I reserve the right to be a cunt

It/its. Adult. Pro-fiction. NO-ACT pro-para. The freak in your DNI, etc.

[dark--friction]

‧͙⁺˚*･🕯️Basic Info･･･････････････････････････････････････････････ 🫀Name: Dark or Friction 🫀Age: bodily && mentally an adult 🫀Pronouns: it/its (not they/them) 🫀Nonhuman && plural 🫀Dark fiction enthusiast 🫀NO-ACT faunoiphile + somnophile 🫀This blog is a place for me to express myself and hopefully make a safe space for other paraphiles who are NO-ACT or agree with the ideology :) 🫀I hardly ever post, expect me to disappear randomly often 🫀Before you interact... This blog is dedicated to being an sfw, anti-contact paraphile blog. might make a separate nsfw blog at some point, but this blog will never be explicitly nsfw. there will be discussion of taboo topics and sexual education, however!

(NO-ACT stamp ; somno flag)

[dark--friction]

ur the thing who has paraphile knowledge right ? and stuff ? whats ur experience with the term "radinclus"?

Oh I'm actually quite new to the community! I know a lot IMO, but definitely not everything, especially things like discourse labels, their origins, and such.

Radinclus can have… a lot of meanings. It seems to be a spectrum rather than a set-in-stone belief system. I've seen people labeling themself as radinclus to be anything from "radqueer-adjacent" to "anti-para" to "anti-alterhumanity" to "pro-contradictory queer labels" and so on so forth.

There's also an Urban Dictionary page for radinclus, but all of the definitions are different and only go back to 2021, while I'm pretty sure radinclus has existed as a term for longer than that. If I had to guess with my shitty memory, I'd say I was seeing the term radinclus pop up around 2017-2018 (9 years ago... I feel old now lol).

However, the most common definition seems to be specifically a Queer discourse label, with the meaning : "Accepting all good-faith/contradictory queer labels, while excluding/being neutral on pro-paraphiles, transIDs, alterhumans, etc."

TL;DR: Most commonly seems to be centered around goodfaith/contradictory queer identities, and not have a stance on anything outside of that.

I hope that helps! Anyone who knows more is free to correct me :)

[cottonstuffedpup]

to be so honest i always feel a bit wary at first when i see someone label themselves as "anti-radqueer", not because im a radqueer (im not, im critical of radqueers myself) but because i always assume they mean theyre anti-rq in the paramisic ("kill all pedos and zoos") way, and not the "anti pushing tolerance and acceptance of pro-contacts and xenosatanists" way

[123gocat]

YES LITERALLY SAME! i've seen "pro-para anti radqueer" but like,,, anti-radqueer is a common enemy of the pro-para community as well.

[cruel-hiraeth]

if you build “community” around hating other people, just know that the second you step out of line—regardless of your moral uprightness or the hypocrisy on their part—you’re the next person they’re going to tear to pieces.

[dark--friction]

Some NO-ACT blinkies I made! I plan on making more, but I felt like posting these ones on their own :3 The first one is a PNG on purpose lol.

[dark--friction]

hope it's ok to ask, i want to learn, what does non-consenting contact of any kind mean? thank you for what you do

Of course it's okay to ask! I want to be as clear as possible, part of NO-ACT is striving for proper education and knowledge.

I (and by extention the NO-ACT movement) define non-consensual acts as: -Sexual or romantic contact between a legal adult and minor, unless it's a small age gap like 17/16 and 18. Additionally, major age gaps between minors such as 6 and 15. Minors cannot consent to sex with adults, but can consent to sex with each other. -Any sexual contact with a theriform animal. Theriform animals cannot consent to sex. -Sleep sex that has not been consented to and/or properly negotiated prior. -Corpse sex that has not been consented to prior and/or was not properly/legally negotiated prior. -Sex with someone so intoxicated they cannot consent to sex. -Sex with a person who did not give consent via verbal statement/AAC. This can include; someone who doesn't say "no" but doesn't give enthusiastic consent, someone who said "yes" in the past but has not given consent in the present, etc.

I'm also against photography or film of any of these acts, alongside consumption of such material. CSAM/CSEM is immoral to consume due to supporting a harmful industry, and any other form of non-consensual footage/photography is also immoral to consume.

On the other hand, I am fully in support of properly negotiated roleplay such as consensual-non-consent and pet play, or fictional works depicting non-consensual acts. Nobody is being hurt by either, so both are fine.

Consent is a nuanced and complex thing, and it can be hard to explain every single scenario with broad generalizations, so if you have further questions don't hesitate to ask!

[colliecreates]

uhh para graphics or something !!

necro

zoo

biasto (apologies dark ver looks weird.. idfk what to do ‘bout it..)

map

aam

if u use these cred is appreciated but not rq! no dni either

[ooppo]

I think I'll pass

[123gocat]

professionals say something like, what, "men-tall dih-sore-dur" , but i call it kinning the concept of abstract concepts . doesnt that sound much cooler???

[123gocat]

combined the symbol for conceptkin from the otherkin wiki and the flag from the mogai wiki and made my own conceptkin flag!!

conceptkin alt flag yayyayayayyaya

[manuciruja]

awww the like button turns into a rainbow when you press it! that's so cute...hey staff what's with all the trans women you keep nuking?

[manuciruja]

i think we should be ridiculing them more for this. you don't get to try and go all "queer website" when your staff likes to go on nuking sprees targeting the trans fem users

[thegalvanizedstaff]

"animals can consent, because they bodily enjoy it and/or their body language is not obvioisly aggressive or fearful" implies that not all rape is rape with humans either, just because you felt pleasure or reached orgasm during it, or even if you just froze, didn't resist or fawned. or that CNC and such stuff are actually non-consensual, because the sub fought it and acted like they hate it. like yeah, we get it, youre horny, you want to fuck animals and you don't actually care about the community you pretend to have. there is no pattern

just a thought i had. aren't sex and general relationships all about verbal communication? you can't just go off the body language, pal! like, what even about people who are super nervous before (first) sex? does their fearful body language imply they don't rly want it? lol

[dark--friction]

I'm cooking up somthing for pride after being inspired by all the lovely para pride art I've seen, but for now you get this silly doodle. Ptide Moth 💚💙🩵💜🩷

[dark--friction]

Almost sent an anon suggesting clarifications for your last post before i went back to read and realized it's already labeled as anti contact 😭 I'm so used to people using "anti noncon contact" as a cover up "stance" while genuinely believing kids/animals can consent I completely skipped the first row of the post </3

Thank you for the flag and symbol!! It's so beautiful and I'm definitely switching to this one. I know the other flag is also originally coined as anti-c but I see a lot of pros using it so I was not entirely comfortable with it, it's really nice to have an alternative now

Thank you so much! This is the exact reason NO-ACT was coined originally -- I was really fed up with pro-contacts stealing our symbols and flags and diluting the meaning of "anti-contact" into something meaningless. It makes me really happy to hear other people like what I make and find it a reprieve of the confusion and cover-ups of modern contact discourse. It's exactly what I strive for!

Especially with the original MAP flag, it's so endlessly frustrating to me that it was originally coined to be anti-contact and got co-opted by pro-contacts... hopefully we can fully reclaim it!

[necrofoxfang]

there is some concerning discourse happening revolving in the radqueer space right now, i may not know anyone or understand what is happening fully but i am completely on the side of those treating grooming, abuse and csem with full seriousness. I just wanted to take this moment to say we really need to push for communities like these to be less lenient on these situations revolving abuse and minors, because ive seen so many blogs try and defend it and accuse those speaking against it “fakerads” “ageists” and other labels 😐

guys.. what are we doing lol.. look i know im not technically a radqueer or in your community, im not sure if me speaking up even matters to some of you, i could care less about the personal drama of the individuals involved, but i feel like everyone seriously needs to lock in for a moment, push aside the personal grudges and face the problem of the literal fucking csem and grooming issue right in front of your faces because this is genuinely getting ridiculous. Please treat child abuse seriously and pause the bullshit for at least one second.

I do not wish my words to be harmful, but it must be said, you wonder why spaces and communities like this are painted so bad and awful and called “cults” in youtube videos when a lot of members treat issues of child exploitation like this..

there should be no tolerance and desensitization for any type of abuse or victimization, those crying “fakerad” when other blogs express their concerns about abuse, contact, ect, are the true problem in the community and ive been holding back saying anything for a long while. I only wish the best for para communities, but none of them see that the ones bringing harm, toxicity and encouraging real dangerous behavior are the ones holding these communities back. Please stop tolerating individuals who show this behavior. I know its all about radical inclusion and queerness, but what is even the point when safety of said members of community is not a priority at all?

[dark--friction]

NO-ACT MAP flag!

A stance on minophilia/minor attracted adults that is anti-sexual/romantic contact with minors. Read more about NO-ACT here.

This stance is against non-consensual contact of any form, and believes in expressing oneself safely through fiction, kink, and/or roleplay with a consenting, bodily adult partner. In cases of plurality, alterhumanity, age regression, etc. consent varies on a case-by-case basis on the individual's ability to understand and consent to sex/romance. This stance emphasizes RACK (risk aware consensual kink), communication, and bodily autonomy -- and is against sex or roleplay that hasn't been consented to prior, isn't properly negotiated between partners, or that infringes on the bodily autonomy of one or more partners.

Symbol and blank flag below the cut.

[dark--friction]

I think the word "minor" should be akin to "theriform" in referring to anyone who is chronologically under the age of 18/whatever age the age of consent in their country is. You can be a legal adult and a little/middle/transage/chronosian/etc. but I think the term "minor" should ONLY be in reference to those who are legally underage. Because the term "minor" is literally a legal term. It would really clear up confusion regarding contact stances, since talking about "children" and "teens" gets confusing when chronosians/age regressors/etc. exist as legal adults. Not sure if this will catch on, but from now on anytime the term "minor" is used in the context of the NO-ACT movement, it is referring to anyone who is legally under the age of consent.