#it's not a callout it's just a reply to a misrepresentation

[delusion-of-negation]

do y'all remember this post from earlier?

(you'll soon see why I can't reblog it to say this)

well, apparently the op of the post decided not to read that last reblog, instead op unironically took the route I pretended to take for comedic effect (assuming that the person was sincerely suggesting that we apply op's logic to furries)

the reblog that I linked just then says it best

the person wasn't saying that furries want to fuck animals, they were using furries to point out why you're wrong, as a comparison - they don't want to fuck animals, many of them do not even have a furry kink, and that's exactly the same as shippers, it's called an example

nobody at all that I saw "admitted to" being "a bunch of sibling/child fuckers" by any stretch of the imagination, the most was somebody joking about how they shipped their adult self with their child self (I don't know if you know this op, but we haven't invented time travel), it is such a gross misrepresentation that I almost want to suggest that this could just be a troll

and for the record, something can be illegal to act upon and still be a kink, and it's also really worrisome how often op presents morality as dictated by the law... there are unjust laws

also I'm kind of sus that they said "playing the victim" in that post, since everyone was either joking around or correcting them, and correct me if I'm wrong but as far as I recall I didn't see anyone talk about victimhood except me when I mentioned my abuse (the very first link), but I don't want to put words in their mouth there

they've also said this relatively recently

this is offensive to me as a survivor - because somebody writing/drawing an entirely fictional piece with these imaginary people making out could never be anywhere near as bad as what happened to me, and even if you believe that them shipping a thing is gross or immoral you should still be able to say wholeheartedly that these two things are not the same level of bad

[what the fuck happened to the formatting? for anyone who didn't see, apparently tumblr felt like the last paragraph was so important that it needed to be repeated over half a dozen times]

and as an aside, fictional depictions of illegal and/or immoral acts are not illegal everywhere and, for the record, nobody is normalising the dynamics by writing fanfiction (especially not given that they're not mainstream, they're very often tagged with warnings and age ratings, it is expected that viewers are able to distinguish between fantasy and reality, and so forth) and nobody is "projecting trauma onto antis", it is often brought up to explain a point or context, or because antis claim a monopoly on trauma and use survivors as a shield in these convos

also what are "real life, and real people fiction"? that's a genuine question... acted media? slash fiction about real people? the phraseology is all over the place throughout these posts

edit: I'd like to be clear, I am not cherrypicking, there are so many posts like this littering their blog - for example, in this one they specifically and repeatedly target proshippers with trauma throughout, they say "supporting these ships when you’re a victim is selfish and ignorant towards other victims", they call every proship person "an abomination" and "nasty pedos", as they conflate shipping with maps towards the end, and multiple times during the post they'll say "supporting fictional incest and pedophilic relationships is insensitive to people who were victims of it" (using victims as a shield, but all over their blog they decry proshippers who are survivors and bring up that they are) and "but what’s really sad is that pro-shippers think that fictional incest and pedophilia is different from real life, when in reality it’s the same thing", the insistence that real abuse and fictional stories are exactly the same is ubiquitous on the blog, and it's a disgusting and simply incorrect view

[grcndel]

a handy dandy little guide for the rpc because the amount of bullshit callouts i’ve seen within the past few months is.  fucking staggering.

WHEN IS IT NECESSARY / APPROPRIATE TO BLOCK AND MOVE ON ??

someone is interacting with a person, character, or piece of media that isn’t especially problematic, but makes you personally uncomfortable.

someone has a differing opinion from you on an ultimately insignificant topic, but their opinion still hurts your feelings, which is valid, and you have every right to separate yourself from them over it.

someone accidentally violates your rules.

someone makes you uncomfortable, but you can’t really put your finger on why.

someone you have old, personal beef with has resurfaced on a new blog, but isn’t actively hurting anybody and seems to have changed their ways  --  you just don’t want to see them around anymore.

you just don’t like the way someone writes, portrays their character, etc. for reasons that are personal, not actually harmful to any one community.

WHEN IS IT NECESSARY / APPROPRIATE TO CONFRONT SOMEBODY PRIVATELY, IN THEIR INBOX  +  IMs, OR IN THEIR POST REPLIES ??

unintentional misrepresentations, miscommunications, misunderstandings, or unwillful ignorance  --  i.e.  someone is portraying a ____-ist stereotype but doesn’t seem to be aware they are doing so;  someone is accidentally feeding into ____-phobic rhetoric;  etc.  it’s important, for the safety and comfort of the community and for the proper representation of marginalized people, to keep these things in check  --  but with any rational person / actual ally, this means offering constructive criticism and engaging in sincere, open conversation with them over the flaw.  attacking someone or slandering them instantly for a few mistakes without ever giving them a chance to listen, grow, and change is not helping anybody.  at all.

petty disputes that can be resolved privately, such as url theft, graphics theft, etc. so long as it is a first-time offense, a basic human error, or someone who genuinely just does not understand the rpc’s etiquette yet.

essentially  --  anything that can be resolved by just informing someone that their behavior isn’t acceptable  +  allowing them the opportunity to make the necessary alterations to it is something that should be talked over, first.  civil discussions can go a really long way.  if the disrespect or offense in question isn’t malicious, there’s no need to approach the topic maliciously.  you’d be surprised at how much can be solved by just asking someone to do more research, clarify something, or change a small detail.  most good people will hear you out.  they deserve the chance to do so before you lay their shit out on the table in a callout post.

WHEN IS IT NECESSARY / APPROPRIATE TO NAMEDROP SOMEBODY PUBLICLY OR WRITE A CALLOUT POST ??

when you have repeatedly approached someone about any of the above, but they have not apologized for their actions, or have apologized disingenuously, and are continuing to commit said offensive acts.  this indicates that the person has no desire to change for the better and cares more about keeping themselves out of hot water than they do about accurately portraying their character(s) and behaving as a kind, respectful member of the rpc.

somebody who has been abusive / manipulative, and who you worry will continue to be abusive / manipulative if you don’t warn people about them, probably needs to have their name out on the line.  this is for others’ safety.  you want people to be able to refer to a callout about someone who hurts others in the community so they can then make their own rational, adult decisions about how they want to handle that information, and whether or not they still want to associate with the abuser / manipulator after the fact.

someone who is bigoted, is actively attacking and harming marginalized groups, or who is so blatantly ___-ist or ______-phobic that it could not possibly be an accident, or a misunderstanding.  this isn’t really that fine of a line.  it’s the difference between someone being inconsiderate and writing a native american character as an alcoholic, and someone straight up saying racial slurs when they don’t belong to that race.  the former is something you should probably discuss privately before taking rash action.  the latter is something that others in the rpc need to be aware of Immediately.

someone who preys on / fetishizes other members of the community, other peoples’ characters, or marginalized people, knows that this is what they’re doing, and does so regardless.  pedophiles are the primary offender, here, but there are also those nasty fucking  “orientation-”  and  “race-”  play people, as well as anybody who fetishizes / romanticizes incest or rape.

someone who expresses a blatant interest in partaking in the point above, even if they haven’t actively gone and harmed a real person yet.

TL;DR   -   CALLOUTS ARE A PREVENTATIVE MEASURE TO KEEP OTHER PEOPLE FROM GETTING HURT AND, IN A LOT OF CASES, SHOULD BE TREATED AS A LAST RESORT.  WHEN YOU CALL PEOPLE OUT WILLY-NILLY, TAKE THEIR STATEMENTS OUT OF CONTEXT TO DEMONIZE THEM, AND NEVER GIVE PEOPLE WHO HAVE MADE HONEST MISTAKES CHANCES TO CORRECT THEMSELVES, YOU’RE TRIVIALIZING ACTUAL ISSUES IN THE RPC, SUCH AS WILLFUL BIGOTRY AND THE DISTURBING PREVALENCE OF BLOGS THAT PARTICIPATE IN FETISHIZED RAPE, INCEST, CSA, ETC., AND YOU ARE MAKING IT INFINITELY MORE DIFFICULT FOR CALLOUTS CONTAINING ACTUAL, IMPORTANT WARNINGS TO GAIN TRACTION.

DON’T WRITE A FUCKING CALLOUT OVER SOMETHING YOU COULD HAVE HANDLED IN PRIVATE.  DON’T WRITE A FUCKING CALLOUT JUST TO GET BACK AT SOMEONE YOU DISLIKE.  DON’T WRITE A FUCKING CALLOUT FULL OF EXAGGERATED, CONTEXTLESS, OR STRAIGHT-UP FALSIFIED INFORMATION.  

             WRITE A CALLOUT IF IT’LL ACTUALLY KEEP OTHER PEOPLE SAFE.     

CALLOUTS CAN BE USEFUL IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES, BUT YOU HAVE TO BE CAREFUL WHEN YOU’RE HANDLING SOMETHING AS BIG AS SOMEBODY ELSE’S REPUTATION.  CALLOUTS SHOULD NOT BE THE DEFAULT METHOD OF HANDLING DISCOURSE ANYWHERE, BUT ESPECIALLY NOT IN THE RPC.