???…. Anyway I’m going to ship what I want and draw what I want
I’m not doing anything wrong
Anon, who the hell is doing that? Because it sounds like you are pushing the boundary. It sounds like you are the one shoving something that will make this fictive uncomfortable onto them. Lacey isn’t doing that. She tags her posts. Her tags are the easiest to filter. But you on the otherhand, anon, are coming up to this fictive who is also implied to be a little, aka a child mentally, and telling them all this graphic stuff. That’s not on Lacey, anon, that’s not her fault. Anon, that is yours.
Speaking as a fictive and fictionkin, one again:
Creators are not responsible for how you, a fictive, relate to their creative work.
You, a fictive, do not have sole ownership over a character as a concept in fandom, or how that character is used in creative works.
this anon makes no sense.
Also anybody else die inside when antis use fictives in their excuses??
I did so much over it!!! It’s so dumb!
It’s why đŒđȘ used to advise kin and fictives to just not interact in the fandoms they’re from at all. Cause some people just can’t handle themselves!!
Ive had to read that anon over and over cause the second sentence makes no sense???
Hhhhh
I wish I could tell this to anon personally.
Speaking as a fictive, my abusive father sexually abused me in canon, and there are people in fandom who get off to porn of that.
And I will defend their right to do it!!
From far far away because it makes me feel sick to my stomach and I have all those tags blocked!!
Look, I know and appreciate that there are many paedophiles who are content with fiction and don’t groom or abuse real children or even look at/own real CSAM/CSEM. I’m sorry this topic is tricky and you are often vilified even though your behaviour, personally, may not be harmful at all.
But claims that ‘most groomers and predators aren’t actually paedophiles’ really needs backing up before you get mad at me for saying that most often (i.e. I know not always) paedophiles would rather seek out real content over fictional characters with a two year age gap who are both technically minors or whatever bs proshippers are accused of being pedos over. And you would have to super prove that those predators and groomers caught in anti circles aren’t actually pedos either before getting mad you’re being compared to antis.
Anyway I edited the post to discourage further pedo interactions.
Basically all of the recent science agrees on the âmost abusers arenât pedophilesâ claim, and anyone in any of these sciences will readily tell you that. [link 1][link 2][link 3 (pdf)].Â
If youâve undergone a certain kind of online discourse (especially the ones where antis will LARP as NAMBLA-like pro-contact advocates) you might have an instinctive reaction to claims like this, but this one in particular is supported by the scientific consensus.
Most rapists of all sorts are not ‘overwhelmingly attracted to their victims until they go rabid and start raping.’
This is a well known, well studied and well understood aspect of law, psychology, and neurology.
Specifically regarding law, most child rapists are ‘situational’ offenders, just like most rapists in general. People who want to commit violence, and see an opportunity to do so.
This is as opposed to preferential offenders, people who want to ‘have sex with’ their victim.
If we could run a brain scan to identify rapists preventatively, rest assured we would. Look how desperate every part of our societies are to criminalize and imprison everyone possible.
The basic facts surrounding sexual violence don’t evaporate as soon as a child is hurt.
In actual facts, the majority (that is, about half) of all sex crimes against children are committed by other children.
(See section on Abuse By Children for additional data).
Setting aside COCSA which has complex interactions with child psychology and trauma, and often has the perpetrator ‘age out’ of the behaviour as their brain finishes developing…
Among the minority of CSA committed by adults, less than half of those adults have persistent attraction to pre-pubescent children.
Mathematically, it’s just not possible for pedophiles to be the majority of abusers. There’s simply not as many of them as there are rapists of children.
Given that about 15% of people report some childhood sexual abuse, and that roughly 90% op abuse is done by friends or family, then fully one in ten people would have to be pedophiles.
And they aren’t.
The rape of children stems from the same causes as the rape of anyone else: violence and control.
Why get into the serious world of political advocacy when what you really want is an excuse to be mean and nasty to people online?
So I’m not really that into rpf, so I don’t particularly read it, but I have an inkling of a suspicion that the reason that pictures/videos of real living children are illegal is because you have to physically be there, abusing a child to make them, and written rpf about child actors or whatever isn’t illegal is because the person writing it is probably sitting in their room at a desk or something 1000 miles away & has never met this child in their life.
So I can see why priorities might point to real pictures of csam would be the thing that’s illegal.
antis: you ship a minor with an adult so obviously you are a pedophile, groomer, and child rapist. i am morally superior to you proshipper: actually i ship it because i was groomed and raped as a child. antis: lol your rapist should’ve killed you, but since he didn’t you should kill yourself
Toko and Jack promised some evidence that Slenderman was associated with pedophilia during his origins. Here’s some old web discussions that imply that Slenderman’s love of children is less than wholesome.
As a bonus, here’s something you won’t like.
Accusations of pedophiles using Slenderman to groom children.
context: this is a continuation of an argument between Toko and another user. That user was a slenderman enthusiast (who appears to self-ship with slenderman) who was accusing proshippers of creating “content for pedophiles.”
This post is meant to point out the hypocrisy of being a slenderman fan who is against proshipping.
if anyone has Tiktok please be warned the video Daisyâs Destruction is going around- itâs not the video but the screen shot and it is the most gruesome insane cp known out there- i have not seen the video but i want to warn people that if you see anything of it please report it and do NOT watch it
I’m sorry, WHAT? That video is still around?? Fucking hell.
For anyone not in the know, “daisy’s destruction” is extremely gruesome CSAM that has unfortunately been in circulation on the net for many years.
Try not to see it, but if you see it, immediately report it.
This is not something that you want to see, I promise you. Like, not even out of morbid curiosity. It’s horrific shit. Please do not expose yourself or anyone else to it if you can possibly avoid it.
Proshippers when the cops break into their fucking house: “ But officer! the DNI goes both ways! đ ”
What part of being a proshipper do you believe is illegal?
This post makes it sound like you support institutionalized police brutality– do you support police brutality?
Maybe they’re somehow under the impression that being a proshipper is a war crime that warrants someone vaporize them with a laser beam on the spot.
I hate to be the one to break this to you dude, but it’s actually illegal for any kind of authority to break into your house without a warrant, and in order to get one, they have to have real reason to believe you are breaking the law or have broken the law badly enough to get arrested.
Surely you agree with at least this much, since you’re so eager for cops to bash people’s skulls in for the horrendous crime of disagreeing with you…?
So you agree that some things are so illegal that even a false tip with no evidence leaves a person’s door wide open to police? That’s what you’re going to go with here? Please, correct me if I’m misinterpreting, because I thought “innocent until proven guilty” was a cornerstone of multiple fucking democracies?
And also…no it’s not. No it’s fucking not. Any kind of “pornography” that features purely fictional characters is perfectly legal. In fact, the authorities on the subject have had to tiredly explain to people like you again and again that if no real children are being harmed, then nothing illegal is actually happening. Seriously. Why do you think CSAM (child sexual abuse material) is so illegal? Because it gets people off using something icky?
No! It’s illegal because it is ACTUAL FOOTAGE OF A REAL CHILD BEING ABUSED. Real living, breathing children are trafficked into a space where they’re exploited and abused, and it leaves them traumatized afterwards, especially if the victim is particularly young.
Fictional characters cannot be harmed. They are constructs. They are imagined ideas. They are NOT REAL.
And for the millionth time, don’t use the term “child pornography”. Children are not a porn category. Porn by definition is something you have to participate in willingly. Adults can do porn. Children cannot. Say underage fiction if you mean underage fiction, and say CSEM or CSAM if you mean CSAM.
Please don’t tell me you support police brutality if it aids in your mission over censorship. Please, ratofautism. You’re better than that.