#online discourse

[bethanydelleman]

I have to say something about how to approach fiction, because while I think I've always done it automatically, judging by online discourse this is not universal: when engaging with fiction you should just accept the premise and in-universe rules.

For example, you reading a story set in the past and the main couple are 17 and 25. Does everyone in the story treat this as a totally normal age gap? Okay, then for now, put your 21st century morality in a little box and label it "real world morals" and then put this couple's age gap being normal in a box called "in-universe/historical morals" and accept that you can store both boxes in your mind without exploding because you are are thinking, rational human being. Because it's driving me straight up a wall that people can't seem to do this! "He kills people, what a red flag!" "Ma'am, that is a magical warlord and if he stopped killing people they would kill him. He doesn't have an office job."

"That was very dubious consent. I can't support this ship." "Sir, she grew up in literal hell, I doubt they had comprehensive sex ed there. Also, she might learn and grow?"

"She's only sixteen, he's a pedo!" "If society at that time says that sixteen is the marriageable age, then no, he's not. That is not how any of this works."

"They grew up together and their parents want them to marry? Gross." "Yeah, it would be weird today, but everyone is treating this as normal. I guess it was A Thing."

Sure, in a modern, non-fantasy story set in your country, judge by your moral code all you want, but if you want to actually enjoy a story that isn't written with your exact morals, you need to accept the premise. Step back later and do some analysis, think about how society has changed (hopefully for the better), but keep in the mind the intent of the author in that time, culture, genre, or universe.

Yeah, Marianne Dashwood & John Willoughby are a creepy age gap today, but Jane Austen thought it was normal so while you read Sense & Sensibility, you can do that too. I promise it will make your reading experience 1000% better and you won't go straight to hell or anything. If you can't handle that, I banish you to the non-fiction section of the library.

Edit: I'm not saying force yourself to read something that is too ick for you. I'm not saying you can't say, "This narrative supported something I found repulsive, so I stopped." I'm just saying, try to read the book from the perspective offered and see what you think instead of freaking out the second something doesn't agree with your worldview.

Edit 2: I don't think this is suspension of disbelief. S.of D would be "I accept that vampires exist in this world" and this would be, "In a world where vampires exist, it's fine for a 900 year old vampire to date a 20 year old human."

[proship-shuujuu]

harassment is not an appropriate reaction.

anon hate is not an appropriate reaction.

doxxing is not an appropriate reaction.

death-threats are not an appropriate reaction.

suicide-baiting is not an appropriate reaction.

encouraging self-harm is not an appropriate reaction.

harming someone, either with words, baits, or trying to cause them physical harm, is not an appropriate reaction.

what is an appropriate reaction to things or people you do not like on the internet is a handy little feature that comes free with almost every social media platform, but is hardly ever used; the block button. use it.

[pinkelotjeart]

The one thing I’m learning from the Tyler Catastrophe thing happening online, is that the internet yearns for a lolcow.

Like sure, him defending Wilbur soot is weird, but c’mon, the only thing that makes people act like this is the most interesting controversy ever is just because he’s cringe. People going through his whole history on the internet and dissecting his past trauma and such, is JUST as parasocial as people are claiming Tyler is being.

Like I can assure you, this guy that makes jewellery and art and has a kinda outdated millennial vocabulary isn’t as interesting as y’all are portraying him to be.

[reallyimpressivetitle]

Lowkey loving how conformitygate totally shifted the conversation from Is Eleven (Jane) actually dead or is she alive? Like, from the interviews they've given, they were probably expecting that to be the discourse after the finale and that there would be debate about it. And that they'd be asked about it (maybe they thought they'd feel proud and praised for how clever they were for such a nuanced and brilliant ending)

And then BOOM, everyone starts talking about how the finale was so bad it had to be FAKE and a Vecna vision and nobody cares about that dead-or-alive dilemma they were trying to hype (with the whole, only Millie knows this, and we have told her not to tell Noah yadayadayada).

And the fact that it started in the byler fandom.

[honeyed-katsu]

my blog is by no means a discourse blog, but this came up on my dash because i use "#tw incest" frequently enough, and i have. words to say about it. opinions, if you will.

i am an "incest victim" (though i think that wording's stupid. the incest wasn't what hurt me, what hurt me was my father deciding to sexually abuse me as a young child). i also create incest content to "jerk off to". and yeah, most of it's porn. i find it arousing.

does that mean i'm no longer a victim? no.

i could sit here and explain that victims of sexual abuse that was perpetrated by a family member ("incest victims") often have incestuous intrusive thoughts because of that trauma, and that exploring those thoughts through fiction (a safe space where no one will be harmed) can help some victims lessen those intrusive thoughts towards real people, myself included.

but oop doesn't care about victims. it's obvious. all they care about is that things they personally don't like exists and is enjoyed by people. censoring art you find distasteful isn't helping victims. attacking victims for drawing things "wrong" isn't helping victims. using your own victimhood and the victimhood of others to bully people who enjoy things that you don't is not helping victims. if anything, you're making things worse for victims.

you're allowed to dislike things. but others are also allowed to like those things. you can't police art just because you're a victim and art makes you uncomfortable.

[i-think-therefore-i-sin]

genuinely, how do chronically online people do it? being online is so draining, people are always saying some stupid shit

[mogamuncher]

Alright fine, rent lowering gunshot incoming:

If you dislike a show enough that you're nitpicking every single possible microatom of a problem so that you can bitch, to the point where people online are afraid of admitting that they're fans of said thing and the creator gets harassed, then you are the worst type of person and incredibly miserable in every way

[fake-married-my-dead-fiance]

I accidentally looked at the comments section on MDL of The Sword and the Brocade and it's mostly people freaking out about the age gap between the actors (16 years! Fully grown adults who are 16 years apart! Bring me my pearls!) and that the male lead marries his wife's sister.

I think I might just have a really high tolerance for whatever if it's historically accurate, but I learned a while ago that it was normal for sisters to marry the same husband if it was an important family alliance so the sister thing didn't bother me at all. I did find it kind of funny when he went to her house during the marriage and was like, "Hey in-laws, I'll have another" but the logic behind it totally makes sense. An aunt probably is the best bet to raise her nephew, better than a random woman who wants to replace the former heir with her own.

Age gaps between actors I can't even understand unless one of them is not an adult. They are playing characters, their real life ages don't matter. What is wrong with people?