I'm going to be fully honest, I hate the use of problematic as a coined term for fictional ships. I feel like problematic has just become one of those terms tossed around at anything and everything and often used as a gotcha net.
"I don't care about your ships as long as they're not problematic."
Okay. Are we talking about incest or just a ship where they have clashing political opinions?
Am I not allowed to ship the sentient wolf creature with the twink or am I not allowed to ship the two middle aged store clerks who have different views on wanting children?
What if one half of my canon ship gets de-aged to eighteen? Is it suddenly problematic to ship them for as long as that character remains de-aged?
What kind of age brackets are we defining as problematic these days? What are the cut-off points for when its not problematic for two people to fall in love? What if one person has a birthday before the other one and for a few months they're not part of that acceptable bracket anymore?
Problematic is just being used as a one-word way to shut people down and force them to comply with your own expectations and boundaries. Problematic is thrown around as a way to box people into behaving and existing in ways that make you comfortable.
"I don't like the way that you exist so I'm going to brand you as this negative word that forces you to change to suit my preferences or be shunned by society."
Problematic means to constitute as or to present a problem. It is not the shiny new term for 'if you ship this thing you're a terrible person.'
A Miracle Smile - page 53 (read from right to left)
Sorry for the slow updates, I'm so busy with school and work I hardly have time to draw. :(
previous first page
Here's a big Fran Bow fanart which looks like a poster.
Anyways, hope you like it โค
They discovered a neat hack. It lets them accuse people of a crime so bad that reasonable people are reluctant to try to defend the accused. It also allows them to imagine the most extreme punishments on the accused. Also, the emotional response of revulsion makes you easy to be manipulated by people who want you to focus your energy on whatever you're disgusted by, whether real or not.
It also means they never have to question the morality of their behavior since the "them" they are targeting are so depraved it justifies almost any actions to stop them.
From a post on reddit about why certain people "are obsessed with pedos". I felt this was relevant here.
The original context was in relation to Q anon, but it's the exact same behavior that we see from antishippers.
I absolutely will die on this hill, access to fiction that makes your skin crawl and open discussion about it is the best way to keep that skin crawling fiction from happening in reality.
It doesn't matter if it is ~positively~ or negatively portrayed. If you censor it, we don't talk about it, then we can't protect against it.
๐ You don't have to justify the types of romantic relationships that you write or enjoy in fiction.
๐ To restate the above-- you do not have to justify your 'ships'.
๐ The types of romantic relationships you write or enjoy in fiction do not indicate your real life preferences.
๐ It's typical and valid to write or enjoy romances in fiction that contain more turmoil, darkness, drama and taboo than you would actually want in your real life.
๐ Fictional relationships do not erode your sense of morality or what's desirable in a real relationship.
๐ It's normal to imagine dark and unpleasant ideas in fiction that you would never want to happen in real life.
๐ Romanticizing the darkness, turmoil and taboo in relationships in fiction has been done for eons and it hasn't destroyed civilization or humanity's moral fiber yet.
๐ If you tell people that dark romantic fiction will erode their morals or is indicative or personal moral weakness it makes you sound like a Victorian era misogynist worrying over girls reading novels.
๐ You don't have to justify the types of romantic relationships that you write or enjoy in fiction.
Tiny unit welcomes human home
(via)
yes! i do like [problematic thing]! and unfortunately i am under no obligation to defend my interests to strangers on the internet. good day and thank you for your time
When Floofs Attack
FB worldbuilding: Light and Darkness have to keep in balance in the Realities. The Great Valokas is the ruler of the 1st, and Mabuka the ruler of the 5th Reality. Our concept of death only exists in the 3rd and 4th reality.
Me: okay
FB lore: TG Valokas died in a war with the darkness, Mabuka still lives tho.
Me:
๐น Someone else's fiction cannot cause you physical harm.
๐นIf someone else's fiction is causing you emotional or psychological harm, or distress, you can put it down and not read/watch it.
๐นYour emotional well-being is not the responsibility of fiction writers.
๐นSomeone else's fiction is not about your personal trauma.
๐นWhen reading or watching fiction, you always have the power. You can always stop. You are never reading fiction without your own consent.
๐นFiction writers are not responsible for other people's mental health.
๐นThe content of a piece of fiction does not reflect on the morality of its author.
๐นJust because someone writes about bad things happening, doesn't mean they want those things to happen.
๐นDon't like? Don't read.