sheepfilms
he wasn't even looking at me and he found me
$LAYYYTER
Stranger Things
JVL
tannertan36
Lint Roller? I Barely Know Her
#extradirty
d e v o n
Monterey Bay Aquarium
Mike Driver
Janaina Medeiros
cherry valley forever
roma★
Origami Around
titsay
h
will byers stan first human second
seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Netherlands
seen from Uzbekistan
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from France
seen from Jordan
seen from Canada
seen from United States
seen from Netherlands
seen from South Korea
seen from United States
seen from Poland
seen from Israel
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
@shadow-complains
I am an adult who uses this sideblog to engage in discourse. For the sake of transparency: I am 19/an adult. You can call me Shadow/Whine/whatever you want. I don't care.
My asks are always on. Send whatever. Engage in civil dialogue with me or throw insults. As long as it isn't something disgusting like gore I'll respond to it directly.
I will never support: pro/darkshippers, radqueers, those who harass people, toxic users, T.R.A.S.H. media/people
Banner by: Trà Chanh Tẩm Đá
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
question to the selfship community; how does one go about shipping themselves with a canonically aro/aroace character (which the fandom is typically also heavily protective of)?
Somebody is going to say “aroace means LITTLE to no attraction, keyword is little, so go for it” and while true, this is aroace erasure, albeit unintentionally so. They use “technically they can date” as an excuse to go against the aroace label, even though many aroace people may be entirely repulsed by the concept or acting out the concept, erasing those people to the point where it becomes “we’re all just a little allo”.
Think about that and the fact that when a character is aroace there are people actively erasing that person’s identity by finding a loophole in the identity. Dont become that person.
Look at the character individually and ask yourself: would they be romantically/sexually repulsed? Up to date? Would they only want to date platonically? And come up with the conclusion on a case by case basis.
anyways. my final thoughts on the ai thing is that if you've used ai for fanfic writing, you can just stop. if youre genuinely just someone who's using it as a tool bc youve gotten used to it, its not too late to stop. I guarantee you that your writing will be better and all AI is teaching you is now how to write like AI. u need to learn how to write like u. and if you look, you Can find people in fandom to help you. theres someone who can help you proofread your fic, or tinker with your sentences. someone to help you with code. someone to help u find the answers to all your hockey questions. and itll be more fun this way
Everytime I see the discourse saying "oh my god 100s of years old vampires and teen, underage humans, are so deeply problematic and we shouldnt ship them and it shouldnt be common in popular media"
Im just like: god forbid teens also have yearnings to meet a vampire that will wisk them away from all the mundane bullshit?? You started watching a teen show or a young adult book and then got mad that the main character was actually a teen.
Literally there are adult romance vampire books and shows read and watch those and stop purity culturing over everything.
I find it funny that this is being considered "purity culture" when I feel like it's common sense to not want anything glorified with immortal beings decades, hundreds and even thousands of years in age to be in love with a 13 y/o. That being said, some of it is... fine. It genuinely depends on the being in question. For example: I think Inuyasha and Kagome is fine. Inuyasha is 50 years old but he is clearly just aging slower because he's a separate species entirely. I know someone around here likes Kamisama Kiss and Tomoe is easily centuries old, but he only has one tail, so he's a teenager just as much as Nanami is. That being said, an adult immortal being with a teenager is disgusting.
I find it funny how one of the tags says "why are there child soldiers in media" because guess what, there are child soldiers in real life and it's not "purity culture" those are real experiences real people go through. I don't know why people pretend like child soldiers do not exist IRL. There are millions of them, it's under a category called organized extreme abuse. Can we not use representations of real people as a "gotcha" moment and use purity culture discourse as an excuse to glorify and discount victims of abuse? Thanks.
"Child soldiers are not fake, they are not in your movies, and they are def not for you to use as a weapon" couple things: Did not say that was a fake thing solely made up in media??? Truthfully I do not know lots about in real life child soldiers but I don't disbelieve their existence? And I also didn't use it as a weapon? I was talking about narrative conventions? I was making reference to when people watch something like My Hero Academia or Percy Jackson and then complain that the kids are child soldiers in the media despite watching a teen show. (Which are important so children can see themselves in roles of leadership and strength and responsibility. As well as having agency.) I wasn't referencing purity culture with that. It was just a separate example of hyper analyzing children and teen media through an adult lens and then getting mad at the content. Oftentimes centering adult involvement and forgetting the target audience isn't an adult and thereby the adults should not be leading the charge in this fantasy world. My point was simply child soldiers in media are not a bad thing and even in relatively positive media like my hero or percy Jackson (hell even buffy the vampire slayer) they still show the negative side effects of this role very well. Its unfortuate you have gone through something like that but that has very little to do with this conversation.
And as for the vampire media. It is 100% purity culture because those who don't want vampire relationships with teens say it shouldn't exist at all or (oftentimes) only when it is depicted negatively because it does not fit within their morality. That is moral purity culture.
If we take an example like Twilight: that book uses vampires as an outlet for a teen girl who is struggling and parentified by her parents. Who desperately wishes for a way out of that life: in comes vampires who give the teen girl that chance. And the reasons for marriage and having a child narratively make sense from the perspective of the teen girl comes from a broken home so she dreams of the idyllic version of what a marriage could look like. It also exposes teenagers to the idea that when you come from a neglectful and at times controlling home you might disregard red flags of a potential partner because you've normalized the behaviors. And by showing Bella ending up with a vampire who is outright controlling and abusive (despite Bellas own resistance to the controlling aspects of his character) she still ends up with him because of her desperation to escape.
You could use a regular human her age, but the point is it to be fantastical and out of reach. It's supposed to be a complete escape. Which a human, in context of the narrative, can't provide.
I also think it is very interesting you're using 13 year old for the age. Which implies to me that you are thinking of very different vampire media from which I was talking about. I have never seen media use a 13 year old so i cannot comment on that. (Although im sure it exists) The vampire media I'm talking about is the 16-17-18 year old media. And usually the media also happens to write it so the vampire was turned at around their age. And if they aren't they typically portray it as very creepy. (Or not even endgame: in the case of Buffy the Vampire Slayer for example.)
I also think we need to remember that oftentimes these vampire media are also horror. And even through the contexts of the book you can see the glaring power dynamic issues.
Grooming is a very complex issue and talking about and analyzing the inherent power dynamic inequality in teen vampire media is fine (and also you absolutely should) which is also usually supported by the text even if it is a romance with an endgame relationship between a vampire and a teen human. And it even is a fun and engaging way to approach discussions of grooming and what it looks like to teenagers who may be unfamiliar. But the way some people say it shouldnt exist at all and that it is bad/evil is purity culture.
Lastly.
No real people were used while discussing this so I'm not entirely sure why youre projecting that on to me.
Victims of abuse were also not discounted at all. (And if you feel as though you were discounted in the original post, that would be projection and has nothing to do with me. Because i literally do not know you.) Whether someone identifies themselves as being a victim of abuse or not is not relevant to what should or should not be depicted in media. Most especially because two people with the same identity can differ on depiction and what they deem acceptable. So there is really no winning and can actually silence the creative self expression of victims trying to work out their trauma in a safe manner. Media does not have to teach you a moral lesson or have to depict bad things as bad to be acceptable media.
I wrote what I wrote because I was annoyed and it was more emotionally charged and less rational than usual. I think your post here has some good points and I apologize for my response clearly coming from an act of projection and lashing out as opposed to anything productive in the 2nd paragraph. You are right in saying this is not a you problem. It is definitely a me problem.
Me personally being annoyed by a throwaway tag that has nothing to do with the meat of the problem, and projecting onto you that you must somehow think child soldiers do not exist, was wrong. It was also wrong of me to imply that you simply thought they were fake or invalidating victims. I apologize for that and I will try and do better at keeping my personal life and feelings away from this discourse.
Disappointed in the harassment shown on some sides. I have very passionate opinions. That being said, me disagreeing with you will not cause me to harass you. Too many people are hurt in doing so. I was especially disgusted to see that some are being driven to suicide when attempting to recover from dangerous practices like proshipping or being radqueer. I will never, ever support this. To those who harass these people: get off the internet. Stop talking. Make a new account on your social medias solely for keeping up with your favorite media/the world's real issues and never interact outside of pressing a like button. Please.
In addition, stop havin a "anti-harassment EXCEPT" clause. Harassment is NEVER okay. Be the bigger person and don't attack anyone. I am not asking you to be a pushover and lie down if you are harassed, harmed or insulted. By all means, clap back to their public/private comment, but ensure it does not become doxxing or a way for a hate mob to come to them.
I hate these communities just as much as the next person. I especially despise the grown adults who facilitate these enviornemnts, but attacking them is not the answer.
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
tcc proship daughter or radqueer son
Both disowned.
I know we talk about how the whole "problematic content makes you think abuse is okay" is an offshoot of "violent games make school shooters." But we don't talk enough about how they stem from the same place a lot of times.
People want to be able to explain how these things happen. They want to have one thing to point to and say, "that's what did it." They want to have something easy to blame and to shun.
Because it can be hard to understand what causes these things and even harder to address them.
It also lets people say "I could never do that, my son could never do that, my mom could never do that, my friends could never do that because..."
It helps other that sort of behavior. Your friends don't enjoy problematic content, so they could never be abusers. You don't have to worry. It wouldn't happen to someone like you. And you won't exhibit any of those toxic traits either because you don't like that stuff.
No, fiction makes people more likely to be pedophiles. So, if you don't hang out with people who enjoy that fiction, you're safer. And if people just stopped engaging with that sort of fiction, harm against children would greatly reduce.
And then that turns into moral superiority. Your son doesn't play violent video games, not like those other kids. And you're going to campaign to make sure nobody else's kid can play violent video games either. And no, it's not overstepping. It's not being controlling. It's not overreacting. You're literally just trying to keep people safe, you're a good person. You're really doing your part.
I struggle to really understand what this post is trying to say. I think, if I'm getting this right, this person is trying to expand on the "fiction doesn't affect reality" argument by using the Violent Video Games craze as an example. I find this incredibly interesting because it's a false equivalency.
Most video games do not have realistic types of violence. Yes, even on a scale of extreme abuse most of it simply will never happen in the real world. No, your child will not be forced to fight zombies in the apocolypse. No, your child will definitely not have super powers/abilities, and be able to respawn, or go onto islands, or team, or emote. Literally none of this happens in real life.
But do you know what violent video games could have been horrible? How about Ethnic Cleansing, a first-person-shooter made by a Neo-Nazi group by the name of the National Alliance. Suddenly we're putting real world concepts into the violence and promoting hate. But it's fine because Ethnic Cleansing follows a fictional account, right...? I hope your answer is no. It's wrong.
And this is where the equivalency falls apart. Video game violence is fine because nobody will be faced with wacky slapstick violence or put on teams to shoot each other (and before you point to war, listen: war is NOT like how it is in most shooter games). But you know what isn't? Grooming. Glorifying abuse. Romantacizing hitting people, or seeing children in an objectifying/sexual manner. Because all of this happens in real life and teaches them to be complicit. A zombie apocolypse does not.
I encourage you to read this thesis: https://egrove.olemiss.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2605&context=hon_thesis. It directly goes against what you say. Fiction affects your perception of life for everyone, directly and indirectly. Media changes the course of your life whether you want it to or not. It's disingeous to say otherwise when there is evidence to the contrary. Thanks.
Everytime I see the discourse saying "oh my god 100s of years old vampires and teen, underage humans, are so deeply problematic and we shouldnt ship them and it shouldnt be common in popular media"
Im just like: god forbid teens also have yearnings to meet a vampire that will wisk them away from all the mundane bullshit?? You started watching a teen show or a young adult book and then got mad that the main character was actually a teen.
Literally there are adult romance vampire books and shows read and watch those and stop purity culturing over everything.
I find it funny that this is being considered "purity culture" when I feel like it's common sense to not want anything glorified with immortal beings decades, hundreds and even thousands of years in age to be in love with a 13 y/o. That being said, some of it is... fine. It genuinely depends on the being in question. For example: I think Inuyasha and Kagome is fine. Inuyasha is 50 years old but he is clearly just aging slower because he's a separate species entirely. I know someone around here likes Kamisama Kiss and Tomoe is easily centuries old, but he only has one tail, so he's a teenager just as much as Nanami is. That being said, an adult immortal being with a teenager is disgusting.
I find it funny how one of the tags says "why are there child soldiers in media" because guess what, there are child soldiers in real life and it's not "purity culture" those are real experiences real people go through. I don't know why people pretend like child soldiers do not exist IRL. There are millions of them, it's under a category called organized extreme abuse. Can we not use representations of real people as a "gotcha" moment and use purity culture discourse as an excuse to glorify and discount victims of abuse? Thanks.
Oh boy, Glitch's done it again.
so these screenshots of Glassdoor reviews from Glitch employees have been making the rounds on Twitter recently. now i personally cannot confirm or deny the truth of the allegations told in these screenshots, but i do know this: Glassdoor is a website where employees can review the working conditions they face at the company they're employed at. it's a well-known fact that Glassdoor doesn't allow just anyone to post a review there unverified; they have to show ample proof that they actually were employed at the company they say they were. so, we can operate under the assumption that these reviews are, most likely, more or less a legitimate look into Glitch Production's inner workings. however, if i'm wrong, please let me know. tl;dr: these reviews essentially state that Glitch treats its female employees like shit (what a surprise), sets ridiculously unrealistic expectations for its workers, resorts to intimidation and threats on multiple occasions, and even coerces workers to write false good reviews to boost their Glassdoor ratings (among other horrible shit). and Boy, am i not surprised but still somehow disappointed. honestly, i didn't think my respect for glitch could sink any lower, but here we are, i guess. apparently this is the same company that's going to be "paving the way for a new generation of indie artists" or whatever. more like falling back on the very same underpaying, overworking, greedy, toxic abusive bullshit that's been plaguing the animation and entertainment industries for decades now. great work guys, thanks! you're a stain on our history and the future of animation is even deeper in the pits than it ever was. we're one step back from ever redefining and reworking the rampant malpractice, mistreatment and dehumanization going on behind closed doors. link to Glitch's Glassdoor page: https://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/Glitch-Productions-Reviews-E8656356.htm Link to twitter posts with screenshots and summaries: https://x.com/lumirunner/status/2057519161648333178 https://x.com/lumirunner/status/2057800789977174404
apparently media criticism automatically = misunderstanding the point of the author now! and calling out racism = harassment, defamation and overreacting lol. love that for us in 2026; you get a free pass for shitty behavior because [insert identity label here] and you're an "indie" creator so you can do no wrong
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
Continuation of this post, in a way.
It turns out that Goose, as a then-26 year old, interacted with a 17-18 year old through the latter's sexual fan art.
Because Tumblr will stop this post from spreading if I tag it, I need to warn you here:
TW FOR SEXUAL INTERACTIONS BETWEEN AN ADULT AND A MINOR.
The rest of the post will be under the cut; viewer discretion is advised.
18 is legally an adult, you know. Quit calling them a minor.
It started when he was a minor, thus the trigger warning focusing on it starting when he was a minor.
Okay, but the way you worded it sounded like you’re against 18 year olds talking to 26 year olds when it’s perfectly legal.
@tadc-crit don’t bother trying to engage with them; they are unironically AFRAID OF BLACK PEOPLE. i WISH i was fucking joking. just because black people bullied you when you were younger doesn’t mean every single black person in existence will do the fucking same. there is no nicer way of trying to explain this to a 31-year old. PLEASE do better.
...Oh.
...
OOGITY BOOGITY MOTHERFUCKER I'M A BLACK GROOMING VICTIM
Being told yumeshipping as a term is racist on a main and I genuinely want to understand. Frankly I am not interested in non-Japanese voices on the matter, I need someone to link me someone who is Japanese explaining something because White Knighting is notoriously common in place of actual POC and I'd like to hear the POC voices. Thanks.
Vent/rant below. I do not support harassment or toxicity of any kind. If these posts sound like yours and you don't wanna be included, I'll edit it out.
Parasocial MCYT fans/CCs is genuinely very exhausting. They're all so incredibly parasocial it hurts. And it's also very triggering to see so many people blatantly go against a vital part of any relationship (boundaries) as a victim of OEA, but I bet most of them don't even know what that is. Also the weird analogies comparing shipping/boundary discourse to racist micro-aggressions is also something.
This post is short/more emotionally charged than normal, and in a way it is a vent due to the fact that I find some of these takes (specifically one where it said, if you think you should follow boundaries, then you're "susceptible to abuse") so I will not be using main tags. This is also not an example of everything I do on this sideblog. It's just really annoying to see people use therapy speak as a counter. It is actively so triggering but you know what? I'm a protector. I push through. I can deal with it. But other people can't.
Some of you need to watch your words.
I’m not trying to attack you or anything, just trying to get a more clear idea.
But from what I’m understanding a creator posted a boundary about something they’re uncomfortable with and you’re just deciding to ignore it?? If so, that’s actually insanely disrespectful. If not, is there possibly something more clarifying to say?
I’m actually glad you asked! This is probably the last post I’m going to be making on this subject, but let me provide you with a comparison that might make things easier to understand.
This is a bit like someone you know saying; “Hey, people listening to rap music makes me uncomfortable, can you please stop?”
And it’s like… what? I mean, I can… not play it out loud when I know you’re around. A bit of a weird request to make, but if it’s really that bad, then I don’t mind making accommodations.
And they reply with; “No. The fact that people listen to it all makes me uncomfortable. I want you to stop listening to it entirely. It’s against my boundaries.”
Which like… that isn’t a boundary. A boundary is something that dictates how people interact with YOU. Like, I can’t even listen to it in my OWN privacy? How the hell does that affect you in any way, shape, or form? That isn’t a boundary, it’s an attempt to control my personal agency and interests. I don’t even have to LIKE rap music very much for this to be a problem.
Then they say; “If I catch you or anyone else in this community listening to or creating rap music, then I will be sending people to harass and excommunicate you from this space.”
like… ??? I’m sorry, but that’s absurd. You do realize how that’s entirely absurd and unreasonable, right? In a community that is known for loving and thrives off of it? It is not our job to coddle your internet experience- if something is triggering or makes you uncomfortable then it is your responsibility to avoid those things. I am not shoving these things in your face, and at this point you’re only going to find it if you are actively looking for it.
This doesn’t even begin to address the issue of queer-baiting and internalized homophobia of the matter. A fan space ultimately belongs to the fans, first and foremost. If there is something that makes you uncomfortable, then you don’t have to interact with it at all. When you share a creation, you forfeit control over how people perceive and interpret those things, that’s just the nature of art and performance. If you truly cannot handle the way people interact with the things you make, then perhaps this is not a career you are fully equipped to handle.
Hopefully this helps explain a couple things- this allegory has been floating around in my mind for a while, and I appreciate the excuse to share my perspective on things.
DISCLAIMER: I DO NOT SUPPORT THE HARASSMENT THIS CC IMPLIED HE CARRIED OUT. I DO SUPPORT BOUNDARIES AND HATE HOW THIS IS USED AS AN EXCUSE TO DISRESPECT THEM.
This feels like it intentionally misses the point, which is unfortunate. And using rap music as the analogy is kind of annoying, as a Black person who had to constantly deal with those micro-aggressions. These are not the same thing. First of all, when 75-80% of people ask you to stop playing rap music they are being (intentionally or unintentionally) racist, but I won't harp on that. The example is in very poor taste.
First of all, what this YouTuber did is not asking people not to play music around them that has nothing to do with them. This YouTuber asked you to not USE THEIR IMAGE in their works. So let's rework this analogy that misses the point:
"Can you guys please stop making songs about me? It really makes me uncomfortable?"
Key phrase here is "About me". Let's keep the "about me" in there. Because frankly if someone did the same to me I'd be extremely uncomfortable. These are not random ships, or stopping shippers period, he just doesn't want people doing it to himself (and neither do many CCs).
People are allowed to have boundaries about themself. Once again, once I saw the clip I do not support the implied harassment towards people who ship him. However, this is incredibly obtuse. It is a boundary. And you could've done better with the choice rather than rap music, frankly.
Boundaries are Human. Yes, ALL Humans.
Interesting how people do not know what a boundary is versus what censorship is. Boundaries are "our limits", "how much we’re willing to take from other people" according to therapist Olivia Brouillette. While her blog post focuses more on boundaries in romantic relationships, the idea of a boundary at the broadest point goes for anything. This includes content creation.
So, what counts as a boundary? I made up a few specific examples:
Not allowing family members to post pictures of your little kids online
Declining alcohol/going to a bar at all
Refusing to go to a specific location (club, church, restaraunt)
Not wanting to be including in jokes about romance with your friends
Asking people not to touch items from your sentimental collection
So, with this broad definition in mind, why do the boundaries of an individual suddenly change when they have a following?
One might argue that they cannot control the behaviors of their audience. No, they cannot. In fact, anyone who puts down boundaries cannot control them. Someone might still try and take a swig of alcohol around you anyway. Another might still try and ship you, coo, and ask when the baby's coming. But they should still respect it.
Nobody owes you justification of a boundary. Nobody needs to explain why for you to get it. If you cannot respect a boundary, then that is a you problem and you should do it away from the individual(s) asked for it and re-evaluate your priorities. Ask yourself: "Why am I continuing to do something someone asked me not to do when what they asked me not to do doesn't hurt me, them or others?" Get to the bottom of it.
Common Rebuttals:
"If you don't like it, don't look" respect should not hinge on the other person turning a blind eye to something clearly laid out.
"They're famous/have a huge following. It's inevitable" everyone knows that there are some things you cannot control. That does not mean it's okay that it's happening.
"It's censorship" Ask yourself: "Why do I decide to use my freedom of expression to actively go against what someone explicitly asked me not to do when it does not hurt them, myself or others?" The goal of this post isn't to say you cannot do what you want. The goal of this post is to say that you should evaluate why, out of all the things you want to do, it's to rebel against something someone asked you not to do.
Nobody should harass people when their boundaries are violated. But they are objectively boundaries.
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
goose's design for "fem jax" looks like she googled "girl characteristics" and picked the first three that popped up to draw ✌️
CW: long rant, again!
Hey, I was the anon who originally talked with you about Goose's usage of "Isn't She Lovely," and I was reading the comments on that post. I don't want to call anybody out by name, but there was a specific argument I saw that is one rooted in white ignorance:
I mean, your assertion that a black song (THAT THEY PAID THE RIGHTS TO USE) shouldn’t be used because they’re not black really speaks of deeply ingrained segregation-like beliefs. Black songs ONLY for black people. White songs ONLY for white people. You sound deranged and EXTREMELY hypocritical (and a little transphobic) when you talk like this...
We have LAWS about what is or isn’t good use of transformative use! Why the fuck are you trying to segregate people by their skin color?
This argument immediately jumps to segregation, which is exceptionally odd because no one was talking about segregation. Historically, non-white people were segregated by white people to keep public areas "clean." They were forcibly removed from society. Spaces meant for POC only are not forged out of that segregationist mindset, which is why applying a colonialist mentality, like that commenter was doing, to these arguments does not work.
No one is saying that white people cannot use songs made for black people, or vice versa. That's a strawman created to guilt POC into not establishing boundaries. The problem is that Gooseworx, a white woman with an antiblack past, used a black song about a black baby girl's birth and recontextualized it to be about a non-black character's trans identity. Her ignorance is what I took issue with.
There is a significant difference between a director using SZA's "Kill Bill" in their Netflix movie about a non-black, vengeful ex-girlfriend and a director using "Run And Tell That" from Hairspray, recontextualizing it to be about a white man with a tan. Though they are both songs by black artists, one song's meaning is not universal, while the other's is.
That's not even mentioning the antiblackness Gooseworx has exhibited, in addition to continuing to work with people who are antiblack themselves. It adds another layer of disgust to the situation.
Well done explaining. I wish people would bother to look up terms/history before they use them in their arguments.
