#that's the real danger of censorship I think

[homestuckconfession]

Honestly, I think it’s inauthentic to read homestuck censored, especially on your first read. It’s like putting your [you, general, not you, confession blog owner] head in the sand because the author said something uncomfortable. If you’re unwilling to confront the art as it was made, what’s the point in reading it? You’re doing a disservice to yourself by refusing to acknowledge the truth of how the comic was written. Also. The future-arachnidsGrip joke is funny.

.

[wreckedhoney]

^^ "coming to the conclusion that positioning the "can people enjoy things that would be immoral IRL in their fiction" debate as a proship v anti fandom debate is akin to pretending that "should we have the death penalty" is a discussion that only matters in Death Note discourse"

not proshipper not anti but a secret third thing (person who has a career in the media and, through covering legislative politics, has watched "associating with problematic fiction or entertainment is an indicator of moral degeneracy" rapidly become a mainstream GOP position that they are encoding in legislation to target the queer community under the guise of protecting children, thus coming to the conclusion that positioning the "can people enjoy things that would be immoral IRL in their fiction" debate as a proship v anti fandom debate is akin to pretending that "should we have the death penalty" is a discussion that only matters in Death Note discourse — the extent and manner to which fiction affects reality is an issue that is immediately relevant to today's US politics, and to summarize my opinions on the matter in fandom terms would be to diminish the ways this debate is affecting america Right The Fuck Now. and i have stopped taking "this person is bad for shipping the wrong anime thing and being horny about it" in any sort of good faith ever since I saw it literally used as part of a GOP smear campaign against a transgender state legislator in an attempt to defend the right from backlash after they used their supermajority in the Montana house to prevent her from speaking on the floor. Anyway I think everyone on this site, especially Americans, could benefit from ceasing to think in proship v anti vocabulary and instead developing coherent political positions on the nature of fiction that do not directly align with current fascist political tactics)

[literallymechanical]

Just finished Alien Clay, the new standalone novel by Adrian Tchaikovsky. Reads a bit like Annihilation meets Baru Cormorant. I've been on a real Tchaikovsky kick this year, and I think this one might be my favorite.

Far-future science fiction where political dissidents are put on one-way sleeper ships to lethally dangerous exoplanets as prison labor. The protagonist, Professor Arton Daghdev, has been shipped off to Imno 27g, colloquially known as "Kiln," as part of the Mandate's crackdown on "seditious" academia.

As one would expect from Tchaikovsky, the book is equal parts political screed and speculative biology worldbuilding exercise, both of which he knocks out of the park. Alien Clay is one of the more overtly radical Tchaikovsky books I've read so far – the story is divided into three parts, "Liberté," "Égalité," and "Fraternité," it's not exactly subtle.

I think this book rises above the rest because of the protagonist. Daghdev's first-person narration is playful, wry, and bitter all at once, and the core of his revolutionary ideas center around state control of the philosophy of science, more so than literal academic censorship. That's a subject I don't see tackled often in fiction.

If you're a fan of fungal body horror, political revolution, and academics who can take a punch, this is the book for you.

[letters-to-lgbt-kids]

My dear lgbt+ kids, 

If you sometimes come across the term “banned books” but don’t really know what it means, here’s a simple little introduction to the topic: 

“Banned books” refers to books that have been censored or removed from libraries, schools, or bookstores due to objections from certain groups or individuals.

When we read that definition, I think a really common and understandable response is: „whoa, okay, these must be really bad books full of dangerous ideas!“… and in some way, that’s true. 

Because, you see, to someone with a homophobic worldview, any book with a gay character is really bad and dangerous. And to a child abuser, any book that educates children on consent is really bad and dangerous. 

Among the top reasons for book bans are lgbt+ content, sexual content (including sexual education or education on sexual abuse), themes of racism and themes like drug use or addiction. Over the years, many books with significant cultural and educational value have faced bans - and this continues to be an issue all around the world, including in the US. 

When books are banned, it restricts the access to information people (including kids and teenagers) need to understand themselves and others. This negatively affects queer people and other marginalized groups (for example people of color or disabled people) but it also impacts everyone else. Diversity in literature enriches our understanding of the diversity of real life. It helps to build empathy, compassion, kindness and understanding. Access to different stories and viewpoints is vital for an inclusive society. 

Censoring queer books in particular also normalizes the message that queer experiences are inappropriate or “dirty” - which, again, is really beneficial to homophobes and transphobes. If it feels safe for them to say that queer books harm children, it paves the way for all other kinds of discrimination and harassment of queer people. 

Now you may think “this all makes sense when it comes to books with gay characters! But didn’t you also mention stuff like sexual abuse and addiction and racism up there? These are indeed bad and dangerous things!” 

I think this is another really common thought. These things happen in real life and it can be uncomfortable to even think about them. But that’s precisely why we need books about those “uncomfortable” topics! 

We may not like the idea that a child hears about racism or abuse - but in a world where kids can experience racism and abuse, they also need to be able to read about racism and abuse. They need to be able to say “this is what’s happening to me and this is not okay”. We need to be able to name bad things when they happen to us or when we witness them happening to others. We need an understanding of and a language for bad things. That’s the only way to fight the bad things. 

Another thought you may have is “Okay, and now what? I don’t have the power to do anything about all this anyway”, and honestly I wouldn’t blame you for that one either. Hearing about book bans (on top of all the other negative stuff we hear about) can feel really depressing. But there are things you can do to push back and help keep diverse stories accessible - even if you are young or have limited resources! 

Some ideas: 

use your public library (many public libraries actively resist censorship and make banned books available!) 

use a digital library (services like Libby and Project Gutenberg offer free access to many books) 

look out for online petitions or letter-writing campaigns by organizations that oppose book bans (for example PEN in America) 

look up if there are any “little free libraries” in your area (free book-sharing box operating on the honor system: anyone can take or leave a book for no cost) 

look up if there are any book swapping events in your area 

take part in reading groups, book clubs etc. (either in person or online) 

And of course the big one: if you can afford to buy books - make a point to buy banned books (or more generally, queer books and books from marginalized authors and books on topics that frequently get banned)! As a starting point, you can find lists of banned books online. Wikipedia has one, for example. 

If you have a bigger budget, you could even buy multiple copies and put some in your local “little free library” or bring them to book-swapping events or gift them to friends etc! (You could also ask your local public library (or school library or prison library or youth center or women’s shelter etc) if they take book donations, but you may want to hold off on buying before they say yes - not all of them can accept donations!).

Happy reading and resisting!

With all my love, 

Your Tumblr Dad 

[blanketforcas]

Would you call yourself a proshipper then? Are you fine with people shipping incest, pedophilia, abuse etc? because what proshipping really stands for is having zero restrictions as to what is allowed in shipping, even harmful and taboo things, and if you aren’t fine with all that, or “pro” that, I’d be seriously cautious using that term. Because that’s what proshipping actually is, not what “antis” have made it out to be.

yes anon i don't believe thought crimes are real.

and you know what makes life so easy for us folks who are easily squicked out by "problematic" content? the fact that you can simply not go looking for it and block the tags you need to block!

there have always been people who enjoy things in fiction (fiction!) that they would never even consider in real life. that is and has never been a problem. the actual harmful thing is when people advocate for censorship cause censorship only leads to people finding loopholes. and you know what will suck for you and me, anon, when it comes to that? those tags we blocked won't work anymore.

i'd encourage you to research the dangers of censorship, cause that is what you're promoting. you think you're being helpful but what you're actually doing by posing the question "what content is so harmful we should ban it and shame everyone who engages in it?" is giving a gun to the oppressor who will eventually think that you're too problematic too.

[anonymousredactedconfessions]

Let's have a talk, shall we?

Major Trigger Warning for rape, false accusations, and mentions of child sex crimes

I let you guys get away with a lot of shit. I let you be a little bitter, or mean spirited, or pissed off. I let you guys vent and let out grievances and complain for the sake of complaining. And i do all of this because it is important to have a space that you can do so without fear of judgement, it is unhealthy for you to bottle up negative emotions. I provide this in a public space because with the way this fandom is, if I didn't many of you would be pressured into not doing so at all. This fandom has a habit of ostracizing those who have differing opinions and interpretations, those who wish to critique the art they consume, those who have unpopular opinions, and all of it is done with the utmost aggression and vitriol. The things that have been said to some of the people in this fandom genuinely makes me lose faith in humanity if i think about it too hard.

This blog exists explicitly to counteract that. I refuse to encourage or enable it. What you are doing is actively dangerous, and I won't be having it in the space I curate within this fandom.

If you haven't noticed, this is one of my rules:

It means that you are not allowed to come in my inbox and accuse people of serious harm over this fiction.

You will not come and accuse people of something as egregious as rape apologia in my inbox. You will not accuse people of rape, abuse, assault, or child abuse/rape/exploitation in my inbox.

These are serious real world issues, and the reason they are bad is because they cause direct harm to real living people who can feel pain and can be violated. Your disgust holds absolutely no ethical weight. At All. You should have the mental, emotional, and intellectual capability to understand the ethical difference between allegories for rape, stories with/about rape, erotica of rape, and actual real life people being raped. Making accusations of this weight over make believe is abhorrent, and as a matter of fact, it shows that you don't treat these tragedies with the weight or gravity that they deserve. If you believe that it is appropriate to accuse someone of violating another person like so because of the creation of or opinions about art, then you have some serious learning and growing to do as a person if you wish to navigate these topics with any level of maturity or respect towards victims.

There is no good that comes out of accusations such as these. They only ever serve to:

Demonstrate to victims that the tragedy of their abuse is as trivial as fanfiction/art that you deem nasty (but is ultimately ethical), or even something as inconsequential as someones' love for a fictional character.

Shame those who love these characters, or this art, or creating, into hiding their opinions for fear of harassment and serious accusations when they have done zero harm by enjoying it.

Stifle creation and participation in fandoms.

Limit the spread of ideas, interpretations, critique/criticism, and general opinions in the fandom, which just turns fandoms into boring echo chambers devoid of variety and creativity.

Encourage actual censorship and moral policing. (More on that on this reblog by @escapedaudios on a post of mine. Thank you Escaped for your two cents, they are much appreciated 💖)

Spread the incredibly harmful idea that people are defined by the art they enjoy. You cannot accurately judge a person’s values or morals based on what tropes and themes they enjoy in fiction. You create an environment and culture incredibly dangerous for vulnerable individuals (like minors) when you tell them that they can know who is safe to trust based on whether they consume "the good kind" or "the bad kind" of fiction. This makes it so very easy for predators to virtue signal about fiction to lure in potential victims to abuse.

The majority of you are very good and well behaved when it comes to this, but the amount of people i have had come into my inbox and accuse others of being rapists with no evidence other than "they made X" or "they like Y" is not zero. And i will not be satisfied until it is.

This is all i have to say about the subject.

[proshippers-against-censorship]

https://www.tumblr.com/proshippers-against-censorship/762170991820652544/idc-if-a-teenager-has-sexual-thoughts-or-thirsts?source=share You can delete this if you want, but I think it should be mentioned just how fucking harmful the idea that children expressing sexual attraction towards an underaged FICTIONAL character is because that exact mindset literally had me planning my suicide at fourteen because I was convinced I was ontologically evil for thinking Ash Ketchum is kind of hot. Like it sounds kind of funny when I say it out loud but I'm serious when I say that I genuinely was. Like I'm good now obviously, but wow. It literally could've been it for me because I was so desperate to conform to these standards of purity and thought crime that the internet forces people to conform to

This is a topic that I feel needs to be way more focused upon, definitely.

Children shouldn't be condemned for liking children. And it's really, REALLY fucking weird to say that kids should only feel attraction to adults.

I'd almost dare to say that such a thing sets real kids up to be in danger from predators.

[pastryjay]

I know some OFMD fans have become more biased against Izzy content, Izzy fans, and Con himself due to two years of discourse, and I get it, but that is not an excuse for this. Some people have to be more careful/ respectful of the way they talk about Con O'Neill.

Context: he streamed a workshop about creative insults titled 'How To f*ck off with Con O'Neill'. This was explicitly stated to be for people 18+ only. At one point, he was seen briefly wearing only boxer shorts and a t-shirt in his own home. This was in a non-sexual context - he was just sitting down. Now, he's being called out for sexual harrassment and indecent exposure because of that.

Firstly, i'd like to say that anybody loudly offended by this 'incident' has made it clear that they didn't attend the workshop, and those who did attend are fine with it. The Venn diagram of people who wanted to attend that event and people who love Con's cheeky humour is a circle. Con knows his audience and his audience know him. You, random person who doesn't like Con much anyway, don't have to like it but it making you uncomfortable doesn't mean it is morally wrong.

It's important to note that Con O'Neill is open about being queer and proud about that. He is not shy about his sexuality or willing to censor his queerness e.g. he's not afraid to make suggestive (but not overly explicit) jokes or show his support for queer fanart. That is a good thing! It reeks of homophobia seeing him getting accused of being perverted just for existing as himself. It's not the first time either. In the past, OFMD fans have called him gross, a freak and creepy for sharing suggestive fanart to his Instagram.

It's wild to see all the focus on a cheeky, harmless moment when there are so, so many real issues in the world. Countless people are out there committing real sexual harrassment daily. Focusing on this queer man over nothing is dangerous. Accusing queer people of preying on those around them just by existing is literally right-wing rhetoric. Especially as there is a bigger push than ever from right-wing politicians to paint queer people as dangerous predators. Censorship, homophobia and puritanism is not welcome in the fandom for a show about queer joy.

Lastly, To the people mad about this: Why are you fine with anybody posting thirst traps online or people existing in swimwear in public, but you cry about 'not consenting' to seeing a queer man in boxer shorts and a shirt? Why are you upset about Con doing this, but love it when Rhys Darby posts shirtless photos to his Insta stories for fans? Why is it okay for most people to be comfortable in their sexuality/ their own body... but not Con?

I know the kind of people who need to see this probably won't take any of it on board, but it is really uncomfortable to see the way some people are talking. If many people like myself (I have been very critical of some Izzy fans and mostly avoid Izzy content) disagree with you, maybe you should re-think what you are saying.

[homucifer-ryotan]

The lack of awareness

I like how this online journalist of this article acts like that the only criticism people who aren't Rand Paul have on KOSA is the censorship of LGBT content and left wing opinions online (and even dismissing that by saying "KOSA is about design features not censorship") and not all the others problems with this bad internet bill like the invasion of online privacy for everyone, not just kids and teenagers in American and how it make America look bad and hypocritical.

It's like she fails to realize that if KOSA pass, it will negatively affect her job as online journalist (especially if Democrats win the election, since this particular web journalist seems to be right wing) and she will have show strangers (American politicians) her ID just so she can do her job. Not to mention the real issue with hackers.

Journalists like her should be biggest opposers against KOSA.

I agree that minors (and some adults too) should spend less time online, but KOSA isn't fix that problem, and when minors need to use the internet for things like school projects, they will have to risk their personal information getting data breached thanks to KOSA.

Please don't stop calling to show opposition against KOSA.

[needtoloveoutloud]

let's stop using the word puritan for fandoms okay

Hi Anon :)

I'm guessing you're referring to this post I made a few days ago about the pro ship/anti ship discourse?

Why does it bother you if I use this word specifically? (I'm honestly asking, not trying to pick a fight or anything.)

According to Oxford Languages Dictionary, these are the definitions of the word:

Apart from the actual English Protestant group from a few centuries ago (which would then be capitalized if specifically referred to), it means the following:

“A person with censorious moral beliefs, especially about self-indulgence and sex.”

If there's another word for forbidding or trying to suppress or prohibit certain media content (it doesn't matter if it's books/stories, news, films, etc.) besides “censorship” feel free to use it interchangeably, but I'm not sure there is.

Possible or already existing censorship, while more important in a news-related context, is still an incredibly important topic regarding other content, such as books and stories, published online on sites like tumblr, AO3, Wattpad, FanFiction.net, etc. The sheer amount of stories on there is impossible for actual humans to filter through, which means that algorithms would need to be set up to automatically delete stories when certain criteria are met. Any form of automated algorithm can and will be faulty, however, which means that even stories that wouldn't theoretically “have to be deleted” (according to the AI-powered algorithm, at least) will slip through the cracks and get deleted without warning.

This happened before to Wattpad and FanFiction.net. There was a massive, and I mean massive purge of stories in 2002 and 2012. Only this year, it happened to Wattpad, too. A lot of authors and readers lost their stories immediately, without warning.

The US, for example, has a bill called KOSA (“Kids Online Safety Act”). It works under the disguise (I am absolutely sure that there are some 100% valid points in the bill, though, I am not from the US and have no legal background, so feel free to correct me) of child safety, but is pretty much an overreaching government censorship bill (again, I'm going off of people who know way more about the legalities of all of this). I'll quote someone from a reddit thread that addresses the consequences of the bill.

“It is technically a violation of free speech and the 1st amendment, but that's not gonna stop them. This bill would require that internet users upload their government ID to access any site, and state attorney generals could sue to remove any site that contains content deemed “harmful” to children. This would include fanfiction and fanfiction sites.”

I hope you immediately see the issue and danger of having to upload an ID to be allowed to merely access any website. Not to only view certain things (for example, I wouldn't have any issues if you have to verify your age via ID if, let's say you wanna order cigarettes or alcohol online or something) but to simply view the content and information on the page.

“I have to mention that this bill is dangerous for more reasons than just censoring fan fiction. The government will be able to censor ANYTHING - such as abortion info, LGBTQ+ resources, and any content relating to protesting or organizing. They will also be able to ID you if you search for any of these topics. And VPNs will not work.”

This. This right there is where puritan beliefs and movements get us, long-term and short-term. It has happened before, and it will happen again if we do NOT use our critical thinking and are able to differentiate between written, fictional content, and real life. The US isn't the only country that is considering implementing such laws, Canada has something similar going on with “Bill S-210”.

Internet censorship, which often starts/started with banning not only certain political content, but also under the guise of “protecting the public” is an issue in a LOT of countries and endangers the safety of various groups. China, Palestine, Indonesia, Armenia, Saudi Arabia, etc., Turkmenistan, North Korea (strongly assumed), Turkmenistan, etc. for example.

I know that you only criticized the word “puritan” and I am completely going above what you probably meant, Anon, (and I hope you don't feel attacked or think I put words in your mouth) but I hope to at least make you consider my point of the slippery slope and dangers of the gateway puritan censorship issue. It often starts with the government's reasoning of protecting their citizens or children from something, when long-term and historically speaking, that never ever leads to something good and sets society back by a mile regarding the acceptance of certain issues or free information gathering on various topics and safe exploring (of, for example, sexual topics, or learning about their own sexuality, etc.) for minors.

In my opinion and experience, it's better they figure out what they might like or not like in the safety of stories. Sure, minors are impressionable, and mature content should 100% be tagged as such, including potential trigger warnings, but if done right by the author, it can also educate. Or deliberately show unsafe behavior — which requires media literacy and critical thinking, which can ONLY be gained by consuming the media and analyzing afterwards.

That does not mean that I condone 12-year-olds reading stuff about incest, bestiality, (all in a fictional setting!), or whatever is out there. Not at all! BUT: it's the parents' responsibility to be in charge of teaching their children about internet safety, and perhaps even monitoring (to a healthy extent) what they consume and open discussions about what their children consume.

Authors are nobody's parents but their own children's (if they have any), so it is NOT their responsibility to take care of that. Tagging properly and warning the audience about the content, however, is. No discussion. But this is not just important for the protection of minors, but the mental well-being of adults, too.

I'm open to discussing this topic even more. There are a LOT more nuances and valid points and concerns from both sides, so to speak, but I'll be honest: I'm from a country where the media and government swayed the public's opinion about a certain group a LOT by censoring others in the past, and it literally lead to the death of millions. So critical thinking regarding any type of censorship (even if that scale I just referred to cannot be compared at all, I am well aware of that) and being vigilant about wanting to ban certain media or content under the guise of “protecting” others is something very, very high on my personal priority list because as soon as you learn how easily stuff like this gets out of hand, even if it starts sort of innocently, makes you kind of aware and sensitizes your for a lot of stuff.

I'm sorry if my rambling is all over the place and I hope my reply is readable — English is not my first language, so please excuse it if stuff is unclear or there are any mistakes. And I'm sorry for going completely off the rails. You maybe simply took an issue with the word “puritan” itself. If that's the case, please tell me what exactly your issue with it is, maybe we can talk specifically about this topic then, and not the whole censorship debate I started just now. Maybe we're even on the same page regarding a lot of things.

Take care. 🤍

[dallasgallant]

Time period post: Teenage culture

Now “youth culture” has been a thing since the early 20th century but it really began to take off and see “teenage” as its own thing in the 1950s. Both as a new group to advertise to but also as a distinct time in life. Now while it was still a relatively new demographic the 1960s is when things really began to kick off and sort of the height of the age, rebellion, catering and so on and you can sort of tell a lot of it was throwing at the wall and seeing what sticks. Shows, music, products etc.

This is just a quick post on a bunch of topics related to that, but for further looking into

- “Age of teen angst”

- “Teen car culture”

- 1960s hangouts

- dissolving censorship/more freedom of the time

Teenage rebellion! Distancing from parents, wanting to have fun and danger and change tradition. (Especially with the way the world was changing at the time with social justice and technological advancement) Clothes started to be less conservative, hair got bigger and longer, kids got more openly touchy and expressive etc.

Cars have always been a part of rebellious youth culture since their invention, they represent both a literal freedom in being able to travel and sexual freedom (unchaperoned, away and private - another aspect to reach a peak in the 50s and 60s with drive ins and look out/make out points)

Subcultures were also huge, not to be mixed with today’s “aesthetics” a subculture isn’t a short form thing based souly on appearance. Its looks, beliefs/attitudes, often music taste etc. where you were in the world and social class has a lot to do with it. (For examples Greasers being working class, city/some suburban, like rockabilly etc)

Regionality-

Speaking of place! The world in the 60s was not even close to as interconnected as we are today, sure you may get a little more of the world news on tv but it wasn’t this melding we have. Culture of counties, regions, states etc were much more distinct (same goes for accents) and while more things were shared across the world things weren’t universal.

Being from Tulsa Oklahoma you’re going to be more concerned with Tulsa Oklahoma and what’s done there than say New York. You’re not going to know everything or care about everything. There was more local and community focus. And perhaps a much more optimistic view of the future in SOME regards, huge time for technology, space travel, social change etc.

Where you are also affects availability, you’re not exactly going to have the hot new fashion in small city Oklahoma. Especially not just ordering it off Amazon- people traveled, waited for things to come, order from magazines etc.

Food-

Fast food is not brand new but is still relatively, they’re not nearly as common as they are now days. Most of the time when going on a road trip, people would still pack food rather than have the expectation of stopping at a drive thru all the time. However it was coming more common.

Some of the wacky gross foods of the post ww2 period were still “in” and the same goes for some Great Depression recipes. You could also find a lot of stuff in a can or processed, precooked etc. they were convient and exciting at the time… I’d bet the boys like a lot of stuff we’d consider “gross” tv dinners were also a big hit.

Dating-

This differs across class lines but there was still a lot of older rituals that were still followed in the 60s depending on who you were, these sort of holdovers from “courting.” Stuff like promise rings would be much more of a Soc thing than for greasers— though I think giving jackets or other items that aren’t a specific thing like a promise ring are general.

Dating was becoming its own thing for a few decades and didn’t have to result in marriage. Relationships were simultaneously slow with steps and milestones (1st base, 2nd base etc. lol- aren’t “official” but sort of a real thing) but quick as it’s also a thing to marry pretty damn fast and young… shotgun or otherwise.

There was a more “loose” idea on dating and relationships while some more traditional elements also remained, again it depends on who you are, where you are, class, race etc.

[mayapapaya33]

Knowledge and Power

I've been thinking about this for a while. They are in Vasselheim now, Is the Horn of Orcus ok? Has it been unsealed? Did someone manage to sneakily steal it when the solstice happened? I NEED TO KNOW MATTHEW!!! I'm mid episode 104. I know we have a lot going on right now, but Matt keeps dropping hints about what's happening elsewhere in the world, like Desirat being released from their prison, all of Vasselheim's dead rising, stuff like that. I need to know about the Horn! Come on Matt, give us a problem for Campaign 4! lol. It's great storytelling, fleshing out the reality that Bells Hells are one group of many fighting the good fight and a lot of shit is currently on fire right now. I've loved every bit of it.

The Horn of Orcus was also the first and most prominent time the concept of dangerous knowledge came up in the game. Not just in a "knowledge is power" way, but in that, by knowing the information you are giving power to something bad and opening yourself up to trouble, literally just by possessing the knowledge in your brain. It's such an interesting concept to explore in a magic setting. How knowledge and worship and power intertwine.

I myself am very anti-censorship Irl, but the very rare times it's justified in my opinion are for things like recipes for horrific biological or chemical weapons, stuff like that. That concept can be broadened in the context of magic, like in C2 when reading that book gave Beau and Caleb magic eye herpes lmfao. Usually I am very much on the freedom of information side of things, so Ludinus threatening to share information was a bit of a meh threat to me personally at first. While it would be very disruptive in the short term, and people may indeed kill each other over it, I do think historical truths should be freely disseminated, not hidden for fear that people are too stupid to handle it. (Even though people ARE often too stupid to handle it, we have a right to our own stupidity I feel).

What I'm wondering is if Ludinus is making a subtler play than they are imagining. Yes divide and conquer is a good tactic, and that information will help him get people disagreeing. But more than that, shaking the faith of mass swathes of people all at once CAN'T be good for a Godly constitution. I don't think it's just about swaying people to his cause, I think he's trying to strategically weaken the God's power base before the big throw down with Predathos. Kind of like what Vecna did/ tried to do in late C1. So stopping Ludinus from sharing this information might end up being VERY important in the grand scheme of things.

Yes people already knew the Gods destroyed Aeor, and I think it was even known that the Primes and Betrayers formed a temporary truce to handle the threat. But knowing that information academically and seeing it firsthand are two VERY different things. Seeing the Primes care about and bicker with the Betrayers like... well...siblings, may come as a slap in the face to the truly devout. Also how many people actually knew that about Aeor or that Aeor even existed? Not everyone is proficient in history nor religious studies. Not to drag this too much into the real world, but how many religious people actually read whatever book they claim faith in cover to cover and know the whole history of it? It's definitely not all of them lol.

I bet there's plenty of religious people in Exandria that don't know shit about Aeor. Most people in Vasselheim probably would, because that place is THE God city on Exandria and survived the Calamity, but everywhere else? Unless they were specifically interested in religious history, why would they know it? So the reveal has the potential to be very impactful still, both for it's visceral feeling in exposing a peak into the God's relationships, and their deeds, and it will still be new info for some.

[elumish]

You know, a while ago, I saw a post that was something along the lines of "On Tumblr, you could write a post saying 'I like pancakes' and people would reply with 'So you hate waffles???' like nah man that's a whole new sentence!".

These anon you've been getting are really proving the point of that post's OP. I'm sorry you have to deal with Tumblr's often rather mediocre reading comprehension.

FWIW I follow you for being one of the people with actually nuanced takes instead of that weird thing most of this site has got going on, where it's either "If you EVER even think of a character who did ANYTHING wrong in any remotely positive light you're irredeemably evil" on one side and "If you ever so much as imply that maybe there's some things people write or put in shows that can cause harm to real people, you're irredeemably evil.". I hope they all grow out of their black and white thinking. Or at least learn to leave you and others alone.

I appreciate it.

I think, if I'm to give a little bit of grace now that my frustration has died down a very small amount, that people have become so conditioned to reading one argument that they assume everything that looks even remotely similar is the same thing.

On my dashboard, most of what I see is people arguing the same exact points as the anons, usually using fiery overgeneralized language to rile people up about the dangers of censorship online. And so if all you see is people getting mad over and over about this point, written in a way that paints everyone who is critical of any content in fiction in the same broad brush, you are going to start to believe that it's all one thing.

And they're not entirely wrong about the dangers of censorship and harassment--there are, obviously, broad efforts across the United States (and I'm sure other places, but the U.S. is what I'm most familiar with) to censor certain types of literature based on conservative fears of their content.

There have also been efforts, generally well-intended, from the left to reduce "problematic" content. While some of these have been great (e.g., sensitivity readers), others have been abused, often by people who lacked the cultural competency to understand what they were reading or who wanted an excuse to harass people. Many of these efforts, especially those that were implemented most ineffectively or most abused, were focused on the criticism and removal of writers or existing content.

I understand the sensitivity, I really do. I also disagree with efforts that have happened across the board to remove wide swaths of content just because they made someone a little uncomfy.

And yes, I do talk about content moderation, because I also recognize the difference between "made someone a little uncomfy" and "we are welcoming to Nazi content" and unfortunately certain places err too much on the latter side rather than the former in the name of universal free speech with no exceptions.

But most of what I talk about is writing, because I'm a writing blog. I do want to change how people approach writing, because I believe fundamentally in our responsibility as human beings to 1) do what we can to avoid harm and 2) do what we can to improve the world around us. And if that means that there's less of certain content, like magic that relies on biological essentialism and love stories involving SS commanders, then I'm okay with that.

[dumplingprincessextraordinaire]

I’m going to give myself some time sit on it and think more, maybe look for more perspectives and info on it but as of now, my gut reaction to pro paraphilia stuff is kinda “ummm idk about that” at the moment. To be clear y’all aren’t on my DNI list, I’m just iffy/nervous about it. Because my comfort and acceptance currently goes toward FICTIONAL taboos (hence my proship stance) but people who have attractions toward irl beings that can’t consent …. Yeah even if you’re anti contact I don’t know if it’s a good idea to advertise that you’re still supportive of them as people. But idk. Maybe “paraphilia” isn’t as scary as it sounds.

But recently a pro-para blog followed me (I won’t be saying names because they didn’t harm me and also backed off when I asked them to not interact with me) and told me straight up they were a map (I don’t even like that word, would rather just call them pedos to be honest) but were anti contact. Like okay, it’s great you’re not hurting anyone but to be honest I still don’t want pedos or people who are attracted to real animals anywhere near me.

Yes, to be fair, not EVERYONE uses darkship or kinks as a coping mechanism but let’s be honest, a lot of us still do. I use darkship and lolicon stuff to vent and explore what I’ve been through as a teen. So seeing people in the proship community saying “well I still support people with harmful paraphilias, just not contact” STILL makes me very uncomfortable?? Scared?

And on a greater level even just beyond me, I also think it’s going to make it ten times harder to advocate for proshipping. I mean it’s already kinda hard to explain that pro/darkshipping is ultimately harmless and non-toxic, but yall advertising being “pro” for anything to do with irl attractions (harmful attractions, to be clear) MAKES IT EVEN HARDER AND FRUSTRATING WHEN CONVERSING WITH NORMIES/NONPROSHIPPERS.

Lastly, when it comes to people struggling with irl attractions that are dangerous or sexual disorders in that category, I don’t necessarily know if it’s our place? Like yeah we can debate and advocate all day long for expressing fiction freely and anti-censorship but most of us still aren’t mental health professionals and idk if we should be putting out a stance on shit like this. I mean. Irl people with dangerous, harmful attractions to irl potential victims.

I hope this post didn’t come across as mean or attacking anyone because I don’t want it to. I think I have a few propara moots following me (I’m only just now kinda learning what it is) so if y’all can educate me, the comments and reblogs are y’all’s place to do it. Maybe this whole propara thing isn’t even as big in the proship community as it looks or maybe “pro para” isn’t even as scary as I’m seeing it currently. Im open to opinions and education what not. But ofc personal attacks and stuff will be blocked!

Edit:to be clear—I still don’t want irl pedos or zoophiles to interact. But propara blogs in general may, as I’m not saying that automatically makes someone pedo/zoo/whatever else is harmful.

[crowvert-bird]

quick warning: i dont support the creators of dandys world and their actions (roxs (allegedly) EXTREMELY questionable actions towards minors, the (alleged) censorship of people talking about roxs actions in their discord server, and their (alleged) constant downplaying of the controversy just to name a few), i just like the game, thats it

also third batch!!! i think im gonna make fully rendered art of them eventually or 3d models if im bored enough, i kinda miss the 50 hours id spend making the lineart and shading ngl

first batch , second batch

o yea and i gave some of them new abilities cuz i felt like it and sometimes their design was fundamentally different enough from the original that itd be better to have new abilities than try to figure out how the redesign would use their canon ability (like redesigned toodles), if i dont mention an ability thats kept in the redesign its probably been replaced with another one, and im calling canon twisteds by CT!(name) and the redesigned twisteds by RT!(name)

twisted toodles: third worst jumpscare

- Can now see as far as CT!Pebble can. As slow as CT!Finn when roaming, but rolls REALLY fast like a bowling ball when chasing. The rest of her stats are the same.

- A little bit before her roll starts, she splashes some ichor on the ground near the player (to basically tell them the direction of her roll). It's close enough that they'll be able to see it even in a blackout without light upgrades, but far enough that you'd have to pay a bit of attention to notice it.

- When she's chasing a player but ends up going out of a specific range from them (the range is a VERY big circle), she stops, repositions herself really fast and rolls again to run over the player. If she hits a player, she keeps rolling until she hits a wall. Then, when she hits a wall she immediately loses aggro, gets blinded and can't move for like 2 seconds before getting back up to roam again. If she doesn't hit a wall while she's chasing a player, she keeps rolling.

twisted tisha: figure from doors real

- She's slower than average now. She still cleans floors, but now she cleans ceilings too!! The rest of her stats are the same.

- Can extend her legs really far, to the point where she can touch the ceiling with her hands. Leading to her being able to look above walls and down at you.

- She can now feel the vibrations your footsteps make as long as you're near her, even when you're walking and she's really high up. She won't attack you immediately, she'll just pause her cleaning for a bit and look in the direction of the vibrations (there's a short delay between her noticing the vibrations and her looking). If she sees you, she'll start chasing you like a normal twisted while retracting her legs to be at her normal height.

twisted teagan: more dangerous than twisted shelly (oops)

im splitting this into 3 parts for each character in the tea set

disurf

- Is as fast as CT!Toodles but is always hiding in a corner.

- Runs away from players when RT!Teagan starts attacking, bringing RT!Teagan with her to hide in another corner. Disurf actively dodges players as much as she can while still keeping her speed, so she sometimes ends up running into players making them lose a heart. Disurf keeps running away until her attention span runs out, at that point she's gonna start looking for the nearest corner to hide in.

teagan

- Her line of sight defaults to where Disurf's line of sight is. When Disurf sees a player, RT!Teagan looks in the same direction as her for like 1 second. If RT!Teagan doesn't see anyone, she goes back to her default line of sight.

- Only attacks when she has direct line of sight with a player. She attacks by throwing twisted Cupbits at you. You can dodge them by hiding behind walls, or, if she's far enough, by stepping aside so that the Cupbit flies past you.

cupbits

- They're average speed, never break when thrown, and have a shorter than average attention span. They have no special abilities, only a regular attack.

- They die after 7 seconds by falling apart and turning into pure ichor, then that ichor gets smaller and smaller and disappears. There's no limit on how many twisted Cupbits can be spawned at once.

AND:

- They're a hivemind, if one of them sees you, all of them do. When you get seen by one of them:

All twisted Cupbits have their attention spans refreshed, but only if the player that was seen is the same player they're chasing.

- Disurf will avoid running in your direction and will instead do a full 180 and run the other way (even if there's players in that direction).

EVEN LONGER RANT UNDER CUT but i explain my twisted designs, the actual reasons to y i dont like the canon designs, and other shit i guess idk (in that order)

my twisted design process (for all twisteds):

i realllly didnt like the way i handled the twisted designs in literally every single one of my redesigns (except for poppy, box and lamp i guess??) so i made some rules for how to make them so its not just "make them big and sharp and splash them with ichor", its canon divergent yes but its really cool i think so its staying:

the twisted versions of every character are mutated versions of themselves that lean so very hard into their main personality trait or role in a very negative way, to the point that theyre almost like mean-spirited parodies of themselves (carries over to how their special twisted abilities work too), theyre waay more likely to get violent too (u kno, so that theyre twisted versions of themselves)

patches of ichor appear at spots that changed from the original design (the ichor comes first, then the mutations), or their clothes absorbed it cuz the ichor kinda acts like water that makes worse stains, or they got filled up by ichor in some way

i headcanon that these versions of the twisteds would sometimes reenact episodes from the tv show or some of the routines theyd go through while the place was still running, but waaaaay more tense and sometimes depressing cuz of their mutations and very big personality shift

most likely reasons to y i rlly dont like the canon designs:

i looked at some more fanart and i legit cant tell if i actually dont like the character designs or if i just dont like the games artstyle wat the hell ;-; LIKE THEY LEGIT LOOK PRETTY GOOD WHEN OTHER PEOPLE DRAW THEM!!

BUT I FINALLY FOUDN THE WORDS TO PROPERLY EXPLAIN Y I AHTE THE CANON DESIGNS SO MUCH!!! its cuz a lot of them feel very lazy and generic, like the only thing making them stand out is the fact that theyre a dandys world character and not just a character, like theyre simple yes thats cool and that works really well for a character like pebble and sprout, but most of them are TOO simple cuz they usually have like only 1 range of color in their design (tisha is blue to white, brightney is dark red to white, shelly is brown to cream, while sprout is red to white and green, and rodger is black to brown and purple)

but some of them have things in their design that just dont work (finn, poppy, brightney), maybe its cuz stuff are in bad places (poppys bow on her head) or they just dont look good (finn), wat makes this even worse is that some characters like tisha and brightney and shrimpo have patterns to try and make their design more interesting i gues?? but it just doesnt work and genuinely makes it feel more generic :(

so i think the real problem with dandys worlds designs is a few things:

1. that theres not enough diversity in their colors if u get wat i mean, like seriously most of the skins do this (having different colors to make sure not everything is visually samey)!!!

imo the biggest example of "not enough color diversity" is vee and astro and their skins, like they look SO MUCH BETTER when theyre not just "green, black" and "purple to cyan, black, white" (i wouldve put teagans skin in here too if there was just slightly more yellow), it doesnt even have to be colors that are on the opposite sides of the color wheel, just visually pleasing color combos!!!

2. just better structuring (if thats wat u call it) i guess??

like finn, yes his character design fits the having enough color diversity problem, but it just doesnt work, i think its cuz of how saturated the cyan and orange are, making them not mesh well together, like if the orange was a darker less saturated color then maybe the colors could work, but it could also just be his clothes, like switch out his life vest for anything else thats related to marine stuff (maybe a swimsuit with flipper feet??) and his pants for something darker

3. not following their theme very well, or theyre pretty lacking in roles so their theming is very vague

i think shelly is the biggest example of this, like why is she a shell, i get that shells can be fossils too but honestly just make her a skeletal dinosaur at that point or one of the many modern descendants of dinosaurs (like birds and crocodiles and turtles), her twisted design is rlly good tho!!! its my favorite design in the entire game and its honestly the coolest one too

and now for 3 characters that i think have problems in most of these (that i havent already mentioned):

glisten is an example of another color problem that i didnt mention cuz i felt like this was a problem that only glisten had, the colors not being the right color (idk how else to name it ;-;), he looks SO GOOD in fanart but hes just meh in the official game even when compared to his original picture as a dhmis oc, and im pretty sure its cuz the pink parts of his design arent saturated or dark enough, leading to the yellow parts of his design blending in more easily with the bow (look at the black and white version as a reference on that, the brightness of the pink and yellow are very close to each other meaning ud have a harder time trying to tell them apart, its easier to tell when colored yes but their brightness still carries over leading to some color blending (idk another word for it srry), not as much blending as in the black and white version but still a subtle detail u could pick up on), and his blush, im gonna be honest with u i just think it looks bad and i dont even know y, just eyeshadow would look waay better

boxten oh god, they do kinda follow the color diversity thing but the way hes designed is just not it, he doesnt come off as shy in his design or the dialogues i saw or even animation, hes more of a softie than anything, i only knew that he was shy when i read his info card

poppy follows the color diversity thing the most imo, pink cyan and yellow are colors that i think work really well together, but the structure of her design and how well her design fits her role doesnt work either, actually im pretty sure i fixed her design structure in my second redesign (second batch) of her, all i did was move the bow from being weirdly placed on her head to being tied around her waist like glisten and mess around with the colors, now with her design fitting her role, i think the bubble is a good choice!! it fits playful way better than energetic i think but it still works, my only problem is with her clothes, it does not give off energetic vibes, i honestly think shed have a better design if she wore the clothes professional tag players and maaaybe mountain bikers wear

other shit idk:

honestly i wanted to include all the mains here too (as of writing, shelly has a complete redesign (more changed than the lamp) and vee and astro are just light redesigns, im not done with sprout and im never redesigning pebble hes already perfect) but the release date for the new update dropped as soon as i was gonna start digitizing the twisted tea sets design, actually i think i went overboard on like ALL of the redesigns to the point where i should prob start calling them rewrites or very loosely inspired instead, oops i did NOT mean to do that

also i just recounted the total characters, theres only 21 of them how the fuck did i get 22 last time???

[tyrantisterror]

Can you give some advice on how to write scary/dark fantasy media for a younger audience, like Gravity Falls, Coraline, The Owl House and Trollhunters (to some extent) etc? How to balance scary and silly elements so it doesn't get too frightening but still keep an eerie atmosphere, and make the story feel like a folktale/have folk-tale-like elements.

I haven't written anything with children/young adults specifically in mind, so I don't know whether I can really be considered an expert in this subject, but I'll try my best.

So, the examples you listed all work in part because they don't talk down to their audience. They accept the idea that children/adolescents/young adults are still, you know, people, people who understand that there are things to be afraid of in this world and that it's not all sunshine lollipops and rainbows. Kids, even little kids, know the world can be violent and dangerous, even if they don't fully understand how harsh those dangers can be. 3 year olds will draw pictures of lions with red scribbles around their mouths to show they've been eating meat from their prey - kids know the world is dark.

The purpose of horror media is to allow us to explore the things that make us afraid in a safe, fictional context - to get the experience of confronting what lurks in the shadows without actually risking getting eaten by it. And it serves that function for kids as much as adults - kids LOVE a good scary story.

So good scary kids' media isn't really different in overall content than good scary adult media. The stakes have to be real, the characters have to react with real fear, et cetera. The difference is really just in how severe you make it.

Like, Gravity Falls had zombies, child-eating monsters, etc., but it didn't have, like, scenes of zombies tearing people open ala Day of the Dead, or cracking open skulls to eat the brains like in Return of the Living Dead. The Owl House has some pretty intense body horror, especially with Emperor Belos, but it's abstracted enough not to be too visceral, too real, too traumatizing for children. It's all about pulling your punch just enough to keep from actually showing children something they're not prepared for, but not so much that they don't flinch in response to it anymore.

Artists complain, mostly rightfully, about how corporations force censorship on them, especially when they're working in kids' media, but it's noticeable that often that censorship creates something exquisitely creative. Batman the Animated Series was barred from showing the Joker kill people, so instead he hits them with a nonlethal gas that leaves them with a horrible rictus grin - a nightmarish and unique image that still scared the piss out of many a kid, while never crossing that line into the inappropriately grotesque.

So I guess the rule of thumb is to write your story like you would any other scary story, but whenever you hit upon the normal scary payoff, think of how you could do something technically less gruesome yet more creatively awful. How can you take a normal horror scenario and replace "death" with, well, something like the Joker gas?