there was a post going around saying “”dldr is meant for things like, “if you don’t like coffee shops, don’t read this coffee shop AU,” not, “i can be as racist as i want and you have to deal with it because i used a disclaimer””. a lot of people in the tags argued that this is what they mean when they say incest/p*dophilia/abuse portrayed in a positive light in fanfic is problematic. whats your opinion? xoxo

freedom-of-fanfic:

… phew. this ask almost passes as a legit question, but the ‘xoxo’ at the end is a little much.  still, what a great opportunity to talk about this ongoing problem of people ignoring warnings that a work contains content that upsets them, then complaining that they were upset when they viewed it.

(first, a side note: don’t censor the word ‘pedophilia’. It’s not a slur – it’s a content warning. If you censor it, the blacklists of people who don’t want to see posts that mention pedophilia won’t catch it and they could be harmed. Just use the word.)

anti-shippers who look at a fic or fanwork’s tags and say ‘this has problematic content! I better go tell the author how problematic their content is!’, I have news for you:

warnings on fanworks indicate that the person creating the work knows the content is ‘problematic’, not for all audiences, and may hurt people if they view it unsuspectingly.

stop taking fanwork warnings and tags in bad faith and using them as an excuse to harass and harm creators.

warnings aren’t ‘disclaimers’ (and aren’t used as such). they’re the CONTAINS NAPROXIN. KEEP OUT OF REACH OF CHILDREN sticker on painkillers. The content is good, even helpful, for some people, but for others who don’t need it or are too young to understand what they’re consuming could be harmed. take the warnings seriously and if you don’t like what they say the fic contains, you really are better off not reading/viewing it!

‘they’re not warnings, they’re advertisements!’ they can function as both! people who want to read that content can find it and people who don’t want to read that content can avoid it. everyone is happier, except anti-shippers who are mad that people are enjoying content they don’t personally approve of.

‘If the creator knows their content is problematic, then they shouldn’t have created it in the first place! Or if they did, they shouldn’t have put it on the internet for people to see!’ well that’s a very different conversation. What you’re saying is that you advocate for censorship, and in that case ‘don’t like don’t read’ would be worthless: only things you like would be allowed to exist in the first place.

But let’s talk about how ‘they shouldn’t have put it on the internet for people to see.’ the basis for this is, I know, that it could corrupt the unsuspecting youth who read the bad content. But isn’t this a bit contradictory? if a fanwork is tagged with a warning that it contains abuse, everyone who looks at the fanwork is going to know that 1) the author believes that abuse is bad and needs to be warned for, and 2) the work contains abuse. Taking these points together, no matter how positively the abuse is depicted, a viewer has foreknowledge that it’s abusive and the creator thinks abuse is bad.  It’s simply insulting to imply that viewers will look at the abuse in the fanwork so uncritically as to not think it’s horrible after receiving such a warning.

In fact, I’ve heard anecdotal evidence that people who have been raped or abused (or still being abused) or undergone other harm have read fics with these warnings and because of the warnings, realized what had happened to themselves was not okay.  If anti-shippers had their way, those fics wouldn’t even exist, much less be warned for.

I’m about to say something radical, so brace yourself: 

because tagging warnings is the accepted way to warn people about dangerous content in fandom, the things more likely to cause confusion and harm in fanworks are the things that aren’t warned for.

Even the most positive depiction of abuse would be spoiled by a warning. Can you imagine if the beginning of every copy of Nabokov’s Lolita started with ‘Warning: this work contains depictions of csa, abuse, and child grooming.’ It would force readers who are blind to the hints that the narrator is unreliable to read the work with a very different eye, and I doubt most people would read it and conclude it’s a love story the way many people do today.

Now Lolita was intended to be a kind of monster story from the point of view of the monster – it was never meant to be a positive depiction at all. Nabokov’s work was too subtle for most people, but he was a master storyteller. I think if he could, he’d go back and add a warning so people would stop getting the wrong idea.

In fandom, where we have a widely-accepted tagging system, potentially harmful content that the creator adds deliberately will be warned for. But the potentially harmful content that the creator doesn’t know about won’t be – and that’s the stuff that tends to be a lot more sneaky and insidious.

Let’s take your example: 

“i can be as racist as i want and you have to deal with it because i used a disclaimer".

Racism does crop up a lot in fanworks, but not in the way this implies.  There’s a huge difference between a creator recognizing racism exists and utilizing it as an aspect of a setting or acknowledging it in a respectful, truthful way and a creator who does not recognize their own racist blind spots and therefore ends up perpetuating harmful stereotypes or providing racist narration without realizing it.

The former tends to be warned for; the latter never is because the creator doesn’t even know they’re being racist. The former may be painful, because racism is shitty and harmful and real, but a person can steer clear if they want to avoid it and the warning shows the content is known to be bad. The latter is more painful because it’s not just depicting racism: it is in fact perpetuating racism.

So which is actually worse: the fic that has a warning for racism or the fic that doesn’t?

And this can be applied to anything. A fic that depicts a character being abused but doesn’t warn for abuse tells me that the author doesn’t know the work contains abuse (which is worrying for the safety of the author). A fic that contains dubious consent but the author doesn’t warn for noncon/dubcon/rape tells me that the author has a poor understanding of consent.  These are the fics that are more likely to be dangerous. Fics without content warnings are also the ones most likely to unironically and uncritically depict the bad behavior in a positive light – because the authors have been taught by the rest of society outside fandom that what they’ve depicted is normal/not harmful. They are victims, and they need help, not people yelling at them about how problematic they are.

Two last notes, which I’ll try to keep short:

  • If a fanwork depicts a relationship that’s canonically unhealthy in a world where it’s fluffy and healthy, they are not responsible for putting warnings on their fic that pertain to the canon version of the ship.  For instance: Kylo and Rey are enemies in current Star Wars continuity and Kylo tried to torture Rey for information. But if a fic is set in a future where Kylo is well-adjusted and happy and dating Rey in a non-abusive relationship, the fic does not need to warn for ‘abuse’. the fic doesn’t contain abuse. Let it go.
  • No creator is beholden to using anti definitions of words like ‘pedophilia’, ‘abuse’, and ‘incest’ for their warnings. The definition of what antis call ‘pedophilia’, ‘incest’, and ‘abuse’ varies from fandom to fandom – sometimes from pairing to pairing. While tags will always be somewhat subjective, the wide variety of definitions these words have in anti-shipper parlance makes them all but meaningless, so use them when you see fit, not when antis demand it.  If antis have a problem with it, they’ll just have to start treating ship tags as warnings* and avoid all depictions of ships they don’t like. (which is what we all wish they’d do anyway.)

And now for the final irony: every time anti-shippers use warnings as a reason to go yell at people about how their fanworks are bad, antis give creators less incentive to tag warnings. People might start to hope that if they just don’t warn up front for the potentially dangerous content people will stop yelling at them without even looking at the work itself. Or if the work is borderline (’maybe this is abusive but maybe it’s not’), they may opt to go without the warnings so they can avoid the extra trouble. this is already happening with dubious consent depictions. If a noncon warning gets you yelled at, then fics where the consent isn’t completely denied will just not get warned for at all, and that’s fucked up.  And when the warnings aren’t there, people are way more likely to stumble on something of a nature that upsets them! 

So as usual, in their crusade to eradicate all content that isn’t unquestionably wholesome and pure antis make everything a little less safe for everyone. Thanks, guys.  (please stop.)

and creators: please, depict terrible things in your fanworks in whatever light you choose – and warn for them. you might accidentally help save someone from a real situation that’s terrible.

*ship tags also work as both warnings and advertisements, as it happens. Funny, isn’t it?

margarittet:

awooble:

deanplease:

dancingalone21:

I don’t…I can’t…I’m just gonna leave this here lol.

– Days Of Our Lives. Soap Opera Digest. 2000.

oh my gawd

Oh my god, I remember this storyline!!! I hated Nicole for this…I at first hated Eric but he turned out to be nice??? But the fact she married sweet Lucas (who could never do wrong in my eyes) and I remember Greta turned out to be worse…or so I think. (Jensen was a babe but he was a bad boy on the show, Sami was the “good twin” lol)

Wait, was his twin really named “Sami”? 😳Just like his gay lover in the other movie was named “Cass”? Now, what a coincidence.

theanticakes:

There are only two things in life that I truly enjoy, morning coffees in the shower, and the look of content on that little lemon dudes face.

Look at him. Look. He’s so. Fucking. Content. He’s just been summoned from some other astral plane of citrus dimensions and ripped into our reality, and he’s just like “This is neat.”

What a fucking champ.

maliciouslycreative:

fangirlfromtartarus:

cosmicspacequeen:

cosmicspacequeen:

hey tell me fun facts about pirates

this is everything i could ever want

i googled the matey thing and it’s legit. also:

today on “history is queerer than you were taught”

@rosemoonweaver

This is my shit right here. 

Though, more fun facts: 

– “Pirate” means a lot of things. Though, unless I state otherwise, assume I’m talking about The Golden Age of Piracy and all the men and women who stole stuff from the French, English, and Spanish when “the new world” was first a thing. 

– Pirates usually attacked merchant ships. Depending on where they were headed to, the most valuable things abroad could be spices or fabrics. Privateers, on the other hand, were men hired by their governments to attack the ships of enemy nations and steal all their stuff. (Technically it was to “recover” whatever worth of things they’d had stolen by pirates flying that country’s flag but it was also often to just steal stuff. *cough cough Sir Walter Raleigh cough*) The difference between a pirate and a privateer? A Letter of Marque. 

– Cheng I Sao was one of the most feared pirates in history and definitely the most infamous pirate in the South China Sea. And piracy in that area is waaaay older than The Golden Age. I’m talkin’ 10th century CE and earlier. Other notable lady pirates include: Anne Bonny, Mary Read, Grace O’Malley, Rachael Wall, and Mary Crickett. There are many, many more. 

– Buccaneer comes from the bastardized French word boucainer, who were French hunters in Hispanola. The smoked their meats, hence why they were known as boucainer. These hunters often turned to piracy because it made a lot of money and was super easy to do. 

 – Scurvy is actually a vitamin C issue and could be avoided with oranges. Fresh water is hard to get ahold of on a ship so they wouldn’t waste it bathing. They bathed as much as everyone else – which is to say not that often. And they didn’t mask their scent in perfume because perfume was valuable and often stolen. 

– Madagascar was an anarchy pirate safe haven for a time. Didn’t last long though. 

– Pirates had codes that dictated behavior on the ship. Most banned gambling, staying up too late, and fighting. They also outlined who got hom much of the take when they took things from other ships. Captains were elected. 

– Pirates were as brutal as you think and sometimes not. Some captains tortured innocent people before killing them some captains didn’t care what happened to innocents and some banned their men from torture and cruelty. It really depended on who ran the ship. 

– Calico Jack, Anne Bonny, and Mary Read are the people you’re thinking of for that poly deal. Anna actually called her husband (Jack) and damned coward on his execution because he was drunk below when they were captured. Anne and Mary were both pregnant when they were captured and thus escaped execution for a time. (Keep in mind these women were fighting while pregnant while the were too sloshed to fight.) Read died in prison in childbirth but we don’t completely know what happened to Bonny. There are dodgy and conflicting accounts. 

– Pirates really didn’t give a shit who you had sex with. Sexuality on pirate ships was much more fluid than it was on the mainland. Navies on the other hand….

I suggest the following for more reading: 
Sodomy and the Pirate Tradition: English Sea Rovers in the Seventeenth-Century Caribbean by B. R. Burg
Under the Black Flag: The Romance and the Reality of Life Among the Pirates by David Cordingly
Between the Devil and the Deep Blue Sea: Merchant Seamen, Pirates and the Anglo-American Maritime World, 1700 – 1750 by Marcus Rediker