things some people, especially people who are new to ao3 or fandom/fanfic space as a whole, seem to not understand:
archive of our own is an archive. not a social media.
archive of our own was built with the stance that there would be no censorship, because other platforms already had censorship where some things that were taboo were reported/removed. ao3 was built with the purpose that all of these works, that were not allowed on other platforms, would be allowed on ao3.
the archive will house anything that’s considered fanworks. so no, you cannot report this fic because it portrays in explicit details taboo topics about xyz, you cannot report that fic because it romanticizes and glorifies xyz. ao3 will not remove any of those fics, because whether or not you like it, those fics do not go against ao3’s terms of service.
“but these things are not allowed on other platforms” that’s precisely why ao3 was created, to house and give a platform to these things that were censored/banned/removed from other platforms.
if you have a problem with this, you can use other platforms to post and read fanfics
but you should also know that ao3 by far has the best tagging system, meaning you won’t get anything like what ao3 provides on other platforms, meaning it may be a pain in the ass for you to find a fic with the prompts and pairing you’re looking for, meaning you may still get jump scared by things that are triggering to you half way through your reading of what you thought was an innocent fic. because other platforms don’t have tagging systems, where you can find and avoid any character/pairing/tag as you please, like ao3.
i think it's quite harmful to share the mindset that basically anything goes on ao3. yes, tags and filtering are super helpful to avoid your dislikes, but because of how many "taboo topics" are written, it's more challenging to find what i want when i have to scroll past abuse, mental health glorification, etc. i think authors need to really take some time to self evaluate and really come to terms with what they're writiinf and if it's that important to be written.
actually, authors can write whatever they want because they write for themselves. not. for. you.
we don't have to cater to your personal liking or comfort because we fucking write whatever the hell we want for ourselves. we are our main audience and priorities. and we already tag our warnings, it's your job to avoid them.
also if you actually filter out tags about topics you don't like, you won't have to scroll past most of the things you don't like, because every fic that's tagged as such just won't show up on your screen at all
Ah yes, and here we have tumblr user "innocent bean" telling AO3 to abandon the mission they were created for, and fan authors to shut up and conform all of their fic to what "innocent bean" wants to read.
Idk, maybe I’m too woke, but I think people writing violent r4pe and other sexual abuse in great detail about a 2 month old for sexual gratification as if it’s just normal smut is mad harmful for everyone and anyone and shouldn’t just be brushed off as “taboo”, and it’s harmful to describe it as such. I’m not trying to say AO3 should be restructured but I think to be so casual about such horrendous crimes being sexualised/romanticizesd is awful and whether you like it or not these works are public and open to criticism and to use the excuse of “they write it for themselves not you” is kind of null and void as there is an option to make your work private and the moment work is public to the world it’s open to other people and no longer fully yours if they truly wrote it for themselves they would have put it in the “unrevealed” collection like writing child p0rn is unacceptable and I’m not talking about work that explores the effects of sexual abuse of kids I’m talking about full on p0rn also there is a big problem with people not tagging the work properly so no filtering tags doesn’t always works It's crazy to me that people have made fanfic spaces and fandom spaces a safe place for literal predators that if you so much as criticise the weird things (incest, non-consensual, and pedo stuff) you'll be called a puritan. Like, since when was I a prude for calling people weirdos for thirsting after teens IMO, wanting kids to not be sexualised is not censorship it’s just basic logic.
Way to read the post and completely miss the point. It is an archive first and reading place second. A writer has every right to post and make a work as public as possible, and you have every right to ignore the person. Unless they improperly tag based on the AO3's rules, you can either block them or leave the page. Seriously, it's that simple. It doesn't matter how casual you think they feel about it. What you think is casual could be treating it as serious or with perfect care to more people, and you don't get to dictate how others feel about their art. Art is not about taste, only expression and feelings. And if someone wants to write tape, pedophiillia, incest, ect, they can and have very much the right tom.
To say otherwise is not basic logic, it's censorship, no matter what "I'm uncomfortable so it shouldn't exist" paint you splattall over it. That's the attitude that lead to the AO3 site in the first place (I'm pretty sure a founder wrote wincest). It is better to have a safe place to store it and can be told to tag it better (and blocked if you are not satisfied with their refusal if they follow the rules) verses a place that has zero tagging and might have deceptive wording to hide it (and might have reports ignored by the bot moderation like many sites use, unlike AO3's human volunteers).
The fact of the matter is, don't like, don't read. It's always been that simple. Sometimes you find stuff you dislike on accident, but that's why the back button exists. You control what you see, not the creator or an algorithm.
I see what you're saying and agree for the most part, but you have to understand that sexualisation of children is a serious issue, and you can definitely see the difference between someone who's clearly working through something and someone who's getting off to the idea of children being abused sexually.
Now I don't support censorship, but more so I don't support child predators being welcomed and protected. Freedom of speech should have limits when it comes to child protection. Like, does this anti-censorship expand to AI videos of children being put in a sexual situation? What stops it from being freedom of speech and being a form of CSAM? Whether it's realistic or not, because in my opinion any glorified version of children being sexually abused is where it crosses the line from freedom of expression/speech, there is no possible context where painting a child in distress in a sexual context is okay.
Like with these videos with children playing with Diddy and Jeffery Epstein, people are laughing, saying it's not that deep. Like, imo that's not okay. That's not like, if that's funny, then I'd like someone to explain what's funny and same goes with these stories with literal babies being raped. Where is the benefit? Where is the benefit of keeping this disgusting fiction? What is so good about children in compromised positions that it's worth defending? Because all it's doing is normalising pedophilia and forcing us to make a safe space for these predators to express they're disgusting fantasies, and that's not cool, but oh, as long as they're not taking it too far, whatever "too far" is, as long as it's not real kids, I suppose. Do you know what the number one downloaded image on pedophiles' computers is? It's the copper tone logo that depicts a child's pants being pulled down by a dog it starts there then progresses and gets worse because it's not enough to fantasise it or see it even if with ai they can generate the exact scenario they want that will not be enough and that's why when people justify that in anyway I don't think children are safe around you the thing is with these predators first it's fiction it's stories and then it's drawings then it's real videos real pictures and then they go after a real kid it always escalates when it comes to dopamine it will numb itself you go into the more tame stuff then your mind numbs itself and you need to get into the more freaky shit to get that high again and if that high includes children I don't think there's any defending that.
You have to ask yourself what kind of person would write that deplorable shit? What kind of person would put that prompt of children playing with sex toys into an AI? Would you? Are you the type of person who in your free time writes stuff of children being sexually abused? My bets are on no, so ask yourself, who would? The answer is predators they're the ones who want to see kids in that light.
I get that AO3 is a place for people to post whatever they want without fear of it being taken down, and my points are more of a broader statement, like in general, and l am in no way trying to promote censorship, but there has to be a line between what is okay and what's not, and the sexualisation of children is where I think that line should be drawn, and I'm not talking about the effects that sexual abuse has on kids or stories that explore CSA, as I do, as a victim of child physical and sexual abuse, think those stories need to be told and do help victims process what they've been through, but there is a clear difference between that and CSAM
I an going to make this very simple for you. It doesn't matter. It doesn't involve real people who can or cannot consent, it doesn't harm actual kids, and it can be hidden behind warnings like porn sites. Your rights start at your fist and end at the other person's face if I want to give a a metaphor.
Here's the thing about this entire situation: until it has the potential to harm actual kids, which words on a page do not, it is not CSAM by the legal definition--no buts about it, it is under the first amendment that AO3 is following. The only authorities we need to care about is the government, which cannot silence you for artistic expression, and AO3, who fully supports the art being posted there. Your right to complain about being uncomfortable or experiencing a triggering situation is equal to my right to write my violent rape and torture fics--we are not hurting anyone doing either. And the only people I am affecting is fictional characters and willing readers who saw the very clear tags.
I would rather have a person with pedophillic urges with internet have access to words on page instead of going to a website actively selling it--it's harm reduction. It shows they know that they can keep themselves responsible and children can remain unharmed. I am not going to go so far as to say they would be safe around actual kids (that's a debate raised not related to this discussion).
No, I don't think all of them escalate to the real thing, because many know the taboo behind these actions and feel shameful. I believe instead of going about saying what they will do because of their mental health conditions, we should be trying to get these people help with the problem and preventing actual CSAM creation, not dealing with artists who use a mouse, tablet, keyboard, ect. Many probably would like to have a way to talk about this to a professional without judgement (like their victims) and no hurt actual children, and those that do want to hurt children are not giving the effort to stay online. They're the ones asking for personal meetings. They're the ones who are caught going out doing it. They're the ones who are blaming others for their actions when caught. They're the ones you should be focusing on. Because no matter how much you say this isn't about stories discussing CSA, that entire response sounds like pure censorship, no matter how you spin it about keeping kids safe. You cannot, no matter how much you explore a work, treat them any different from a gen fluff fic when they're art. CSAM must use real children, and a work about two fictional characters/a fake child getting painted/written about being abused being lumped in with something that tortured real kids waters down the definition of CSAM. I'm not sorry, that's actually damaging to the reason there's a distinction.
No, I don't think anything you used as an example of art counts as CSAM, even if the intent is for personal desires. Nor do I enjoy cartoon kids being put into programs for the creation of more content. However, you are literally attacking the windmill while physical giants roam free. All of your issues are for what happens with the smaller group that are active predators, not those who might be swayed or sated by art. I will not put them in the same group when they want to remain harmless and I can advocate for harm reduction. I understand that it's a disorder, and I would rather have no victims in the first place.
There's going to be people who do not want to be good and decent, or want to follow the rules, but we really need to focus on stopping the person going after real vulnerable kids instead of a person getting off to a painting of a girl with a lowered diaper. That's where the line must be drawn and is already drawn legally. And the one that AO3 follows.
