#including many that are specifically advertised to children

[tired-fandom-ndn]

I don't think kids really need to be protected from "inappropriate" content so much as they need the tools and safe adults in their lives to handle when they encounter things that they need help with, BUT I will say that there is a growing amount of misinformation and disinformation being spread online that is deliberately targeted towards children and people need to be aware of that and prepare for it.

I'm not exaggerating in the slightest when I say it took about a week of watching Youtube Kids for my baby sister to start parroting Q-Anon level conspiracies about the government hiding the fact that extinct animals like wooly mammoths and saber tooth tigers are still alive. This wasn't innocent shit, she was getting genuinely upset about the government supposedly watching her through the security cameras of a sandwich restaurant.

There are people out there, especially content farms, who knowingly and deliberately spread misinformation to children specifically and who knowingly spread disinformation about basic scientific facts. And that's not even getting into content farms that share "life hacks" that get kids injured or killed.

The internet is becoming more dangerous for kids and it has very little to do with fanfiction, it's almost all because corporations like youtube prioritize their profits over the safety of children.

[marzipanandminutiae]

Dear marzi, for reasons of trying not to give period characters too modern fetishes in my smut, may I have some recs as to where I may find some of that olde fetish content you've previously seen?

On the Wikipedia page for the "corset controversy," unfortunately!

Historians have been taking obvious tightlacing fetish letters seriously for...way too long. And sometimes still are. Confirmation bias is a hell of a thing. Of course, there's no way to 100% tell which letters are fetish fuel and which are real, but generally any that use particularly heightened language or common erotic tropes- or that seem to fly in the face of evidence from extant garments, unedited videos, stock and advertisements from real corset companies, etc. -are to be viewed with suspicion.

(The same is true for letters used now to claim that nipple piercing was a real Victorian trend- for, indeed, the only source is anonymous magazine letters and many of them fall into the same obvious patterns as the tightlacing letters. One DOES describe the alleged process in detail...but it's basically the same as the process for ear-piercing, a service jewelers did commonly offer back then. Just applied to nipples. So whether it's real or not is still uncertain, but it's highly doubtful that large numbers of Victorian women were running around with nipple piercings given that no extant nipple rings have been found, such piercings are never mentioned in letters or diaries or other more concrete sources, etc.)

Besides that, I've seen glimpses of most modern fetishes in various sources:

the Psychopathia Sexualis, a medical manual of "sexual mental illness" (in heavy quotes because things like homosexuality and gender variance are mentioned under that heading), talks about everything from a fetish for tight boots and gloves on women, to bloodplay (initiated by a woman, actually, who wanted to drink her husband's blood), to force-femming, to some very elaborate femdom scenarios that I hope the sex workers in question were paid well for. Of course, since the cases are anonymous, these are also difficult to confirm- but clearly someone had THOUGHT of them, since they're written into the book.

And I've seen at least some of them in other sources, too, including some of the magazines that published the nipple piercing and tightlacing letters. The Englishwomen's Domestic Magazine was notorious for its letters on tightlacing, tight gloves, spanking, etc.

Photographic porn was definitely a thing almost as soon as photography came into being. A lot of it is pretty vanilla, but I could swear I'd seen piss kink photos (with urine painted in after development) before the blog where they were hosted went defunct

James Joyce's letters to his wife get into farting and scat fetish territory. Yes, really.

Speaking of letters, there was one man living here in Boston who, in the late 19th century, wrote letters to his wife describing erotic dreams of her as a giantess who pissed on him and then ate him. I cannot remember his name and it's going to drive me insane all day, but he was the head of Boston's censorship organization, the Watch and Ward society and these letters were first released by his own children for an unauthorized biography written five years after his death. Guess there was little love lost there.

BDSM is old. Like, really old. Old, to quote the sacred texts, as balls. I'm pretty sure there are sexual flagellation texts going back to the Renaissance, but don't quote me on that.

Basically, Rule 34 can be back-applied, too. If it existed, there was a fetish for it, probably. Of course, things that specifically involve modern technology or properties are out, but beyond that...the sky is the limit

[writingwithfolklore]

How to Nail your School Essays

                Not to brag, but I’m kind of a big deal when it comes to essays at my school. Since I started highschool I haven’t received a grade less than 90% on an essay—so I’m here to share my secret. This works for the classic essay, but you can also use the same advice and fit it to formal reports or other academic writing.

1. Your essay is about 2 things, demonstrated 3 or more times

This is how I’ve always thought about essays. They’re about two ideas, demonstrated as many times as you need to fill the wordcount. Shakespeare + Feminism, Media + Truth versus Misconception, etc. etc. If you’re lucky, your teacher or prof will give you one of your elements. You’ll get assignments like, “write an essay about Hamlet” or “write an essay about the American dream” lucky you, that’s your first thing—now you need to connect it with another.

This connecting idea is my favourite part because you just get to choose a concept or idea you’re interested in. Here’s a tip, if your first/given topic is something concrete, choose an abstract connecting idea. If your given topic is something abstract, choose a concrete.

So, Hamlet (concrete) could be paired with any abstract concept: Loyalty, Truth, Feminism, etc.

However, if your prof gives you something like, “truth” or “race theory”, you’ll find it much easier to connect that with a more concrete thing, like a book, movie, or other piece of media, or even a specific person.

If you are luckiest, your prof will give you both things, “write about the American Dream in The Great Gatsby” in this case, you’re onto the next stage.

2. Stick to the formula

Tried, tested, true. Nothing wrong with a formula, especially not when it gives you A+ grades. Typical essay structure is:

Intro with thesis

2. 1st Body

2a. Evidence that proves it 1

2i. Justify its relevance

2b. Evidence that proves it 2

2ii. Justify its relevance

Etc.

3. 2nd Body

3a. Evidence that proves it

3i.Justification

Etc.

4. 3rd Body

4a. Rise and repeat, you know where this is going.

5. Some may argue…

6. Conclusion

Let’s break it down.

Thesis:

                Thesis completely outlines all your points, or the three+ places you’re demonstrating your connection, and why it matters.

                Here is an intro + thesis I wrote a couple years ago:

“This literature review will explore the impacts influencer marketing has on the children that regularly consume social media content. Specifically, this review will focus on how influencers can impact children’s brand preferences, dietary choices, and lastly, the influx of children taking advantage of this system and becoming influencers themselves.”

Or

“Burned discusses the human aspect of sex work and reverses reader’s expectations on sex workers, while Not in My Neighbourhood discusses prostitutes as victims of a system created against them. Both challenge readers’ perceptions of sex workers, effectively drawing attention to the ethics of displacing sex workers from their cities.”

                So you have your connection (children and social media)/(Burned and Not in My Neighbourhood and sex work), and the different ways you plan on exploring or proving that idea (children’s brand preferences, dietary choices, children becoming influencers.) etc.

                You may also have a more specific stance in your thesis. Such as, “In Macbeth, ambition is shown to be Macbeth’s ultimate downfall in these three ways.”

The Body Paragraphs

                You start out every body paragraph with the point of the paragraph, or what it’s aiming to prove. Such as, “Influencers often include advertisements within their content, which can encourage children to feel more amiably to certain brands their favourite content creators endorse frequently more than others.”

                After this claim, you spend the rest of the paragraph further proving it through examples. This will look like citing a specific source (a book, academic journal, quote, etc.) such as, “The authors claim likeable influencers can associate their likeability with the products they use, influencing children’s perception of brands, referred to as ‘meaning transfer’ (De Veirman et al. 2019)” (super important to always cite these sources!)

                The last part is after each example/proof--you need to justify why this proves your point/is important. So, “This proves children are more influenced towards certain products depending on how close of a relationship they perceive to have with the influencer.”

                Typically, your evidence will all lead into each other so you can transition to the next piece of proof, then the justification, rinse and repeat until you’re finished your paragraph. You can have as many pieces of evidence as you want per paragraph, and the longer your word requirement, the more you’ll want to fit into each point (or the more bodies you want to have.)

                Piece of evidence + why it matters, rinse and repeat.

Some May Argue:

                This is a small paragraph just before your conclusion where you anticipate an argument your readers may have, and disprove it. So, for example, you’d start with, “Some may argue that with parent supervision, the impacts of influencers on children could be lessened or moot. However…” and then explain why they’re wrong. This strengthens your argument, and proves that you’ve really thought out your stance.

Conclusion:

                Lastly, you want to sum up all the conclusions you came to in a few sentences. Your last line is one of the most important (in my opinion). I call it the mic drop moment. Leaving a lasting impact on your reader can bring your essay from an A to an A+, so you really want to nail this final sentence.

                My final sentence was, “Ultimately, it is hard to know in advance how technology and social media will impact the development of children who have always grown up with some form of screen, but until they grow up, parents and caregivers need to take care in the content their children consume, and their very possible exploitation online.”

This sentence is backed by the entirety of the essay that came before it, and usually leaves a little something to chew on for the readers.

Any other tips I missed?

[vhsdruid]

terribly sorry if this is a weird question but i would LOVE to hear more about wasps . funky little dudes

wasps are a relatively new species in terms of insect evolution, having appeared in the jurassic period alongside the first dinosaurs. there are hundreds of thousands of species, which could include ants and bees depending on your exact definition. they're all included in the group apocrita, or the "wasp waisted" hymenoptera. they are some of the most successful insects on the planet.

DID YOU KNOW?: the stinger of apocrita is a highly adapted ovipositor, the organ used for egg laying.

STEP ONE: their ancestors, the sawflies, had evolved a serrated ovipositor that could bore into plant material as a safe place to lay their eggs.

STEP TWO: the first wasps would use the ovipositor to instead lay their eggs inside of other animals (parasitoidism), which then provides the developing young plenty of food. many of these wasps would develop a unique variety of venoms to aid in the capture of prey, often by paralysis.

DID YOU KNOW?: there are more parasitoid wasps than any other kind of wasp, with an estimated 100,000 species! this includes the iconic cicada killer wasp.

STEP THREE: the transition from egg laying to defense is not entirely understood, but is believed by some to have been a direct response to predation by vertebrates. if you think about it, it's not all that easy to sting through a tough exoskeleton (though it can be done), it's much easier to sting soft, fleshy things that are trying to eat your delicious grub children. these wasps no longer lay eggs with the ovipositor, instead having an opening at the base of the stinger. the venom would be adapted to illicit a pain response, a harsh lesson to not mess with wasps!

DID YOU KNOW?: male wasps CANNOT sting as they do not have an ovipositor. though, some males will still mimic stinging, or even have pointed abdomens to help sell the illusion.

QUICKFIRE ROUND:

while wasps are famously eusocial and will often live in large communal hives, the vast majority of wasps are solitary and live on their own.

the largest species of wasp is the northern giant hornet, who's queens are around 2 inches in length. the smallest species of wasp is also the smallest insect ever! dicopomorpha echmepterygis males have been measured as small as 139 micrometres in length.

its common knowledge that wasps can sting multiple times and honey bees cant. this is a unique adaptation of the honey bee, who deliver a more potent sting by leaving the stinger embedded in the victim as it continues to pump rounds and rounds of venom. unfortunately, the stinger is directly attached to many vital organs, which are then damaged in the process, causing the honey bee to die.

insects breathe by absorbing oxygen directly into their "blood". wasps aid in this by rapidly expanding and collapsing their abdomen to force air in and out. if her butt is vibrating, shes just taking a breath :)

the iconic coloration of the wasp, usually yellow and black, is part of their defensive strategy! this is a form of aposematism, the advertising of danger to potential predators. they want you to notice them, so you know to steer clear!

the coloration is SO iconic that thousands of insect species mimic it in hopes of also warding off predators. this includes flies, moths and butterflies, and even their own ancestors, the sawflies.

parasitoid wasps are very specific in their choice of prey, likely due to the unique cocktail of venom they must possess to influence any given species. for any arthropod, there is a species of wasp that specializes in parasitizing THAT specific arthropod.

because i know some people are wondering, the venom of parasitoid wasps can only effect arthropods, there will be no wasp based mind control within the next few million years. some parasitoids have been known to sting defensively, which is still quite painful depending on the exact species.

some wasps are HYPERPARASITOIDS, meaning they will lay their eggs on other parasitoids that are already parasitizing something. its parasitoids all the way down.

one of these hyperparasitoids is the velvet ant. despite it's common name, they're actually a species of wasp with flightless females. the males do possess wings, and in some species, will assist the female by carrying her to an environment with better resources.

the venom of gall wasps will, when inserted into a tree or other vegetation, cause it to grow a mass, known as a gall. basically a bootleg fruit, filled with nutrients. these wasp galls will then safely house the wasp's young which eat it from the inside out, before emerging as adult wasps.

obviously, theres wasps that parasitize the gall wasps inside the gall.

fig wasps are the only animals that can pollinate figs, and do so by crawling inside to lay their eggs before dying inside the fruit. well, the only animal other than humans, which find figs quite tasty but don't typically enjoy eating dead wasps.

i probably wont ever get a better opportunity to share this information, sorry: the queen honey bee mating with a drone is audible to the human ear, making a popping sound. the drone's endophallus (penis) is violently detached in the process and he dies soon after.

lastly, lets just marvel at the beauty of the wasp. they have some of the most striking appearances of any animals on earth.

i am just fillled with awe when i look at them. a powerful and intimidating predator that takes great care in raising the next generation. perhaps my favorite animal.

[serial-unaliver]

people joke about blaming reagan for everything but you'd be surprised how many oddly specific things are tied to reagan. the guy technically is responsible for the show "my little pony"...this is particularly an insane rabbithole, essentially reagan and a lot of other wealthy capitalists said "it's crazy we care about children’s health and education when it's so unprofitable".

you want to know a statistic that saw a drastic increase in the 80s?

essentially mr. ronald reagan had issues with any regulation intended in helping children have a normal and healthy diet for their age. this included everything from what food was given to students in public school to what advertising permitted.

people often mention things like "the US could ban xyz ingredient that is already banned in xyz countries" but it goes quite beyond that...this is about the psychology of advertising. capitalists had to create a demand where there wasn't one.

also, wrt childhood obesity,it's worth mentioning children with this sort of...reagan diet? end up with similar health issues even when at a 'normal' BMI--I forgot the documentary on this I watched, but they had two kids from the same family with the same diets but drastically different weights examined. outside this documentary exploring how deregulation impacted health in children I can't say i've seen your average doctor look at two kids like that and conclude both are unhealthy...but this is a reagan hate post and not a rant about how children's health is normally approached. however I am willing to be mad about all the above 🙏

[whumpinggrounds]

Overused Disability Tropes

Woohoo here we go. I expect this one to be a bit more controversial because I am using specific media as examples. I would really prefer if, when critiquing this post, you avoid defending specific media, and focus instead on what’s actually being said/represented about disabled communities. If you feel I’ve done a really grave injustice, you can come into my askbox/DMs/replies to talk to me about it, but I might not answer.

One more time: I am not interested in getting into a debate about whether something is a good show/movie/book/whatever. I’m not telling you it’s bad, or that you shouldn’t enjoy it! People can like whatever they want; I am only here to critique messaging. Do not yell at me about this.

Newest caveat aside, let’s get into it!

Inspiration Porn

Without a doubt, our biggest category! Term coined in 2012 by badass activist Stella Young, but the trope has been around for literal centuries. There are a few different kinds that I will talk about.

Disabled character/person is automatically noble/good because of their disability. A very early example would be A Christmas Carol’s Tiny Tim, or, arguably, Quasimodo from The Hunchback of Notre Dame. Real life examples include the Jerry Lewis MDA telethon, or children’s hospital ads that exploit sad-eyed kids with visible illness or disability.

Having a disability does not automatically make you a kind/angelic/noble person. This many not seem harmful, and may even seem positive, but in reality, it is condescending, inaccurate, and sets bizarre standards for how disabled people should behave.

This portrayal is often intended to elicit pity from abled audiences, which is also problematic.

In these portrayals, disability is not something to be proud of or identify with, only something to be suffered through.

Disabled character person does something relatively mundane and we all need to celebrate that. This is less common in writing, but happens in the real world when people do things like post pictures of disabled people at the gym captioned “What’s your excuse?”

This is condescending, and implies that anything disabled people are capable of, abled people are automatically capable of.

Makes it seem like it’s an incredible feat for a disabled person to accomplish tasks.

Uses people’s actual lives and actual disabilities as a reminder of “how good abled life is.”

The “Supercrip” stereotype is a specific kind of inspiration porn in which disabled people are shown to be capable of amazing things, “in spite of” their disability.

The Paralympics have been criticized for this, with people saying that advertisements and understandings of the Paralympics frame the athletes as inspiring not because they are talented or accomplished, but because their talents and accomplishments are seen as “so unlikely.”

Other examples include the way we discuss famous figures like Stephen Hawking, Alan Turing, or even Beethoven. Movies like The Theory of Everything and The Imitation Game frame the subjects’ diagnoses, whether actual or posited, as limitations that they had to miraculously break through in order to accomplish what they did. Discussions of Beethoven’s deafness focus on how incredible it was that he was able to overcome it and be a musician despite what is framed as a tragic acquisition of deafness.

The pity/heroism trap is a concise way of defining inspiration porn. If the media you’re creating or consuming inspires these emotions, and only these emotions, around disability, that is a representation that is centered on the feelings and perceptions of abled people. It’s reductive, it’s ableist, and it’s massively overdone.

Disabled Villains

To be clear, disabled people can and should be villains in fiction. The problem comes when disabled people are either objects of pity/saintly heroes, or villains, and there is no complexity to those representations. When there is so little disabled rep out there (less than 3.5% of characters in current media), having a disabled villain contributes to the othering of disability, as well as the idea that disability can make someone evil. There are also a few circumstances in which particular disabilities are used to represent evil, and I’ll talk about how that’s problematic. 

Mentally ill villains are colossally overdone, particularly given that mentally ill people are more likely to be the victims of violence than perpetrators of it.  This is true of all mental illness, including “””scary””” things like personality disorders or disorders on the schizoaffective spectrum. Mental illness is stigmatized enough without media framing mentally ill people as inherently bad or more suspectible to evil. This prejudice is known as sanism.

Explicit fictional examples of this include the Joker, or Kevin Wendell Crumb in Split.

People can also be coded as mentally ill without it being explicitly stated, and that’s also problematic and sanist. In the Marvel movie Doctor Strange and the Multiverse of Madness, Wanda’s appearance and behavior are coded as mentally ill. This is used to make her “creepy.” Horror movies do this a lot - mental illness does not render someone creepy, and should not be used as a tool in this way.

Visible disability or difference to indicate evil is another common, incredibly offensive, and way overdone trope. This is mostly commonly done through facial difference, and the examples are endless. These portrayals equate disability or disfigurement with ugliness, and that ugliness with evil. It renders the disabled villain in question an outcast, undesirable, and uses their disability or difference to dehumanize these characters and separate them from others. This is incredibly prevalent and incredibly painful for people with visible disability or facial difference.

An example of visible disability indicating evil is Darth Vader’s prosthetics and vastly changed physical appearance that happen exactly in time with his switch to the dark side. In contrast, when Luke needs a prosthetic, it is lifelike and does not visually separate him from the rest of humanity/the light.

Dr. Who’s John Lumic is another example of the “Evil Cripple” trope.

Examples of facial difference indicating evil range from just about every James Bond movie, to Scar in the Lion King, Dr. Isabel Maru in Wonder Woman, Taskmaster in Black Widow, Captain Hook in Peter Pan, and even Doofenschmirtz-2 in Phineas and Ferb the Movie. Just because some of the portrayals are silly (looking at you, Phineas and Ferb) doesn’t make the coding of facially scarred villains any less hurtful.  

A slightly different, but related phenomenon I’ll include here is the idea of the disability con. This is when a character fakes a disability for personal gain. This represents disabled people as potential fakers, and advances the idea that disabled people get special privileges that abled people can and should co-opt for their own reasons. 

In The Usual Suspects, criminal mastermind Verbal Clint fakes disability to avoid suspicion and take advantage of others. In Arrested Development, a lawyer fakes blindness in order to gain the sympathy and pity of the jury.

In much more complex examples such as Sharp Objects, a mother with Munchausen by proxy fakes her daughter’s illness in order to receive attention and pity. Portrayals like this make Munchausen or MBP seem more common than it is, and introduce the idea that parents may be lying or coaching their children to lie about necessary medical treatment.

Disability as Morality

Sometimes, the disabled character themselves is a moral lesson, like Auggie in Wonder. Sheerly through existing, Auggie “teaches” his classmates about kindness, the evils of bullying, and not judging a book by its cover. This also fits well under inspiration porn. This is problematic, because the disabled character is defined in terms of how they advance the other characters’ morality and depth.

In the “Disabled for a Day” trope, an otherwise abled character experiences a temporary disability, learns a moral lesson, and is restored to full ability by the end of the episode/book/movie. Once again, disability is used as a plot device, rather than a complex experience, along with more permanent disability being rejected as impossible for heroes or main characters.

Examples include an episode of M*A*S*H where Hawkeye is temporarily blinded, an episode of Law and Order: SVU where Elliott Stabler is temporarily blinded, and an episode of Criminal Minds where Agent Hotchner experiences temporary hearing loss.

Real life examples include sensitivity trainings where participants are asked to wear a blindfold, headphones, or use a wheelchair for a given amount of time. This does not impart the lived experience of disability. It should not be used as a teaching tool. 

Disabled people as inherently pure. This is related to inspiration porn and disabled people as noble, but is different in that it is usually appears in combination with developmental, cognitive, or intellectual disabilities. These characters are framed as sweet, “simple,” and a reminder to other characters to be cheerful, happy, or grateful.

Examples include Forrest Gump, Rain Man, I Am Sam, and What’s Eating Gilbert Grape.

No matter what the stereotypes of a given diagnosis are (yes, I’m thinking of the automatic cheerfulness associated with Down Syndrome), disabled people have personalities. They are capable of being sad, angry, sarcastic, irritable, annoying - any number of things beyond good/sweet/pure. It is reductive to act otherwise.

Disability as Surreal

Less common than some of the others, but still worth thinking about!

Disabled characters are framed as mystical, magical, or other than human, a condition that is either created by or indicated through their disability status. This is especially common with little people.

“Disability superpower” is when a character compensates for, or is uniquely able to have a superpower because of, their disability. Common tropes include the Blind Seer, Blind Weapon Master, Genius Cripple and Super Wheel Chair.

Examples include Pam from Supernatural, Charles Xavier from X-Men, or the grandpa in Spy Kids.

Disability as Undesirable

Last and least favorite category here. Let’s go.

Disabled people as asexual or not sexually desirable. Disabled people can be asexual, obviously. When every portrayal is asexual, that’s a big problem. It frames disabled people as sexually undesirable or implies that it is impossible for people with disabilities to have rewarding, mutually satisfying sexual relationships.

Examples include The Fault in Our Stars or Artie in Glee.

Abandoned due to disability. Hate this trope. Often equates disability with weakness. Don’t want to talk about it. It’s all right there in the title. Don’t do it.

Examples: Quasimodo in Hunchback of Notre Dame, several kittens in the Warrior Cat series, several episodes of Law and Order: SVU, Bojack Horseman, and Vikings.

Discussed in 300 and Wolf of Wall Street.

Ancient cultures and animal nature are often cited as reasoning for this trope/practice. This is not founded in fact. Many ancient civilizations, including Sparta, cared for disabled people. Many animals care for disabled young. These examples should not be used to justify modern human society.

Disabled characters are ostracized for disability. Whether they act “““normal”““ or odd, characters with visible or merely detectable disabilities are treated differently.

Examples include pretty much every piece of media I’ve said so far. This is particularly prevalent for people with visible physical disabilities or neurodivergence. Also particularly prevalent for characters with albinism.

This is not necessarily an inaccurate portrayal - disabled people face a lot of discrimination and ableism. It is, however, very, very common.

Bury your disabled. What it says on the label.

Examples: Animorphs, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, American Horror Story, Criminal Minds, Dr. Who, Star Trek, The Wire.

Mercy killing is a subtrope of the above but disgusting enough that it deserves its own aside. I may make a separate post about this at some point because this post is kind of exhausting and depressing me.

Examples: Me Before You, Killing Eve, Star Trek: The Next Generation, Of Mice and Men, and Million Dollar Baby.

Disability-negating superpowers imply that disability is undesirable by solving it supernaturally instead of actually portraying it, and giving their character powers instead.

Examples include (arguably) Toph from Avatar: the Last Airbender, Captain America: The First Avenger, The Legend of Korra, Dr. Strange, and Daredevil.

Overcoming disability portrays disability as a hindrance and something that can be defeated through technology and/or willpower.

Fictional examples include WALL-E, Kill Bill, The Goonies, The Dark Knight Trilogy, Heidi, The Secret Garden, The Inheritance Cycle, Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D, The Big Bang Theory, Dr. Strangelove, Sherlock, The Witcher.

Real life examples include videos of wheelchair users standing from their chair to walk down the aisle at a wedding, or d/Deaf children “hearing” for the first time through cochlear implants.

What Does This Mean for Your Writing?

First of all, congratulations for making it this far!

Now, as I have said again and again, I’m not going to tell you what to write. I’ll ask some questions to hopefully help guide your process.

What tropes might you be playing into when writing disabled characters? Why do you find these tropes compelling, or worth writing about? How prevalent are these tropes? How harmful are they? What messages do they send to actual disabled people?

Just because they are common tropes does not mean they are universally awful. Cool fantasy or futuristic workarounds are not necessarily bad rep. Showing the ugly realities of ableism is not necessarily bad rep. It’s just a very, very common representation of disability, and it’s worth thinking about why it’s so common, and why you’re writing it.

As always, conduct your own research, know your own characters and story, and make your own decisions. If you have questions, concerns, or comments, please hit me up! Add your own information! This is not monolithic whatsoever.

Happy writing!

[krispdreemurr]

oh oh i have an interesting discussion/query ! what do u think the meta purpose of making kris act like they do at the end of chapter 1 was? specifically like the imagery of a kid in a green/yellow shirt manipulating a red soul, pulling out a knife, having red eyes and grinning evilly cause like... i feel like deltarune definitely incorporates the memory of undertale throughout? like its advertised as a game for people who finished undertale and theres lots of references and things that are only as impactful if you had an emotional connection to the original game, like spamton neo and gaster saying "have you been looking for me?" and just.. so many things but most interestingly imo being that ralsei almost comes across like a fanonized "cinnamon roll" version of asriel that was so popular way back when? ofc he's more than that but thats like. a Part of him anyways what i mean is like, when chapter 1 released many people (myself included) saw that and instantly assumed that kris was being controlled by chara because of how strongly chara-esque (*especially* to the fandom, like ralsei) the imagery was, only for chapter 2 to come out and many people (myself included^2) completely disregarded chara as having any bearing on the story whatsoever and that kris is just themself trying *not* to be controlled by us. i think we can all agree that the latter is correct, and some people were clearly smarter than me in chapter 1 and deduced the truth even then (e.g. lynxgriffin in their comics), but i am left wondering what the point of that was almost? i thought you might have some interesting thoughts on that, cause like, if kris's frustration with the player is essentially the main plot of the game (give or take), the allusion to chara was a little bit 'distracting' for the fandom i feel like? some ppl are (somehow) still confused & blaming chara even! i guess im just wondering, what if kris had wore a different shirt and menaced the player in a different way at the end of chapter 1? do you think it would have improved the story to eliminate the possibility of confusion, or do u reckon toby fox want us confused? idk LMAO just thinking aloud atp. just been on my mind the past few days bc in retrospect, while the intro to deltarune is obviously trying to trick you into believing this is "undertale 2", post-dark-world the game is unambiguously super different, to the point where it feels a little bizarre that there'd be a red herring *after* deltarune already smashed the notion that it's a prequel or sequel into pieces doesnt it?

i think it's most legible to me as an attempt by Kris to psych us out that they sort of get lucky with thanks to toby helping them!

like, obviously they have no way to know you've been menaced by nonbinary children before - the specific parallels aren't a thing they're reaching for. but they're trying to get the player freaked out, and toby sort of lends them a helping hand by making them coincidentally charalike.

it's not the first time he's had a character freak us out with knowledge they don't have (thinking about sans and the talking flower in grillbys), and it's not the first time in Deltarune alone where a parallel is arguably sheer coincidence in world but happens to echo something to the player. i don't think it's like cheap or anything - toby fox does a really good job building up a language of associations and connections and motifs and then sometimes uses that to trick you just the tiniest bit lmao

but just like Chara, the ways to see thru the trick are there if you're looking. if you pay attention to Chara, you learn their oh so ominous faces and scares were originally just a thing they did to have fun with their brother, and maybe you get an appreciation that they were a child trying to scare you in childish ways. similarly, if you talk to everyone in town, you learn that Kris is a prankster by nature who delights in freaking everyone out (and also someone who would eat an entire midnight pie), and maybe you get the chance to go "oh, they're pranking me, huh?"

a little like Chara, Deltarune ch1 uses Kris to ask if you've been paying attention to the material. did you notice this really, really wasn't Undertale? and if you did, what conclusion do you reach about this new kid?

[unitezine]

Frequently Asked Questions

What's a Zine?

A fanzine, or zine- short for magazine- is essentially what it says on the tin! It's a fan-made magazine based around whatever topic!

This zine is based around Nicktoons! Specifically, Nicktoons Unite, which reaches its 20th anniversary near the end of 2025! The theme is crossovers- looking

What Nicktoons can I use?

If it's a Nicktoon, you're in! Of course, there are a few restrictions- ex. if it's a show based on a pre-existing media, you must be creating your pieces based on the show specifically.

If your idea includes a show that isn't necessarily a Nicktoon but has aired on Nickelodeon, feel free to ask about it!! As a mod team, we have a few select shows that we'd allow in that aren't EXACTLY Nicktoons, but can be seen as one somehow. Take a second and ask!!

Is there a Theme?

As I mentioned before, the theme for this zine is Crossovers! Nicktoons Unite is a crossover at heart, and we want to highlight that!!

Want to make a piece featuring the classic Jimmy Neutron and Fairly Odd Parents crossover? Or maybe one between Doug and Robot and Monster? Perhaps Star Trek: Prodigy and Hey Arnold! Whatever you want to bring to the table, we'd love to hear it!

The layout of the zine is planned to be reminiscent of a late 90s/early 2000s Nickelodeon Magazine! So, magazine games, articles, ads- it's all fair game and we'd love to see people get creative!

What Can I Make?

Most zines are based around fanfic and art, and yes, that is the main mediums we are planning on working with here!

But! We'd also love to see anything else you guys can come up with! Magazine games, articles, cosplays, anything! There's a whole section in the sign-ups specifically for this, and you can throw in any ideas you want!!

What's Required?

Artists will have a variety of different sizes for their pieces, depending on what they sign up for/what they end up choosing (this may or may not change depending on how many artists we end up with!)

Two Page illustrations will be 5,100x3,300

Singular Page Illustrations will be 2,550x3,300

Comics will be one to two pages, with page size at 2,550×3,300 !!

There will be a few other options that will have specifics brought up later, with others being case by case!

Fanfic writers have a minimum of around 1.5k words! We have a tentative maximum of around 5k, so it doesn't get too long, but it'd be alright if it goes a little over, or even a little under that 1.5k. :)

Are there any Restrictions?

This is a SFW Zine. Nickelodeon is a children's TV channel and we want this to be a family friendly zine!!

No non-canon romances please! We'd like to keep it open to a lot of fans and shipping can be a touchy subject to some!!

No OCs, please. We are planning on adding them to the credits page, so they will get their spotlight, I promise!

If you plan on joining, please be ready to reply to check-ins and get your pieces completed on time! - Please, if you do get behind as well, let us know!

Pieces cannot be shared outside of the discord until the zine has been posted and the mods have given the go-ahead! - There may be times where contributors are allowed to post wips publicly in order to advertise and the like! Listen to the mods on that front!

If you have any more questions, please do not hesitate to ask!! Thank you all so much and I'm very excited to get this thing started!!

[evidence-based-activism]

So men claim that women have more body empowerment and that body shaming them is considered wrong. But Ik that it’s not true but I really only have anecdotal evidence. Or that women are more likely to be affected by ED and that they get more cosmetic procedures done. Do you have any evidence that body issue affects women more?

Indeed I do!

Some of this directly addresses self-reports of body image, but a lot of it is indirect evidence. In these cases we extrapolate a higher prevalence of body issues among women based on a different factor (eating disorders, cosmetic surgery use, etc.) that we can is logically associated with body image issues. (Academic research supports this association [12]).

The prevalence of eating disorders among women is at least twice the prevalence of eating disorders among men in the USA [1]

This difference in eating disorders prevalence may be closer to 3-4 times as many women than men when examined world-wide [2]

At age 6 to 10, girls start to worry about their weight, and by 14, 60 to 70% are trying to lose weight. [3]

This Italian study [4] found women showed greater dissatisfaction with their bodies than males in reference to both their own ideal and what they believe the opposite sex finds attractive. In addition, women's expectations of what men find attractive were further from men's actual ratings than men's expectations about what women find attractive were from women's actual ratings.

This Chinese study [5] found that women reported significantly less body appreciation than men. In addition, lower levels of body appreciation were correlated with more symptoms of depression, anxiety, and suicidality but only for women. (That is, lower body appreciation in men was not associated with these indicators of distress.)

This meta-analysis [6] confirms the above results, indicating lower body appreciation among women.

According to the American Society of Plastic Surgeons, in 2022 women accounted for 93% of all cosmetic surgery procedures [7]. (Note: cosmetic surgery is a type of plastic surgery that is specifically not reconstructive and not medically necessary.)

The percent of cosmetic procedures performed on women has been increasing -- not decreasing, as suggested by some -- over time. This is particularly true for cosmetic surgical procedures which increased from 84% female to 94% female from 2005 to 2022. Over the same time frame, minimally invasive procedures increased from 89% to 93% female and total procedures increased from 88% to 93% female [7, 8].

Women spend significantly more time on minor body-modification behaviors (i.e., "beauty enhancing" behaviors like make-up use, hair styling, etc.) than men around the world [9*, 10*]. It's probable that these behaviors are self-reinforcing, such that "beauty enhancement" leads to less comfort with the natural body, exacerbating body image issues and instigating more "beauty enhancing" behaviors. (*See the reference section for additional notes on this topic.)

So, women both self-report more body image issues/less body appreciation and display behaviors strongly associated with body image issues (eating disorders and both major and minor body modification).

---

A related issue here is the hyper-sexualization of women and girls in society. The APA reports on the extent of this issue and the problems it causes, discussed below [11].

Hyper-sexualization of women and girls is found in every form of media and advertising, on the internet, in girl's toys, and in women's and girl's clothing. Examples include:

Sexualized depictions of women (and a lack of strong, female protagonists) in television, movies, music, video games, magazines, etc.

"Increasing sexualization of female athletes comparable to their overall increasing visibility."

Comparatively recent "production of “sexy” clothing in child and teen sizes" (for example "the thong, an item of clothing based on what a stripper might wear, is now offered in “tween” stores as well as children’s wear departments, often with decorations that will specifically appeal to children.")

"Young women and adult women are frequently, consistently, and increasingly presented in sexualized ways in advertising, creating an environment in which being female becomes nearly synonymous with being a sexual object"

"Much of the content of mainstream magazines geared toward adolescent girls and young women heavily emphasizes ... rigid norms of physical attractiveness through the consumption of products such as cosmetics and fashionable clothing"

Other sources of sexualization of girls comes from: parents, teachers, peers, and the self:

Parental interactions (i.e., body commentary, diet culture) with girls has a significant impact on self-image. Beyond that parents may directly contribute to the sexualization of their daughters by supporting/initiating activities like beauty pageants or cosmetic surgery.

"[Teachers] encouraged [girls] to play dress up more than boys and ... encouraged girls in their dress-up games to play at being sexualized adult women."

Male peers "mark" girls as sexual at a very young age and make "sexual commentary and evaluation in school."

"Sexual harassment by boys and men is a regular part of school and work life."

The APA also acknowledges that sexualization can be internalized and result in self-sexualization:

"Psychological researchers have identified self-objectification ... as a key process whereby girls learn to think of and treat their own bodies as objects of others’ desires."

"Many studies have demonstrated that girls and women self-objectify more than boys and men do"

Ultimately this sexualization is harmful to women and girls:

Girls are more susceptible than women to sexualized messaging

Research shows hyper-sexualization directly reduces women's and girl's mental and physical performance on various tasks (e.g., math performance, sports, etc.)

"Near-constant monitoring of appearance that accompanies self-objectification leads to increased feelings of shame about one’s body"

Sexualization is linked to: lower self-esteem, negative mood, depressive symptoms, and diminished sexual health among adolescent girls and young women.

Sexualization may "lead [women and girls] to accept more constrained and stereotypical notions about gender roles and sexual roles" and "may contribute to broader societal consequences, such as sexism, sex bias, and sexist attitudes"

The above link is particularly important since "numerous studies have shown a connection between stereotypical attitudes about women’s sexuality and aggressive sexual behavior." (As in sexual exploitation, harassment, and abuse of women and girls, e.g. "findings suggest that viewing sexualized portrayals of girls could lead viewers to associate children with sex".)

So, women and girls have more body image issues, and in addition to that our sociocultural landscape is directly contributing to (possibly creating/perpetrating) these issues. The (negative) effects of this social messaging extends beyond body image into general views and behaviors of and towards women and girls. Notably, we do not see similar objectifying messaging commonly produced and distributed about men and boys.

References under the cut:

Deloitte Access Economics. The Social and Economic Cost of Eating Disorders in the United States of America: A Report for the Strategic Training Initiative for the Prevention of Eating Disorders andthe Academy for Eating Disorders. June 2020. Available at:https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/striped/report-economic-costs-of-eating-disorders/.

Galmiche, M., Déchelotte, P., Lambert, G., & Tavolacci, M. P. (2019). Prevalence of eating disorders over the 2000–2018 period: A systematic literature review. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 109(5), 1402–1413. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/nqy342

Mehler, P. S., & Andersen, A. E. (Eds.). (2017). Eating disorders: A guide to medical care and complications (Third edition). Johns Hopkins University Press.

Gualdi-Russo, E., Rinaldo, N., Masotti, S., Bramanti, B., & Zaccagni, L. (2022). Sex differences in body image perception and ideals: Analysis of possible determinants. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(5), 2745. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19052745

Liu, Z.-H., Cai, H., Bai, W., Liu, S., Liu, H., Chen, X., Qi, H., Cheung, T., Jackson, T., Liu, R., & Xiang, Y.-T. (2022). Gender differences in body appreciation and its associations with psychiatric symptoms among chinese college students: A nationwide survey. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 13, 771398. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2022.771398

He, J., Sun, S., Zickgraf, H. F., Lin, Z., & Fan, X. (2020). Meta-analysis of gender differences in body appreciation. Body Image, 33, 90–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2020.02.011

2022 Plastic Surgery Statistics . (n.d.). American Society of Plastic Surgeons. https://www.plasticsurgery.org/news/plastic-surgery-statistics

2005 Plastic Surgery Statistics . (n.d.). American Society of Plastic Surgeons. https://www.plasticsurgery.org/news/plastic-surgery-statistics

Kowal, M., & Sorokowski, P. (2022). Sex differences in physical attractiveness investments: Overlooked side of masculinity. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(7), 3842. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19073842

Kowal, M., Sorokowski, P., Pisanski, K., Valentova, J. V., Varella, M. A. C., Frederick, D. A., Al-Shawaf, L., García, F. E., Giammusso, I., Gjoneska, B., Kozma, L., Otterbring, T., Papadatou-Pastou, M., Pfuhl, G., Stöckli, S., Studzinska, A., Toplu-Demirtaş, E., Touloumakos, A. K., Bakos, B. E., … Zumárraga-Espinosa, M. (2022). Predictors of enhancing human physical attractiveness: Data from 93 countries. Evolution and Human Behavior, 43(6), 455–474. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2022.08.003

Zurbriggen, E. L., Collins, R. L., Lamb, S., Roberts, T.-A., Tolman, D. L., Ward, L. M., & Blake, J. (2010). Sexualization of Girls 2010 (p. 72). American Psychological Association.

Presnell, K., Bearman, S. K., & Madeley, M. C. (2007). Body dissatisfaction in adolescent females and males: Risk and resilience. The Prevention Researcher, 14(3), 3–7. https://www.academia.edu/6035545/Body_Dissatisfaction_in_Adolescent_Females_and_Males_Risk_and_Resilience

*These studies support the assertion I made, however I have a significant issue with them I want to address. These studies indirectly or directly imply equivalence between all the "beauty enhancing" behaviors they report on. However, these behaviors range from acts necessary for health (hygiene, exercise, caring for diet) to behaviors with no other benefit/potential negative effects (such as makeup use and "looking at mirrors"). There was also insufficient clarity on what was included in each category (i.e., did they consider shaving to be a form of body hygiene?, is acne medicine or or other medical skin products included in cosmetics or hygiene?, etc.).

But, as an example, it's clear that comparing makeup use to cardio- or strength-exercise is a false equivalency. Exercise provides significant immediate and long term health benefits, whereas makeup has an at best neutral and most likely negative effect on physical and mental health. Equating them in order to create near-parity in "beauty enhancing" behaviors is disingenuous.

And on that note: (1) Despite this, even when including these pro-health behaviors (in [9] as an explicit attempt to find sex parity in behaviors), women were still found to spend significantly more time than men on "beauty" enhancing behaviors around the world. (2) When excluding exercise (and other health-promoting factors) from the analysis, this difference becomes even more extreme, indicating that most of the time men spend on "beauty" is on health-promoting factors where as most of the time women spend on "beauty" is on non-health-promoting factors. Indeed [9] indicates that women and men spent equal time on hygiene, men spent more time on cardio and strength exercise, and women spent more time on all other (non-health-promoting) behaviors. The supplementary materials for [10] indicate that women spend more time on "beauty enhancing" behaviors, but that men spend more time on exercise, indicating that removal of exercise would strengthen the effect of sex on these behaviors. Unfortunately, they do not provide an analysis of each individual factor.

[ohsalome]

your post reminded me how people on here tried to gotcha on the idea that ukrainians are inherently racist because of the issue with black ukrainian people fleeing and they tried to pin it on ukraine itself when it was literally just poland who didn't want to take them

Mhm, from what I remember, the problem came from the fact that during the first days the evacuation trains were prioritising women, children, elderly and disabled over men. + Not all foreign students are fluent in ukrainian, and not all ukrainian railroad workers are fluent in english. This created a miscommunication issue, where the railroad management failed to explain the students what to do and where to go.

If you've been here, you know what kind of chaos happened during those time period. The tension was fucking high. Everyone was in the survival mode. The infrastructure wasn't prepared to a full-scale war. A lot of mistakes happened on all levels of management.

The people who were in panic and jumping to the worse conclusions (based on their lifelong experience of racism) were given the platform by russian propaganda machine; and those who understood the language a bit better and were explained the priority of saving women and children first, didn't. If you have time and inspiration to bother with translation, here is an artice from March 2022 that includes quotes from both sides of the story.

We need to admit that this event was bad. A lot of people were hurt. But it wasn't a specific campaign targeted at black people. Yet russian propagandists and their lap dogs turned it into an anti-ukrainian smear campaign.

additional rant below

It's sad how easily westerners are ready to eat up anti-ukrainian propaganda, even when it comes from people who sent their mercenaries to commit war crimes in Africa. Y'all really think russia is a reliable source to learn about racism? Really? Ukraine has a black politician, we were represented by black artists in Eurovision twice - by popular vote! - and in russia, people bully brands who use black models in their advertisement into withdrowing the ad and apologising for hurting the feelings of consumers. I know this comparison sounds pathetic, especially if you're from a country with large black population, but keep in mind that we didn't partake in the transantlantic slave trade route, and yet we still do better than russia which has thrice the population we do.

People who don't speak russian don't have a clue about how racist their society is. If you know those fringe internet guys who scream about culture war and throw tantrums about black disney mermaids - this is literally the status quo of russian culture. And THESE are the people westerners have decided to trust on their word in questions of racism?? Really?

No matter how many times we disprove those "ukrainians are racist because we didn't allow black people to evacuate burr burr" claims with facts, they still come up. The rebuttals were there immediately. Yet 2 years later, I still get lectured by usamerican tweens about how all ukrainians are racist by birthright because "i googled ukraine racism and a russia today article told me it was so"

[agro-carnist]

Now that I'm slightly less in the spotlight, I'd like to talk about what has been going on and give my side. I'm sure you've all seen what has been said about me, but in case you haven't, this will include a discussion about zoophilia, zoosadism, pedophilia, and taboo kink/fetish.

I've taken several days to write this because I needed to clear my head so I could write something concise. I did not want to immediately write something too quickly that I couldn't think through.

I don't expect anyone to completely understand me or totally agree with my opinions, but I am writing this with full sincerity. I'd just like a little bit of faith when you read this. My positions are based on the science that I read, and I try to be someone that sticks to the side of evidence, not one of pure feelings or assumptions or what we think is common sense, even when it is difficult to understand or seems counterintuitive. I've always preached this principle on here, so I hope you all feel the same way. I ask that you read this with that in mind. Even if you don't reach the same conclusion as me, consider what I say and what I give with good faith.

All linked sources with restricted access can be read by copy/pasting the url or title into sci-hub

First, that twitter account is mine. The art contained on the twitter account is mine. Yes it is graphic. No I am not a zoophile, zoosadist, or pedophile. I understand this kind of art is disgusting and/or disturbing to many people. That is why I kept it on an account specifically for this kind of extreme art. It is why I don't advertise it. I am not secretive about my kinks/fetishes - I enjoy things like gore, noncon, and animal characters - but I know when and where these kinds of things are appropriate. Some of my art is not meant for a general audience. I won't advertise it to anyone and everyone to see because it can be upsetting to most people. That's also why I give plenty of content warnings and include the twitter censor that blurs the image and you have to click 'show' on to see. And that's why I believe posting screenshots of this material with my username, showing everyone exactly where to go to find this content, is irresponsible. I know the people that posted it think they're doing a service, but this is how children find content they shouldn't see. Callouts are how people find things they otherwise would never see. I, personally, don't think calling people out this way helps kids. I think it does more harm than good. My twitter was public but is now private because I don't want curious minors to look me up and look at what is on the account.

I understand that it can be hard to know why someone would enjoy erotic art of violence between animal characters without being a zoophile/zoosadist. But there are many reasons people enjoy taboo erotica without desiring it in the real world. About half of people experience paraphilic sexual fantasies, and the fantasies alone are not indicative of pathology. Deviant sexual fantasies are, in fact, "within the normal realm of human experience." There is little evidence that fantasy alone means someone wants to or will commit a sexual offense. Forced sex fantasies are extremely common. Violent sexual fantasies are not abnormal. Sex therapists and educators acknowledge that fantasies are not necessarily repressed desires. Sexual fantasy is not sexual desire. It's ok for our sexual interests to not reflect our moral code. Often taboo sexual fantasies are a way to explore how we feel about things, like repulsion. Humans are curious animals. We have morbid curiosities. Fantasies can be a way to experience something that would be immoral to act upon.

Why I am into taboo kink is hard to explain, and a lot of it I don't understand myself - human minds are very complex - but I can try to explain some of it. I enjoy exploring the darker parts of humanity. We're still animals and that means we still hold onto aspects that don't align with our morals. We have morbid curiosities. When we pass by a car crash, we want to see it, or when someone tells us something disturbing is spreading on the internet, we take interest in what it could be. Art is a way to fulfill that curiosity without any victims. Another thing is that it can be fun or therapeutic to imagine yourself in situations of bodily harm. That's probably confusing, but I like to explore what my body looks like on the inside, or what it would feel like to experience certain physical traumas, without the threat of dying. Fear and arousal are closely intertwined. The animal characters I draw are also very far removed from real world animals. They are sapient and behave very human. To me the only difference between them and an anthro furry character is the number of legs they walk on and the lack of clothes.

Because I draw this kind of content, many people are claiming that I am faking having ZOCD and my intrusive thoughts, or that my intrusive thoughts have turned into wanted thoughts. They say that if I really was distressed by these thoughts, I wouldn't engage with them through art. But my intrusive thoughts are about real people and animals. I do not have intrusive thoughts about characters. I watch movies and read books with murder, kidnapping, torture, disease, and freak accidents and enjoy these pieces of media. This does not negate the fact that I have intrusive thoughts about these things or the distress I feel regarding them. Someone getting hurt in a movie does not distress me. My intrusive thoughts include ideas of me or a loved one getting hurt, or me suddenly hurting someone. Intrusive thoughts target your fears and your morals. They make you question who you are as a person. That's why thoughts of real world violence are so distressing and depictions of violence in media are (usually) not. I fear losing someone I love, I fear losing a part of my mind or body, I fear losing control of my humanity and hurting someone, I fear loss of inhibition that makes me do things I wouldn't otherwise do. I don't fear hurting a character or a character doing a bad thing to another character. When I'm obsessing and becoming paranoid it's not over things that happen in fictional worlds. My therapist doesn't have to reassure me that I'll be ok if something bad happens in that fictional world. She does have to reassure me that the world isn't out to get me and that I don't have to act on a thought. Others with OCD might find media that resembles the content of their intrusive thoughts triggering, and that's normal, but not everyone will react the same. Not everyone copes with their mental illnesses the same way or has the same triggers. Most violent depictions just don't garner that same reaction from me because I don't have any moral qualms with fake people or animals getting hurt since they aren't real victims. It doesn't attack my moral beliefs that way. It may be upsetting to see, but doesn't make me fear for my or others' safety.

I love horror movies and haunted houses. I love the adrenaline and fear I experience during them. But I still metaphorically shit my pants at the thought of an actual serial killer stalking me and jumping out of a hiding spot. The difference is that the former exists in a safe space that I can leave and where I know it's a script. How I feel about a scenario in fiction does not dictate how I feel about it happening in the real world. To tell me that I don't actually have the disorder that I've been diagnosed with is extremely upsetting. So is to tell me I'm hiding secret bloodthirsty desires behind a mental illness or that I'm making OCD look bad by not having a moral conundrum about fake people or animals being hurt. I especially don't appreciate people that don't have OCD preaching about what "real" intrusive thoughts are or what I should or should not be doing while having OCD. The things that have been said to or about me have been undeniably ableist. And the distress that has caused me has just been brushed aside because I don't adhere to what people think I as a person with OCD "should" act like. I feel like I'm not being granted agency over my own experiences.

I am even being compared to some of the worst people like Kero the wolf or HypnotistSappho. I hope you believe me when I say that is truly disgusting and offensive. These were the kinds of people that belonged to groups for sharing material of real animals being tortured for sexual pleasure, or tried to start an organization to promote bestiality, or openly promoted zoophilia and pedophilia as normal sexual orientations, or actively abused children and animals. I have not done anything like that. My artistic expression is nothing like their real world, extensive and widespread levels of abuse. I am so offended that I'd spend years spreading animal welfare advocacy, including explicitly anti-bestiality rhetoric, only to be lumped in with monsters, like my art erases all the work I've done. How someone could believe I actually desire to torture animals baffles me. How someone could think all this work was just master manipulation to con everyone so I could secretly abuse leaves my head spinning.

I also haven't ever claimed that my nsfw art is a coping mechanism for my OCD/intrusive thoughts. This is an assumption people have made. Occasionally elements of my intrusive thoughts will make their way into my art as a way to confront them head on on my own terms, but almost always are not a factor in my nsfw art. Art based on my intrusive thoughts as catharsis I don't share publicly.

Yes, I enjoy hurting fictional characters. They exist in a world with no consequences. Nobody actually gets hurt. Anything can happen to them and nothing about the world changes. I have no desire to hurt an animal, because that impacts the real world. I have never looked at an animal and felt excitement at the idea of hurting it. I have never felt attraction to an animal. I have never felt the urge to make sexual contact with an animal. I have never experienced attraction to a child, either.

I am also being accused of being a pedophile. This is because I made a tweet saying I enjoy explicitly abusive relationships between adult and minor characters, but don't enjoy minor/adult ships depicted as cute or wholesome. People interpret this as me having a malicious desire to abuse a child. But here's the thing: you don't know why someone enjoys a certain dynamic. Many people that like to see abusive relationships depicted in stories or erotica are survivors of abuse themselves. Many people use kink as a coping mechanism, and the stigma of their kink play often hinders them from trauma recovery. Like I said before, kink and fantasy are not morality guidebooks. This also assumes every character drawn in ship art or erotica is an object of attraction to those that create or consume it. But even porn can serve a purpose other than arousal. Personally I just like these dynamics because they offer a compelling story and/or character interactions that can explore trauma and its effects and can feel therapeutic to work through.

Art does not exist in a vacuum. I don't argue it does. Art is influenced by its creator. But you can't look at the content of someone's kink or fantasy to judge the quality of someone's character. This is the position of professionals that study and counsel people. Whether or not someone commits a sexual offense is more influenced by that person's personality traits, moral positions, pre-existing positive beliefs about offending, environment, and negative emotional states. And, look, fiction does indeed effect reality, but there is little evidence that porn encourages someone to offend or results in more violent offenses. Availability of porn may even be associated with lower levels of sexual aggression. This professional report goes into great detail on sexual offending and concludes that there is no reason "scientific or otherwise" for criminalization of any type of virtual porn because it does not lead to offending, and may even provide a substitute for people that may otherwise offend. Even if you find that content reprehensible. Offensive art has its place and deserves to exist. That is the position I have come to based on the scientific evidence.

And I want to make another thing clear: I am not a proshipper. Disliking the position of one group does not make me a member of a different group. I have no desire to put myself in a category, I just have my own opinions. I also have plenty of issues with the proship community. I just now look at fiction and kink with more nuance than I used to. I don't participate in fearmongering based on knee-jerk reactions to media anymore.

Going forward I'm going to do my best to be more responsible with my nsfw accounts. Any interactions I've made with minors are honest mistakes. I genuinely don't want to expose minors to my nsfw or interact with them. I don't go out seeking minors to talk to. But I know interacting with minors through an nsfw account is serious, so I'm going to do better to police myself and always check that no one I'm interacting with is underage.

If you made it this far, thank you for reading. Sadly I expect many people won't read this, they'll just continue to repeat "zoophile" and "pedophile." But I really appreciate you if you took the time to read. I know many people really do want to be good and believe they are protecting people by engaging in callouts against people for their fictional interests. I think most people have their hearts in the right place but are misguided by the current culture. And I don't mind if you disagree with me, but I always want people to take their positions with the most information. I want there to be honest discussions about these topics, not naming and shaming people.

I might make updates to this post if I think of things I forgot to address. Like I said, it's been many days of my head buzzing and this post is also very long. I welcome any good faith questions or concerns. People that come just to attack in bad faith will just be blocked. I won't humor that. Please meet me with the same honesty I came with. I want to continue to do good.

-Agro

[omegaphilosophia]

The Social Consequences of Marketing

Marketing, while essential for businesses and economies, has also been criticized for causing harm to society in various ways. Here are some significant ways in which marketing has negatively impacted society:

1. Promotion of Consumerism

Excessive consumption: Marketing often encourages the idea that happiness and success are linked to material goods, promoting a culture of consumerism. This has led to excessive consumption, debt, and environmental damage, as people are driven to buy more than they need.

Planned obsolescence: Companies sometimes design products with limited lifespans, encouraging consumers to buy new versions frequently. This practice contributes to waste, depletion of resources, and increased consumer spending.

2. Exploitation of Insecurities

Body image and self-esteem: Advertising in industries like fashion, beauty, and fitness often exploits people's insecurities by promoting unrealistic beauty standards. This can lead to mental health issues such as low self-esteem, anxiety, body dysmorphia, and even eating disorders.

Fear-based marketing: Some marketing strategies use fear to sell products, such as insurance, security systems, or health products, by making consumers feel unsafe or inadequate without them.

3. Targeting Vulnerable Populations

Children: Marketing often targets children, who are particularly susceptible to persuasive messages. This leads to the commercialization of childhood, with kids exposed to unhealthy food, consumerist values, and a materialistic mindset from an early age.

Low-income groups: Companies sometimes market harmful products, such as payday loans or unhealthy foods, more aggressively to low-income populations, exacerbating financial hardship or health problems.

4. Perpetuation of Stereotypes and Social Divides

Gender roles: Marketing often reinforces gender stereotypes, portraying women as caregivers or men as breadwinners, thereby perpetuating outdated norms that limit gender equality and diversity.

Cultural appropriation and tokenism: Some brands use cultural symbols or minority groups in marketing campaigns without understanding their significance, which can lead to cultural appropriation and tokenism, alienating and misrepresenting marginalized communities.

5. Environmental Damage

Overemphasis on fast fashion and disposable goods: Marketing has contributed to the rise of fast fashion and a throwaway culture, promoting short-term use of cheap, disposable products. This has serious environmental consequences, including pollution, resource depletion, and the generation of vast amounts of waste.

Greenwashing: Some companies falsely market products as "environmentally friendly" or "sustainable" in an attempt to capitalize on consumers' eco-consciousness, misleading the public and delaying genuine action on environmental issues.

6. Manipulation and Misinformation

False advertising: Companies sometimes make exaggerated or false claims about their products, misleading consumers and creating false expectations. This can be particularly harmful when it comes to health products, pharmaceuticals, or weight-loss treatments.

Addictive design: Marketing techniques are increasingly used to promote addictive behaviors, particularly in the context of social media, video games, or gambling. Companies manipulate users through behavioral nudges and psychological triggers that keep them hooked.

7. Invasion of Privacy

Data mining and surveillance: With the rise of digital marketing, companies have gained unprecedented access to consumers’ personal data. Many firms engage in data mining and targeted advertising based on individuals' online behavior, often without full transparency or consent, leading to concerns about privacy and data security.

Personalization and manipulation: Highly personalized marketing can lead to manipulation, as companies can target individuals with ads tailored to their specific vulnerabilities, making it harder for consumers to make objective decisions.

8. Promotion of Unhealthy Lifestyles

Junk food advertising: Aggressive marketing of unhealthy foods, particularly to children, has been linked to rising rates of obesity, diabetes, and other diet-related diseases.

Alcohol and tobacco marketing: Despite restrictions in some countries, marketing of alcohol, tobacco, and vaping products continues to glamorize these potentially harmful substances, leading to addiction and public health crises.

9. Contributing to Financial Instability

Credit and debt marketing: Marketing of credit cards, loans, and other financial products often promotes spending beyond one's means, contributing to personal debt and financial instability. Predatory lending practices, such as payday loans, are frequently marketed to those already in financial difficulty.

10. Reduction of Authenticity and Creativity

Commercialization of art and culture: Marketing can sometimes reduce art, culture, and creativity to mere products to be sold, stripping them of their authenticity. This can lead to the commodification of creative expression and a focus on profit over substance.

Trend exploitation: By constantly pushing new trends, marketing fosters a culture of superficiality and short-term thinking, where value is placed on what is fashionable or trending rather than what is meaningful or lasting.

While marketing plays a critical role in the economy by connecting consumers with products, it also has significant social, psychological, and environmental consequences. From promoting overconsumption and exploiting insecurities to targeting vulnerable groups and contributing to environmental degradation, marketing practices have often prioritized profit over societal well-being. Reforming marketing to be more ethical and socially responsible is essential for creating a healthier, more sustainable society.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Cecilia Nowell at The Guardian:

When Project 2025 began making headlines this summer, it was largely for the ways the conservative “wish list” of policies for a future Trump administration would restructure the entire federal bureaucracy, deepen abortion restrictions and eliminate the Department of Education.

But the document – a proposed mandate for the next Republican president authored by the Heritage Foundation, a conservative thinktank – also outlines steps that would radically transform food and farming, curtailing recent progress to address the excess of ultra-processed foods in the United States. Among those: weakening the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (Snap), ending policies that consider the effects of climate change – and eliminating the US dietary guidelines. “This is a deregulatory agenda,” said Marion Nestle, a professor of nutrition and food policy at New York University. “And what we know historically from deregulation is that it’s really bad for consumers, it’s bad for workers, it’s bad for the environment.”

Project 2025 proposes changes to the country’s food assistance programs, like Snap and the Women, Infants and Children supplemental nutrition program (Wic), that Nestle believes are intended to dismantle such programs. It also calls for ending support for school meals. But one of the most notable of its proposals is calling on the next Republican president to eliminate or reform the dietary guidelines. Those guidelines form the basis for all federal food policies, from school meals to Snap, Wic and other programs.

“There is no shortage of private-sector dietary advice for the public, and nutrition and dietary choices are best left to individuals to address their personal needs,” the document reads. The food industry has long pushed the idea that chronic, diet-related health conditions, like diabetes and obesity, are the result of individual choices – like not exercising enough. Today, nearly 42% of adults in the US are obese and about 12% have diabetes. But nutritionists emphasize that those conditions are not the result of a moral failing, but rather conditions caused by the ingredients and policies (like aggressively advertising to children) pushed by food companies. Nestle sees that as one of many pro-business policies outlined in Project 2025’s agricultural provisions that trusts companies to prioritize public health over profit. “There’s twice as many calories available in the food supply as the country needs on average. So the food industry is enormously competitive in selling calories,” she said. “Republicans want to deregulate, and give those food businesses every opportunity to make as much money as they possibly can, regardless of the effects on health and the environment.” Experts also fear the way Project 2025 could undermine the work being done by the Food and Drug Administration and the Department of Agriculture to limit the flow of ultra-processed foods in the US food supply.

Today, ultra-processed foods make up 73% of the US food supply, according to Northeastern University, and provide the average US adult with more than 60% of their daily calories. While the science is still emerging, researchers are increasingly linking UPFs to a range of health conditions including diabetes, obesity, depression and certain cancers. At the FDA, work is currently under way to develop a front-of-package label that corporations would be required to print on the fronts of products indicating when an item is high in sugar, fats, sodium or calories (the exact label has not yet been made public). Although the label wouldn’t specifically indicate when a food is ultra-processed, it would likely apply to a high percentage of UPFs in the food system because many contain large quantities of those nutrients.

Warning to Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and co. who are backing Donald Trump on the basis that he would clean up the food supply: Project 2025 calls for rollbacks that would limit the tools needed to fight against ultra-processed foods.

[marzipanandminutiae]

U seem to know a bit abt corsets, and I’ve been wondering, what is the actual difference between like… day-to-day ones vs ones that are more Just For Fashion ? Are they built different or was it more of an advertising thing? Like when you see some ad like “oh this bra is DESIGNED for HIKING” and you try it and it’s basically a regular bra

I will not be able to cover all of them, because there were various Patents Georgs going around in the 19th century coming up with 10,000 new types of corsets per day, who were outliers adn should not be counted. You can find patents out there for designs that were almost certainly never actually sold, some with extreme and bizarre specificity. But more popular adaptations included:

corsets with less boning/differently placed boning/shorter boning/boning of allegedly more flexible materials. what you might call your standard corset of the 19th century was boned with flexible steel or baleen at many points throughout the garment, vertically, from the top edge (usually nipple-level) to the bottom (top of one's hips, in most decades; sometimes as low as mid-hip). some of these were aimed at women who did physical labor- bet Symington never realized their Pretty Housemaid model would take the corseted world of 2023 by storm, but here we are -and some were intended for various athletic pursuits

corsets with adaptations for hot weather. these were usually made of mesh between the boning channels, and quite popular for summer wear, or women living in hot climate

children's corsets. don't let the name scare you! these were almost invariably just vests with some cording or quilting to stiffen them, fastened in a way that made figure reduction or reshaping quite impossible. they were used for extra warmth and to encourage good posture

maternity corsets. while one could simply let out the lower part of one's normal corset to accomodate a pregnancy- and many women did -there also existed purpose-made corsets for the expectant mother. these generally featured laced or buttoned panels on the lower sides, that could be opened wider and wider as needed. (to answer the question of why women wouldn't just ditch their corsets during pregnancy, I refer you to Breasts and the Support Thereof For Comfort. also Multiple Skirt/Petticoat Waistbands and the Potential Digging Thereof Into One's Abdomen.)

men's corsets. often called "health belts" in the period, which is more helpful in actual primary source research on this topic than simply typing in "men's corsets." these were marketed along the order of weight belts today, aimed at men doing heavy physical labor, and looked very similar to those modern garments. however, it's well-known that some men quietly used them as shapewear instead.

I'm sure there are others I'm not thinking of, but those are the main unusual corset sub-types that come to mind

[is-the-owl-video-cute]

here's the whole post if you want it. it's very predictable. Really love the "I'm not a proshipper!!" part. Agro, you're not getting any favors by lying lol. you are literally a proshipper and even say that directly on your pedo tweet about previously being an anti lmao.

--------------------

Agro-Carnist:

Now that I'm slightly less in the spotlight, I'd like to talk about what has been going on and give my side. I'm sure you've all seen what has been said about me, but in case you haven't, this will include a discussion about zoophilia, zoosadism, pedophilia, and taboo kink/fetish.

I've taken several days to write this because I needed to clear my head so I could write something concise. I did not want to immediately write something too quickly that I couldn't think through.

I don't expect anyone to completely understand me or totally agree with my opinions, but I am writing this with full sincerity. I'd just like a little bit of faith when you read this. My positions are based on the science that I read, and I try to be someone that sticks to the side of evidence, not one of pure feelings or assumptions or what we think is common sense, even when it is difficult to understand or seems counterintuitive. I've always preached this principle on here, so I hope you all feel the same way. I ask that you read this with that in mind. Even if you don't reach the same conclusion as me, consider what I say and what I give with good faith.

All linked sources with restricted access can be read by copy/pasting the url or title into sci-hub

First, that twitter account is mine. The art contained on the twitter account is mine. Yes it is graphic. No I am not a zoophile, zoosadist, or pedophile. I understand this kind of art is disgusting and/or disturbing to many people. That is why I kept it on an account specifically for this kind of extreme art. It is why I don't advertise it. I am not secretive about my kinks/fetishes - I enjoy things like gore, noncon, and animal characters - but I know when and where these kinds of things are appropriate. Some of my art is not meant for a general audience. I won't advertise it to anyone and everyone to see because it can be upsetting to most people. That's also why I give plenty of content warnings and include the twitter censor that blurs the image and you have to click 'show' on to see. And that's why I believe posting screenshots of this material with my username, showing everyone exactly where to go to find this content, is irresponsible. I know the people that posted it think they're doing a service, but this is how children find content they shouldn't see. Callouts are how people find things they otherwise would never see. I, personally, don't think calling people out this way helps kids. I think it does more harm than good. My twitter was public but is now private because I don't want curious minors to look me up and look at what is on the account.

I understand that it can be hard to know why someone would enjoy erotic art of violence between animal characters without being a zoophile/zoosadist. But there are many reasons people enjoy taboo erotica without desiring it in the real world. About half of people experience paraphilic sexual fantasies, and the fantasies alone are not indicative of pathology. Deviant sexual fantasies are, in fact, "within the normal realm of human experience." There is little evidence that fantasy alone means someone wants to or will commit a sexual offense. Forced sex fantasies are extremely common. Violent sexual fantasies are not abnormal. Sex therapists and educators acknowledge that fantasies are not necessarily repressed desires. Sexual fantasy is not sexual desire. It's ok for our sexual interests to not reflect our moral code. Often taboo sexual fantasies are a way to explore how we feel about things, like repulsion. Humans are curious animals. We have morbid curiosities. Fantasies can be a way to experience something that would be immoral to act upon.

Why I am into taboo kink is hard to explain, and a lot of it I don't understand myself - human minds are very complex - but I can try to explain some of it. I enjoy exploring the darker parts of humanity. We're still animals and that means we still hold onto aspects that don't align with our morals. We have morbid curiosities. When we pass by a car crash, we want to see it, or when someone tells us something disturbing is spreading on the internet, we take interest in what it could be. Art is a way to fulfill that curiosity without any victims. Another thing is that it can be fun or therapeutic to imagine yourself in situations of bodily harm. That's probably confusing, but I like to explore what my body looks like on the inside, or what it would feel like to experience certain physical traumas, without the threat of dying. Fear and arousal are closely intertwined. The animal characters I draw are also very far removed from real world animals. They are sapient and behave very human. To me the only difference between them and an anthro furry character is the number of legs they walk on and the lack of clothes.

Because I draw this kind of content, many people are claiming that I am faking having ZOCD and my intrusive thoughts, or that my intrusive thoughts have turned into wanted thoughts. They say that if I really was distressed by these thoughts, I wouldn't engage with them through art. But my intrusive thoughts are about real people and animals. I do not have intrusive thoughts about characters. I watch movies and read books with murder, kidnapping, torture, disease, and freak accidents and enjoy these pieces of media. This does not negate the fact that I have intrusive thoughts about these things or the distress I feel regarding them. Someone getting hurt in a movie does not distress me. My intrusive thoughts include ideas of me or a loved one getting hurt, or me suddenly hurting someone. Intrusive thoughts target your fears and your morals. They make you question who you are as a person. That's why thoughts of real world violence are so distressing and depictions of violence in media are (usually) not. I fear losing someone I love, I fear losing a part of my mind or body, I fear losing control of my humanity and hurting someone, I fear loss of inhibition that makes me do things I wouldn't otherwise do. I don't fear hurting a character or a character doing a bad thing to another character. When I'm obsessing and becoming paranoid it's not over things that happen in fictional worlds. My therapist doesn't have to reassure me that I'll be ok if something bad happens in that fictional world. She does have to reassure me that the world isn't out to get me and that I don't have to act on a thought. Others with OCD might find media that resembles the content of their intrusive thoughts triggering, and that's normal, but not everyone will react the same. Not everyone copes with their mental illnesses the same way or has the same triggers. Most violent depictions just don't garner that same reaction from me because I don't have any moral qualms with fake people or animals getting hurt since they aren't real victims. It doesn't attack my moral beliefs that way. It may be upsetting to see, but doesn't make me fear for my or others' safety.

I love horror movies and haunted houses. I love the adrenaline and fear I experience during them. But I still metaphorically shit my pants at the thought of an actual serial killer stalking me and jumping out of a hiding spot. The difference is that the former exists in a safe space that I can leave and where I know it's a script. How I feel about a scenario in fiction does not dictate how I feel about it happening in the real world. To tell me that I don't actually have the disorder that I've been diagnosed with is extremely upsetting. So is to tell me I'm hiding secret bloodthirsty desires behind a mental illness or that I'm making OCD look bad by not having a moral conundrum about fake people or animals being hurt. I especially don't appreciate people that don't have OCD preaching about what "real" intrusive thoughts are or what I should or should not be doing while having OCD. The things that have been said to or about me have been undeniably ableist. And the distress that has caused me has just been brushed aside because I don't adhere to what people think I as a person with OCD "should" act like. I feel like I'm not being granted agency over my own experiences.

I am even being compared to some of the worst people like Kero the wolf or HypnotistSappho. I hope you believe me when I say that is truly disgusting and offensive. These were the kinds of people that belonged to groups for sharing material of real animals being tortured for sexual pleasure, or tried to start an organization to promote bestiality, or openly promoted zoophilia and pedophilia as normal sexual orientations, or actively abused children and animals. I have not done anything like that. My artistic expression is nothing like their real world, extensive and widespread levels of abuse. I am so offended that I'd spend years spreading animal welfare advocacy, including explicitly anti-bestiality rhetoric, only to be lumped in with monsters, like my art erases all the work I've done. How someone could believe I actually desire to torture animals baffles me. How someone could think all this work was just master manipulation to con everyone so I could secretly abuse leaves my head spinning.

I also haven't ever claimed that my nsfw art is a coping mechanism for my OCD/intrusive thoughts. This is an assumption people have made. Occasionally elements of my intrusive thoughts will make their way into my art as a way to confront them head on on my own terms, but almost always are not a factor in my nsfw art. Art based on my intrusive thoughts as catharsis I don't share publicly.

Yes, I enjoy hurting fictional characters. They exist in a world with no consequences. Nobody actually gets hurt. Anything can happen to them and nothing about the world changes. I have no desire to hurt an animal, because that impacts the real world. I have never looked at an animal and felt excitement at the idea of hurting it. I have never felt attraction to an animal. I have never felt the urge to make sexual contact with an animal. I have never experienced attraction to a child, either.

I am also being accused of being a pedophile. This is because I made a tweet saying I enjoy explicitly abusive relationships between adult and minor characters, but don't enjoy minor/adult ships depicted as cute or wholesome. People interpret this as me having a malicious desire to abuse a child. But here's the thing: you don't know why someone enjoys a certain dynamic. Many people that like to see abusive relationships depicted in stories or erotica are survivors of abuse themselves. Many people use kink as a coping mechanism, and the stigma of their kink play often hinders them from trauma recovery. Like I said before, kink and fantasy are not morality guidebooks. This also assumes every character drawn in ship art or erotica is an object of attraction to those that create or consume it. But even porn can serve a purpose other than arousal. Personally I just like these dynamics because they offer a compelling story and/or character interactions that can explore trauma and its effects and can feel therapeutic to work through.

Art does not exist in a vacuum. I don't argue it does. Art is influenced by its creator. But you can't look at the content of someone's kink or fantasy to judge the quality of someone's character. This is the position of professionals that study and counsel people. Whether or not someone commits a sexual offense is more influenced by that person's personality traits, moral positions, pre-existing positive beliefs about offending, environment, and negative emotional states. And, look, fiction does indeed effect reality, but there is little evidence that porn encourages someone to offend or results in more violent offenses. Availability of porn may even be associated with lower levels of sexual aggression. This professional report goes into great detail on sexual offending and concludes that there is no reason "scientific or otherwise" for criminalization of any type of virtual porn because it does not lead to offending, and may even provide a substitute for people that may otherwise offend. Even if you find that content reprehensible. Offensive art has its place and deserves to exist. That is the position I have come to based on the scientific evidence.

And I want to make another thing clear: I am not a proshipper. Disliking the position of one group does not make me a member of a different group. I have no desire to put myself in a category, I just have my own opinions. I also have plenty of issues with the proship community. I just now look at fiction and kink with more nuance than I used to. I don't participate in fearmongering based on knee-jerk reactions to media anymore.

Going forward I'm going to do my best to be more responsible with my nsfw accounts. Any interactions I've made with minors are honest mistakes. I genuinely don't want to expose minors to my nsfw or interact with them. I don't go out seeking minors to talk to. But I know interacting with minors through an nsfw account is serious, so I'm going to do better to police myself and always check that no one I'm interacting with is underage.

If you made it this far, thank you for reading. Sadly I expect many people won't read this, they'll just continue to repeat "zoophile" and "pedophile." But I really appreciate you if you took the time to read. I know many people really do want to be good and believe they are protecting people by engaging in callouts against people for their fictional interests. I think most people have their hearts in the right place but are misguided by the current culture. And I don't mind if you disagree with me, but I always want people to take their positions with the most information. I want there to be honest discussions about these topics, not naming and shaming people.

I might make updates to this post if I think of things I forgot to address. Like I said, it's been many days of my head buzzing and this post is also very long. I welcome any good faith questions or concerns. People that come just to attack in bad faith will just be blocked. I won't humor that. Please meet me with the same honesty I came with. I want to continue to do good.

-----------

Oh, and for that last study they linked? Here's the abstract:

Abstract

Whether pornography contributes to sexual aggression in real life has been the subject of dozens of studies over multiple decades. Nevertheless, scholars have not come to a consensus about whether effects are real. The current meta-analysis examined experimental, correlational, and population studies of the pornography/sexual aggression link dating back from the 1970s to the current time. Methodological weaknesses were very common in this field of research. Nonetheless, evidence did not suggest that nonviolent pornography was associated with sexual aggression. Evidence was particularly weak for longitudinal studies, suggesting an absence of long-term effects. Violent pornography was weakly correlated with sexual aggression, although the current evidence was unable to distinguish between a selection effect as compared to a socialization effect. Studies that employed more best practices tended to provide less evidence for relationships whereas studies with citation bias, an indication of researcher expectancy effects, tended to have higher effect sizes. Population studies suggested that increased availability of pornography is associated with reduced sexual aggression at the population level. More studies with improved practices and preregistration would be welcome.

------------

So even the abstract of the study itself admits almost everything was flawed.

It should also be noted the rest of this study is locked behind a paywall, so there's no way to tell exactly what kind of 'sexual agression' the Study was..... well, studying. But I sincerely doubt it was about the effects of pedo or zoo porn, let alone fucking snuff porn.

Oh, and for that "half of people have fantasies considered paraphillia" that study's Abstract mentions things like exhibitionism, voyerism, masochism, etc-- literally zero things about pedo and zoo shit.

And we all know they used that wording in their post to imply 50% of people think animals or kids are hot, because that's the first thing that comes to mind when people are discussing paraphillias, especially on a post defending creating fucking snuff porn of cats being tortured and raped to death.

It just really boils my blood to see people like this still having a following, the only thing he admitted to doing wrong was "i should never have interacted with minors on my nsfw account, and I will do a better job of policing myself in the future"

Which, even the wording on that statement was a way to gain symphathy lmao. "policing myself"???? Seriously?

Anyway, for anyone still unaware, this is Agro-Carnist aka Angrysnakes aka another Warrior Cat's themed blog I don't recall the name of.

the other warrior cat blog is minkpool.

But yeah this says more or less what I expected. Guy who claims to not be a proship uses every proship talking point and whines about antis anyway.

I’m going to be fully transparent and say that I am not inclined to read that entire thing because it is an incredibly long statement and the parts I did read weren’t anything I wasn’t expecting really.

He’s more or less just breaking it down to “just because I love sexualizing and masturbating to cartoon children and cats being raped to death doesn’t mean I’m sexualizing those in real life 🥺” which is just a bit hard to believe because, as I have said before, drawn pornography exists to satisfy fantasies that can’t or won’t be shown involving live actors but ultimately is made as a stand in.

Attracted to a fictional character? Well, the most accurate way to satisfy that is to find drawn or written fanmade porn because the cartoon character doesn’t exist and couldn’t film a porn shoot if they wanted to. Into something like vore or inflation? Well you can’t do those in real life, but that doesn’t mean people aren’t fantasizing about that happening in real life, it just isn’t possible, that’s what the drawings are there to emulate.

So when you’re drawing little kids in a sexual situation? What is the appeal going to be for most people?

It really isn’t much deeper than that.

[mariacallous]

The other day I was driving up from Orange County to home in Los Angeles when out of nowhere, I suddenly remembered the Matzah Ball Books. There was no specific impetus to the memory; it just wandered out of nowhere. The second I put the car in park, I beelined to my bookshelf. After thoroughly destroying the recesses of my shelves (and if I’m being honest, the surrounding area), I couldn’t find them. I started second guessing myself. Were these perfect children’s books a wishful imaginary artifact I created as a young child? I finally went on the internet to discover that they did exist, but it seems that I might have been one of only a handful to read them, given that there are so few reviews. If I didn’t have specific memories of picking up the books at a local Los Angeles Jewish museum then I would be convinced that they simply weren’t real, a fever dream after all.

At this point, you’re either nodding along joyfully, or you’re completely confused. If you didn’t happen upon these in your local Jewish museum like I did, let me get you up to speed. The Matzah Ball Books are a series written by Anne-Marie Baila Asner that center around a singular character with a characteristic described with a Yiddish word. There have been additions to the collection in recent years, but the “OG” ones that my family always loved included “Noshy Boy,” “Schmutzy Girl,” “Shluffy Girl” and “Kvetchy Boy.” Now, many years after I first discovered them, there are eight picture books in the collection with “Kibbitzy Girl” finishing it up — and there might be more to come as “Keppy Girl” is advertised on the website!

The books all center around that specific character who is frequently interacting with another one of the “boys” or “girls.” In the interest of broadening my horizons, when I started walking down memory lane I didn’t pick up one of my old favorites. I instead opted for the more recently published “Kibbitzy Girl.” If we’re being completely honest, I actually related to her the most.

The book opens by introducing Kibbitzy Girl who is “very chatty and loves to joke around” and her friendship with “Keppy Girl” (keppy is an endearing way to say “head” in Yiddish). As you may imagine,  while Kibbitzy Girl loves to chat, Keppy Girl wants to study and learn. When Keppy Girl rebuffs Kibbitzy Girl in class one day, Kibbitzy Girl runs into “Schleppy Boy” in the hallway. He tells her that if she wants to impress, she ought to do the talent show because, as he puts it, “kibbitzing is [her] talent.” Buoyed by this news, Kibbitzy Girl goes home “to make a list of her silliest kibbitzes.” She even practices in front of her brother, “Kvetchy Boy,” to see if it made him happy. She saves all of her kibbitzes for the show and has the whole talent show laughing! Kibbitzy Girl realizes that her kibbitzing is a gift. After the show, Keppy Girl comes to her and explains that it isn’t that she doesn’t love Kibbitzy Girl’s kibbitzing, it’s just that she needs to learn in class! Kibbitzy Girl understands, and the two move forward in their friendship, good as new.

These books all end with a lesson. For Schmutzy Girl, she learns that if her schmutziness is bothering other people, maybe it should be addressed. Noshy Boy learns that he should maybe make healthier eating choices. Shluffy Girl learns that not every time is nap time and maybe it’s only worth it to sleep when you’re actually tired. Schleppy Boy learns that if you spend so much time being prepared, maybe you’re not actually spending time with the people that you love.

As I researched these books, I kept on coming across one main point of praise for the series: the Yiddish emblazoned on the front cover. I majored in history, so in addition to just generally bemoaning the state of the world (tag yourself, I’m Kibbitzy Girl!) I’m often thinking about what has been lost and I am often concerned that Yiddish might soon be added to the “dead languages” list. Though it is frequently used in the Haredi community — where many consider Hebrew too holy to be used in casual conversation — the common use of Yiddish of only a couple of generations ago is waning. But the reviews of these books praise them for the simplicity of the Yiddish added in the texts. In “Kibbitzy Girl,” the definition of the Yiddish is never explicitly stated. It is meant for the child (or the reader of any age) to quickly make the connection between the multiple text bubbles in the illustrations and the opening line: “Kibbitzy Girl is very chatty and loves to joke around.” The connection is seamless and though there are certain words in Yiddish that have become commonplace even among those that aren’t Jewish, these books fill in some of the lesser known words.

I love peppering “farkakte,” “altacocker” and “fresser” as I kibbitz in conversation, but there is something comforting about seeing these books with the Yiddish on their cover in a bookshop. Though these books are meant for children (and the childlike at heart), I was happy to have remembered them, and genuinely moved to learn more Yiddish from their simple stories. So if you’re looking for encouragement from someone other than Duolingo to learn Yiddish, might I suggest The Matzah Ball Books?