Tooth Lesbian

Bless every fic writer for "older" fandoms no longer in their "heyday"

Bless every gif and photoset maker for "older" fandoms no longer in their "heyday"

Bless every roleplayer for "older" fandoms no longer in their "heyday"

Bless every Photoshopper and video editor for "older" fandoms no longer in their "heyday"

Bless every musician for "older" fandoms no longer in their "heyday"

Bless every liveblogger for "older" fandoms no longer in their "heyday"

Bless every theorizer and meta writer for "older" fandoms no longer in their "heyday"

Bless every fan who writes wikis or gives news updates for "older" fandoms no longer in their "heyday"

Bless every fan who comes in screaming about what they love for "older" fandoms no longer in their "heyday"

I love you so much

I love you so much

I love you so much

I love you so much

Title: she's gonna save me, call me "baby"

Relationships: Anne Boonchuy/Sasha Waybright

Tags: hurt/comfort, angst with a happy ending, post traumatic stress disorder - PTSD, alcohol abuse/alcoholism, implied/referenced eating disorders, post Amphibia, pre time skip (they're 18)

Summary:

Anne didn't need her. She shouldn't need Anne. But something made her tap the phone icon with her thumb. Seeing Anne’s profile picture pop up, a photo of her and domino from her 7th grade birthday sleepover, she couldn't do it. She panicked, and slammed her thumb on the end call button, shaking slightly. She dropped her phone and heard something break, undoubtedly another crack on the screen. She picked it back up and inspected it to see if it was still usable, and almost dropped it again. It was ringing.

Or

After a rough night, Sasha Waybright finds herself stranded alone at the police station in the middle of the night with no one to call. Well, except for one person.

One of her family told us that she had given birth yesterday evening, but that Child Protection services had taken her baby away with no warning, claiming that she wasnt prepared to look after him. What had happened, is that she'd literally only just given birth -- hadn't even passed the afterbirth yet, is holding her blood-coated, crying, newborn baby to her chest -- and a nurse asked what her feeding plan was. She was tired from the birth and distracted by the brand new baby in her arms and thrown off by the timing of the question, but still, she managed to answer, and said she planned to breastfeed him whenever he was hungry.

Well apparently that wasn't enough of a plan for the hospital staff, who reported her and claimed that she was unprepared to look after the child, and claimed that had no social supports, and that the baby was at risk if left with her. All because a brand new mother, 30 seconds after giving birth, didn't have a PowerPoint presentation ready to go that cited the timing cycle she would feed her kid on, and instead simply said that she would feed him when he was hungry.

Child Protection services showed up, took her kid, and she was told to show up to court the next day to contest custody if she wanted her baby back.

So a woman who had given birth less than 24 hours prior was forced to rally her family and show up to court to prove that she a) had a feeding plan for the child, and b) had enough social supports to justify reclaiming her baby.

It was one of the most appalling things I'd ever seen. I don't even know if she won her case. They didn't know at the time we saw them, and after that brief interaction on the stairs, i never saw them again. I sincerely hope she got her newborn baby back.

That was about 5 years ago. And the exact same kind of thing is still happening today.

News broke today from a South Australian whistle-blower of the appalling treatment new mothers frequently receive, including hospital staff taking the baby away from the mother "for medical tests," only for the mother to then be told, with absolutely no prior warning, that the baby was not going to be returned to her.

Here's the article, and here are some excerpts:

1) the U.S. entertainment industry (especially animation) is run by older conservative types who make up offensive terms and get really mad about them.

2) the people who run Disney would be the first to fall in line with a fascist regime.

3) most of the media we consume is tailor-made and watered-down to appeal to the tastes of older, deeply religious conservative audiences.

And published it in Penthouse, to force those same censors to buy a skin mag. The editor there asked, why Penthouse?

That one is from his autobiography, Becoming Superman. See also:

When he was making Pulp Fiction, he was worried that the MPAA would object to the high level of violence in the film, so he shot a bunch of extra-gory stuff that he didn’t actually want in the film, and added it in before submitting it to the MPAA. Predictibly, they asked him to cut most of it (without even commenting on some of the things that had him worried, like the bits of Marvin’s skull that lodge in Samuel L. Jackson’s hairpiece). The resultant cuts were actually more permissive than he’d expected, so he cut a little more and submitted it, and it got passed with an R.

The second story is about that artist on Morrowind whose name escapes me (I’m not a big ES fan tbh) who figured out that if he made two creature designs, one weird and what he wanted, and one even weirder, he could get Todd Howard to agree to just about anything by showing him the whopper first, then going back and “working” for another few hours on a second, “toned-down” version, and it worked every time.

The reason I bring these up is that the thing that drives censors isn’t some extant physical rubrick of what is and isn’t acceptable, it’s the idea that they can have absolute power over someone else’s creative work. It’s about the social dominance of the interaction.

There is nothing so innocent, so clean, that a censor will not find some fault with it. Because they must find something wrong with it to justify their existence, and because it makes them feel powerful.