all ships are good ships

“Proshippers” created fandom years before “proship” and “antiship” were even concepts. Antis don’t get to come in and change the narrative now that fandom is “mainstream”. This is where the weirdos (affectionate) gather and it’s always been that way.

I miss the simple days when, for the most part, people just minded their own damn business. I miss when the worst thing someone could say to me over shipping royed or something was “they’re not even gay, you freak!”, instead of immediately accusing me of literal pedophilia over a cartoon. I miss when fandom was chill and not a morality crusade.

you’re right and you should say it

dni if you dont name your pokemon, have short nails, think british accents are attractive, have blonde or bleached hair, have blue eyes, own more than three pairs of shoes, are currently a student, never broke a bone, never had a cavity, been to a concert, play games for the gacha function, use tea bags, dislike tea, dislike oatmilk, dislike any vegetable, taken an ap class, wear only jeans, wear socks to bed, had a phone before age 12, like the summer time, live in the midwest or south of the usa, know one language, can find your name on keychains, finish 2+ season shows in less than a week, own airpods, own any apple product actually, never bitten someone, think 80 °f / 26.6 °c is hot, enjoy drinking coffee, or use discord consistently

CRYINGGG

ough ty for the tag this was so fun

Thank you, Chex, v fun, now I uhhhhhh-

man

dni if you dont name your pokemon, have short nails, think british accents are attractive, have blonde or bleached hair, have blue eyes, own more than three pairs of shoes, are currently a student, never broke a bone, never had a cavity, been to a concert, play games for the gacha function, use tea bags, dislike tea, dislike oatmilk, dislike any vegetable, taken an ap class, wear only jeans, wear socks to bed, had a phone before age 12, like the summer time, live in the midwest or south of the usa, know one language, can find your name on keychains, finish 2+ season shows in less than a week, own airpods, own any apple product actually, never bitten someone, think 80 °f / 26.6 °c is hot, enjoy drinking coffee, or use discord consistently

i feel like this makes me a red flag-

the AP class thing is questionable because im from like the middle of nowhere so we didn’t have enough teachers for AP classes / advanced classes so they just put me in class with ppl a grade above me in the things i was good at. (i’m also planning on going to college full-time soon if possible  which is basically our other equivalent of AP classes??) 

[image described in alt text]

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ZPWixvzwkVal4iZGPc3plQyecQWc_dVH/view?usp=sharing

Transcript: I've been thinking again, which I know is always a dangerous thing for me to do, but have some thoughts from my brain about how people get to the point of harassment.

I'm gonna speak specifically about fandom but I don't think this is fandom-specific. Anyway, I think it starts with, "I like a thing." or alternatively, "I don't like a thing." And that's perfectly fine. Everybody likes and dislikes things, and that's totally normal.

From there, "I want to talk to other people who like this thing" (or dislike this thing). Again, totally normal. We like to talk about our interests. We like to talk about things that are important to us.

After that, perhaps you wish more people liked that thing. Great. I also want to have more people who like the things that I like because that gives me more people to talk to and a bigger community to engage in.

Where we start to get on a little bit of shaky ground from my perspective is "Liking this thing is a good thing for people to do." When you start thinking about preferences being good or bad, that's where things could potentially go awry.

But you know, in a lot of cases it's just, "If you don't like this thing you're missing out." Which again, I have totally felt that thing before like, "This thing brings me so much joy! I want other people to feel that joy with me! (or even without me) I just want them to enjoy something that I know of as enjoyable."

The flip side of that, of course, is "Liking this thing means that I am better than other people." and that's getting a little judgmental. It could be harmless but it could be not so harmless. Flip it around, "Disliking this thing means that I'm better than other people." Again, could be harmless but could be a little more insidious.

And when I say that I mean the next step is, "People who feel the opposite of how I feel are bad people." "I like this thing. You don't like this thing. You are a bad person." "I dislike this thing. You like this thing. You are a bad person."

It's just a preference, but the step after that is thinking, "I am morally superior for having the preference that I have." And now we're getting into pretty dangerous territory. Because once you feel morally superior for your preference, the step that comes after that is "Having my preference is a good, moral choice. Having the opposite preference is a bad moral choice. People whose preference is different from mine should be punished for having a different preference."

And where does that punishment so often end up in online spaces? In online spaces, it often ends in bullying, harassment and threats of violence. Very often when we get to that point, the step after that is, "Anyone whose preference is different from mine should die." Very often the comments that come along in those when we get to that stage are about killing oneself.

But that's not all. A lot of the time there are threats of violence from one individual against the person that has a different preference, and then the step after that is, "Anyone who disagrees with my punishment for that person's other preference also shares that other preference and should also be punished, harassed, bullied and have violence enacted upon them as a result of that."

And that I think is where a lot of online spaces are trending these days. It's part of the reason why I've been quieter on Tumblr because it's not even directed at me as an individual human being, but I see things in tags and I see things in the notes where somebody who's reblogging or replying or tagging is talking about another group of people separate from me, just in their own fandom space, and so often it's threats of violence it is words of hatred. It is discussion around people deserving punishment, being bad human beings. All because of what they like or what they don't like.

I don't really have a point to this. I just have been thinking about how do you get from "I like this thing" to "you should die because you don't like this thing," and I don't think it's it's a one way street. And I don't think that everybody who starts at liking ends in threats of violence. I don't even know that most of these threats of violence are genuine. I think a lot of it is, you know, sarcastic online conversation. "Can't you take a joke?"

Yes I can. I just don't think jokes about violence are funny.

But a part of me is also extremely curious about their thought process behind shipping the problematic stuff like incest, pedophilia, etc etc besides the whole "it's just fiction" or "it's a coping mechanism" things

I definitely don't claim to speak for the proship community as a whole, but personally? I do it largely because I think there is value to be gained from the exploration of dark themes. It's not a coping mechanism, because everything I need to cope with I've already worked through with a therapist and put behind me.

But I do think that shipping a problematic relationship can provide an avenue to explore topics that I would never touch in real life, similar to how I sometimes write smut even though I'm asexual and don't want to have sex in real life. For example, it would obviously be wrong if I were to be in a relationship with my sibling in real life, but in fiction*, an incestuous shipping dynamic is an interesting way to explore the way a character or characters think and react to the world around them. The same goes for any other problematic ships, be they pedophilic, abusive, non-consensual, or otherwise not acceptable in a real life situation.

Related point: I feel like a common miscommunication here could be the definition of shipping. A lot of people define "ship" as thinking these two (or more) characters would be good for each other if they were in a relationship, which is a valid definition, but I, and from what I've seen, many other proshippers, define "ship" as thinking it would make an interesting story if they were in a relationship.

The main thing I look for in media is a compelling narrative, and sometimes depiction of things that are morally reprehensible in real life makes for an extremely compelling narrative. Depiction. Not glorification. This post sums it up very succinctly, but in case you don't want to click the link: "depiction is not the same as glorification [...] depiction from the POV of a character who thinks it’s okay is still not glorification"

The thing about proshippers is that a lot of us want to depict things that are wrong in real life, and we know those things are wrong in real life. Our views on what is acceptable in fiction are different from our views on what is acceptable in real life. We have no intention of glorifying or normalizing these things in real life. We just believe that people's taste in media does not define their moral worth.

When an English teacher, or reader, taught or picked up 1984, it wasn’t with the intention they were going to love the protagonist. They picked it up with the intention of reading a whole story and trying to grasp the theme or catharsis from the story. If the protagonist was a *shitty* person it played into the the themes or the story, because it wasn’t about morally judging the book or *liking* or feeling attachment to the protagonist. Sometimes and often times, books were just about gaining another perspective. 

No one read Lolita expecting to endear, or like, or be inspired by Humbert. You are supposed to be upset by his behavior, you don’t read Lolita with the intention of being inspired. You read it to learn more about what the fuck is going on inside someone’s head when they behave like that. How children get sucked into abusive situations. Or read “The Great Gatsby” not because they want to fall in love with Gatsby or Nick, but to better understand and analyze the experience of the 1920s or destitution of the American Dream. 

A lot of internet and fandom culture has changed that though. When we say something like “I love the Great Gatsby” it comes with the idea or association that means you must *love* or relate to one of the characters. And maybe you do, but the first assumption is not longer about the quality of the work or themes, or cathartic impact-it’s about character admiration. And with that character admiration, in tumblr stan culture, or kin culture, or exalting characters with fanart/romance/so on you don’t just ‘admire’ or find that character ‘compelling’ it now translates to ‘you LOVE that character’ or you ‘DIRECTLY relate to that character.’ 

You can’t say “I love how Humbert is written, it’s so fascinating and dark”, without it directly translating you somehow relate to a child abuser or condone his actions. Taking in media has become an act of worship and connection. We no longer watch meant to just see the story as a whole, we watch expecting to connect to a character and if we offer them our “worship” as it’s become, as opposed to just attention or interest study as it traditionally was, it means we are condoning the character or saying we directly empathize with all their actions. 

I think that’s why there is often now so much fuss over *toxic* characters or not. Or whether that classical novel is showing good or bad things anymore. We’re treating the characters as people we should love or want to draw or write about. Sometimes a story is just about getting the the theme or catharsis or learning another perspective. We don’t NEED to like the character. Or we don’t HAVE to like a character to be impressed by how they’re written or intrigued by their behavior. 

And this is where “unhealthy relationships” in fiction come in too. Well-written, complex stories of bad relationships aren’t supposed to be good and healthy examples. If it’s held up that way (Twilight), then the issue is the writing and the writer. Unhealthy relationships in, say, Anna Karenina are obviously unhealthy but they are, to misquote James Joyce “portals to discovery.” You can know that a fictional relationships is seriously bad and still find it interesting. Psychology! Complexity! 

Also I want to add that some characters (Humbert Humbert is a good one) are written so that if and when you find yourself sympathizing or saying “Yeah, I know that feeling” you’re supposed to stop and consider that. Not in terms of “I am a sick individual and deserve to die.” but more like “is it possible to have compassion for terrible people?” and “what is it in our culture or my upbringing that makes me think like I do?”

I’ve heard way too many people say “I will never read Lolita because of what it encourages” and I just…you’re missing the point? Completely? Like, you’re so missing the point that it’s almost meta? You’re not supposed to like Humbert??? You’re supposed to either be like “wow, gross, dude” or “oh fuck, wait, why do I have even 1 thing in common with this guy?” Nabokov is not going to be straightforward with you! 

It’s like the jokes about being mad at your teacher for asking why the sky is blue in a certain book. Maybe there really is a reason. Did you think of that? For a bunch of people who’ll write thesis-length defenses of your favorite ships and trace down one instance in one minute of one episode of the 15 season show to prove that you’re right, it concerns me that you’re not as willing to look at a lot of other things with any depth. To say nothing of multi-chapter fanfic.

If you surround yourself with only good and pure and wholesome media approved by the purity-culture police, then you just don’t get to do a lot of introspection and I think that’s kind of a shame. I feel like it really limits your view of the world.

I dunno. There’s a weird kind of anti-intellectualism disguised as protection and good intent sometimes. Or it feels like the kind of prudishness that labels some books “dirty” and the people who read them equally disgusting, but just relies on social ostracism to enforce the labels. You know, “Think of the children!!” 

When like… in any piece of media, the text is the text is the text. The text can be compelling, and fascinating, and contain value whether or not it’s an exact reflection of you as a person. Sometimes there is arguably even greater value in being able to find reasons to relate to the humanity of a character or in a story even though elements differ from who you are personally. It is an exercise in empathy, and it is a pillar of why humans tells stories to each other to expand our viewpoints, and it sometimes results in examining the sources of that empathy as outlined above. Hell, it’s also why “representation matters”: not just so we can see ourselves, but so we can see others, and find reason to empathize despite differences. There’s unquantifiable power in that.

1. Is the author dead? x

2. Is your baby in the bathwater? x

What do I mean by those things? Let’s start with #1. The Death of the Author is a type of literary criticism, the extreme cliff notes version of which is that art exists outside of the creator’s life, personal background, and even intentions. I’m using it slightly differently than Barthes intended, but that’s okay, because the author is dead and I’m interpreting his work through my own lens.

In fandom, the author is dead. In fact, the author was never alive in the first place, not really. The author has only ever been the idea of a person, because unlike published fiction, the only thing we know about a fanfic author is that which they choose to tell us about themselves.

Why is that important?

Because it might not be true. Hell, that happens in real life with published authors, who have SSN’s on file with their publishers, who pay taxes on the works they create and have researchable pasts. If the author of A Million Little Pieces could fake everything, why can’t I? Why can’t you? Why can’t the writer of your favorite fic in the whole wide world?

Stop me if you’ve heard this before: “you can only write about [sensitive subject] if [sensitive subject] has happened to you personally, otherwise you’re a disgusting monster that deserves to die!!” Or maybe “you can only write [x racial or ethnic group] characters if you’re [x racial or ethnic group] otherwise you’re racist/fetishizing/colonizing!”

You can play this game with any sensitive subject you can come up with. I’ve seen them all before, on a sliding scale of slightly chastising to literal death threats.

Now, I could tell you that I’m a white-passing Latina whose grandmother was an anchor baby. I could tell you that I speak only English because my family never taught me to speak Spanish, something which I’ve been told is common in the Cuban community, though I only know my own lived experience. I could tell you that I’m mostly neurotypical. I could tell you that I’m covered in surgical scars. I could tell you lots of things.

Are any of these true? Maybe! I could tell you that my brother has severe mental development problems, so uncommon that they’ve never been properly diagnosed, and that he will live the rest of his life in a group home with 24-hour care. Is that true? Am I allowed to write about families struggling with America’s piss-poor services for the handicapped now?

Am I allowed to write about being Cuban? After all, I did just say that I’m Cuban. But is it true? Can I instead write a character that’s Panamanian? Maybe I really am Panamanian, not Cuban. Maybe I’m both. Maybe I’m neither. Maybe I’m really French Canadian. Should we require people to post regular selfies? I can’t count the number of times I’ve had someone come up to me speaking Arabic, and I’ve been told that I look Syrian. What’s stopping me from making a blog that claims that I am Syrian? Can you even really tell someone’s race and ethnicity from a photo?

Am I allowed to write about being a teenager? Am I allowed to write about being a college student? Am I allowed to write about being an “adulty” adult? Can I write a character who’s 40? 50? 60? How old am I?

All of this is to say: you can’t base what someone is or is not “allowed” to write about on a background that may or may not be real. No matter how good your intentions. And I get it - this usually comes from a place of well-meaning. You’re trying to protect marginalized groups by stopping privileged people from trampling all over experiences that they haven’t suffered. I get that. It’s a very noble thought. But you can’t require a background check for every fic that you don’t like.

If you say “you can only write about rape if you’re a rape victim,” then one of three things will happen:

Real survivors will have to supply intimate details of their own violations to prevent harassment

Real survivors will refuse to engage and will then have to deal with death threats and people telling them to kill themselves for daring to write about their own experiences

People who aren’t survivors will say “yeah sure this happened to me” just to get people to shut up

Has that helped anyone? I mean really - anyone??

So now let’s get to point #2: is your baby in the bathwater?

If your intention is to protect marginalized people from being trampled upon, stop and assess if your boot is the one that’s now stamping on their face. Find your baby! Is your baby in the bathwater? Which is to say: find the goal that you’re advocating for. Now assess. Are you making the problem worse for the people you’re trying to protect? Does that rape victim really feel better, now that you’ve harassed and stalked them in the name of making rape victims feel safe?

Let’s say you read a fic that contains explicit sex between a 16 year old and a 17 year old. Is this okay? Would it be okay if the writer was 15? 16? 17? Should teenagers be barred from writing about their own lives, and should teenagers be banned from exploring sexuality in a fictional bubble, instead of hookup culture? Is it okay for a 20 year old to write about their experiences as a teenager? Is it okay for a 20 year old to write about being raped at a party as a teenager? Is it okay for a 30 year old? How about a 40 year old? Is it okay so long as it isn’t titillating? Is it okay if taking control of the narrative allows the writer to re-conceptualize their trauma as something they have control over? Is it okay if their therapist told them that writing is a safe creative outlet?

Is your author dead?

Is your baby in the bathwater?

Now let’s take a hardline approach: no fanfiction with characters who are under 18 years old. None. Is the 16 year old who really loves Harry Potter and wants to read/write about characters their own age better off? Should they be banned from writing? Should they be forced to exclusively read and write (adult) experiences that they haven’t lived? Will they write about teens anyway? Should they have to share it in secret? Should 16 year olds be ashamed of themselves? Should we just throw in with the evangelicals and say that the only answer is abstinence, both real and fictional?

Let’s say that no rape is allowed in fiction, at all. None. What happens to all the hurt/comfort fics where a character is raped and then receives the support and love that they deserve, slowly heal, and by the end have found themselves again? Are you helping rape victims by banning these stories? Are you helping rape victims by stripping their agency away, by telling them that their wants and their consent doesn’t matter?

Is your baby in the bathwater?

Fandom is currently being split in two: on one side, the people who want to make fandom a “safer” place by any means necessary, even if that means throwing out all of the marginalized groups they say they want to protect - and on the other, people who are saying “if you throw out that bathwater, you’re throwing the baby out too.”

The whole point of fandom is to be able to explore all kinds of ideas from the safety and comfort of a computer screen. You can read/write things that fascinate you, disgust you, titillate you, or make your heart feel warm. This is true of all fiction. People who want to read about rape and incest and extreme violence and torture can go pick up a copy of Game of Thrones from the bookstore whenever they want. Sanitizing fandom just means holding a community of people who are primarily not male, not straight, not cis, or some combination of those three, to higher and stricter standards than straight white cis male authors and creators all over the world.

There is nothing you can find on AO3 that you can’t find in a bookstore. Any teenager can go check out Lolita, or ASOIAF, or Flowers in the Attic, or Stephen King’s It, or Speak, or hundreds of other books that have adult themes or gratuitous violence or graphic sex. The difference is that AO3 has warnings and tags and allows people to interact only with the types of work that they want to, and allows people to curate their experiences.

Are these themes eligible to be explored, but only in the setting of something produced/published? Books, movies, television, studio art, music - all of these fields have huge barriers to entry, and they’re largely controlled by wealthy cishet white men. Is it better to say that only those who have the right connections to “make it” in these industries should be allowed to explore violence or sexuality or any other so-called “adult” theme?

Does banning women from writing MLM erotica make fan culture a better place?

Does banning queer people from writing about queer experiences make fan culture a better place?

Is M/M fic okay, but only if the author is male? What if he’s a transman? What if they’re NB? Who should get to draw those lines? Should TERFs get a vote? What if the author is a woman who feels more comfortable writing from a male character’s perspective because she’s grown up with male stories her whole life, or because she identifies more with male characters? What about all the transmen who discovered themselves, in part, by writing fanfiction, and realized that their desires to write male characters stemmed from something they hadn’t yet realized about themselves?

How can we ever be sure that the author is who they say they are?

Who is allowed to write these stories? How do we enforce it?

Is it better for none of these stories to ever exist at all?

Have you killed your author?

Yay thank you I adore ata

- Sokka x Katara

- Zuko x Azula

- Katara x Her dad

- Sokka x Katara x Aang

- Sokka x Azula x Zuko

- Zuko x Azula x Tylee