#csa m

[alienpupy]

its "think of the children" and "let kids be kids" but they won't even let a 9 year old pretend to be a cat without causing a moral panic. they won't let little girls wear anything that might show their fucking shoulders in school and teach them that their bodies are inherently sexual and they should be ashamed of it. they won't even let a five year old boy cry without making fun of him for it. nor will they condemn it if an adult woman pursues a teenage boy, so long as it's straight. "protect children" my ass.

[dateamonster]

just had a rly weird experience. might go into it later but right now my only real thoughts are like. why does it seem like being interested in monster stuff online so often gets me caught in this bullshit fandom culture war between people who think putting horror elements in romance/erotica is the work of the satanic groomer boogeymen vs people who talk about wanting to explore complex and dark themes and then turn out to just be obsessed with "lolisho" and incest porn

call me batshit fuckin crazy but it rly feels like i should be able to just exist without having to worry about getting conscripted into the puritan v sex offender wars because i followed the wrong person on twt

[sevicia]

Also someone left these tags on that last post and it's pissing me offff like why the fuck are we comparing horror movies to CHILD PORN ???? What do you MEAN "actual horror movies"?? And every horror movie iceberg I've ever seen HAS a title saying stuff like "Distubing horror movies" "Extreme horror movies" "Banned horror movies" so the thought of someone clicking on that and going "There better not be anything upsetting in here!" is so crazy to me. ARE YOU STUPID???? "Can you actually recommend stuff that's genuinely worth watching" Can you kill yourself???

[realian]

damn that's crazy. imagine if that was the point and that the show is a social commentary on the partriarchy and sexual abuse of young girls. too bad this person will never find out because they're bad at comsuming media and only watched fourteen episodes.

[skymantle]

angel-athetos wasn’t even anti-contact she was openly pro-contact she straight up thought she should be allowed to fuck kids

that makes it even worse!

[evilneo]

YELLS AND SCREAMS. anyway

[gendertroublemaker]

csa trauma is rlly gettin to me today also.

[toxic-mothers-tourney]

hey calling underage smut csem is worse. it stands for child sexual exploitation materials is worse. the goal of the term is to center that a child is being sexually exploited and pixels and lines on a page are not a real fucking child being exploited.

I see the distinction now! thank you to anon and the person who replied as well. I think as long as we can agree that writing or drawing sexually explicit content of children, real or fictional, is unacceptable, we'll be on the same page. written and drawn cp is used as a tool to groom children as well so it's not like it's a harmless piece of art

[librarycards]

re suburbia fostering an abusive environment, are there more cases of abuse per capita in suburban places? ive heard abt how the nuclear family can prop up abuse, but havent heard anything specifically abt suburbia

apologies for the delay on this!

I genuinely am not sure how one would acquire "truly accurate" stats on this, given 1) the deadly bias carceral social services have toward 'neglect' (typically, though not exclusively, parents unable to afford to properly care for their kids, rather than refusing to out of malice) and 2) toward targeting poor families of color over white middle class (and thus, suburban) families.

my comment about suburbia is an extension of what we know about nuclear families: they facilitate isolation, especially from potential safe adults to disclose abuse to. we also know that, given the aforementioned bias, reported abuse is less likely to result in meaningful action when coming from whiter/wealthier families. lastly, sexual abuse is the most reported category of child abuse, and the overwhelming majority of CSA is committed by people who already know a child, esp. a family member.

isolation, stigma, and institutional foot-dragging together (setting aside for the moment familial refusals to disclose abuse/childrens' very legitimate anxieties about opening up about it) and we have a suburban environment that encourages child abuse by its very social organization and physical architecture.

[elevatortherapy]

episode 30: the barefoot girl / stoker (2013)

[bbbholdmebbb]

FFS PROSHITTERS FUCK OFF??? If you’re a minor in this space, please please gtfo they r grooming you

I don’t really want any young kids following me, as they shouldn’t have watched cc, but it’s probably fine/I can’t control that so if there’s any kids here anyway, please please stay safe and stay away from/get out of the pro///shipper spaces. I know they make it out so ‘oh it’s so silly that people get so upset over enemies to lovers’ type stuff but they’re just using that as a cover for their csa shit

[skin-bible]

Ffun fack: my trigger nightmares are Fre///ddy Kru///ger

If you're a Freddy fan do not touch this post I'm serious.

[gendertroublemaker]

I truly wish that sex didn’t scare me. I’d be the biggest slut out there if that weren’t the case

[librarycards]

speaking of books, i'm just wondering if you've read the novel "pet" by akwaeke emezi? i'd be curious about your thoughts on it, both as a YA novel, and in terms of its understanding of utopia

spoilers below

i read it quite a while ago and didn't like it - i'm not fond of the ease and neatness of predator --> rehabilitation, esp. presented to young readers. the idea that a kid, with the help of a mythical being/divine intervention, is responsibilized in punishing a literal and figurative monster, feels so fucking off to me. what about the kids who will never get their justice, who will go through this alone? ugh. i hate this (ab)use of "utopia" as a space where Everything Works Out uwu, especially in such a brief book.

i'm a fan of emezi's work and emezi as a person. their books for adults have been excellent, as far as i've read them. i don't think they're good at writing for young readers, and that'd be the case even if i was fond of the message of the book: the pacing and tone were really inconsistent, and i was especially perplexed at the simultaneous precosity and childishness of a 16 year old MC. in terms of metatext, it has the distinction of being overly didactic and also, imo, insufficient in its political/pedagogical vision?

anyway, yeah. didn't like, but. still have the book and maybe need to reread it. if only for the cool eye melting scene.