puddingskinmcgee:

Honestly shoutout to all the ppl who are trying hard to be more positive and make meaningful changes in their lives and work towards recovery because this shits hard and people definitely don’t say it enough, but focusing on recovery is very difficult and the progress you make is so valuable, just by choosing to work towards bettering yourself you have already come so far and that’s something to be really proud of

harriet-spy:

notagarroter:

anarfea:

wrangletangle:

Okay, so I’ve seen enough purity wank at this point to notice a common slip of the fingers among multiple wankists that admits the main complaint: some people feel that tagging a work that has dark themes or triggery content in the ship or character tag that they follow on AO3 is akin to posting in a tumblr tag as an anti.

I’ll go ahead and clearly state: that is not true.

The tags on AO3 literally mean “X content is in here.” X may be a ship, a character, a trope, a setting, a fandom, a gender category, you name it. But that is literally all it means: “X is here.”

That doesn’t mean you’re going to like the X that’s in a given work. You might hate it. It might include your squicks or even your triggers. That’s okay – you don’t have to open it. The point of having multiple tags plus summaries on works is to help you make an informed decision. I break out into chills just thinking about opening a high school au. In some fandoms, that means there’s barely anything left. That’s okay. It’s not up to creators to make stuff that I like. It’s up to them to tag clearly and accurately so I can avoid stuff I won’t like.

(For the record, that includes both underage and character death, but I will absolutely stand up for anyone who wants to make those things in ships and for characters I love, because I don’t have to open them. Someone else out there does want those works, and that’s great. More power to ‘em. I’ll be over here buried in fluff and curtainfic, which I’m sure someone else out there hates.)

I have much more sympathy for those who complain that posters are
tagging with ships or characters or concepts that don’t appear in the work or are
only mentioned once, because that’s a case of tagging something that
isn’t there on the screen, just in the creator’s head. But if something is there on the screen? Doesn’t matter what else is there with it. The work belongs in the tag.

Tags on AO3 don’t belong to a specific group of people. I have seen people be run out of tags by harassers dogpiling them, and I’m here to say that is not on. No matter how much you like a thing, the tag for it is not yours to decide who gets to use it and who doesn’t. Don’t like, don’t read. You have a scrollbar and filtering. Use them like a responsible adult.

(If you’re not an adult, don’t lie about your age to get through the age filter and then complain about what you find on the other side.)

The “anti” problem arose because Tumblr has no functional community structure, meaning people started using the tags themselves to replace the communities from back on LJ. In that context, tagging a negative post with the tags that apply was making the posts show up in the only viable community structure, which was a violation of LJ etiquette (where communities were self-selecting and moderated). This was exacerbated by the lack of functional cut tags, so everything was all completely visible, and you had to scroll past every post in its entirety. The culture of “don’t post anti in the tag” was a social concept developed to deal with Tumblr’s non-functionality for fandom purposes.

That’s unfortunate, but it’s Tumblr’s problem, not AO3′s. AO3 is not a blogging or social media platform. It’s an archive. It relies on a fairly unique tagging system that only works properly if posters tag fully. Don’t import Tumblr social norms about what belongs or doesn’t belong in a tag onto AO3; they don’t fit. All they do is break the tagging and filtering system by bullying people out of tagging fully.

Yes, Hydra Trash Party works belong in the Bucky/Sam tag if they are about Bucky/Sam (filter for removing all 8 htp works from Bucky/Sam). Yes, works about Derek Hale being Superman belong in the Supergirl tag (filter for removing all 2 Teen Wolf crossovers from Supergirl). Instead of dogpiling people, learn how to use the filters to your advantage. Here’s how to remove Hux/Kylo and Kylo/Rey and similar ships from the Star Wars TFA results, or remove the above plus Hux entirely. Seriously, I could go on all day. Ask me for any filtering need you have, and I will show you how to do it.

We need to stop harassing people for making what they love instead of what we love. That makes fandom a more awful place for everyone.

Seriously, I didn’t even know this new wtfuckery was a thing.

Okay but honest question: what about Trojan Horse fic? Where someone specifically trolls shippers by tagging for one ship and then doing a bait and switch with another.

Anybody can do anything in bad faith.  If you’re in a system that allows user participation, you have to compare the potential harm done by bad-faith actors to the benefits of the user participation.

In this case, the harm is…oh no, someone read a story that included a pairing they didn’t like.  (And that assumes that they kept reading instead of quitting when the unwanted pairing turned up.)

Is that potentially really freaking annoying?  Yes.  But we must resist the idea that, as a general rule, seeing something you’re uninterested in or don’t care for is a Great Fannish Tragedy that we must engineer our institutions around averting.  It’s part of the risk you take every time you open up your mind a little by looking at work created by someone else.

apeeled:

i love it when things stop bothering you. like two months ago i was totally bitter about so many things and now im like “u know what i don’t even care” & that’s a beautiful feeling

tenaflyviper:

bean-femme:

“fiction doesn’t affect reality!!!” catcher in the rye inspired three different murders

Here’s the problem with your statement: Being inspired by something does not equate to causing something.  You’re using the “Slippery Slope” logical fallacy (which, ironically, is a favorite amongst overzealous fundamentalist conservatives).  By your logic, you’re placing the blame for an incident of a child jumping off the roof in the 90′s on Wile E. Coyote.

Bear with me here, folks:  I’ve become increasingly tired of seeing the argument that “FICTION IS REALITY!”, and I think it’s time to stomp some sense into it.  It was bullshit when they tried to use the same argument against video games in the 90′s, it was bullshit when they tried to use it against horror movies and heavy metal music in the 80′s, and it’s bullshit now.

Let’s talk about the criminal mind for a moment.  It has been shown time and time again that criminals and abusers have a lack of function in the prefrontal cortex, which is responsible for controlling our impulses, connecting our actions to their consequences, and having empathy for others.  Now, there are those out there with low functioning in these areas that never harm a fly.  Why?  Because there are more ingredients required to create an abuser.  How?  Not by “problematic” works of fiction:  They are primarily a result of broken homes, traumatic experiences, and–most importantly–parental abuse/neglect. 
Parental influence (or lack thereof) has been directly linked to lack of function in the brain, and behavioral issues, meaning that their time in the crib had a far greater influence on them than anything they will ever read, see, or hear.  When
nature and nurture have come together to create a psychopath, they have
molded an individual that is disconnected from reality in a very
dangerous way.  It takes many factors working together to create people capable of committing abuse.  No amount of fiction changes a person’s upbringing, genetics, or brain function.  These are not average people–they are damaged.  They are a very, very small minority of people that are fully, completely aware that their behavior is wrong–they simply lack the inhibition to not go out and do it, and the empathy to care.  They would be this way regardless of the media they consumed, and removing them from it would change nothing, except potentially causing them to actively seek out the real thing, which–unlike fictional media–causes real, physical harm.

For your homework:

• http://bigthink.com/insights-of-genius/why-we-love-violence-in-fiction
• https://psychcentral.com/news/2013/03/30/why-do-people-like-violent-movies/53211.html
• https://elflands2ndcousin.com/2012/12/04/the-anatomy-and-value-of-fictional-violence/
• https://www.edge.org/response-detail/23745

TL;DR: Not everyone who reads fiction even has the ability to act out in ways they know are morally wrong: A well-adjusted person (including most with lower-functioning empathy) knows and understands the consequences for such behavior.  They are still able to connect their actions to how they may affect others, which–in turn–keeps those actions in check.  The people that do act out inappropriately are already broken, and would act out regardless of whatever they see or hear (especially if they are already into or past adolescence, as the majority of brain growth takes place from infancy to early preschool).

You’re screaming at the wrong people.  Teenage girls writing fan fiction aren’t going to go on to abuse anyone (except maybe their own self-esteem).  The people that might?  They wouldn’t give a fuck, no matter what you say–THAT’S LITERALLY WHY THEY ARE THE WAY THEY ARE.  THEY DO NOT FUCKING CARE.

daftpunk-delorean:

jumpingjacktrash:

rrojasandribbons:

I tried to explain to a friend of mine who has never ever been poor in his life why it is that poverty is a cycle, and why it’s so difficult to escape poverty. 

His response was, “just save money”. I kept trying to explain that when you are living paycheck to paycheck, there really is no saving money because most of your income is being spent on basic needs: food, shelter, clothing, transportation. 

So, then he responded, “well, why can’t you just save $5 every week”. Well, a lot of poor people do try to save. I would manage to get a few hundred in my savings account, but then you get a flat tire, or you end up getting sick and missing a week of work, or you have an unexpected bill. And, that few hundred dollars suddenly disappears. I tried to explain to him that when you’re poor, unanticipated expenses can very quickly and easily blow through what little you have in your savings account and put you back at square one. 

I also tried to explain that when you are that poor, you need to make purchases while you have the money. Like, if I needed a new pair of jeans and I had an extra $30 that week, I would buy myself a new pair of jeans that week because I didn’t know when I would have an extra $20 or $30 to spend. So, he countered that with, “You don’t need to buy clothes. You could have put that $30 in your savings.”

To which I responded, “Well, if it were socially acceptable to walk around without pants on, then maybe poor people could climb out of poverty, but until then, when your jeans have holes in them, or don’t fit you anymore, you need to get some new ones.”

Then it kind of clicked for him.. a little. 

So, I went on to talk about the sociological aspects of poverty, like how growing up poor, or growing up as part of a marginalized demographic pushes your starting block 100 feet behind your peers.. how our educational systems are set up to fail impoverished children. The light bulb flickered, but never fully turned on. 

And, then he said, “I still can’t believe you were ever on food stamps.” 

Yes, my friend, poverty and I get a nice little reunion every few years. I know it intimately, which is why you should sit back, relax, and just listen. 

I never understood how it was so difficult to see the realities of poverty. To me, it is sort of common sense. And, what is irksome is that poverty doesn’t always present itself as an old beat up car, and falling apart sneakers. People who grow up middle class and financially secure seem to think that poverty looks a lot like dirty children with dirty clothes, and no shoes. But, it doesn’t. It can be that, but it’s often not. 

I grew up in a nice house in the suburbs, but we were poor. We were very poor for a long time, in part due to my medical issues. People assume that because we went to Catholic school, and had a nice house that we were well-off. We weren’t. My mother worked 2-3 jobs, and my parents took out loans to pay for our school tuition. My mother’s parents helped pay for some of our education, even though they were also incredibly poor. My parents sometimes struggled to put food on the table. 

I never had clothes that were dirty or falling apart, but most of my clothes and shoes were hand-me-downs from my older cousins. In fact, a lot of my toys were, too. 

Both of my parents grew up in poverty. My father, especially, grew up in complete and abject poverty. Their parents grew up in poverty, and so did their parents. My parents made immense sacrifices to set us up for financial success, but life always finds a way to intervene. 

Personally, my health issues have been the driving factor behind my own financial issues. I have amassed thousands of dollars in medical debt. I work a job that doesn’t use my degree at all because I can work part time and still get benefits, and because I know I won’t get fired if I need to take extended absences due to my health. 

So, when you say, “I still can’t believe you were ever on food stamps,”  you are really saying, “I have this picture in my head of what poverty looks like, and you don’t fit that image.” 

That idea we have about what poverty is supposed to look like is a big reason why people in the middle class are so content with cutting safety net programs, even though they are one medical problem, one car accident, or one lay-off away from complete financial ruin. What does poverty look like, then.  How do you “just save money”, then. 

poverty in the developed world doesn’t look like a refugee child with flies on their face.

it looks like a normal person in normal clothes, in a normal apartment, with their bills spread out on the kitchen table, crying.

That last sentence, bruh

simplateau:

angelicavpd:

an authority figure: [expresses slight, arguable disappointment in me]

me, shaking: Wow. Can’t Believe I’m The Worst Person Alive

authority figure: *is in a bad mood or even is just less friendly than usual*

me, stomach in knots: My fault? I must be the cause of this?