Tumgik
#purity wank
Text
👉 It's okay to write fiction about imaginary events, people and themes that would be considered taboo, disgusting, or evil in real life.
👉 It's okay to write fiction about imaginary events, people and themes that would be considered messed up or weird in real life.
👉 You do not have an obligation to write fiction about imaginary events in a way that all potential readers will approve of or understand.
👉 You do not have to disclose your own trauma in order to get permission to write about taboo or disgusting fiction in whatever way you choose to write it.
👉 Fiction is not required to to have a moral or lesson that strengthens the values of the reader.
👉 Adults who already know right from wrong do not need their morals spoon-fed to them by fiction.
👉 Adults who already know right from wrong do not need their hands held to understand that evil actions in fiction are bad, even when a story portrays them as good.
👉 Adults can read and write fiction that glorifies, fetishizes or romanticizes, dark, evil and taboo subjects without being led to believe that those things are good in real life.
291 notes · View notes
littlefaeella · 3 months
Text
i know that a lot of people already know this, and that this may come across as condescending to those who do, but it has become increasingly clear to me that many people, particularly younger people, don't understand this but—
purity culture is more then just thinking sex is bad and evil and gross
purity culture is the belief that you can be corrupted, that there is an level of purity that can be tarnished by thinking or doing something deemed sinful or icky and that once you lose that purity, you are lesser then those who have not been "tainted". it's the belief that seeing, thinking, or doing something inherently nonharmful to others will fundamental change you in a negative way
purity culture is watching gory horror movies and being told that you are disgusting for finding it interesting to watch
purity culture is being told that violence in books, movies, games, etcetera will make you violent
purity culture is being told that wanting to hurt someone makes you bad, darkens your heart, whatever, even if they hurt you first, even if you have no plans to ever act on that desire
purity culture is being told to forgive your abuser, rapist, or even just people who have slighted and hurt you or else you will never fully heal, or that it makes you in someway bad too, or even just as bad as them
purity culture is being told that hating someone is equally to killing them, or wanting to kill them
purity culture is when people have intrusive thoughts that scare and harm them that make you uncomfortable, possibly even triggered, and telling them that they secretly want to do, have, etcetera, those things or else they wouldn't be thinking about it
purity culture is being told not to curse because it makes your mouth filthy, makes your heart filthy, makes you mean and bad and unpleasant
purity culture is being told that jealousy, anger, rage, disgust, and other stigmatized emotions are "bad" or "unhealthy" emotions
purity culture is refusing to let youths or even teenagers read or watch potential upsetting books, shows, movies, games, comics, etcetera out of fear they will act them out, become violent, possessed, unruly, etcetera
purity culture is being told that writing, drawing, or just in general making something dark and uncomfortable makes you gross and evil
purity culture is telling you that you have to portray bad things as bad or else people won't under that it's still bad, that it will normalize this bad thing, that people can be corrupted by it because they can't think for themselves whether this bad thing you portrayed as good is not actually good
purity culture is thinking bad things done for good reasons is just as bad as bad things done for bad reasons, like a mother stealing baby formula to keep her child alive versus someone stealing your pet because they wanted it are equally wrong
purity culture is being told that drinking, smoking, being addicted to drugs, unemployed, homeless, makes you lesser and filthy and corrupts you
purity culture is believing that someone wanting to do something bad, but choosing not to do it because they know it's bad, still makes them bad because they still want to do it
purity culture is thinking people getting tattoos, dying their hair, piercing, wearing make up, getting cosmetic surgeries secretly hate themselves and are disrespecting themselves
purity culture is so much more then just sex. it expands so much further then just christian/religious people and communities
purity culture is doing something bad, and when you try to seek atonement or correct the mistake, that it is unforgivable and will alway be a blight on you, even if others can "learn to look past it"
if you think that someone thinking or do something that does not cause any inherent harm makes them lesser, makes them bad, makes them gross, corrupts them or can lead them to corrupting others, you are pushing purity culture
this is coming from a women raised in an extremely sex negative christian household who spent years hating herself and her body due to sex based purity culture being pushed onto her from the age of six due to early puberty by the way, so don't try to gate keep purity culture on this post as only a religious and or sexual thing
16K notes · View notes
craycraybluejay · 5 months
Text
You know how a pretty obvious majority of kinksters are submissives? You want to know a big part of the reason why it's hard to find a dom that's into the same hard kink you are?
Ask a hardcore masochist what they think of being whipped.
Then ask a hard sadist what they think of whipping someone.
Do you notice that the sadist/dom will often either dance around an answer or try to use soothing language/euphemism not unlike the way how in many places people are still expected to discuss sex if at all. Gentle, calculated language.
The issue is, especially with a new surge of purity culture overtaking so-called "leftist" online circles, is that fantasy becomes a moral judgement.
Sub with a noncon kink: "I want to be raped" (cnc but like. People can talk ab it how they want don't cancel me fr.)
Response from Normies: "well that's weird and kinda dark but ok"
Dom with a noncon kink: "I want to rape"
Response from Normies: "I'm calling the police and you should kys and you're also a sexual abuser and even though you haven't said anything about kids you're also also a pedophile :)"
Not only does the attitude of murderous hatred against doms/tops with hard kinks/fetishes/paraphilias make it difficult for them to practice those kinks (safely and ethically) out of fear of social backlash if it's ever found out even if both they and their partner[s] had a great time and are fine-- but, it actively puts innocent people in danger by equating thoughts and attractions of ANY KIND to the act of hurting others against their will. It equates fantasy, which can oftentimes be played out safely if in a modified way with real harmful actions.
Also, kink is still illegal in many places, so don't "its illegal" me about harder kinks. Law is not morality, none of us are free until all of us are free, etc. You get the gist.
You want to see more doms? Meet someone who can indulge your "scary badwrong" sexy feelings? Then maybe don't actively promote a culture where you put ANY kind of attraction or kink under fire. It doesn't matter if it'd be unethical to act out in real life. Some of the most common kinks worldwide are unethical as fuck to act out irl, including rape. That's why we have cnc, come on, guys.
You know what? In fact, you SHOULD actively shun people who shame others for their sexual feelings. EVEN if you think it's gross. EVEN if it wouldn't be ethical to act on irl. Let these types know that their puritan ideals are NOT accepted here. Let them know that if they want to go to church they can do that but not in your space, not forcing other (non consenting!) people to listen to their hateful and repressive ideology.
Like, hey, I'm not into ABDL, for example. But I will defend to the death other people's right to be into that. To think and feel whatever they think and feel. You think diapers are sexy? Great! I don't personally see the appeal, but you do you boo. There is no Correct Way to be sex/kink negative. Either you believe in thought crime or you don't.
And yes, this post includes "harmful" paraphilias (I put it in quotes because they're only harmful if acted on), sadomasochism, mutilation fetishism, etc etc. Every "gross" or "evil" kink, fetish, para you can possibly imagine. The stuff that makes you horny is just stuff that makes you horny, and being horny is normal. Being "weird horny" is also normal. No one deserves to experience shame, let alone public harassment or hate over feelings they most of the time don't Choose to have. Be mindful of puritan rhetoric and strike it down when you see it.
6K notes · View notes
mswyrr · 1 month
Text
When people shame women for enjoying romance and erotica I want them to know they're being an ally of sexist prude evangelical men like this
Tumblr media
558 notes · View notes
all-de-fandoms · 2 years
Text
Lmfao as a religious trauma survivor and a product of Christian fundie indoctrination myself I am in full support of calling fandom wank "purity culture" and the use of the word "puriteen"* as well actually.
It perfectly encompasses what purity culture was. It wasn't just about "no sex before marriage"; it policed every fucking thing you did and forced you to walk on eggshells your entire life so your Magical Sky Daddy didn't clutch His heavenly pearls at your naughty behaviours.
Holding hands with someone you weren't married to? Gateway to sin. Making eyes at someone of the opposite sex? Gateway to sin. Thinking "impure" thoughts about someone else? Thoughtcrime Gateway to sin. Wearing the "wrong" type of clothes? Listening to the "wrong" kind of music? Having the "wrong" sort of values? Enjoying the "wrong" kind of media? All of it was seen as a stepping stone toward being a sinful godless heathen (and to some people it was essentially just as bad).
And it wasn't enough to just avoid BadWrong Behaviours, either. In my ex-community you were expected to express your disapproval of it and be well versed in the theological how's and whys. Does any of that sound familiar?
Purity culture at its core is so much more than "wear this purity ring and pinky promise to Jesus that you'll never have sex until you're married" and if you didn't realise that while you were there you weren't paying attention.
*OP EDIT AS OF 24/02/24
Hey guys just a quick note I had said I ""support"" the use of puriteen because of its reference to Puritans, but as of now my views regarding that have changed somewhat. I still agree that young people who act like this are still emulating Puritan culture but I no longer agree with deriding them based on their age because ageism is bad actually. Thanks!
14K notes · View notes
sweaterkittensahoy · 6 months
Note
Stop misappropriating the abuse and trauma cults use through purity culture for your stupid fucking shipping discourse? Holy fuck no wonder everyone hates this whole discourse.
Since when is "priests getting shuffled around after raping kids and kids being told they're sinful because they had bodily reactions to being SAd" comparable to "Bobo the clown said my ship was cringe"
I'm not gonna answer this with The Aristocrats, as a I threatened, because I want to make a very serious point to this anon:
Purity culture isn't just religious abuse. It is most widely connected to religious abuse. Including actions in the Catholic Church and all fundamentalist Christianity. It's entire existence is about terrifying and indoctrinating people into being fearful of their own actions and bodies so that they feel certain that moving out from the "umbrella of safety" (to use a fundamentalist term) will result in them being harmed in ways they can't imagine. This is generally happening at the same time as they are being harmed by those who are supposed to be keeping them safe from all those terrible, worldly evils. Like speaking up when you're being abused. Believing you are not responsible for the actions of a rapist, and many, many other things that any person with an ounce of self-worth and good sense (two things not allowed in fundamentalist circles) knows are true in abuse situations.
But the point of the purity culture as identity in the above-mentioned circles is to teach people from birth that they aren't to have their own feelings, ideas, or instincts. They are only to follow the feelings, ideas, and instincts on the approved list in order to stay within the structures they know and feel safe in even as they feel very unsafe.
That being said:
Purity culture can also exist WITHOUT a religious structure while still being about controlling the thoughts, feelings, and actions of everyone within it. In terms of fandom, purity culture is groups of people stating that if you write something uncomfortable or gross or immoral, then YOU must be uncomfortable or gross or immoral and therefore, not worthy of the safety and moral superiority of the group.
Purity culture without religion teaches black and white thinking, encourages thought policing, and shames anyone who steps outside of a very narrow definition of good and bad by turning an entire group of people against them for being "bad".
Just like in religious circles.
Just like in the cult of fundamentalism.
Purity culture is a term taken by fundamentalists and turned into a whole way of life because the goal of fundamentalism is to make people too scared to leave. Purity culture in fandom does the same thing. It uses fear and threats of abandonment/harassment to control the way people act because a group of people decided they didn't like something, so they must try and wipe it out rather than simply ignore it.
I am not mis-using the term because "Bobo the clown said my ship was cringe." My use of the term is intentional and precise because what is happening in fandom spaces now is non-religious purity culture cult thinking. My use of the term does not invalidate or water down the use of it in conversations about religious abuse and trauma. With or without religion, purity culture is a dangerous cult of "us vs them" that is built to demoralize and eradicate those deemed unworthy.
1K notes · View notes
johannestevans · 17 days
Text
Addressing Common Arguments Against “Consuming Harmful Content”
Challenging purity culture in online spaces and their fears of “problematic media”.
Read this piece on Medium. / / Leave a tip.
Tumblr media
Photo by Ethan Will via Pexels.
Constant and continuous arguments endure on social media about the dreaded and frightening spectre of problematic media — from television shows that supposedly “glorify” unhealthy relationships or “sexualise” and “excuse” abusive relationships; to erotica, adult books, and 18+ fanfiction that supposedly teach teenagers bad life lessons and impact their ethics; to anime and manga that surely must be the cause of child abuse the world over. 
I wrote an in-depth essay about the intellectual flaws in these reactionary assumptions, delving into their roots in lacking media literacy and rising anti-sex attitudes here: 
The above essay discusses at length many of the fears and anxieties that lead to this reactionary thinking, but does not challenge or explore the echo chambers that can arise in online spaces, particularly in aggressive environments such as Twitter/X, and for young or isolated individuals who are particularly vulnerable to peer pressure and fears of ostracisation if they admit to the “wrong” opinions.
Many of these arguments are used by “anti-shippers” within fandom and online spaces, the term commonly shortened as “antis” — if you’re unfamiliar with the term, these are people who define themselves as opposing one or more specific ships, fandoms, tropes, or kinks, often due to what they perceive to be their “problematic” or inherently “harmful” elements when engaged with or portrayed in various forms of media and art. Because of the virulent and highly aggressive nature of these online communities, these people — many of them young or isolated, often marginalised and disenfranchised from in-person, supportive environments — can become radicalised, and can experience great fear and anxiety at the premise of others holding different opinions or perspectives from the ones these online communities have impressed upon them should be held immutably by all.
In this piece I’m going to be addressing common arguments and assumptions seen on social media one by one — it is not really intended to convert the above, often radicalised individuals, but to provide support and guidance in understanding why their perspectives can be flawed, and how to engage with and deconstruct those arguments. 
It is also intended to provide support and structure to begin to engage with and potentially challenge or affirm your own beliefs and ideas about fiction, art, and other forms of media, and the extent of the impact it can have on you or others — this piece is me addressing these arguments with my own perspective, but I would encourage people to disagree with and critique my rebuttals!
The goal here is always more critical thought, analysis, and understanding, and that doesn’t come from automatically following another person’s line of thought or argument just because it’s well-poised or you particularly respect or like them — no matter who that person or people may be. 
--
“Depicting [a theme] in media is the same as glorifying it!”
Let’s first engage with what people might be discussing when they panic about “harmful content” and “problematic” ships or pieces of fiction.
They might worry about people reading or watching works that discuss or depict anything from violence, incest, sexual assault, age gaps, BDSM, kinky sex, child sexual abuse, trauma recovery, rape, rape recovery, drug use, bestiality, to abusive relationships or anything else, will encourage people to think positively about those acts, those traumas, and those experiences. 
You might look at the list of things I just wrote there and go, “Um, there are big differences between some of those things and the others!”
And yet the same consideration still applies. 
Just because a theme or idea is present in a work, or is depicted in it implicitly or explicitly, doesn’t mean it’s being “glorified” and portrayed as overwhelmingly positive — and even if a theme or aspect is being glorified, this does not mean we shall simply unthinkingly absorb that perspective.
Reading a story that contains something doesn’t mean I’ll automatically think that thing is good or bad, regardless of how it’s portrayed in fiction — the media and art we engage with doesn’t wholly change and adjust our own ethics and morals as soon as we’ve interacted with it. 
We might play a videogame and disagree with the way some themes are presented, have criticisms of them, whilst enjoying and appreciating others; we might read a piece of erotica and find some parts about it very hot, but find others disturbing and a little uncomfortable; we might watch a TV show and just think it’s in very poor taste, despite theoretically being up for the premise. 
Engaging with media does not turn off and on switches in our brains that make us completely “pro” or completely “anti” one premise or other. 
People are more complicated than that. 
We have complex and layered feelings about every argument and perspective there is, every experience there is, because human beings are social animals, and we experience very few things through an uncomplicated, binary lens. 
For me personally, I often seek out works that cover the same traumas and harms I’ve experienced — why? Because seeking out those themes helps me process and better understand what has happened to me, and how I’ve felt about it, how I’ve responded. 
“I don’t have a problem with people writing about certain harmful topics to show them as bad, but some people sexualise or fetishise them!”
I’m sure you’re right. 
Some people might write about rape to work out a complex trauma recovery narrative — others might write about rape in a work as kink. An author might well write with both goals in mind in the same work. 
A traumatic event doesn’t become less traumatic because it sexually aroused us or brought us physical pleasure — in fact, those feelings can add to the impact of a trauma and the inner conflict we experience in the aftermath. 
Some people undercut victims of sexual abuse by saying they “enjoyed” it, pointing out that they orgasmed or showed signs of arousal as signs they “secretly” wanted it, and these feelings can contribute heavily to shame and fear as a victim. 
Sexual arousal is a bodily response. It is not consent, and it’s not an excuse for assault or abuse. Moreover, some people might feel arousal or pleasure but not be fit to consent — for example, if someone is underage, or if someone is drugged or insensible with drink. 
These people cannot give knowledgeable consent, but abusers might still say after an assault that they “enjoyed” it. 
This is purity culture at work — anti-sex attitudes use people’s “enjoyment” of something to undercut their autonomy and right to consent, by implying they “deserve” that abuse — abuse is abuse whether it’s sexualised or not. 
But the thing is, the obverse applies. 
Just as someone’s mixed feelings or sensations of pleasure during a sexual assault does not mean they consented to the assault, or because someone’s feelings of happiness and love for their abuser does not mean they deserved the abusive treatment they experienced from them, a person writing sexually or erotically about a topic, or engaging with art and narratives about that topic, does not mean they actually want that thing to happen in real life, to real people, or to themselves. 
Fiction is not real life. 
We watch a horror film, and it doesn’t mean we want serial killers or demons to run amok, killing teenagers or possessing their victims — similarly, just because we engage with porn or erotica that sexualises certain topics doesn’t mean we’re pro- or in favour of those topics for real people. 
Rape fantasies are incredibly common, despite being highly stigmatised, and just because someone fantasises about this sort of control fantasy does not mean they actually want to abuse someone or be abused. 
“It’s harmful to depict abusive or immoral characters as sexy or desirable.”
If you have never experienced abuse, manipulation, or otherwise poor treatment from someone you thought was attractive, charming, or admirable, if you’ve never been groomed by someone with whom you were enamoured, I’m very glad. 
I’m happy for you, honestly. 
But many of us have. 
People want to believe that all abusers are evil, are ugly, are obvious from a distance, are blatant from the out. People want to believe they can “tell” someone is abusive just from a glance, and write them off — and that anyone who would or might spend time with that person is therefore “asking for it”, or “letting themselves” be abused. 
In actual fact, many abusers aren’t. 
Many abusers are beautiful and charming — some of them draw you in, slowly bring you closer and closer until it’s very difficult to untangle yourself from your need and craving for their approval. They ruin lives, ruin psyches, and they cause unspeakable damage to their victims. 
And yes, victims often feel conflicted in the aftermath of their abuse.
Many of us hero worship or greatly respect our abusers, love them very deeply, crave their good opinion, because we are carefully groomed and manipulated, over time, into relying on their praise and their attention. For victims isolated from other sources of care and support, and especially for young children and teenagers, it can be very difficult to recognise what is happening and has happened to us. 
Even after we know and understand exactly what has happened to us, and also internalised that it was wrong, we can still feel conflicted. 
We are not retroactively deserving of our abuse because we crave our abusers’ good opinion, or their love, still. This instinct does not excuse or justify the abuse we’ve experienced. Victims of abuse are still victims of abuse even if we go back to our abusers, even if we “accept” or attempt to justify our abuse to others, if we try to excuse it, if we don’t ask for help. 
Abuse is never the victim’s fault, no matter how imperfect we are as victims. 
“Writing queer characters as abusive is bad representation!”
If we exclusively write queer characters who are perfect and unimpeachable, we’re not letting ourselves write queer characters who are fully human, with all the flaws and complexities humanity comes with. 
Queer people are not less deserving of this complex representation than cishet people are — and in any case, the purpose of art and media is not exclusively to provide good representation, or to show good moral examples for others.
We create to express ourselves, to reflect the world, to critique it, laugh at it, commiserate over it, to feel our feelings, to connect and communicate with others through shared stories. 
If we only let ourselves do things that might be seen as “good rep”, we rob ourselves of the ability to express ourselves as completely as we might wish to. 
“If you write abusive queer characters, you’re just contributing to homophobia and bigotry in art and media!”
Queer people writing queer stories with queer villains is not the same as cishet people including queer people or queer-coded characters just to be villains. The power dynamic is completely different. 
Queer writers’ writing of queer villainy is often inspired by their own experiences, including of bigotry, and the harm they might do reflects harm by society, the ways harms might be felt more keenly by their victims. 
Writing queer villains as villainous because their queerness makes them (or is used as a shorthand for them being) predatory, cruel, or callous, is homophobic and is often shitty, whether people intend that or not. 
But just having queer villains, having queer characters do bad or abusive things, or just have flaws? 
That’s as much a part of queer humanity as having queer heroes and having queer characters do good and helpful things.
Why would you read about rape when you could read consensual non-consent?
[Consensual non-consent being a kink wherein partners agree to roleplay a non-consensual situation.]
Rape in fiction is a form of consensual non-consent. 
The fictional characters, who are not real and do not have real feelings, are not consenting, but the reader choosing to read is. 
In the same way that two people playing a CNC roleplay game in the bedroom might be a safe and fun way of experiencing or re-experiencing the fear and trauma of assault with an escape clause (a safeword), a reader can do the same — they can stop reading. 
If a television show, film, or videogame becomes upsetting, again, one can stop watching, stop playing. It is a person’s own responsibility to set safe boundaries for themselves and protect their own mental health. 
“Why would someone write about trauma and abuse when they could write fluff?”
Why would someone watch a horror movie when they could watch a romcom? Why would someone eat cheese when chocolate is an option?
People do not have to choose one or the other — many people like both horror films and romcoms, cheese and chocolate, and reading about both horrible shit and positive things. 
“You mentioned that people might engage with media about dark topics to work through their feelings from their own abuse. How do I know if someone’s actually been abused?”
Why do you think it’s your right to ask that? 
Why are you prioritising your personal comfort and curiosity over that person’s privacy? If your instinct is to try to license who is and isn’t allowed to engage with a piece of art or media, why? 
You are never entitled to the details of someone else’s abuse. Your validation is not important enough to potentially trade for someone’s private traumas and experiences. 
“If you write or create about certain topics as a survivor, you’re just perpetuating abuse and you are as bad as your abuser!”
Creating works of art or fiction about people who are not real experiencing fictional harm that is also not real, is not in any way equivalent to real people doing real harm to others. 
If your support of abuse survivors hinges on how palatable their reaction to their abuse is, and you believe that some abuse survivors “deserve” their abuse for depicting their abuse in art and fiction, you’re not actually supporting survivors. 
If you believe that all abuse survivors do or should act the same way, or respond the same way, to their abuses, you are mistaken. 
If you are effectively angry at someone for not looking enough like a victim, for being “impure”, and therefore the same as their abuser, that is a form of victim blaming. 
Do you hold artists who create media about non-sexual trauma or violence to a different standard than those who write about sexual trauma or violence? 
Why? What is the difference to you?
If someone writing about sexual abuse in media is equivalent to real life abuse, is a fictional murder?
“People shouldn’t write or engage with media about traumatic things, they should just go to therapy!”
Therapy is not a moral machine where bad people with bad thoughts go in and good people with good thoughts go in. 
Good therapy and counselling provides us with the tools to manage our own mental health, our own emotional and psychological needs, heal from our traumas, and so forth. 
Many therapists will actually recommend safe re-exposure to frightening or upsetting topics, and also encourage self-expression on the subject of one’s most impactful experiences, which might include creating art and media to explore and discuss their feelings. 
With that said, therapy is as flawed as any other tools for emotional catharsis and healing — therapy and mental healthcare can be very expensive or inaccessible because of one’s working schedule; some therapists and mental health professionals are abusive or bigoted; some people may not be in the right place for MH care or therapy at this time, et cetera. 
Therapy isn’t a catch-all for anything you disapprove of in someone else, and it’s also not a punishment to force someone to repent for their sins. 
“It’s okay to write a story to cope, but you shouldn’t publish it in case it upsets others!”
So long as the work has appropriate content warnings and/or is published or screened in an appropriate space, it is not inherently harmful. In fact, reading narratives and engaging with those narratives can be valuable for us. 
Engaging with media that bears similarity to our own lives, reflects our own experiences, written by other people who we know understand the complicated emotions of survivors — whilst still condemning the actions of abusers or not — can be extremely validating and offer a lot of assurance. 
This is especially useful in regards to media that shows victims having a codependent relationship with or still loving their abusers, or where their abusers are shown as sympathetic, whilst the narrative still shows the toxicity and pain caused by the relationship. 
Moreover, there can be a sense of reclamation and security in exploring stories about similar harm as we’ve experienced whilst knowing we are now in a place of safety and are free from those past experiences, or that other survivors have escaped and we can too. 
“If children read this work or watch this show or play this game, they might think that the things depicted in it are okay!”
Is the work rated G or PG? 
Is it shown on a children’s TV channel, or appear in a section that is marked for children? Is it put on a children’s website, where the primary audience is children? 
In short, is the work aimed at kids?
If no, then it’s not for kids. 
Particularly if a work is marked for adult audiences only, if it’s labelled erotica, if it’s marked M or E or NC-17, if it says it’s for adults or asks people to check a box agreeing that they’re an adult, then the work in question is most definitely not for children. 
Everything in the world doesn’t have to be child-safe just because children exist.
It is the responsibility of parents and guardians to appropriately supervise their children’s online use, and to teach children and teenagers internet safety, some of which includes setting appropriate boundaries for themselves and not seeking out content that might distress them, or to know what to do if they stumble across content that does distress them — namely, to speak with a trusted adult about their feelings and what they can do to manage them and look after themselves, and be looked after.
It’s not the responsibility of random other adults in the world not to make horror movies or watch porn or play adult videogames or anything else, just because a child could potentially learn of their existence. 
“But someone else engaging with that work might think the things depicted in it are okay!”
You’re right, they might do. 
They might also engage with the work and think things depicted in it are bad. Fiction does not exclusively exist for our moral education. 
“It makes me feel uncomfortable or unsafe that people are writing about [a topic] with a tone or in a manner that seems wrong to me!”
Yes, many of us feel uncomfortable with some topics being depicted in fiction, and might find them viscerally disgusting or triggering, consider them to be in poor taste, badly considered, or similar. 
This is normal and okay. 
It’s perfectly natural to have limits on what one can handle in fiction, or to find your ethical considerations don’t match up with the things other people make. 
But it’s our job, as responsible adults who look after our own mental health and consider our own boundaries, to avoid that content. 
You cannot control what other people think about, feel about certain topics, or how they portray them in fiction. You cannot control other people. 
You can only control your environment, your boundaries, and the works you choose to engage with. 
You can limit your time on social media, mute tags or keywords, block particular users or sites, or simply look away or leave the room / close the tab. 
“What about rampant problematic works on Ao3!?”
Works on Ao3 are not a real issue. 
They are not representation. Fanworks and original works on Ao3 are not the mainstream. They are being read exclusively by members of various internet subcultures who read fanfiction in those specific fandoms, after reading the tags. 
This doesn’t mean we can’t or shouldn’t discuss certain tropes and norms in various fandoms — we might address our own biases around race, sexuality, religion, disability, and other characteristics, and how these biases and bigotries can come across in people’s approaches to fandom, the characters and ships they concentrate on, their headcanons, et cetera. 
The same can be said of people’s original creations. 
Ao3 has a robust tagging system, and allows people to mute and block tags they might be upset or triggered by — and in the event one clicks on an explicit work, a window will come up asking people to consent explicitly to moving through to read the work. 
It is people’s own responsibility to set their own limits as to what they can handle in reading fiction — and not to obsess over what other people might or might not be reading, which we cannot control, and is also none of our business. 
“What about loli and shotacon? Isn’t that the same as child pornography?”
“Child pornography” is generally not in use as a term — many people who have been victimised find that terms like “child porn” and CP grate, because “pornography” is work made with willing, adult participants. 
Videos and images produced of children are instead referred to either as CSAM — child sexual abuse materials — or CSEM — child sexual exploitation materials. CSEM is evil because it involves the unspeakable and agonising victimisation of a real life child or children, being abused and manipulated by adults around them, and worse than that initial victimisation, the recording their abuse is another victimisation in itself.
With every share of a piece of this material, that child or children are victimised another time, made vulnerable to more people, and the creation of this material can create more market desire, meaning that other abusers will encourage further abuse and recording of these children’s victimisation, or for the recording abusers to seek out other children to abuse. 
Victims of this sort of exploitation live in terror of the pictures or videos of their worst moments being shared to those they know, of being found by their loved ones, shared to workplaces, disseminated in any community they try to live in and be happy with — it is difficult enough to recover from one’s own abuse without the spectre of it constantly hanging over one’s head. 
People’s cartoons or art of fictional children is not equivalent to CSEM, because there are no real children depicted in it. 
It’s understandable to find these works disgusting or upsetting, triggering, unsettling — but to say that underage art or fiction is the same as or counts as CSEM is patently untrue. As a victim of CSA, it is galling to be told that choices my abuser made to harm and exploit me are equivalent to an abuser choosing to draw or read a comic about a victim that doesn’t actually exist. 
Some final questions to ask yourself: 
None of the above rebuttals are intended to imply people shouldn’t critique or criticise different media or their depictions. 
As well as the initial essay I linked, I actually wrote a big guide on how to approach close reading of text, and I’m working on another about analysing television and film.
In my opinion, it’s really important to be aware of different tropes and themes that you feel are harmful in fiction and art — racist tropes, sexist ones, homophobic ones, and all the rest.
It’s worth considering how works are harmful, and what you actually want to be done about it. 
I personally have criticisms of various tropes in media — I have particular dislike, for example, for the ways in which teacher/student relationships in TV shows and films are portrayed as “forbidden love”, with issue of their positions of power being depicted as one of bureaucracy or technical rules rather than a real power imbalance — I don’t care for the “sexy schoolgirl” trope, and the “barely legal” porn genre unsettles me.
All of the above three tropes often coincide with people’s thinking of teenage girls, especially those in school uniforms, as sex objects, and portraying school uniforms themselves as sexual or deserving of this sort of sexual attention. 
Not all depictions are the same — some works subvert the sexy schoolgirl trope by having those schoolgirls be secret monsters than punish abusers, and some works exist that critique teacher/student dynamics. 
It’s also important to note audience and outreach — a work that’s put on mainstream television channels or put in movie theatres by huge studios have a very different range of impact than an indie published novella, or one person’s fanfic on Ao3. 
Note where you’re holding individual or small studio creators — especially those who are in some way marginalised and are already facing adversity in their work — to higher account than large studios, or fixating on imagined harm their work could potentially cause. 
Is a work harmful, or is it just uncomfortable? Is it harmful, or is it just personally triggering to you? 
Can the work you’re concerned about do as much harm as you’re envisaging? Is it actually reaching the individuals you are worried might be vulnerable to harm as a result of it? Does the work intend to do that harm or hold those harmful views, and are the authors or creators working to address or apologise for that harm?
Is the work discussing, critiquing, or exploring the emotional impact of the dark themes within it? Does it have warnings or disclaimers before the work begins?
If you’re worried about a work “normalising” or “glorifying” a troubling subject — does the work actually do that? What is your evidence for this, having engaged with the text? Is that thing discussed in the text, argued, explored in-depth, or merely mentioned? Do characters show inner conflict and interpersonal conflict over it? Is it actually portrayed as good or normal? Is your concern the characters’ perspectives within the text, or the authors or creators’ opinions? 
Does the work carry ideas that are bigoted or feel like it includes apologism for some shitty ideas or ideology? Is the work a piece of propaganda, or function as propaganda? Do you feel the work is being advertised or pushed to an inappropriate audience for its subject matter?
If you do consider the work to be either likely to be personally distressing or upsetting to you, or potentially harmful because of its troubling or bigoted or just shitty ideas, how do you want to respond? 
If it’s the former, you should set your own boundaries — you should use your mute and block functions, you should avoid the work, you should seek out things that will comfort you, and perhaps discuss the distressing topics with someone you trust, whether that’s a friend or partner, a loved one, or a counsellor or therapist. 
If it’s the latter, you should absolutely deconstruct the piece in question and analyse the ways in which it’s shitty or harmful, or read essays by those who’ve done that work. You can maybe warn your friends about it, or if it’s a work of political concern — if the harm is being done because the work provides financial support to a hate group or a bigoted public persona, for example, you might perform a boycott, or involve yourself in acts of protest in response to the work or its creators. 
If it’s important enough to you and your beliefs that you feel urged to do those things, perhaps you should — if all you feel urged to do is to harass or shout at people online, though, it might be better for your own mental health to take a step back and do something more positive for yourself. 
Sometimes, a piece of work or media will be shitty, and shitty people will love it, and that will kinda suck — God knows I’ll see work that’s really transphobic or homophobic or antisemitic, and it’ll upset me that people I otherwise love and respect seem to be enjoying it so much. 
I can talk to my friends and my family about it, and I’ll do that — and I can mute and block the topic, and critique it in the right circles, or write essays if I’m really inspired to, responding to the work and what I feel its impact is…
But if my instinct becomes to just snipe at people for enjoying it when they really don’t know what the problem is, or have a go at them when they’re doing so unthinkingly, that’s not really helpful to them or to myself. It’s not addressing the harm I feel is being done, and nor is it really constructive. 
I’m an adult, after all — as I’ve said a few times already, it’s our own responsibility to set our own boundaries and consider what we’re doing to safeguard ourselves, and if in setting those boundaries and personal safeguarding limits, whether they’re in line with our own ethics and morality. 
We cannot control other people and their feelings, or the works they create, but we can take care of ourselves, including breaking ourselves out of obsessive moral spirals or anxieties about other people’s thoughts — and personally, I think that’s actually a very revolutionary thing to do given that we exist in a world that constantly tries to encourage (and monetise) that sort of aimless outrage. 
397 notes · View notes
mywitchcultblr · 2 years
Text
I'm done with your purity
I'm fucking done with all of you westerners fucks who take your freedom for granted. AO3 was banned in china because pissy fans reporting RPF TO THE GOVERNMENT UNDER FALSE REPORT OF PEDO OR WHATEVER thus making life a living hell for Chinese writers and fans. ALSO LET ME TELL YOU that fanfic and AO3 is a safe space for many oppressed LGBT people outside of the west
I can't fucking say that I'm trans and bi without having people beating the shit out of me, but I can fuckin' write that I'm gay as fuck in fanfic or writing gay shit about my fave with fanfic
Imagine some people defending state wide censorship over fanfic, because they don't like icky fanfic, that's a sign that either you are brainwashed or fucking privileged and taking your freedom for granted. You know why Asian and other non western USA-European are more chill with fanfic and fandom?
Why we are less prone to make some stupid callout over fanworks?
Because most of us doesn't have the same information and expression privilege like the west, we take any freedom that we can have
Tumblr media
That's in 2017... There's probably more than one million websites being censored rn. I cannot even buy pride pin here because NO ONE outside of internet selling it! The censorship always begin from "banning information to protect children and moral from nsfw" down to censoring Spongebob Squarepants
You don't like something? Just don't fucking read it, it wouldn't stop the author to write and when they do stop writing usually after they are harassed so bad to the point of mental break down or suicide. What the actual fuck...
Defending and supporting state wide censorship because you want to feel superior on the internet is beyond stupid and it showing your privilege... Also yah fuck you who defend china aggressive state wide censorship because adult x adult RPF icky or whatever, I like reading Tom Hiddleston x Reader, because I'm lonely and it's fun. Don't lie that you never thinking of marrying your favorite celebrities or dreaming about dating Gerard Way.
What the fuck you gonna do about it? Crucify my ass? So long you are not shoving it to the person's face, who give a fuck? It's not a justifiable ground to cheer for government mandated national wide censorship. A lot of westerners are so privileged and terminally online to the point their mind revolve around online discourse 24/7 I'm not saying discourse has no damn merits but you get what I said...
Some people particularly white westerners are so privileged they have the chance to goes back 180° and agreeing with conservative mindset they claim to hate so much... Also your kink critical bullshit and your bullshit crusading over dark stories? Yeah. Heavily influenced by TERF and conservatism. Newsflash...
I'm not a person who agree with all ship or stories, i don't claim any moral high ground. I was so scared of getting cancelled due to the hostile neo puritan fandom culture, but seeing people defending China great firewall and aggressive censorship finally broke something inside of me and I cannot stay quiet
I don't give a fuck about your fanfic discourse, If i don't like something i just wouldn't fucking engage with it and wouldn't read...
Tumblr media
I'm done, I'm tired. Fucking tagging this shit as anti vs pro because i need to get the message out there and LET THE CHAOS begin
( When you want to escape your country censorship to the internet but then you see the supposed liberated westerners people wanting censorship because they want to feel moral. Yes there are even westerners who don't want to see anything even remotely 'problematic' example: they will attack Zutara or fuckin' Reylo shipper whatever. See? You are terminally online and so privileged... Congratulations... Here's your fucking medal and gold star)
3K notes · View notes
raviosprovidence · 8 months
Text
i got blocked by someone over this but critiquing media that has sex in it/critiquing the sex itself is not automatically puritan. Sex negativity is not pointing out that most popular pieces of media that have sex in it are overwhelmingly white, straight, cis, and able bodied. Sex negativity is not pointing out that it is a problem that swathes of people (usually younger women) cannot read fictional books without there being some sort of ~spicy~ scene in it. What IS puritan is someone saying all sex is bad INHERENTLY/there shouldn't be sex depicted anywhere in media at ALL.
230 notes · View notes
not-poignant · 7 months
Text
Every time someone reblogs a post of mine on Tumblr that is like 'actually reading what you want in fiction like incest / rape etc. is fine' with something like 'yes because incest in fiction shows you how wrong it is' I want to scream and shake them like *you missed the pointttttt.*
People can just enjoy it in fiction because it's hot. They can enjoy it because they find it hot and enjoyable. It doesn't have to say anything about a moral compassion, it doesn't have to be huge and meaningful, and it doesn't have to reflect on any real world values re: incest and rape.
Please don't reblog my posts and try and do your thought policing, moral crap with what I'm writing.
When I wrote incest in Strange Sights, I wrote it to be HOT. That's why I tagged and used liberal warnings for it. So that people who find it squicky or triggery can avoid it. When I write noncon, most of the time, I write it because it's hot, because the majority of human beings have had rape fantasy.
We seem to have a genuine issue with folks no longer being able to tell reality from fiction due to a profound lack of media literacy, and a need for opaque, black and white thinking with no nuance, and it's so incredibly dangerous re: the health of our minds.
Like, I genuinely fear for any moral puritan and the people around them, that they don't simply stop and recognise the difference between reality and fiction, that they do not have a 1:1 relationship with each other, that you don't have to be like 'it's okay in fiction because it is wrong there too' or w/e.
Knowing this is going to get worse before it gets better, having come so far down the slide of 'golden age of the internet' to here, is like... deeply unpleasant to say the least.
71 notes · View notes
shsl-fujoshi · 9 months
Text
Going Forward
Back in the livejournal days, I wrote a lot more posts that were long and involved, more thought out, and more personal.
I think all of us-- fandom and nerds and geeks specifically, but along with us everyone in the world-- I think we have been immeasurably harmed by corporate social media.
We have been harmed by conforming to an arbitrary word count, by the pressure to post short, “content” multiple times a day, for that content to be “relatable”, tepidly ‘family (advertiser) friendly’, and in the service of getting as much shallow ‘like/share/reblog’ attention to this “content” as possible. In service to our own egos, yes, but beyond that, in service to the desires of the vast, money hungry corporations who graciously allow us to provide free “content” for their vast, money hungry machines of social media.
We have been harmed, too, by the social pressures these corporate machines of mass communication create. The pressure not to be too cringey, too weird, too arrogant; the anti-intellectual pressure never to be “pretentious”.
Well fuck that my posts are not “content” and they are not created for the money hungry corporate machine, and they are not for it to drip feed to a mass audience like baby birds with their mother’s heavily digested pap.
My posts are weird, they are pretentious, and they are not fucking advertiser friendly.
They have contorted our minds to demand constant attention of the mass-communication money making machine they’ve created, and I don’t want to be part of it any more.
Back on Livejournal we were thrilled if a post made it to a few dozen comments.
And you know what? A few comments is leagues and lightyears better than hundreds of nothing-interactions. “Likes” and “reblogs”.
Shallow interaction for the machine to fill a few more milliseconds of scrolling for a few more people.
My posts are worth more than that.
YOUR posts are worth more than that.
I’m in the middle of a vast self-exodus to my own hosting-- as twitter is destroyed from within, and reddit eats itself, and AO3 is the victim of mass campaign of canibalization by fucking normies who are the front of useful idiots for conservative christians, and for terfs-- I am leaving.
Social media is a corpse on the ground, and we “””content creators””” are the soul of it. That soul will not die, we will simply all find new bodies to inhabit and infuse. 
But until that corpse is gone, I intend to be one damned annoying poltergeist for the scavengers to deal with while they rip apart the corpse of social media.
Fuck corporate interests. Fuck the money machine. Fuck the christian conservatives and the TERFs and everyone else who wants to hold you down and make you conform and lay still while they eat your corpse.
I’m pretentious. I’m long winded. And I’m not safe for advertisers.
Rattle those chains, baby. Rattle those chains.
appendix beneath the cut
related links:
Stop Talking to Each Other and Start Buying Things By Cat Valente
The Enshittification of TikTok by Cory Doctorow
Special note: X-Posted to my personal offsite blog
84 notes · View notes
blackheartbiohazards · 19 hours
Text
There's nothing wrong with writing or reading, or making art about things that some people consider cringey, weird or embarrassing.
There's nothing wrong with reading or writing or making art about characters that some people would consider "mary sues", or overpowered, or evil or "unlikable".
There's nothing wrong with reading or writing or making art about topics, ideas, characters or events that other people consider wrong, stupid, or gross.
Read and write and make art about the things that you want to, without worrying about what others might think.
121 notes · View notes
littlefaeella · 3 months
Text
ramble warning by the way
one of the things about being a girl raised in an extremely strict christian household while never even believing in that religion, let alone any religion, is that you still learn and ingrain a lot of the purity lessons
like, sure i never believed god or jesus would look down at me in shame and disgusting and cast me into hell for feeling aroused, wanting sex, or masturbating, because they're not real to me, but i always knew my family would be ashamed, disgusted, and think me worthy of an eternity of suffering for that
i remember starting puberty young, developing first at six then getting my period at eight, and just never being viewed the same because i was slowly beginning the process of becoming physically mature, and thus, already too close to womanhood to be viewed as a hundred percent innocent
i remember sitting through hour long lectures and going to school tired the next day because they needed, in their opinion, to remind me about how bad, evil, corrupting, disgusting, and filthy sex, masturbation, and being aroused by anything or anyone besides your husband is
i remember feeling so disgusted and ashamed with myself and dirty at ten years old because i was feeling arousal for the first time due. i hated myself and i tried to pretend i wasn't until i cried over being a bad person
i remember being taught how easily my body compared to my brother's is tainted forever. sex will ruin a vagina if it isn't done with your husband, that it will leave it forever dirty like a piece of chewing gum, and that no one will ever want it again like how no one wants bruised secondhand flowers, that if i ever marry after having premarital sex i should always be greatful because they wanted a better, purer, innocent wife but settled for me out the mercy of god
but men? you shouldn't have sex outside of marriage of course, it was disrespectful, but there never any mention of it making you dirty, of it making you undesirable, any less loveable
i hated being a girl, i hated feeling aroused and the idea of masturbation was too shameful because i had i vagina and i didn't want to ruin it. i didn't want to taint myself in the eyes of my family, the family who should have been willing to love me unconditionally, who said they would, but i knew they could not. judging someone, telling them they are in anyways lesser, isn't love, i knew that even then
then around twelve i got access to the internet and suddenly i was introduced into fandom culture, and fujoshis, and yaoi, and the idea of proudly being a freak, of accepting that you're filthy and horny and that's okay! there's a lot of filthy horny freaks out there!
of course, looking back at it, being taught to accept being filthy and freaky for just liking sex wasn't the best, it should have been pushed that sex isn't dirty or corruption or freaky, but it was what i needed at the time. i don't think i could have just accepted that i wasn't a bad person for liking sexual things, it was the transition ground, the gateway drug that i needed
it was easier to accept being the disgusting evil degenerates women i was alway told i was for liking sex then accepting that these people who i loved were wrong. that they were hurting me for no reason, pushing their toxic ideas onto me because they couldn't accept and truly love themselves
i remembered being unable to handle f/m or f/f smut, but m/m was comfortable and provided me a means to finally cope with years of repressed sexual feelings, emotions, and frustration. yeah, i only shipped gay ships, only wrote porn about gay men, and one could agrued that i was fetishizing gay men, but these were characters, objects. they weren't real and the only outlet to comfortable sexual expression i had
vaginas were uncomfortable. i still had so much shame about my body that i couldn't stand reading about other characters with my body having or even wanting sexual things. it felt like i watching these female characters be corrupted, like i was disrespecting them, and if i saw myself in them? i just felt small, dirty, and unlovable again
yaoi lovers, fujoshis, m/m focused fanwork makers, these communities were my lifeline through the good chunk of my early teenage years, and this recent incline of hate in recent years has made me almost feel protective and possessive of these communities despite not being in them anymore
i have learn how to love myself, how to not view sex negatively, and that my body isn't corruptible or filthy, but i learned that from first learning to accept being a filthy yaoi fangirl, from reveling in being a fujoshi, and that me liking seeing dudes get it on was okay. if i hadn't learned to be okay being a freak, i wouldn't have learn that i wasn't really one
i still use the term freak even though I don't use yaoi or fujoshi anymore. it's an affectionate term though for me, more silly because to me, there isn't such thing as a freak. freaks don't exist, just jerks who can't handle people living, loving, or enjoy life/things/people differently then them. to be a freak to me, is to give those jerks the middle finger by taking their weapons of shame and othering away
i like and prefer f/m mostly now days, but m/m was my childhood, and it was my sexual awakening in a way. i feel like this trend of hate towards yaoi fans, fujoshis, etcetera, is just born from the same sex shaming branch of purity culture i grew up it
"oh but you're fetishizing gay men!" these characters are objects, it would be no different from me fetishizing a stool or a pool noodle. unlearn the discomfort of things with your body features being viewed as sexually desirable. unlearn the discomfort of people with vaginas feeling sexual feelings
people just sometimes need something divorced from themselves, to look upon and feel not included, to not see themselves to be able to get off. sometimes seeing yourself is too embarrassing, too uncomfortable, too much, but you still need an outlet and porn of the other gender does the trick
porn, sex, masturbation, arousal, being horny, etcetera isn't dirty, bad, wrong, corrupting, dehumanizing, or whatever negative purity lable you want to give it. people are never bad for just feeling horny over something, even if it makes you uncomfortable
hate yaoi, fujoshis, women who like m/m content all you want, but there's no need to demonize. be disgusted, revolted, and think they're dirty all you want, but gosh, there's no need to push purity culture onto them by shaming them for simply being aroused and horny. a dick is hot, and two dicks is even hotter for some people. they're not thinking about your dick, so get over it. and even if they were, as long as they kept it to themselves who cares!
heck, even women who watch real life gay porn actors aren't bad and evil fetishizing monsters. porn is art form like any other, it's meant to invoke thoughts and feelings, just more sexual ones this time. as long as they aren't going up to random gay couples in real life and sexually harassing them by telling them how hot they are, how sexually turned on they make her, asking sexual questions, who cares!
a thought in a person's head, no matter how sexual and "dirty" you perceive it be to be doesn't effect you! them telling another person and them having a conversation about that thought and you stumbling across it and get uncomfortable about it doesn't hurt you!
it's just purity culture to hate on yaoi and fujoshis, because at the end of the day, it's just hating on someone for being aroused by something, and fearing that arousal will make them a porn addicted dehumanizing freaky monster, that them being aroused by this thing that looks like you will make them disrespect you, because in some way you find sex and arousal disrespectful
i'm not even a fujoshi anymore but i was, and i remember being one so fondly and happily, finally in a space where i could begin to heal from just a little piece of my religiously restricting and traumatizing upbringing. i will defend y'all to the the end of the earth if i must, you all helped me however indirectly. i can't be more thankful for the first sex positive community i encountered
sorry if this is little all over the place by the way lol
66 notes · View notes
craycraybluejay · 6 months
Text
I also heavily resent the ever-present implication in mainstream media that at all touches on trauma that we cannot have any sympathy for Bad Victims. That it's evil to write a sympathetic Bad Victim. Hell, that it's bad to portray one at all at times. Writing a victim of trauma who's an addict or self-destructive is already an edge case-- writing trauma survivors who end up actually hurting someone else, being chronically "treatment"-resistant or having inconvenient ptsd, perpetuate the cycle, or are just kind of a total dick is considered an evil move. Instead of like. An actually complex and interesting artistic choice.
Idk. It pisses me off a lot how often Bad Victims[TM] are brushed under the rug and if you dare to speak of them/make art of them, let alone SYMPATHIZE with them you're an irredeemable monster. And that's just fictional characters. Don't even get me started on the way people treat actual people who have ptsd in a way that's at all inconvenient and problematic in their opinion.
2K notes · View notes
inactiveblog2023 · 10 months
Text
fandom service announcement
Tumblr media
reminder to anyone it applies to: just because you don't like or agree with certain ships, or think they're 'wrong' or 'weird' or 'gross' or whatever, doesn't mean you can dictate how other people interpret characters and who they choose to ship. and it certainly doesn't mean you have the right to shame others for enjoying those ships.
shipping fictional characters hurts no one, but you know what does hurt people? ostracizing them from a fandom on the basis of some arbitrary moral high ground.
so can we please all just be nice to people no matter their shipping preferences? thanks
121 notes · View notes
bump-inthe-night · 7 days
Text
Teenagers saying stupid stuff about sex or being uncomfortable with certain sexual content doesn’t make them "puriteens” and doesn’t make them at fault for censorship being enforced by legislation, school boards, and companies. 
Firstly, teenagers' thoughts on sex will change as they grow older and become adults, which is when they’ll be free to explore sex and develop a better understanding of it. Secondly, teenagers have no control over adults banning pieces of media and censoring websites, who often do it under the false guise of “protecting” them. 
Lastly, stop obsessing over teenagers and their sexual opinions, because it’s unhealthy and extremely creepy to care this much. No adult should be harassing teenagers or bragging to them about their sex lives while also shaming them for not having one. It’s fucking weird.
If you dislike what teenagers are saying about sex, then block them, and while you’re at it, quit blaming them over ADULTS censoring certain media. 
23 notes · View notes