Queer Anarchism & Co.

The person who posted that screenshot posted it on June 30 2020

According to the wayback machine archives of their blog it was actively in their blog from mid-late June to the first week of July (give or take some time the gaps mean we can’t know when precisely)

That link leads to another blog in their circle a reblogged article from star-anise (who is a whole other issue as well) about how 4chan was planning a homophobic raid

Article Link (posted by op May 27 2020)

Commentary added by QA on May 29, more added May 31 2020

What an convenient way to wrap up valid critique and asking for accountability for their actions in this.

I think too the posting of kink critical content by QA in this timeframe is incredibly convenient as well.

They’re well aware of their reputation and I’m sure this has all been so lovely for their little campaign.

I have done the curtesy of archiving their commentary on incest yet on the wayback machine simply to document that they have never removed it to this day.

There is also the matter of their only response to me which was incredibly aggressive and gaslighting. Here is the link. (Sept 20 2019) This too has been archived.

Are you aware at all of how many people have been sexually abused by their siblings, how many people are traumatised by these experiences and then have to face triggering images online of fictional incest just because “it’s fictional so it doesn’t hurt anyone”??

Are you aware of how many people have been sexually abused by people who were not their siblings?

Like, I’m aware that this happens, but I don’t see how it would make all consensual incest unethical. That’s like saying that sex in the back of a car is unethical because a lot of people have been raped in the back of cars. 

Hell, I don’t have the experience of being abused that way, but seeing fictional incest still provokes intense fear, intense disgust. People who think their fictional incest won’t hurt anyone are completely ignoring all the people who, regardless of their abusive experiences or not, can suffer panic attacks or other trigger responses when they see it.

If you’ve never experienced anything like that, where does the disgust come from, you think? And why do you think that a lot of people do not experience that at all? Because, ya know, incest is extremely popular in fan fiction. 

As for the triggers, well, there are a LOT of things in fan fiction that can be very triggering to some. Most fandoms use an extensive trigger warning system for that very reason. 

And as for producing explicit material about ANY ships or characters from children’s shows- a lot of the time, the characters in these shows are ALSO children. Sexualising underage characters, if you are not underage yourself, is absolutely disgusting.

I agree with you that sexualizing kids is unethical. But so is sexualizing rape, which is very uncontroversial in fan fiction.I have mixed feelings about this. I think we need a very vocal and public understanding in all fan fiction communities that sex with kids is never okay and that rape is never okay, but I also think that those who feel attraction towards kids or get turned on by rape fantasies need a way to deal with those fantasies, because bottling them all up just doesn’t work. And writing or drawing about it seems to be the least harmful way to do that. 

Also, people write these stories for more than one reason. Suppose you’re an adult writing fan fiction about two thirteen year olds exploring sexual acts for the first time? It’s possible that you’re writing that because you’re attracted to real thirteen year olds. If that’s the case and writing helps you deal with that, I think that’s a pretty good way to deal with your situation. But it is just as likely that you’re not actually attracted to thirteen year olds at all and are writing that story as a creative way to express and understand your own past experiences of exploring your sexuality when you were thirteen. 

So to summarize, 

Incest: not inherently unethical, capable of being totally healthy or totally abusive, just like non-incest relationships. Some more power complications but that does not inherently make it unethical. 

Branding someone ‘monster’ the moment they express an attraction towards children is exactly the kind of social isolation a person does NOT need in that situation. What a person in that situation needs is help and understanding and SUPPORT. They need their friends to stick with them and to believe in their ability to make ethical choices. They need to know that they are valuable and human and worthy of life. They need to know that they are not a monster. They need to know that they are a whole person, with all the same potential to be a good person (a great person) or a shitty one that all of us have. They need safe ways to talk about their feelings and safe ways to communicate with other non-offending (and no longer offending) pedophiles about how to never act on their desires. They need access to a non-judgemental therapist.

As they explained, having attraction towards children isn’t necessarily a struggle or a big deal. Paraphrasing: “if by some cosmic twist of the universe I could not date redheads without abusing them, that would be a bummer because redheads are really attractive to me. But it wouldn’t be a tragedy. I’d have a great life dating all the beautiful non-redhead people. I would not be haunted by constant pain or thoughts of just grabbing a redhead. I wouldn’t consider myself a danger to redheads.”

So yeah, reflecting on that, I need to apologize for how pathological my post was. I was wrong to assume that all who experience attraction towards children struggle with those feelings. I might consider myself ‘better’ than people who chase pedophiles out of their neighbourhoods, but in an effort to be supportive I made that stereotypical leap towards pity rather than respect and acceptance. Sorry.

Got asked for my opinion on this post. Not linking to it because judging from the OP’s posts over the last day they’re just getting increasingly upset about people reblogging to disagree. Kindly don’t harass the OP with this post if you know who they are.

(built-in cw: nsfw due to open discussion of real and animated pornography, though there’s no graphic content. cp mention, pedophilia mention, human trafficking mention, sexual exploitation mention.)

This teen posted to say that a speaker from an organization called Traffic 911 came to their school and confirmed everything antis say about drawn cp and fictional, written/animated porn:

Before anything else, I have to give the OP points for their sheer audacity. by using vague language, they’ve asserted that you, random porny fanwork creator, are directly responsible for human sex trafficking because all porn increases demand! wow. (also yikes.) That’s bold, and probably doing the usual thing where smutty fic featuring adolescents over the age of consent having a sexual interaction with each other is no different from literal child porn.

but hey: they got it from somewhere, right? It seems reasonable to trust an organization fighting sex trafficking to have an educated position on porn. But as this post is thin on details and we have the organization name, let’s see what they’re about.

Traffick911.com is the only anti-trafficking organization that comes up if you search ‘traffic 911’ on Google. And they have two speaker programs aimed at teens: ‘traps’ And ‘hooked’. ‘Hooked’ is all about how porn affects the brain, apparently, and judging by the curriculum, is probably what the OP attended.

I can easily see how the OP of the capped post heard ‘fanworks about fictional teens are child porn and gateways to sex trafficking’ from this curriculum. So what are the resources on which this seminar is based?

Before we dig into these resources below, note that this is some classic SWERF argumentation going on here. ‘Porn is not a victimless indulgence’, it asserts. Well, no - if the people in porn are being exploited/are trafficking victims, then porn is not victimless. but this only highlights the importance of making the effort to obtain ethically produced porn, not a need to stop watching porn altogether.

The seminar’s strongest points seem to be about how developing a porn addiction is harmful to the addict - which, fair, addiction to anything is frequently harmful, and porn can become an addiction. but apart from that, the points run very thin or dovetail neatly with SWERF rhetoric: porn is bad and harmful and must be done away with.

Fight the New Drug and their subscription-based app Fortify. Fortify is supposed to help people overcome porn addiction and their entire front page is dedicated to convincing people to try their new, updated services.  Fight the New Drug features articles like ‘3 Reasons Why Animated Porn is Gaining Global Popularity’.

As this is the only reference provided by Traffick911′s ‘Hooked’ program that seems to have anything to do with porn that doesn’t feature real people, let’s take a look at this article in more depth.

First it helpfully tells us that all animated porn is ‘hentai’, which we should not look up because it’s just that gross. (wake me up when American imperialism is done telling us that all bad animated content comes from Japan.) it then goes on to explain that animated porn is just as bad as porn with real actors because

people watch it specifically because it’s unrealistic. which is evidently bad because it creates grosser fantasies? or something? even though it’s animated porn viewers who themselves acknowledge the content is unrealistic, and therefore they presumably know not to try it irl.

people who watch animated porn may lose interest in sex with real people. … look, if you’re trying to connect this back to how porn addiction creates demand and therefore increases sex trafficking, this is the opposite of proving your point. If animated porn makes potential rapists of trafficking victims uninterested in real people, isn’t that decreasing demand?

(is this a screencap from otaku no video? i could swear it’s a screencap from otaku no video.)

animated porn lets people ‘justify’ their ‘porn habit’ because they don’t have to worry about whether or not the actors are okay. [link goes to the Glamour article they paraphrased for this part of the article. has explicit content in text.] so basically this isn’t about sex trafficking at all. this is about watching porn of any kind being a bad thing to do. sneaky.

and finally - animated porn is bad because it’s a cartoon, and as we all know, all cartoons are for kids. which mean kids are totally going to end up watching animated porn. I … listen. has this author ever bothered to google ‘hentai dvd covers’? (don’t google it unless you’re 18+. seriously.) because I guarantee you, a minimal communication about what kinds of pictures you don’t click on with the kiddos will prevent them from making an error on this.

(We could also really do with the myth that ‘animation is only for kids’ being done away with. When has even US animation ever only been for kids? Warner Bros shorts were for adults, The Flintstones were for adults. The Simpsons are for adults … please. this is a ridiculous falsehood.)

In summary, this article presents a bunch of evidence that animated porn is, at worst, hurting the person who chooses to view it and summarizes with ‘but it’s still just as bad as porn with real actors because reasons!’

Moving on.

Your Brain on Porn - website with links to lots of studies about the negative effects of porn on the viewer’s brain.  I’m a little skeeved out by the top article comparing the minds of porn viewers to rats.

some of these may be worth a read, but I haven’t taken the time to take an in-depth dive into any of the studies to see how solid the methodology is. I clicked through the third link - ‘Studies Find Escalation and Habituation in Porn Users’ - which provided around 20 studies illustrating that habitual porn viewing tends to ‘escalate’ in the sense of moving from ‘vanilla’ to more kinky or ‘extreme’ porn. There was one link that stated that viewing adult/adult porn at too young an age might create a predisposition for viewing cp down the line; another asserted that the high availability of porn thanks to the internet might increase the likelihood of a map who is also attracted to adults discovering they are a map (only the abstract was visible ahead of a paywall, but despite a provocative title, it did not look like research had demonstrated that porn use created an interest in minors/prepubescent kids.

Under the 5th link on the front page, part of a summary reads: “multiple studies reveal a link between porn use and sexual performance problems and sexual dissatisfaction”. so, again: habitual porn use may decrease interest in participating in sexual activity yourself, which makes the link between porn addiction and contributing to sex trafficking demand rather tenuous.

And the final resource:

pureHOPE - let’s just let their blurb speak for them: “[PureHope is]  working with you to build a strong culture of purity and justice in your church, school, or group […] sharing with your team or group to equip you in the pursuit of purity and justice in our culture.”

well. at least PureHope is honest about being a Christian purity culture advocate.

and hey: I’ve asserted before that I think the hypersexualized messaging in contemporary US culture is harmful to young people. But the US flavor of hypersexualization plays heavily on the taboo of sexual desire and sexual acts created by purity culture. its power is in sex being forbidden and dangerous and, for young people especially, mysterious. the sad fact is that when the effort to keep children ‘pure’ is taken too far - to the point of never educating kids about sex or allowing normal, age-appropriate levels of curiosity to be satisfied - it sets young people up to be completely defenseless against the inappropriate levels of sexualization that come all too soon. Ignorance does not protect kids. Accurate, honest education does. (The sexual stuff will, for better or worse, exist either way!)

in conclusion: If you have a porn addiction, getting help is good, and I’m not saying that all porn is ethically produced by any means or that it’s entirely possible that viewing exploitative porn does potentially increase demand for trafficking. but ‘viewing teen porn and cp, even fictional […] directly influences the demand for human trafficking’ is, uh. not well supported, to say the least!

after clicking on that last link, though, I thought I’d take a closer look at traffick911. and, uh, what I found did not improve their credit with me.

I’ve cut the rest only because this post is already long and I’ve addressed the main point, but tl;dr: traffick911 is a borderline-openly Christian organization that supported FOSTA-SESTA. between their hooked seminar and its anti-porn, SWERF-rhetoric-compatible sources that twist their own data in bizarre ways, their disregard for the safety of sex workers who are not trafficked, and their open support for purity culture, we can derive the following:

Traffick911 is not a reliable source of information regarding the effect of real, much less fictional/animated, porn on human trafficking, and

- When you source OP’s post, it ironically draws a clear, straight line from fandom anti culture to SWERF rhetoric to Christian fundamentalist purity culture.

- it claims to bridge the gap between bisexual and monosexual lgb people but it centers entirely on the same-sex-attraction part, once again reaffirming the misconception that what makes bisexual people part of the lgbt community is that they experience same-sex attraction (the old bi = half-gay billshit). When what actually makes bisexual people part of the lgbt community is every aspect of their sexuality because their bisexuality is a whole, complete thing.

- It creates a weird division where bisexual people are suddenly divided by gender and no longer seen as sharing a bisexual community. Of course communities can overlap but this is rarely acknowledged.

- it once again creates a division between men and women that complete fails to acknowledge how artifical gender is and how many people do not fit into those categories at all. Once again leaving a lot of non-binary lgb people without a place within lgb communities. Really when people say ‘wlw/mlm solidarity’ what I hear is ‘non-binary people don’t matter enough to have a place in how we talk about lgb sexuality.’

so firstly, terms have always and especially recently been a Hot Topic bc not everyone wants to be identified in certain ways but others self identify in those exact ways for a reason. The terms have segregated into different cultures within the broader lgbt+/queer communities. Prior to coming out as trans myself i identified as a d*ke, lesbo (i remember my parents were displeased when i wrote “lone lesbo” in sharpie on my ceiling), gay lady, and my bff certainly shared some new terms with me as well, whatever. however, now that i identify the way i do i keep in mind that i am part of a whole and unless i feel like divulging my entire life experience to everyone i meet that i would dare use the terms as freely as i did, i simply choose not to. it’s easier to stick to the lane im in now. i don’t know that it is ever more offensive to refer to someone who identifies as a d*ke as a lesbian than it is the reversal, ya feel? even if you specifically describe who you refer to, it’s less burdensome to be wary i figure. also i genuinely feel a sense of “i shouldn’t be using this word” now that i id the way i do.

that said (and mind you im on mobile and at work so i don’t have the flexibility of a computer to really nail all this down the way i may want to) i understood from a response they made to a question on the topic that they use the term in reference to people who personally identify as such, who tend to be part of the queer and/or anarchist circles. most if not all terms thrown at the lgbt+/queer community have been at least attempted to be reclaimed including d*ke and queer and, you guessed it, perverted!

as you can see particularly in the 80s when homophobia was all the rage fueled by an ignored and shamed AIDS epidemic. so i believe that’s (at least some) the origin of that possibly, though I’m not sure if lesbians ever reclaimed “perverted” as much as gay men did, I can’t speak on that. also this is not to say im fond of that reclamation, bc i suspect that was a gateway for actual perverts like pedos to start identifying with my queer/lgbt+ communities which leads me to the next point

the pedo stuff: while i can understand the desire to remain a support to someone who expresses they are struggling with being misunderstood. however. 1 being more of an asexual person (if not slightly repulsed) i don’t know if i can speak on this entirely accurately/unbiased? bc sexual attraction is confusing to me as is and cannot conceive of it as anything significant/important to living life. so that is part of my sway and 2 i really find it hard to consider a specific age range an inherent attraction instead of a fetish. bottom line i can’t view anything close to pedophilia as anything other than a fetish, much like how cis men will say they are “into” trans men, but not cis men. they fetishize us for any semblance of femmeliness and also like to infantilize us, and im all too familiar with it. even if you don’t act on it. the only way i could see someone who has a pedo fetish (mind you i also believe fetishes require indulgence to grow but anyway) be “non-offending” is if the only person they share it with is a professional prepared to help them not act on it in or fantasize about it in any way shape or form, and to rehabilitate. if one of this persuasion attempts to seek comfort in someone unable to help rehabilitate them, they are seeking acceptance of that persuasion. “it’s ok kids make you horny” …no it’s not and never has been and never will be. and if you want to talk about love? love is willing to let go and move on when something is unhealthy. fetishist obsession is not love. i fully support these kinds of people seeking help, but it is not something that you require so much support for. it’s sex they want and that is far and removed from love and not a necessity. i know intrusive thoughts are a thing. but guess what. that is what professionals are for and what differentiating from thought to action comes into play.

id also like to add i was exposed to sexuality at an inexcusably young age, so i don’t know that i take “i used to be abused” as a real excuse for explanation for anything toxic or unhealthy. seek help and break the cycle, period. don’t burden others with something as trivial as a sexual desire, it’s not a necessity to happiness or life. and no way in fucking hell is pedophilia ever a part of queer/lgbt+ communities. pedos are not about love. at best pedos are psychologically disrupted and that is not at all what the deal with lgbt+/queer communities is. also if one tries to claim they are attracted to the innocence or naivete? that’s a power dynamic and absolutely fetishization. I want to add, because i do not think our prison complex is helpful at all for any purpose besides being profitable to the elite class and making issues worse, I don’t feel locking up pedos is an answer (and i fear it might even serve them in their pursuits to coerce and manipulate someone potentially naieve). I’m hoping proper therapeutic/psychological rehabilitation is a possibility.

Hey remember how when I told them about how my sister raped me and we were only abt a year apart and then they blocked me and claimed it was to help “csa” victims who receive backlash for supporting them

So only the kind of victim who supports them is allowed a voice

Only “csa” victims not INCEST victims get a voice on whether incest is harmful

When I say ‘dykes’, I mean ‘dykes’. As in: people who identify as dykes. 

In the post you’re refering to I made it quite clear that I was writing about dykes I  know and when I speak of these dykes I won’t erase or sanitize their identities by using a mainstream, tame, deradicalized word that denies the words they specifically chose for themselves to emphasize their identities and their struggles as queer marganilized working class proudly-perverted revolutionary DYKES. 

I call people who IDENTIFY as dykes dykes. Like, ‘my friend Alice, a proud pansexual leather dyke, went to Pride last week and the pictures look so cool’.

I also call groups who IDENTIFY as dykes dykes, like Dykes on Bikes.

I also call people who IDENTIFY as dykes dykes when they are not individually specified in the conversation, such as the sentence ‘My friends and me didn’t go to Pride because there were a lot of police there. As far as we were concerned, we were a bunch of queer, fags, dykes and trannies who would never be safe around cops. We stayed home and had our own party.‘

I am never calling you, or anyone else who doesn’t identify as a dyke a dyke. I do not use dyke as a synonym for lesbian. Dyke is specific and political.

So if I refer to ‘dykes’ in a group setting, I am only referring to people who identify as dykes. If I refer to an individual as a dyke, it is because I know that’s what they want to be referred to. And if you’re half a decent person you respect that self-identification.

not sure if anyone remembers the screenshots I posted on my old blog, but to sum the worst up, queeranarchism said someone upset by incest needed to think about why they have such a strong moral reaction to it. general “anti anti” who’s lost it.

(Screenshot of hater-of-terf’s blog description, which has a link stating that the “rumors” about them & queeranarchism being pedophiles & incest fetishists are false & part of a 4chan conspiracy to tarnish lgbt peoples’ reputations)

This is nonsense. This is an outright lie, a convenient cover. The link goes to a post with an article about a 4chan raid where queeranarchism reblogs talking about how most of the people calling them out on their pedophilia & incest fetishism are terfs. These are literally all lies. I have never fucking used 4chan in my life and I’ve been trying to raise awareness about queeranarchism for a LONG time.

Queeranarchism has explicitly stated multiple times they support relationships between immediate family members, such as siblings. They have stated multiple times that they support adult-child relationships. This is all very well documented by MANY people.

Here is a link to one post with many screenshots (link).

And here is a link to one of mine with the same content + one on queeranarchism’s racism at the bottom (link).

Hater-of-terfs has me & multiple ppl I know blocked for bringing things like queeranarchism literally saying word for word “I believe sex between consenting people of the same age is ethical regardless of their family status. That includes relationships between direct siblings”. They were sent these screenshots and we were blocked.

Hater-of-terfs has multiple posts circulating rn, some on racial topics. As a black csa and incest survivor, it is driving me actually insane to see people like this accepted & supported especially in this context.

(Screenshot of hater-of-terf’s blog description, which has a link stating that the “rumors” about them & queeranarchism being pedophiles & incest fetishists are false & part of a 4chan conspiracy to tarnish lgbt peoples’ reputations)

This is nonsense. This is an outright lie, a convenient cover. The link goes to a post with an article about a 4chan raid where queeranarchism reblogs talking about how most of the people calling them out on their pedophilia & incest fetishism are terfs. These are literally all lies. I have never fucking used 4chan in my life and I’ve been trying to raise awareness about queeranarchism for a LONG time.

Queeranarchism has explicitly stated multiple times they support relationships between immediate family members, such as siblings. They have stated multiple times that they support adult-child relationships. This is all very well documented by MANY people.

Here is a link to one post with many screenshots (link).

And here is a link to one of mine with the same content + one on queeranarchism’s racism at the bottom (link).

Hater-of-terfs has me & multiple ppl I know blocked for bringing things like queeranarchism literally saying word for word “I believe sex between consenting people of the same age is ethical regardless of their family status. That includes relationships between direct siblings”. They were sent these screenshots and we were blocked.

Hater-of-terfs has multiple posts circulating rn, some on racial topics. As a black csa and incest survivor, it is driving me actually insane to see people like this accepted & supported especially in this context.