Antis Will Literally Call U A Pedo With No Context, Further Watering Down The Word Until It Means Nothing.

Happiness to Misfortune!

Marinating the chicken

(via)

Ya'll will put people actively supporting ongoing genocide, those who want trans people eradicated, and people who ship the wrong pair of blorbos on the same level of dangerous then wonder why no one treats your call outs and warnings of danger seriously anymore.

Why do you believe that people have such fragile morals they will be corrupted by a piece of fiction?

Are your morals that fragile?

Why do you believe that reading fiction about harm will cause the people who read it to do harm?

Are you that easily willing to harm people?

Why do you believe that writing or reading nasty fiction will cause people to think that it's alright to hurt and abuse people?

Are you that easily corrupted and changed by fiction?

Why are you worrying that reading fiction will change a person's morality like some kind of evil spell?

👉 You sound like a baptist preacher claiming Pokemon will make children worship the devil.

👉 You sound like a Victorian phrenologist claiming that reading novels will cause women to lose their virtue.

Misfortune, taking a selfie XD

Poor doggy...

I'm gonna say it.

It's unhinged to assume that someone's taste in fiction equates to what they believe is moral or good, or is something they want to see or experience in real life.

That is a bonkers assumption to make.

I'm tired of humoring people with long arguments about it when the simple fact is it is a totally fucking absurd reach to accuse someone who enjoys something in fiction of being in favor of it in real life.

I'm tired of pretending like this is a legitimate position to hold-- that they should be afraid of fiction's dire influence on a reader's moral decay or that it's a sign of what the author secretly wants for realsies in real life.

➡️ Content warnings on fiction are a courtesy. 

➡️ Not every medium of fiction and storytelling has or is expected to have content warnings or extensive tagging.

➡️ Print novels do not traditionally warn for content in any way.

➡️ Until AO3 came along, fanfiction did not traditionally warn for content in any significant way.

➡️ An author is only obligated to warn for content to the degree mandated by the format they publish their fiction on.

➡️ Content warnings beyond the minimum are a courtesy, not an obligation.

➡️ 'Creator chose not to warn' is a valid tag that authors are allowed to use on AO3. It means there could be anything in there and you have accepted the risk. 'May contain peanuts!'

➡️ Writers are allowed to use 'Creator chose not to warn' for any reason, including to maintain surprise and avoid spoilers.

➡️ 'Creator chose not to warn' is not the same thing as 'no archive warnings apply'.

➡️ It is your responsibility to protect yourself and close a book, or hit the back button if you find something in fiction that you're reading that upsets you.

➡️ You are responsible for protecting yourself from fiction that causes you discomfort.

An explanation of the burden of proof fallacy.

This is how it should be when debating.

For those who say...

"Fiction effects reality on a 1:1 scale."

"Consuming ____ leads to ____."

"If you consume/like ____, you're a pedophile."

...it is YOUR responsibility to prove that claim.

N. Tropy decided to commit vanish