#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.

.

[kseniyagreen]

And no one in the world can see through you...

I think one of the most important and acute themes of the drama is the desire to be seen, to be real for someone. The desire is so greedy and desperate that many heroes are ready to die for it.

Because without this feeling of being seen and understood, they feel like they are in an endless dream. Not so real. And for the opportunity to become real, they are ready to pay with pain and life.

Ying Lei and Bai Jiu both died trying to do something meaningful for their special person. Striving to be the one who changes something - himself, alone. And maybe that's why they were so reckless.

Li Lun sacrificed his immortal existence to become a real man for one day - the man Zhao Yuanzhou will not forget.

The bird goddess understands that this Fei is not real - and understanding this, she kind of see the real Fei in her heart.

And therefore she feels it as if they are finally together.

This is a desperate, beautiful but painful desire to have someone who sees you and whom you see, someone who will illuminate the darkness of your loneliness, especially acute and painful for those who are used to feeling like an "anomaly".

The drama also raises the social aspect - about how anomalies are not accepted by society, are seen distortedly and falsely, and this experience of social invisibility makes the desire to find someone who will see and understand the real you even stronger - sometimes dangerous and even destructive.

All the characters are in some sense are dreamers in a dream and puppets in a play.

And in this play you can go beyond the given role, show a glimmer of your true self only at the moment when your role ends. And every hero here dies looking at the one for whom they wants to become real most of all.

This interestingly reflects the fact that under censorship, a lot can only be shown at the cost of the hero's death. Like queer couples in censored dramas, they usually die in the finale (at least one of them). Antiheroes who reject the laws of this world's also usually assert their right for sympathy with a selfless death.

But in reality, a person asserts themself and finds understanding not through death, but through life. It is not the final sacrifice, but the path traveled that matters.

And this is where I see the meaning of Zhao Yuanzhou's path.

He could have died in the middle of the story - and the villain would not have received his power, and the world might not have needed to be saved.

But then ZYZ would have died unrecognized and misunderstood, lonely.

But thanks to the path traveled, he finds someone who sees him, who understands him, who loves him and makes him real.

And for Zhuo Yichen, this is no less important - for someone who was afraid of his dreams and therefore lived as if in a dream, for someone who was afraid of that unconscious part of himself. And therefore, diligently fulfilling his social role, he did not get close to anyone.

But the more alive and real they become together, the tighter the web of fate becomes. As if resisting their desire to be together.

And yet I would like to think that this desire and their mutual reality turns out to be stronger than the tragic scenario.

Like at the moment when Zhuo Yichen was supposed to die together with the villain, but did not die because the Zhao Yuanzhou's spell "recognized" him.

This desire to stretch the thread of connection through all obstacles, barriers and through death itself is very tangible in the way they're holding hands.

And this courage not to let go even when it seems the universe itself is separating you plays a key role in the finale.

"I recognize only the principles of my heart," says Li Lun.

And I like to think that along with his power, he passed on to Zhuo Yichen a part of his rebellious spirit and gave Yichen the courage to resist fate.

Yichen too manages to save part of Yuanzhou's soul because he knows that soul truly. They manage to pull this theme of mutual recognition into a situation as far away from an act of love as possible.

This "I knew you would do this" "and I knew you would do this, and that's why I do something else" and "you're still so..." - as both recognition of "it's you" and surprise and recognition anew.

They are both tied with ropes to their roles, like puppets of a demon who fulfills wishes. But they see each other beyond these roles. And with his final act, Zhuo Yichen seems to connect their destinies beyond the boundary where their roles end.

Zhao Yuanzhou had to fulfill his role as a sacred sacrifice and leave. Zhuo Yichen had to fulfill his role as an instrument on which Yuanzhou would make his sacrifice. But Yichen, taking on an active role in a situation of impossible choice, goes beyond the role of an instrument - and thanks to this, he can do what does not fit into this role.

Save Zhao Yuanzhou's life and connect their fates beyond the fulfillment of the prophecy.

And now they're both free.

[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.

[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)

[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.

[messrsrarchives]

i worry sometimes about the stigma around exploring morality. not just in terms of fanfiction of course, but generally, the fact that exploring negative morality within literature or any other type of media has become synonymous with justification worries me.

because we need to explore morality. we need to explore the reasons behind acts - not for the sake of justifying them and brushing them under the rug, but for the sake of potentially unlocking a new understanding and new preventions. for understanding how seemingly insignificant details, experiences, homelife etc etc can all add up and result in whatever negative thing took place.

and sure, we see it in fanfiction. we see it in the fact you can't explore different ways things could have panned out without being called a sympathiser. we see it in the way you could say "hey, what if regulus did X instead of Y?" and people blow up your inbox. or even when you take a more morally good character like james, and you explore the bullying that took place, people dislike that.

so we see it in fanfiction yes, but we see it in the book bans as well. we see it in the type of books that are being banned in the US, we see it in the media when they refuse to look past the current event and dig into the reasons why, we see it everywhere.

this growing resentment towards exploration and this growing hatred of anything depicted in media which isn't 100% morally perfect, and it worries me actually.

because there's a lot of bad. in everyone, even the more morally correct, and i think this growing resentment to explore the slightest immoral action is dangerous. it limits understanding, it limits education, it limits potential prevention, but really it just divides the world (whether that be fictional ones or the real one) into "good people" and "bad people" and what do we do then when someone breaches that categorisation? what do we do then when someone on the good side starts exhibiting signs and we don't know enough/aren't permitted to explore why?

idk, i'm explaining this really bad but tldr; the censorship of anything morally wrong and the fact that exploration has become synonymous with justification in literature spaces is incredibly dangerous for any kind of progress imo. it's only through the eyes of the oppressor or through exploring oppression that we can learn to prevent it or even just understand it. and it worries me that we can showcase that less and less as media spaces become more puritanical in their views

life imitiates art and art imitates life and all that jazz

[r4wnz]

Radqueers trying to paint a picture of being comorbid with profic beliefs is SO dangerous to proshippers.

I'll never understand how these things got roped together but I suppose the radqueer community is already quite infamous for using false equivalence for acceptance. (Their tendency of comparing homophobia, slavery and ableism to anti paras) Literally an antishipper mindset to think your fictional beliefs reflect your real ones. Sure, every radqueer should be proship, but not every proship will be radqueer—very few of us are, I find.

Yeah someone who's apart of a community that largely grooms children is going to be okay with seeing those tropes in fiction because... if they are okay with it in reality why wouldn't they be okay with it in fiction??? That would be unbelievably stupid.

But proship beliefs say absolutely NOTHING about queer identities it's literally just anti harassment/censorship belief.

Insinuating proship is comorbid with radqueer beliefs is going to result in even more harassment of us. If anti-shipper think we are pedophiles over FICTION, seeing people who ACTUALLY encourage real pedophilia they're going to tear Us apart even though we have nothing to do with that community.

If we receive death/rape/torture threats, doxxing, and witch hunting over emotional speculation what do you think will happen to us when pro contact paraphiles represent our community???

~

(originally this post was expressing confusion on smth regarding radqueer beliefs however I've been informed that what I was thinking of was radinclus! but I still agree heavily with the other part of my post so I decided to edit rather than delete as I think it's important to talk about!! apologies for issues in text- I've been fighting with Tumblrs post editor it's been majorly laggy)

[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.

[kseniyagreen]

Episode 33 comments. Part 2

Bai Jiu's death is the hardest.

They weren't joking when they talked about living in contradictions. And in Bai Jiu's line, these contradictions are very well expressed.

Bai Jiu's main theme is the fear of disappearing. But this fear is actually contradictory, and the whole essence of this contradiction is well expressed in Bai Jiu's love of hide and seek and bells.

When we are afraid of disintegration, we want to hide from danger in a safe place. But when we hide, the fear of disappearing turns into another side - what if this place turns out to be too safe? What if I am never found? What if I disappear from the world in my safe hiding place?

Bai Jiu went through this horror when he was "safely hidden" in his own body - "under the protection" of the big bad wolf Li Lun. And after going through this, he became braver.

In the end, the boy who sought to hide from destruction breaks through the barrier to what is hidden towards destruction - in order to save what is dear to him.

The drama really does constantly return to this theme of affirming one's real existence in death - in the desire to be real as if death does not exist.

And look how the scene with the barrier of Bai Jiu and the scene with the barrier between ZYZ and ZYC are paralleled.

They have their own impossible struggle at this moment, with fate, which constantly puts them in these positions.

They are all trying to break through the barrier with their love. So that what can't work - works. And what should work - doesn't work. On one strong-willed desire.

This scene is so intense - even the villain turns away.

I remember seeing this shot somewhere in spoilers. I thought it is ZYZ's death scene. Makes sense.

The hand moment is symbolic - these scenes run throughout the drama.

But I also can't help but think that if ZYZ and ZYC were just friends, they would definitely hug after this.

But they can't hug as friends in the true nature of their relationship, and they can't hug as lovers because of censorship.

But at least the hands and looks convey the intensity.

[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.