOTH.

Anyways, sorry for the rant, but some of y'all really are getting on my fucking nerves. Do better.

[velvetvexations]

Re the anon talking about ppl claiming that you can do forcefem in a way that isn't kinky and therefore is sfw & shouldn't be tagged – THANK YOU. As an ace person who is both somewhat sex averse and mildly involved in kink (basically I like erotica (of the fantastical, impossible to do in reality variety) & write some of it but I have to be in the right mood and I'm uncomfortable with actually having sex or having sexual interactions that aren't clearly roleplay), I was a little upset with some friends a few years ago for making sexual comments about me (like joking about whether I'm a top/bottom or saying things like 'step on me', etc). I asked them if they could stop/tone it down a little and my actually close friends did but a few kept getting defensive about how it was clearly a joke and they were saying I was a bottom in a slang/meme way and didn't mean anything sexual by it. And like... the point isn't how you intend for something to come across, the point is how it's received and the words you're saying are clearly sexual and it's starting to get weird. Something doesn't stop being rude or straight up sexual harassment if you mean it as a joke/in a nonsexual way.

I'm not a Puritan by any means. All kink (involving consensual adults) is fine by me but being sex-positive also means respecting that some people aren't into your kinks or sex in general and to not get offended if someone unfollows you because of untagged kink/nsfw or leaves a conversation because they're squicked out. (Seriously, we need to bring back the concept of 'squicks' to communicate that there's nothing morally wrong with certain kinks but some can still gross you out and you can choose to avoid them.) Rebranding what's clearly a kink and is understood to be a kink anywhere that's not this website, especially one that can clearly be triggering to people, and calling anyone who doesn't want to see it transmisogynists is just... weird.

(Also while I have 0 problems with people who transition for kink reasons or people who have gender-related kinks, it sets a kind of dangerous precedent for seriously claiming something like forcefem is trans praxis when one of the most common transphobic & specifically transmisogynistic lines of attack is that being trans is sexually motivated & trans people are groomer pedophiles, etc etc. If you think of your transition/gender as forcefemming then cool! Good for you! Kink is an important part of queerness. But maybe try to not apply that to the entire community when there are people who don't feel the same and there are people who are put in real physical danger because of those assumptions that being trans is inherently sexual.)

This is especially true of forcefem because "nonsexual forcefem" is literally just transmascs being forced to detransition. People with non-con kinks kinna have a big responsibility to not go about it in a way that's triggering to other people.

[goldmanguyperson]

i need all people to get it in their heads right now that being horny doesnt actually strip you of your self control, if it does you need to work on that, and if you instantly assume that all other people are like that then you really need to examine why tf you think that. people who have like, a hand kink, arent instantly going to get weird at you and intrude on you just because you have your hands out, and if they do, that’s their problem, not a problem with someone having a hand kink. the whole idea that horny = uncontrollable is literally how people justify making women cover up and harassing them. Please for the love of god you cant perpetuate this

(this post not about finding concept of losing control sexy because fantasy and roleplay is not real nor reflective of who you are in a realistic situation)

[woolieshubris]

So, you've been sent bait: A Guide for Internet Posters and Readers

Disclaimer: I am simply an autistic internet poster with a special interest in human interaction, abuse patterns, and internet culture. I am not a scholar and I do not have a degree in these things. While I have done research into the topics of cancellation, online abuse, and harassment, I am far from an expert.

Introduction:

I've seen this happen dozens of times before. A semi popular blogger will suddenly seem embroiled in a controversial topic, receiving harassment and accusations of some pretty terrible things. It goes on for about 24-72 hours, and then poof, it seems to be completely over, (however, of course, it can be brought up again without warning.) This can be emotionally damaging for the blogger, for the supporters of that blogger, and for the shock waves it will undoubtedly send into the greater community. This also further spreads discourse and popularizes harmful ideologies to people who might have previously never heard of them. The targets are almost always trans women, (with transmisogyny doing most of the cancellation legwork) and it seems to always have the goal of turning fellow trans people against the target. (Though, of course, I've seen this done with autistic creators, nonbinary creators, ect. Trans women are just the most popular target.)

Now, the goal of this guide is to help people understand how this happens, be able to recognize the patterns of a targeted harassment campaign, and be able to try and prevent it in the future. I'll be writing this as a guide to the target, however, I think it's important for lurkers/readers to also be able to recognize these patterns so they too can avoid being manipulated into falling into these pitfalls. A large portion of this harassment initiative is to use "useful idiots" in order to do most of the legwork. As a reader, you must avoid becoming a useful idiot, (which I'll be referring to as fools from now on) and you must be able to tell when other people are being used in this manner as well. This is the most effective way to protect people from unwarranted harassment campaigns.

Section 1: Bait

Types of Bait:

You've been sent bait, but you aren't sure if it is actually bait, or a genuine question from a fan. You don't want to ignore someone's valid concern, so you answer it even though you might not be sure. This is your first mistake! If you think it might be bait, it's best to treat it as such. Think of bait asks as toxic waste. If you aren't sure, it's much better to be safe than sorry. If you receive a bait ask, your best bet is to delete it and not respond at all. Yes, it will probably rattle you, and you'll probably feel bad about deleting the question, but you need to understand that it doesn't matter. If this person was asking a genuine question, they would understand if you don't want to answer. If they get annoyed or angry at your lack of answer- they were likely asking it with the intent to hurt you.

The first type of bait is bringing up a controversial topic.

While certain topics (like queer rights, abortion, Palestinian freedom) do actually matter in the real world and I would believe are worth responding to or making your position clear (as long as it is something you do have an opinion on) this does not mean all controversial topics are equal. Many topics that are "hot debates" online do not matter in the real world. (for example, proship vs antiship). Regardless of the validity of the debate, if it doesn't matter in the real world, it likely isn't worth publicly stating your opinion on those things. That is why people who are active in those movements try to make these things seem like they have real world consequences- to try and make their debate more valid and easier to pull more people into. The real goal with many of these topics is not to try and have a reasonable discussion. The goal is to try and pull as many people into them as possible. If they can successfully get ANY response out of you, then they win. Their debate is now broadcasted on your platform. Their thoughts, arguments, philosophies are now spread to thousands of people instantly. Even if you respond with an answer like "huh?" "what?" or "what does this mean???" they still win. Your acknowledgement of the debates existence at ALL is a win for them. They get to publicly platform their beliefs on your profile. If you respond at all and express even the slightest hint of an opinion, then they will have an entire section of fools that can now send you messages about this topic. Death by a thousand paper cuts. This is the most common type of bait, and the reason is simple. Internet debates can suck in people and can quickly rot peoples brains. Like sleeper agents, people will automatically start trying to chime in the moment they see the hints of any debate. If you fall for this debate, the best thing to do is delete everything, block main players and wait it out. With any luck, it will be completely forgotten by the end of the week.

The second type of bait is an accusation.

Again, while some allegations or accusations are worth responding to, if it is completely false, not responding will be your best bet. If you do respond at all, the allegation and your name will be linked in peoples minds. Even if you deny it, people will be confused as to why it was brought up at all. They might even think that you are lying or deflecting. Responding to the accusation at all is treated as a confession. If this accusation is something you've heard before, it would be worth looking into the source of the claim- someone might be spreading lies about you. However, if this accusation is something you've never received before, it is almost certainly bait. They are trying to make you look bad. Just delete them. If this is something you are receiving from a specific person, ask them about it privately. Never respond to false accusations on your public platform unless you know the source of the accusations. If you have to respond to them, you need to link to the accusation in full, not vaguely describe them. When you vaguely describe them, then you are putting the duty on the readers to find the accusation- they'll read it on the accusers terms- putting the ball directly into the accusers court. If your reader reads it directly from the accusers, then it will automatically make your refutation look dubious by comparison. Make it easy for the reader to see the full accusation and point out the absurdity of the claims. By laying out all of the information clearly, the readers will be able to easily figure out that the claims were bogus. In future confrontations, your supporters will likely even respond to the accusers for you, now that they fully understand the arguments against you. Supporters love to correct people, and this can help you significantly- just as much as it can hurt. It's a double edged sword, so if you point it in the right direction, it can help protect you against false accusations.

The third type of bait is confusion.

This type of bait is a bit harder to spot, and it's usually blended with the other two types. This type of bait is deliberately confusing. The confusing nature is what makes it such effective bait. A vague message can be read a thousand ways, and as long as one person can spin it in a way that makes you a "horrible person" then that can quickly become the narrative. If you receive a question that you do not understand, you have no reason to answer it. If you can't answer, simply not acknowledging it at all is the smartest thing to do.

How to deal with bait:

As I've stated in the previous sub-sections, the first time you receive any type of bait, you should ignore it. The intentions of the bait may differ, but they all need to be treated in the same way- with no respect at all. Anyone who tells you otherwise is someone who wishes for you to be hurt or a fool. If you receive it more than once, try blocking the person. If you continue to receive it, then that means that in all likelihood it's more than one person sending you the bait, and it might not be bait after all. However, you should proceed with extreme caution. You do not respond to the bait- you figure out the source of the questions and answer it on your own terms. Simply making a post like "Hey, for the record, I support dolphins." will go over a thousand times better than a post that goes like "'Why do you hate dolphins?' I don't." If you are receiving bait, another way to deal with it is by turning anonymous asks off and looking into the blogs of people sending you the bait. Search terms relating to the question they asked. If it's something they seem to get into a lot of internet fights over, block them. The approach you must always consider bait with is that all of the bait asks you receive are sent by one person trying to seem like a group of people. This is on purpose- they want to intimidate you into answering. This is why blocking and turning off anonymous asks can be useful tools. It forces them to unmask themselves.

Footnote 1: The response by these bait people is often "keeping on anonymous asks allow people to feel safe in asking these important questions." Your safety is more important. This is just trying to guilt trip you. Fools will also often respond similarly. After all, it can sound compelling. However you are not a publicly traded company. You do not need transparency. You do not have body guards or multiple employees. You are a singular person with a right to privacy and safety.

Summary

In this section, we discussed the main types of bait: controversial, accusatory, and confusing. We also talked about the best way to deal with each type, as well as the pitfalls of responding to each type, and how to deal with a larger harassment campaign.

If you personally have fallen victim to any of these techniques, either as a fool or a poster, I can understand how you might feel- however the important aspect of these types of bait is that they can and do trick people. If they didn't work, they wouldn't be used. It is not your fault for falling for it- it is completely on the perpetrators of this abuse. However, I hope this guide can help people to protect themselves or recognize when these things are happening to them.

[zofimp-revengeance]

Also

Transmisogyny is when a man abuses me sexually and emotionally for months and then alienates all my "friends" from me by telling everyone I've been harassing him when I asked him for emotional responsability. And of course everyone immediately believing him and ditching me without even listening to what I have to say.

Transmisogyny is when I have to disclose I have a penis to any dude that hits on me for my safety and that it's a deciding factor for if I get laid or not, and of course that also meaning that my dating pool with cis men are in almost its entirety chasers that will never see me as anything else than a fetish and a doll without real humanity.

Transmisogyny is when a 17 year old kid with no experience, qualifications and that showed no interest or motivation whatsoever in the interview gets the job over me for mysterious reasons no one would ever guess.

Transmisogyny is seeing a thousand drag shows going on every night in my city but I can count the actual transfems on the stages with a single hand.

Transmisogyny is when I tell any of this to anyone and they don't believe me or say it's not that big of a deal, or that this is not oppression olympics.

This doesn't happen to cis people, get it in your head.

being perceived as a trans woman is not where most of the meat of transmisogyny actually happens, hence why trans women experience it before coming out. like come on people this is really easy to understand it’s basic institutional oppression dynamics

[abearinthewoods]

Okay I don't know a lot about the situation but I don't think people should just get away scott-free from making awful threats to people online. I'll admit I definitely wouldn't do the same if I was in your position, but like?? You can't just go around threatening people without any consequences. They fucked around and found out. And frankly I'm tired of someone being expected to get away scottfree from harassment just because they're a certain identity. It's always 'believe all victims' until it comes to trans men and I'm so so tired of it. I feel no remorse for this person and I hope they learn their lesson that their actions have consequences in the real world. You don't get to use your marginalized identity to shield you from the consequences of your actions while treating other people like shit.

I feel annoyed that we can't trust the fbi or the goverments to handle shit like this sensibly but ya, you got my overall though pattern down. at some point something has to give and i'm tired of society expecting men to be the thing that gives.

[nettlebrand]

Proshippers are so weird because every argument they make is so easily debunked it's actually funny

First of all let's define a proshipper since everyone loves to argue over that. I will also acknowledge the history of the word

Proship in it's early years was defined as proship/anti harassment. It was a term used by people who believed people should not be harassed over what they ship.

But that's its term years ago, and the meaning of words change. Let's not be stupid when it comes to this argument. Proshipper is a term now often used by people who ship problematic things like incest, minor x adult, and abuser x victim.

THIS IS NOT A TERM USED BY PEOPLE WHO WRITE ABOUT THOSE RELATIONSHIPS AND PROTRAY THEM AS UNHEALTHY.

It's a term NOW USED by people who ENJOY and actively ship and romantize those relationships. You can write about a victim x abuser without romantizing it. Proshippers romantize it.

Now that we have defined it, we can tear apart every argument they try to use to justify doing it.

"It's my coping mechanism! My therapist said so!"

I'm going to state my credentials right off the bat. I have a degree in psychology and am currently getting my doctorate degree in it. While yes, many therapists say it can be used as a coping mechanism, it is a TEMPORARY coping mechanism. It is not a long-term mechanism that we recommend at all. On top of that, we certainly do not tell you to post it online for the public to see. No therapist would tell you to do that, and any therapist that says it's okay to do that does have you not have your best interest. We KNOW you will harassed and attacked on the internet if you post stuff like that online. It's why we specifically tell you that if you HAVE to use this TEMPORARY coping mechanism, to not do it publicly.

"Fiction doesn't effect reality! Grow up!"

I'm not defending the people doing the attacking either. IF YOU SEND DEATH THREATS OR HARASS PROSHIPPERS, YOU ARE BAD TOO! No one deserves death threats or to be doxxed because of fictional media even if it is not everyones taste. But therapist can not control what goes down on the internet, and neither can anyone else.

"Well it's fictional! It does effect reality but it's fiction that makes it okay!"

Fiction DOES effect reality it is why we enjoy fictional things so much in the first place. Saying fiction doesn't affect reality, which ignores so much human history and the basics of WHY people create fiction in the first place. Fiction DEFINITELY affects reality, and it affects the human mind greatly. It's why people can laugh cry and get angry at media in the first place. That argument makes no sense because if it didn't affect reality, it wouldn't be a coming mechanism, which is what a lot of proshippers say why they proship.

Romantizing a relationship other people have been through and trying to portray it as a good and well thing is frankly gross and disgusting. It hurts victims a lot and can make them question their own abuse they went through. It's not a good thing at all. If you honestly think on any speck of this planet that romantizing an abusive relationship, whether incest pedophilic or rape in any way is okay because it's fiction, you are honestly not much better than actual pedophiles and abusers. They get off to hurting people, and you also get off to the hurting aspect. Yes, even if you yourself are a victim. Being a victim doesn't mean you get a pass to do whatever you want, and I think a lot of people need to remember that. You do not get a pass to romantize abuse no matter what. It's not a good thing at all to romantize and it can make you worse and question your own abuse.

"Calling us just as bad as real abusers boo!"

I will. I will stand by that, too. Because that's how it starts. My abuser also started with "just writings" and "just drawings." Because that's how it always begins. In psychology, we can tell how far someone will go based on the things they consume and how they consume it. It gets to a point where the person consuming it will be a victim or be an abuser. It's why so many pedophiles when they are caught, have CP on their computers because "it was just images." I'm not saying all proshippers are going to turn out to be pedophiles or abusers because thats obviously not true. But the route you are going down is an addiction, and you eventually won't be able to stop even if you just stop at drawn images. It's why you crave to do it so much and can not stop. It's the rush you get of posting it online to the thrill of being caught. You enjoy every aspect of it. It's an addiction.

"You are dismissing/disrespecting real victims by comparing CP to drawn/written CP!"

I myself am a victim. A very severe one. There are pictures of me out on the deep web somewhere when I wasn't even in double digits. I am not disrespecting what happened to me or other kids. While I do agree with the argument that drawing a fictional child is not as bad as real pictures of children, it is still disgusting to be making at all. It's also disrespectful to victims to be romantizing stuff like that publicly, so you aren't allowed to use that argument as if you cared for every victim, you wouldn't be posting it publicly.

"You are limiting artistic creativity! This is conservative ideologies that wants to censor work!"

If censoring the romantization of abuse being portrayed as good is wrong, then I want to be wrong. Yes, everyone should have artistic freedom, but why in any way would you WANT to be known as the author or person who portrays pedophiles in a good way. Who portrays abuse as okay and romantic. Why is that something you want in your life. No one should want that, and if you do, I encourage you to seek a strong amount of help. Censoring the portrayal of abuse as good shouldn't be a controversial statement at all, but it somehow it. If you are writing pedophiles incest and abuse as a BAD THING and you MAKE SURE, it's portrayed as a bad thing that isn't proshipping. It's when you romantize it and try to treat it as a "cute fun silly >w<." Thing that I see MANY proshippers do that's bad. Yes, I want that censored. Especially when it's easily accessible to minors. Proshippers do not care if minors can access their work, and it's very obvious seeing it. Even if it isn't inherently, nsfw minors shouldn't be seeing and interacting with ANY FORM OF MEDIA that portrays abuse as good.

"What about NSFW artist!?? You don't want them censored!?"

I don't see this argument made as often, but it's still one I want to talk about. Most nsfw artists I see make... normal art that doesn't revolve around romantizing abuse in some way. While obviously there are exceptions, nsfw art is aimed towards adults, which makes censoring a lot easier, and theres an understanding between sex vs relationship. There's a difference between porn with bdsm aspects in it vs. a fanfic writing on two characters, and the abuse is romantical. Sex is different than a romantic relationship.

"Well my artwork is aimed towards adults! Adults can understand it better!"

Adults can still have an awful time with abusive and struggling relationships. Adults can also be uncomfortable and not want to see their abuse portrayed in a good light. While I agree that many adults can understand and differ fiction from reality, that doesn't change the fact that romantizing abuse in any way isn't okay. What a lot of proshippers tend to not understand is how its portrayed that's the problem.

I am a HUGE FAN of enemies to lovers. If they didn't try to kill each other once is it really love/j. But the major thing is it's the build-up and actual relationship that's different. If two characters are in love and one is on a lower power level, then another and just keep getting abused and beaten and mistreated even when they aren't enemies anymore. There's the romantizing abuse. A majority of the time, most don't even add warnings to this kind of content, which can heavily hurt past victims as well. Adults are allowed to not be okay! Adults are allowed to not be okay with seeing literal abuse be romantized! And that shouldn't be an excuse to do it just because your content is aimed for a more mature audience. Horror movies are aimed at adults and can portray murder as awful, proshippers shouldn't be an exception. Proshippers forget that antis tend to also get on people who use excessive gore without portraying it correctly as well. Urbanspook is a recent example who was HEAVILY flamed for his excessive gore without any real meaning or care behind the topic.

"Why do I have to demonize this! That doesn't mean I'm endorsing it!"

That's... what it means. If you do not portray a topic as serious as any form of abuse as bad then... why are you writing about it. I'm not saying it should be the main story because you can write about abuse and have it be a secondary plot point. Many stories do this, and it's don't correctly. But just writing about something just for the sake of having it in there without showing it as a bad awful thing, which is in the definition of abuse, is wrong and bad.

I'm not making this post to "change proshippers." Or "harass and bully them." I'm making this post because every argument they use is wrong and incorrect and hurts other victims, me included. I frankly don't care what proshippers do, but don't make mundane arguments about it. Just admit you want to do it just because you want to not for some anti conservative idea or because you believe it helps. There are better coping mechanisms, and posting yours online doesn't help your mindset. I hope all victims get the help and strength they need to heal from whatever they have been through, but posting romantic abuse online isn't going to help your mind or help anyone else. It's not some splatterpunk idea that slaps conservatives in the face and in fact pushes the idea to censor things more when kids come across it.

And honestly if any proshipper wants to have a debate about this I'm open to it as long as its cival. But frankly I don't see any reason to publicly be posting romantic abuse online.

[squidsinatrentchcoat443]

Rant about pro shipping (warning this has a lot of my opinion [woah see how I said MINE] and a lot of things that endanger kids)

Yes it it good to cope with trauma useing art, I’m not saying it’s not. BUT if you’re gonna do it in a way like this keep it off the internet. You are making a safe space for people who actually support these crimes. You are saying that you LIKE r@p3sts P3d0s and M@PS. You are opening a new space for people who should be no where on the internet. Leave the characters alone, leave the real kids alone. “But my therapist said it’s ok!” Your licensed, professional, trained therapist told you it’s ok the sexualize little kids on the internet? You can do this, whatever I don’t care, what makes me mad is you post it. You give it to people who don’t want to see this, people who are triggered by this, people who are young and are learning what this is. These kids who see this will begin to believe it’s ok. Believe it’s fine if this happens to them. “It’s a coping mechanism!” Yes, I use things like this too. Giving trauma you have to your characters is a good way of dealing with trauma. But you are endorsing it. You are saying this was a good thing. You are saying you enjoyed it. You are sharing it with others. You are making others believe this is good. “Fiction doesn’t affect reality!” Yes it does. People with DID have fictives that majorly affect their life. People become obsessed with a character or plot or idea. People have done terrible things to others and themselves because of fiction. “It doesn’t affect you!” It doesn’t affect me, but it affects many others. People get triggered by these things, people experience these things and hate it. People get major ptsd from it. People are seeing this for the first time and thinking it’s ok. People are doing this to others. “I don’t like it in real life!” You post it online. That’s real! People who see it are real. You are saying ‘I like that idea of a child getting majorly hurt but I don’t what it to happen!’ Do you see the plot holes here? “But it happened to me” and you’re making a space for it to happen more. When Someone has trauma they don’t like it. The character most of the time is enjoying what is happening. That’s not giving trauma to a character. That’s sexualizing minors. “But (character) doesn’t like what (other character) is doing to them!” You’re still exposing ppl to it. You’re still sexualizing the character(s), you’re still triggering ppl with it.

I’m not saying it’s not a way to cope with trauma. But relying on it for your only source of joy, or comfort is really bad. Everyone copes in a different way, but keep your coping mechanism private! Keep your weird thoughts about this to your self! Do you have no shame? Are you not ashamed that you are publicly confessing that you like the idea of R@p3, @g3gaps,and P3d0phl1a? I don’t get it.

In conclusion dont harass these people, don’t send them death threats, but I want people to understand this is not normal, nor ok. You can cope but cope off the internet.

[blueberrymilkcookie]

this was supposed to be a stupid doodle and then i started adding to it

if shadow milk ever became part of modern cookie society he would totally become a twitch streamer and pretend to be an e-girl to get a cult following of incel simps who donate a shit ton of money to him and attack everyone who criticizes him

[seachelous]

to the feelings yakuza showing up in the danny phantom main tag, thank you for showing your whole ass and telling everyone you don't know what blocking and filtering is. i'll put together an in-depth tutorial for you.

Blocking

First, you go to the person's blog that you want to block. I'm using staff as an example.

Next you want to click on the three dots in a circle, next to the gift button. It'll bring up the menu you currently see here. You'll want to click the "Block" button.

Tumblr will ask if you're sure you want to block, as well as list what will happen if you do block the blog. This includes the person being unable to follow you, send DMs, find you in search results, or interact with any of your posts. This also means you will never see their posts. You'll want to click the "Block" button.

When you've clicked the "Block" button, you will see a confirmation that the person has been blocked. You can now click the "Close" button or close the tab you have open to go back to browsing.

If you would like to unblock this person for any reason- perhaps learning the distinction between real morality and "personally, i don't like this"- you can do so in your blog settings under "Blocked Tumblrs".

Tag Filtering

First, on the left sidebar click "Settings".

Next, scroll down to "Content you see". There are two sections here: "Filtered Tags" which will hide posts with specific tags, and "Filtered Post Content" which will hide posts that have specific words. This is to help catch posts that are either mistagged or not tagged at all. So like people venting about something in a main fandom tag that can trigger people, but not using the tag specifically made for that topic.

Type in whatever word(s) you'd like filtered under "Filtered Post Content". Then click the "Add" button. You can even add usernames if you'd like.

For "Filtered Tags" you want to click the little pencil icon, and a similar box to type in will appear, along with an "Add" button. Repeat the process of typing in what you would like to be filtered. You can even add usernames if you'd like. Finally, refresh the page.

When you are done, this is what a post with filtered tags will look like. I'd love to give an example of a post with filtered content, but I was scrolling for a good while and could not find any for this specific topic.

You have the option to click the "View post" button, which will show you the post being hidden, but understand that this is an acknowledgement that you know what this is and you are Choosing to look at it. No one has forced you.

Harassment is never okay. Anon hate is never okay. Suicide baiting is never okay.

Take some time, curate your experience, and maybe lay down on a blanket under the sun.

[linkcharacter]

Oh I have so many thoughts on aroace Curly, I think it brings so much on the table when analyzing the game's story.

Amanormativity ties in with the reoccurring mentions of the nuclear family, from Wrong Organ making 1950s mock advert posters, to Swansea talking about how getting a wife and kids didn't bring him any fulfillment in life.

In the cake cutting nightmare sequence, where Jimmy talks with Dream Curly about the mediocre cake, Dream Curly begins to talk about how sometimes you can only get the subpar stuff in live. Sometimes he'll get promoted, buy a house, fall in love. But other times he'll just have some awful fucking cake with his friend.

I think there is that subtle implication that Jimmy does buy into Amanormativity, with him projecting his beliefs on Dream Curly that a platonic relationship is lesser then a romantic one. But we never see Curly suggesting that he wants such a thing in the pre-crash.

With Jimmy thinking that Curly has everything in life, except for the desire (although I think Jimmy would view it as Curly not having the skills for it) to get a romantic partner, he would heavily lean into getting the one thing that Curly couldn't get in life to one up him.

THATS EXACTLY WHAT IM THINKING!!! AMATONORMATIVITY BE DAMNED!!!!

Looking at Mouthwashing through an aroace lens is interesting

"Jimmy thinking that Curly has everything in life, except for the desire", well said, well said! And references to the nuclear family fit in very cleanly thematically for Mouthwashing.

Jimmy leaning into amatonormativity is a smart observation. Jim internalizes all the social norms and standards on what you have to do to have a normal and desirable life, who sees everything Curly has and what Jimmy wishes he had, and is offended that Curly isn't satisfied, that he has the "audacity" to be unhappy. Curly meanwhile only wishes for his life to be something he doesn't have to run from, because by all means, he has already reached a point where he should feel accomplished, but isn't. Curly doesn't want to be a freighter captain his whole life, he doesn't want to settle with his sustainable position, he just wants to be happy. Like Swansea who has reached the "ideal" outcome of his life, having a wife, kids and a good career, it will never feel as good as embracing all what society deems undesirable yet right for you.

Jimmy does imply to seeing himself as lesser as a friend, "fall in love" being a goal and a "cake with a friend" being something he "has to settle for", it's all in the subtleties with underlying themes of "what you're "supposed to want" by society's expectations" against "what feels right for you". Jimmy is frustrated that Curly is going to "leave the dirt behind him", when in actuality, letting the crew and him go is the last thing Curly wants. Curly wants to be with his friends, he deeply cares about his crew, and about his close friend.

Mouthwashing as a whole reads to me as platonic through and through. Swansea and Daisuke having such a meaningful familial bond, Curly and Anya being sweet, playful and caring without romance, Anya and Daisuke having something of a siblings dynamic are dear to me. Also it's really rare to get to see representations of "toxic friendship" in media. Its always toxic romance this, toxic yaoi that, toxic family there, however in reality, friendships aren't excluded from being as rotten and abusive as the others, yet they're often overlooked. Jim and Curly are especially unique in this way. It's very impressive how they managed to showcase Jimmy's mistreatment of Curly in such a platonic way (at least that how I read it). Jim too, like Curly, in general avoids hints at romance and attraction explicitly related to him during his gameplay, not with Curly, nor with Anya (dear god thanks for that at least). It's all spite, annoyance and parasitizing off of these two. (That man's dry and lowkey hates everyone and everything) No attraction attached, no desires except hoping it hurts.

Curly to me is very much aroace, or at least on the spectrum. Like, the trivia fact that one of Curly's fondest memories is that of his friends putting in effort to make a shitty awful cake, tells us all we need to know on how dear his friends are to him. Platonic relationships mean so much to Curly, even when it's Jimmy fucking Mouthwashing, the worst friend ever imaginable.