Shit Takes Saturday :3

[dead-pidoves-dirt-takes]

A general warning: I block people who are anything but anti-contact with paraphilias concerning entities who are unable to consent.

[dead-pidoves-dirt-takes]

"Charlie Kirk was a victim of political violence!!!!"

Awww look at the losers who shot themselves in the fucking foot and can't say he was a victim of GUN VIOLENCE.

[barneycalhounslutmoments]

literally the reason online discourse is Like That is cuz ppl havent found real problems yet

[barneycalhounslutmoments]

when ur pushing 30 and renting an apartment and reckoning with your health and future prospects ppl drawing pokemon porn becomes a lot less pressing of an issue

[dead-pidoves-dirt-takes]

I think it’s rather interesting what ruminating in a too hot bath tub will do to you and what horrible memories it happens to dredge up.

Reactionaries in all forms like and want the optics of safety but do not want to put in the effort of actually keeping its vulnerable populations safer.

When I was younger the schools used a Catholic, “abstinence centred” sexual education curriculum known as “Fully Alive” which was pushed well into high school. But I think what is important is the stuff they teach the younger kids. They taught the sexual organs, which was anatomy of a penis and a vagina on the page, as well as sperm production and the menstrual cycle.

You know what they didn’t teach? Consent in any form. They didn’t start to mention sex at all as a concept until like grade 6 at the least.

You know who didn’t get the “privilege” of not being touched inappropriately? Who got molested before they could fully understand the concept of sex? Us!

Like it or not, in order to responsibly and reasonably raise your children to be safe from sexual violence and exploitation, you need to teach consent and what is a form of appropriate touch and what isn’t. From the moment a child is able to register their own body parts in relation to other peoples bodies. As well as what the appropriate forms of action are, lest they find themselves in those situations.

Fully Alive as a concept fails not just because it teaches Abstinence only sex education, but because it does not consider the upsetting reality that a child may find themselves in a position of being exploited BEFORE they are of the age that adults around them feel comfortable with breaching the topic of sex and sexual relations with others.

It prioritizes keeping a child’s ignorance, purity and above all else instilling the “proper Christian values” about sex. Because those FEEL like safe ways to protect kids to a bunch of oblivious grownups, and are comfortable/noncontroversial to teach! Rather than actually teaching kids about sex, and who they can find safety in, if they find themselves in a situation and position of sexual abuse, and exploitation.

But what I think is truly insidious and horrible about that book, is that it gives these institutions plausible deniability. You can’t criticize them! They taught kids about safe sex and how the bits work, that’s all you need to know! And you’re actually the weird one for advocating that kids are more informed and not just given the bare bones run down about sex. Not just about their bodies but about others and how they should (or should NOT) treat their bodies!

Bonus points it had a whole section in the highschool version about being against abortion and advocating for people to join anti-abortion causes (oh and I guess non-committedly being against the death penalty… lol)

I personally don’t have many triggers but those shitty purple textbooks are one of them. And it’s pretty much a whole joke at this point.

[cosmicsproutcake]

Arguing with antis is genuinely so exhausting because you will refute one of their arguments with peer-reviewed, scientific evidence proving that they're wrong, and they'll make literally the exact same argument over again, because they pretty much almost unanimously never actually read what you type.

Like at this point I think it's time they admit this is all just to get a socially acceptable excuse to bully people with less conseqeunces and fucking go.

[dead-pidoves-dirt-takes]

To be fair they argue exactly like conservatives and have taken a lot from the alt-right playbook.

Meaning that it doesn’t really matter how much evidence and strong information you provide, they are using slogans that are catchy and memorable. Which, unfortunately people aren’t going to remember “here’s a study that upholds a principle that has been foundational in therapy for decades.” But it is easy to remember something wrong if somebody keeps saying it, and calling the other person over and over with increasing emphasis.

[dead-pidoves-dirt-takes]

Do me a favor and quit reblogging mah shit. I’m tired of hearing your shitass opinions and you’re not doing anything but pissing me off. (And you’re def not doing much more than repeating the same tired points.) If that was your goal, then cool! Goal achieved now leave me alone. If your goal was to convince me or turn me to your side, you have failed and will never succeed so cool, please stop 👍 anyways one of your proship goons (or should I say gooners lmaoo) reblogged it too, so thx for effectively spreading my blog into a community I didn’t want it in in the first place. If I could go back in time and not tag it with “proship” to keep your vile community from finding me, I would, but time travel does not exist </3. Im used to social media where reblogging doesn’t exist so I genuinely expected none of you to find that post. Anyways bye and have a very leave me the fuck alone. Tbh I think all this exchange has done is make me double down on disliking yall mfs 💀💀💀

The block button is right there dude! You can block me and I won’t be able to reblog it. And it doesn’t give me the opportunity to publish this ask and argue back which I will do now because you STILL don’t get it.

This was never about converting you, I don’t care that you disagree about SHIP discourse of all things. I care that you keep applying terms made for actual victims to come foreword and share what has happened to them without being graphic and are applying them, levelling their experiences… to fictional depictions and expressions that you personally find gross. So while I’m sorry your blog and initial comment got posted with my commentary onto a community you don’t want, you can just… delete the post and people won’t be able to find you in either the tags or your blog.

At the very least edit your tags so they aren’t STILL on there if you want less engagement from people you don’t like.

[3possumsinacoat]

I hate when I see a rlly hot post but then see that the blog that posted it also posts/reposts proship nonsense. BLECK. I’ve said it once and I’ll say it again; idgaf if it’s fictional if it exploits children. That shit is nasty. Eh, on the bright side at least their posts coming on my dashboard gives me a chance to block them 👍

[dead-pidoves-dirt-takes]

Maybe don’t post in the LITERAL main tag if you don’t want to see proshippers dude

Also idk how to tell you this but you’re not “exploiting children” if it’s fictional. Child exploitation is an action that affects actual tangible, physical children.

Call it yucky and gross all you want, call the people who jack off to it freaks and whatever. stop fucking bastardizing terms made for victims to discuss what they have been through, legal terms to prosecute actual people who are exploiting tangible children or who support and create a demand for that type of content.

[3possumsinacoat]

I’m semi new to tumblr so forgive me for not understanding how the algorithm works 💀. I talk about proshitters, I tag the post as proshitters. But hey at least I can now block more of you freaks if even more of you ignore my DNI and reblog my post. Anyways, I’m so sick of hearing your excuses about how your behavior is to “discuss” what they have been through. You’re sexualizing children and actively creating content for pedophiles, like it or not. And I don’t wanna argue semantics with you, but what you’re doing is painting literal children in a sexual light. Call it exploitation, don’t call it exploitation, it’s fucking gross. “Bastardizing terms” LMFAO. Idk how to tell you this but yall didn’t need any help making “proshipping” sound bad.

[dead-pidoves-dirt-takes]

Did you even comprehend what I wrote there. Like read slowly and carefully! Try to stop being so discourse-brained for a second because my point about bastardizing the term child exploitation has Jack SHIT to do with ship discourse and “making look pro-shipping bad”

Also tumblr doesn’t EVEN have an algorithm, it’s in chronological order. Instead of learning the algorithm learn to curate your own damn experience instead.

And if that WERE true that actual pedophiles who have an attraction to actual children could be satisfied with Loli-hentai and fictional erotica involving underaged sex then don’t you think that they would… just Jack off to that instead of abusing and exploiting actual children? Or watching content like that?

Oh wait, the truth is that child exploitation and material that sexually abuses children is not about the fucking proportions, or child-like behaviour. It’s about hurting kids and adults using their power, authority and trust to fucking hurt children and get away with it.

[3possumsinacoat]

I hate when I see a rlly hot post but then see that the blog that posted it also posts/reposts proship nonsense. BLECK. I’ve said it once and I’ll say it again; idgaf if it’s fictional if it exploits children. That shit is nasty. Eh, on the bright side at least their posts coming on my dashboard gives me a chance to block them 👍

[dead-pidoves-dirt-takes]

Maybe don’t post in the LITERAL main tag if you don’t want to see proshippers dude

Also idk how to tell you this but you’re not “exploiting children” if it’s fictional. Child exploitation is an action that affects actual tangible, physical children.

Call it yucky and gross all you want, call the people who jack off to it freaks and whatever. stop fucking bastardizing terms made for victims to discuss what they have been through, legal terms to prosecute actual people who are exploiting tangible children or who support and create a demand for that type of content.

[dead-pidoves-dirt-takes]

you can't say "Do what you want forever" and then have a callout cus your twitter mutual has a secret porn account that has kinks you don't like, on it.

come on now

[dead-pidoves-dirt-takes]

"yeah except rape/pedophilia/zoophilia or-" whatever the fuck you cool kids accuse each other of nowadays to go get people to dogpile a person or whatever.

You can try all you want to run a smear campaign with these labels that have very real consequences. Because somebody drew something you didn't like.

but we all know that you don't actually want people to do what they want forever. You just want more stuff that doesn't offend your sensibilities. and god forbid they do, because you will harass them and try and ruin their life for even thinking of going against your groups established thoughts.

[dead-pidoves-dirt-takes]

you can't say "Do what you want forever" and then have a callout cus your twitter mutual has a secret porn account that has kinks you don't like, on it.

come on now

[dead-pidoves-dirt-takes]

Another thing that happens to piss me off about how “pro and anti ship discourse” is “flattening media literacy” or whatever.

Like yeah sure, it is! But the group of people who are being deliberately obtuse and avoiding engaging in literary analysis of works they dislike and want eradicated, is not the group of people who are saying “don’t harass people for creating things you dislike.”

And frankly, I don’t even think the people who are campaigning for the censorship of fiction they dislike care about literary criticism and analysis. They assume that because something was created for the purpose of being erotic that it is inherently useless and worthless. And If it squicks them, than it must be harmful.

With that, it is the ways they try and argue that a piece of media is causing harm that is objectively false and wrong. Falsely attributing negative effects that are not the creators fault, to the creation of the media. By assuming that all abuse needs attraction as a prerequisite. Rather than the actual truth, that attraction isn’t even needed, but that predators are opportunistic and will go after people that are vulnerable, without any support, and who are disempowered.

And that doesn’t even mention how a lot of conservatives are pushing legally for children to be further isolated, and cut off from support systems and society, further weakening them, and refusing them even the right to know about bodily autonomy. And making them even more vulnerable to violence coming from within the family.

This isn’t really about literary analysis, though I’m sure it can help with trying to prove that this stuff is valuable. This is all about power and policing what gets created, and what gets discarded and scorned. These people have been given too much power, with the increased sanitization of the internet. And I think that’s a real damn shame.

[dead-pidoves-dirt-takes]

“That is an underaged character!! That character is literally a minor!!!”

This is an attempt to anthropomorphize a fictional concept in order to argue that it should be given special treatment and control what type of content people can and cannot create surrounding that fictional content.

They are fictional characters, and fictional characters can depict certain things! But being underaged and being a minor are concepts that can only apply to real human beings.

[soldierexclipse]

Purity Politics

[internetsprince]

for the record op draws incest & noncon and hangs out with people who draw bestiality. don't fall for this shit.

[internetsprince]

being anti-paraphilia is not being "puritan" it's being a decent person who respects the boundaries of consent and does not indulge unhealthy and damaging power dynamics.

[catgirlbignaturals]

Old dog spotted

[soldierexclipse]

“Draws incest” i drew a comic about how my mother abused me growing up and sometimes people call me mommy. Who cares.

“Hangs out with people who draw beastiality” scoliopede dick? That’s a Pokémon. With sentience. And is not real.

“Draws noncon” and? I’ve been raped several times in my life, the first time when i was 1st grade, an incident that caused me permanent fear and physical pain in sex. My fucking apologies that I’ll sexualize my brutalizations to be able to engage in my sexuality.

Also the only reason you even know about that shit is because my abusive ex spread a “callout post” all over twitter about me to obfuscate the fact that he’s sexually assaulted several people and groomed minors to draw porn for him and I’m an active witness to their abuse. So if you give a shit about fictional noncon imagine how i feel about real rape.

[dead-pidoves-dirt-takes]

“Being anti-paraphile is about people who respect the boundaries of consent and does not indulge in unhealthy and damaging power dynamics”

Do you really respect boundaries and consent though?

You all will go onto some poor persons NSFW Twitter and call them out/expose them for having kinks that you personally dislike. You will go into THEIR spaces, blast THEIR NSFW to people who they clearly didn’t want to associate with their NSFW account. That doesn’t sound like “respecting boundaries” and consent to me.

You will eradicate or call for the eradication of entire tags that are clearly meant to prevent people who have the content filtered. And that content? Doesn’t just STOP existing. It just now doesn’t have one single tag that can be filtered for, it has multiple variations sometimes even going into spaces that were not for it originally in the first place. Making it harder to filter. That doesn’t sound like “respecting boundaries and consent” to me.

Hell you say you respect boundaries and consent in one sentence and then say “does not indulge in unhealthy and damaging power dynamics.” As if you’re somehow superior to us. But guess what? People have the right to consent and engage in shit you think is unhealthy and damaging. They have that right to make choices and decisions for themselves that may harm themselves. Like smoking, like drugs. And a plethora of other things. And we don’t just FORCE them to stop because it’s unhealthy for them. Because that’s what ACTUALLY respecting an individual’s boundaries and consent is. That’s actually respecting a person’s autonomy to the extent of which does not harm another persons wellbeing and rights. Because society cannot and should not be able to override someone’s personal autonomy and consent for themselves only because it is “damaging.”

Even with genuinely harmful ideologies that genuinely undermine consent. The solution isn’t to harass somebody off of a platform and expose them to a bunch of people, (many of which, inadvertently create a support system or allow the ideology to spread to people who are understandably sympathetic to those who have been harassed.) it’s to advocate for better, more stringent and human moderation. It’s to advocate for better report systems that don’t rely on the volume of people reporting something, but the content of which is being reported is actually harmful.

But because that shit doesn’t include harassing and dog piling people who have the audacity to engage in kinks that personally is not palatable to you, you all don’t do it. Because you don’t actually give a shit about people’s consent, autonomy or boundaries, you just wanna weaponize therapy speak against people you personally don’t like.

[dead-pidoves-dirt-takes]

I think what most “reasonable” arguments for censorship are, is acknowledging that there is some part of the system that is insecure underfunded and under resourced, but instead of actually addressing the problem and the role that the people pushing for censorship may or may not play, they instead narrow and simplify the problem down to blame authors, books, huge swaths of people, research and those who fight to say that nobody should have the power to dictate what someone can or cannot read and consume. Under any circumstances.

[dead-pidoves-dirt-takes]

Most anti-ship arguments if they aren’t “ew,” and “you’re a disgusting human being for caring about whatever I think should be banned.”

Are acknowledging the very real insecurities surrounding the education and state of relationships, domestic violence and the abuse of children. The very real insecurity that reading comprehension and media literacy are rapidly in decline, whether it’s factors of English departments not being properly funded… everywhere or that children in the US for around 30 years were not given the proper foundation of phonics and instead told to rely on the pictures to understand words without knowing that the pictures can be misleading.

These insecurities and the concerns about these topics are completely valid. However, the issue does not stem from authors or artists portraying the topic in whatever way they want to. Or whatever way squicks you the most. I.E romanticizing, normalizing or objectifying etc. the topic. Just as, it’s not a breeding kink writers responsibility to make sure that people know proper sexual education.

And when you take these topics that are complicated, and these groups of people who have complex needs and protections. And reduce their problems and their solutions down to fictional content? It not only subtly victim blames and is a slap to the face entirely, it does not properly engage with the issues at hand, and propose a solution that actively helps those who are subjected to abuse. It actively reduces the complexity of these issues and eradicates how society and the systems we live in, play a role in perpetuating harm. It also erases those who have been actively victimized and their needs to an absurdly passive degree. It’s never about what can be done to actively help those who are suffering or have suffered these things. Only focusing on policing other people for “prevention purposes.”

By the way, most of these issues can be made marginally better by giving power through legislative and other means, connecting these individuals to multiple well-trusted support systems and with education and eradication of shame and stigma. None of which include obliterating and dog-piling somebody because you dislike what they create. And think they are a horrible person who needs to be punished.

(As a side note this… rant, makes a rather huge assumption that a lot of these people are arguing in completely good faith, which… sadly is not always the case. I understand that, but I did want to try and properly engage with arguments that could be MADE in good faith.)

[dead-pidoves-dirt-takes]

I think what most “reasonable” arguments for censorship are, is acknowledging that there is some part of the system that is insecure underfunded and under resourced, but instead of actually addressing the problem and the role that the people pushing for censorship may or may not play, they instead narrow and simplify the problem down to blame authors, books, huge swaths of people, research and those who fight to say that nobody should have the power to dictate what someone can or cannot read and consume. Under any circumstances.

[dead-pidoves-dirt-takes]

“Everytime I go to X Characters tag I see DISGUSTING shit that people write like non-con or incest or something yucky like that. I just wanna see nice things and fluff but you FREAKS keep showing me gross-“

Oh my god learn to curate your own damn experience, and block people/tags instead of bitching about writers who don’t write exclusively to your tastes. Tumblr is EXTREMELY good for this. Take advantage of it.

[dead-pidoves-dirt-takes]

Tumblr b like,

U can’t have cock but I’ll force an ad abt a highschool shooter being hot.