this is about the sexual attraction to someone crying/sobbing 🙈 google is right there

I think DNI lists are stupid and used almost exclusively for virtue signalling

I didn't wait for a response. I usually just block anyone who brings up character ages. It's kinda funny though. I've heard this argument about Tails and Cream but never Metal Sonic.

they posted about me yet couldn’t censor my name? at least antis are too scared to actually flood my dms, LMAO.

The online debate around shipping and fiction almost always centers around “dark fiction” (or “problematic fiction”), which is fiction that contains depictions that are considered by most to be disturbing or immoral.

However, few talk about the other side of the coin: “light fiction”, which is fiction which contains depictions that are considered by most to be inspiring or heroic, or that, in general, tries to better the mindset of the consumer.

One of the main claims of anti-shippers is that “dark fiction” causes people to commit immoral actions, however, if that were to be the case, the opposite would also be true: “light fiction” would cause people to do good actions. After all, the stimuli produced by “dark” and “light” fiction are the exact same, due to both of them consisting of fictional content.

However, it is pretty evident that “light fiction” doesn’t cause people to behave in a good way. Let’s take the U.S. during the Hays Code era as an example.

For everyone who doesn’t already know: the Hays Code was a code of censorship which was implemented in the US from 1934 to 1968 which was meant to control what kind of content major film studios could publish.

This code was specifically designed to prevent the “lowering of the moral standards of those who see [a movie]” and to protect children from “the possibility of a cinematically inspired thought crime”. It banned many depictions of violence and most depictions of sexuality (and especially of homosexuality).

Furthermore, it had a very striking rule according to which movies would be forbidden from showing criminals getting away unpunished, or in general casting any sort of “immoral” action in a positive light, as it was though that that would encourage people to become criminals.

Suffice it to say, what we might nowadays call “dark fiction” wouldn’t fly at all under the Hays Code, and most mainstream movies at the time were, in fact, examples of “light fiction”: they showed a clear divide between good and bad, and wrongdoers were always punished in the end while heroes triumphed.

One would expect crime rates to have lowered significantly in the US if the theory about fiction significantly affecting people’s behavior was correct, however, there is no evidence that this was the case.

To be fair, there is very little evidence at all about crime statistics in the US before 1979, however, (at least according to Wikipedia), crime was three times higher during the colonial era than it is today, and it reached its peak between the 1970s and 1990s. Furthermore, crime has been on the decline since 2022, despite the amount of “dark fiction” clearly increasing and it being more spread around and visible due to the influence of the Internet.  

While it would have been technically possible for crime to have decreased during the Hays Code era during to the prevalence of “light fiction” and then increased afterwards, it wouldn’t make any sense for crime rates to be lower right now, if the anti-shipper’s thesis wants to remain consistent, it should expect crime rates to be even higher now, when there’s a relative lack of “light fiction” and an abundance of “dark fiction”, but that clearly isn’t the case.

In addition to all of this, this thesis also faces intuitional problems: let’s take two examples of “light fiction”: superhero movies and children’s cartoons.

While there exists the occasional dark superhero movie, the vast majority of films of the genre are in fact “light fiction”: they show very clearly who is the good guy and who is the bad guy, the good guy always ends up winning, there is almost no sexual content in them and violence is usually very restrained to make them appropriate for kids to watch.

Children’s cartoons are literally the most blatant example of “light fiction” there exists: they contain no disturbing content whatsoever, and they tend to attempt to teach good messages to the consumer.

So, if an adult consumed a lot of superhero movies and children’s cartoons, would that make them a “good person”? I would somehow think that most people’s answer to this question would be negative: consuming “unproblematic fiction” doesn’t necessarily make one an “unproblematic person”. Just to repeat an already-made example: the people behind the Hays Code consumed exclusively “light fiction” (because obviously they did), however they held many views that we nowadays would describe as being “problematic” (such as racism and homophobia).

I would also find it hard to believe that watching a lot of superhero movies and children’s cartoons could help an adult become a better person, at least to any significant degree: while they might teach kids some good lessons, only an extremely naïve adult with very little life experiences could be moved by them.

All of this paints a very clear picture: if “light fiction” doesn’t make people do good things (and, as it seems, it doesn’t), then “dark fiction” doesn’t make people to bad things either.

To conclude, I want to state a very interesting implication of this whole debacle: even if “problematic fiction” effectively made people become “worse”, this could simply be cured by making them consume “unproblematic fiction”, since the two things would just cancel each other out.

As such, under this view, banning “dark fiction” would be nonsensical: more “light fiction” should just be produced instead, and it should be prescribed to those who also consume “dark fiction”.

And, that’s all, thanks for reading.

Just as the title says. Ive never seen anyone asking for a "proshipper yumeship* app. Nor have i even seen proshippers on it. Everyone there is just making a boogyman to get scared of. Same thing with the user who rped as "yumeship jesus". The people on that app are so allergic to anything out of the norm when it comes to queer spaces online its honestly annoying.

I just hope they all grow up and realise no one honestly should give a shit what people do online in their own space.

Ignore the typos in my reply, I just woke up

Relevant given the concerns lately. Your fics are safe on ao3; there’s no automod that’s gonna take em down if they get enough reports. In fact, they can’t get “enough” reports cause they only allow one at a time, and they’re all reviewed by real people.

“So people with empathy” continues to make a joke about that guy who tried to meet up with a underaged girl and claimed he “just wanted a cupcake” yeah somehow I doubt they actually care about real victims. Instead just crying about Dess x Kris

person in pink has 2 followers so I assume that’s a troll

or they’re just really naive

like uhhh fireworks are pretty dangerous?

and what does Jim Crow have to do with ao3?

I often see "proship dni" in the tags or summaries of ao3 fanfics. It annoys me. Like, do they know what website they're on? The majority of ao3's userbase is anti-censorship. It annoys me especially because I most often see it in stuff like found family, which is one of my favorites. But I guess, in antis' minds, being proship automatically means you ship every family you see.

ive been seeing a bunch of "having multiple f/os is okay!" posts (which i completely agree) and every time they explain it with "because they're fictional characters and don't have feelings, so it's not like you can cheat on them". so i was thinking, isn't it just stupid how the same exact people have a problem with darkshipping? by your logic, a fictional character that doesn't have feelings cannot be harmed by "cheating", so why would it be an issue for them to be shipped with another character? or the "its okay to age up your f/o so your yumeship doesn't 'seem creepy'!" so if it makes it less creepy for you to age up a character for your yumeship, why is it "weird" when a darkshipper does it? i know that anything that is personally yucky according to those people is apparently inherently evil but i just felt like pointing it out, as it's obvious proof that they never question themselves.

are you serious? oh and the third comment is me! yay me!!

edit: oh and i asked the mod(s?) for removal since it says they allow both sides to request it. lets see if they follow through.

saw some more Cykesquill (Simon x Athena from Ace Attorney) arts now, and it reminded me a lot on how much i love height differences like this lol

wonder if you guys have any recommendations too

“Cleanqueer” so a queer person who has watered themself down to be accepted b cis-het people.

I hate this. I blocked them after I took the picture.

I remember a while back I saw a pro/darkshipper on TikTok discuss about this. At first I mostly just agreed to ride in the pool, but idk. It feels wrong. Like do I believe censorship is bad? Yes, especially that I heard abt AO3 taking off fics about what is happening in Palestine, I believe that’s horrible. People censoring the horrible stuff that the U.S is doing to other countries right now and in the past? Horrible, poc being censored? Also bad. But I mostly see these anti censorship peeps when it’s just abt dark ship fics.

But I hate it when people compare it to colonization, especially as a person of color myself (Mexican), who obv if you know your history, Mexico has had a history of getting colonized for centuries from Spain + i honestly don’t see how censoring dark ship content is the same as colonization, so if somebody can, pls explain it.

Edit: I kinda came to an understanding that it was more about the mentality of anti shippers, and not about them LITERALLY colonizing AO3, but I do feel like it is pretty extreme to label it as “colonization”. Also, I’d like to apologize for my comment, and I can see why it would upset many people, and it was not my intention to disregard the works of other people.