꒰ა˙Anti-censorhip and Anti-puritanism˙໒꒱

20 | Second Year Psychology Student (shi is stressful)

[helelmcgrippers]

I have seen anti-shippers on TikTok who promote the phrase, "Art should comfort the disturbed, and disturb the comfortable."

BUT THEN, they become diabolically upset when pro-shippers/com-shippers voice their opinions about reading fiction that help detangle the trauma they experienced (which btw, is also therapist-endorsed).

Like dawg- are you a hypocrite or a hypocrite?

[shengmingzi-rochu]

[asipofurmay]

bitten

[syatuoi]

[kumixblarg]

RoChu Brainworms.. .

I love them so much save me

True ending:

[proshippers-against-censorship]

I hope this isn’t a weird question I’ve just been really conflicted and thought this was a safe enough space to ask for opinions from the community. I’ve seen most proshippers use proshipping as a coping mechanism for traumas they have experienced in their lives. It’s been making me feel a bit guilty because I’ve been a proshipper for years. While darkshipping has been a coping mechanism for me, I’ve never experienced major traumas related to the content I consume other than a minor uncomfortable encounter with my mom. It’s been making me wonder if that’s okay or if I shouldn’t be as I am not using it to heal but rather project my own suffering onto fictional characters (in a “I am suffering therefore my fav has to suffer too but way worse than I am.” way.)

You never need to have a "valid" reason to play around with fiction. The mind is curious, the mind likes to explore. Fiction is a safe way to do that. You don't need permission via trauma. Play with dolls as you want.

[lyburnxm]

guys... i'm not a nazi sympathiser.. i clearly just want to fuck august diehl

[proshippers-against-censorship]

It pisses me off when antis say "you're literally getting off to MY trauma!!1!!" like... no I'm not getting off to your trauma, I don't fucking know you or your trauma. Fuck off with that stupid shit. You don't own the concept of rape because you got raped. Antis are so fucking selfish its insane like you don't own the intellectual property rights of trauma, you don't have a right to police everyone who wants to explore dark topics in fiction. Especially when many people who engage in dark fiction are survivors themselves, you have no right to tell people how they should be allowed to cope.

.

[proshippers-against-censorship]

Ngl the fact that folks can acknowledge that RP in kink is morally fine while still going feral over anything dark in fiction is wild to me.

Like, you know damn well that two adults partaking in ageplay aren't harming anyone, so why the fuck are you going feral because somebody wrote like. Poppy Playtime smut. Where's the child being harmed?

The same amount of children are harmed in lolishota content as are harmed in ageplay. That number is 0.

[6yuri0yaoi9]

Do NOT use the "tw: Csam" when you are talking about fictional content.

Do NOT call fictional content csam.

Do NOT reference fictional content as "vcsam"

Do NOT report fictional content for being "csam"

Do NOT tell victims of csam that a drawing is comparable to what they went through.

Do NOT try to scare minors into leaving their coping mechanism with an outdated law.

Do NOT refer to csam as "cp".

Do NOT try to argue with me when I say "cp" isn't the right term. It doesn't matter that predators see it as erotic. It doesn't matter that predators see it as "pornography". You're defending them by saying that.

Do NOT be like antis.

[helelmcgrippers]

I frankly haven’t been active in this account for a while because of college. I’m proud to say I have just reached a milestone of officially becoming a second-year student during my main course in BS Psychology. It’s essentially difficult to find individuals with this form of repulsive mindset in reality— especially in such a field— that I forget they do exist.

I've always heard of anti-shippers claiming that “murder is less gruesome” than rape (or in this user’s term— more “decent”), as if the act of murdering a person doesn’t require a malice aforethought with the clear intent to cause serious bodily harm or unlawfully ending someone’s life. To say murder is a “quick death” is not only factually wrong, but also shows a disturbing oversimplification of violence. Murders can involve prolonged suffering as many cases involve victims being tortured; taking time to die from their injuries; or possibly experiencing terror and pain before death. The idea that murder is somehow “cleaner” or “more decent” than other violent crimes as this user believes, is completely detached from reality. What is with anti-shippers and finding the need to rank violent crimes by supposed "decency"? Both murder and sexual violence cause immense harm, while murder ends a life— although, despite some miraculous cases where victims survive— that would still be a case of atttempted murder, and victims who suffered permanent injuries would also have to live with the trauma the same way rape victims would.

I shall remind you that we were primarily talking about depictions of such topics in fiction, but they're doing so by making callous real-world claims about serious crimes. It’s the kind of statement where it might sound logical (supposedly is why a lot of anti-shippers, especially ones who are underage, arrive to immediately believing) — until you actually think about what they're saying and it’s utter bullshit.

Of course, we are now reaching a portion where this user says, “Having trauma isn't an excuse to romanticize ___”. Beforehand, I wanna acknowledge the opposite perspective of why the user may believe this. From a harm reduction standpoint, they— including pro-censorship individuals— are concerned that depictions of anything taboo could normalize harmful behaviors, especially when it reaches vulnerable audiences without appropriate context or warning.

But here’s the key issue: who decides what counts as “romanticization?” Anyone can label any non-condemnatory portrayal as romanticizing— others might have completely different standards (hell, to some countries it's anything involving homosexual relationships hence why a lot of LGBTQIA+ books are still being banned from other countries).

When you start policing creative content based on subjective interpretations, you're on a slippery slope towards broader censorship. Even if the censorship was selective— it is still censorship.

I have said it before and I'll say it again that no victims are one-dimensional; an unfortunate reality even society can’t accept these days. We have seen it in cases where young men are being perceived as inadequate victim of sexual assault or domestic violence from female perpetrators because people argue “they easily could've fought back” due to biological advantages, or victims who are physically or vocally defiant towards their abusers are criticized because the masses follow a specified criteria that people who have been subjected to these kinds of traumatic events should be weak and vulnerable, and therefore more deserving of empathy and support in public discourse. Now, we see it repeat— and might I add— in the most ridiculous way possible. Although it's not universal as naturally humans have different coping mechanisms and triggers; a lot of victims who write "romanticized" fiction provide them assistance;

In entangling their trauma and putting it in manageable pieces,

Reclaiming agency as some survivors find it empowering to engage in narratives where they control the outcome or framing (this could also include performing certain kinks with their trusted partners),

Validation of complex feelings, as not all traumatic events can be shared with people considering it may be an uncomfortable conversation for either the speaker or listener.

Fiction is a much safer and healthier option for them as a medium for their thoughts as it doesn’t involve real people or directly engaging with harmful actions.

Art therapy is a form of psychotherapy involving free self-expression through painting, drawing, or modeling encouraged by professionals.

I wouldn’t further elaborate on the following argument, because I am certain we are all mature enough to be aware that it is initially the writers responsibility to provide readers the proper disclaimers of their books (or in online forums; the proper tags) as a construction of “warning signs” before proceeding. Most adults within a healthy mindset can generally handle fictional content that doesn’t align with their moral values without being “corrupted” by it, unless they are in a state where fiction from reality is difficult to discern— by then it would be recommendable to avoid those books or any triggering content that may cause you or others harm. Or, a minor who requires a parental assistant to curate the type of content they are consuming and very clearly shouldn’t be in adult spaces that is no longer part of the writer’s responsibility to manage, and shouldn’t be obligated to change the subject matter they write about.

This whole situation reminds me of that one redditor who went to therapy and started arguing about this with their therapist. Lemme add a picture:

[proship-culture-is]

proship culture is laughing whenever antis get pissed at ao3 being called a proship website (One of its founders is a wincestie + AO3 was partially made due to Anne Rice’s response + its stances on DNIs being super clear + No I don’t think it’ll remove the adult x minor or incest fic no matter how you report it. GL on your goals on ‘buying out AO3 and making it do so’, there are guards in place to prevent exactly that. :P.

☆

[helelmcgrippers]

It's even crazier that I saw an anti on TikTok say that "just because Ao3 was a proship website doesn't mean it was a proship website", wtf does that even mean?

[proshippers-against-censorship]

so how would you suggest we get rid of the incest porn and pedophilia without also impacting LGBTQ+ and minority representation?

You can't, To bigots the LGBTQ+ community are not only seen as pedophiles but as active child predators and any depiction of anything that could imply someone being LGBTQ+ is not only pedophilia, but child predation to them if a child witnesses them simply existing. Same with how people deem it pedophilia for someone 25 or above to be in a relationship with anyone under 25 because of the "brain doesn't stop developing until 25" rumour.

Incest could just be two siblings holding hands innocently or saying "I love you" without romantic intentions because guess what? it depends on you as the viewer to use context clues on what the implications are and if a viewer wants to look for incest or pedophilia then they will find it anywhere they look no matter how innocent it actually is. (btw holding hands or hugging is too much for some people because its "too intimate" and "only a lover should touch you like that")

They will insist that their views and interpretation is correct no matter the truth because the truth doesn't matter, it never has to and never will, thats why callouts and slander get so many likes and clicks. The ONLY thing that matters is if people believe you or not and a lot of people believe bullshit as long as you are consistently loud enough or if you have enough people showing agreement. If you only lie then eventually someone will believe your lies because eventually someone will think "surely they aren't only lying, they have to be telling the truth at some point" but the most dangerous thing is the people lying may even believe their own lies and some would rather backpedal on specific things and get more extreme than admit they didn't realise they fell for the lies that they were spreading lies.

When it comes to censorship the most extreme people will always win because they are extreme, if we do all the heavy lifting and only ban "certain" things once thats done theyll just walk right in and start demanding everything else they dont like to be banned and it'll be easy to do because you are dealing with people who manipulate and lie without even realising it themselves and they dont give a shit who gets hurt especially not you, me, or anyone else because they are willing to let everyone suffer for what they want including their families and themselves.

They dont give a shit if everyone wants them dead, they just go and do what they want cause fuck our opinions. For every reason you give thats a "reasonable" demand to ban something, for those people they will see an opportunity to jump on that, push it, take that and slowly twist that reasonable demand, subtle at first, until its unrecognisable to you just to censor everyone they disagree with including not only lgbt people and minorities but even the less extreme people on their own side that agrees with them but just aren't as extreme or loud as them.

Maybe my words are extreme but thats from my lived experience

I am invested about this. maybe too much because I was called a pedo at 13 by my peers parents because everyone thought i would prey on their kids for being into the same gender. I was 13... i was a child surrounded by my own peers and i was the younger one in my class. I had to drop out of school because of it. I know an older gay guy who refuses to walk down any street with a school in it out of fear he will be called a pedo for simply being a gay guy walking past a school. He wants to be a dad but can't out of fear that he'll be labeled a pedophile and the worst part is, It's been proven recently that's exactly what will happen where I live. A married gay couple mentioned about going through the process of adopting a kid and they are now known as pedophiles and any time someone mentions them its always "they'll molest the kids' "oh i hope they dont adopt a boy" "i feel sorry for whatever child they have" but to them they are just protecting their kids and warning others of potentially dangerous people

.

[uraranfirstprize]

Friendly reminder that you are not profiction if you harrass people over fiction or support people being harrassed over fiction.

Friendly reminder that being profiction doesn't mean you need to like every ship or fictional work in existence & you can (+ should) ignore and/or block tags/blogs/whatever that you don't wanna see!

[proship-culture-is]

Proship culture is realizing people still haven't moved on from the "video games cause violence" phase.

I'm from Austria. Just a few days ago, there was a school shooting, which is crazy because Austria is one of the most safest countries in the world. And it's WAYY harder to get a gun than it is in the US for example.

Apparently, people found out the school shooter had no friends but really enjoyed playing shooting video games and now people are blaming the fucking video games over the school shooting??? What the fuck bro??? I thought we got over this phase??

If a video game causes you to become a school shooter, then I think you're the problem, not the game.

☆

[proshippers-against-censorship]

Anti: *Posts an image with two anime girls that says“Umm proshippers shouldn't post that stuff because it might trigger rape victims! UwU” Bitch shut the fuck up you're not innocent, you literally reblogged my proship moots pls and said word for word: “maybe Hitler had a FEW right ideas🗣️” plus you posted a Ben Shapiro meme on your blog that basically said "why do all lesbians look like men?”

Like if you're trying to be the moral police and police other people's views on fiction, then maybe don't post that shit? –a frustrated proshipper

ANYTHING has a chance to trigger ANYONE. That doesn't mean we should just all implode. Tag common triggers properly, tag others upon request, and trust that those with triggers will also handle themselves safely!

[proshippers-against-censorship]

I sometimes see proshippers justifying to/ arguing with antis that proshipping is fine because victims should be allowed to explore and interact with their trauma in fiction. I think this is a poor argument: not because it isn't true that fiction can be used this way; but because it sets up an idea that you need a valid reason to grant you permission to make fucked up shit, and also that people should disclose their personal history as payment to make said fucked up shit. I don't like this implication, especially when you're arguing with a crew that will take any invitation to do background checks on everyone to dig up real or exaggerated dirt while they're verifying you have the correct trauma to make what you make.

People don't need an excuse to make disturbing and taboo content. They can make it because they are free to do what they want so long as they aren't causing real harm to anyone who isn't going out of their way to offend themselves. You can psychoanalyze them all you want but even if there is literally no reason, they're still allowed to do it.

Preach. Do what you want forever.

[helelmcgrippers]

I agree, this opened my eyes honestly.