proship-bad-takes

[proship-bad-takes]

I know this account is supposed to be inactive now, but I'd like to note that one of the people in the screenshots, cultmenephila, is the one who created the 🌈🍖 label, and has repeatedly defended CSEM in the past, among other actually harmful things (such as hate speech), while denying defense of it. But, her label was made to defend things like this. Please stop using it to mean "proship," as that's not what 🌈🍖 means. By her own admission, it means "radically anti-censorship." Take a guess what she means by "radical."

Proshippers who support NSFW art of child actors

Do not spread or justify artwork exploiting the likeness of real children, as it counts as csem in most legislation such as most of Europe and the USA. It doesn't matter if the child in question is an adult now. It's still CHILD EXPLOITATION, just like AI and Deepfakes made on the likeness of existing children

according to these people it's fine to draw child actors in nsfw because they won't sue (it's not fine and it's not legal, not even by twitter TOS)

comparing exploiting child's actor likeness for nsfw to... abortion being banned?

insinuating that "anime" style nsfw of real children is perfectly fine and ok if it's... meme-able?

this is zrcalo/struggs, a well known pedophile and zoophile, denying the artist in question had an obsession with the child actor. which they absolutely did, since they posted and used behind the scenes photos as reference for their art, multiple times, and self-admitted their obsession on twitter

a libertarian arguing it's ok to make NSFW art of real children if they're an adult now and "giving permission" to use their likeness

"just scroll over nsfw art of child actors, no biggie"

[proship-bad-takes]

I'm a bit confused. Paraphile is such a broad term and can cover things like latex fetishes and those that enjoy pup play. It's a medical term and that's the medical definition. If you're talking about pedophilia or zoophillia wouldn't it be better to just say those things?

I've made posts before specifying that when I speak broadly of being against those who support paraphiles, I am referring only to the ones that are harmful if acted upon (pedophilia, zoophilia, necrophilia, etc). I have a few paraphilias myself and am not against paraphiles as a whole, as many of them are harmless! I only am against the ones that cause inherent harm

Overall though, I think most people can infer what I mean, given the context of the posts I make regarding the topic

[proship-bad-takes]

Whoever sent that last ask, could you resend it? It's not showing up in my inbox, all I saw was the first few words in the notification

[proship-bad-takes]

This account is mostly inactive now, but I still don't want pro-para or pro-radqueer people to follow me.

I am radically inclusive, but cultural appropriation, paraphiles, etc are not queer, and it makes me really sad how some groups are intentionally coopting terms to weasel into the community and cause harm to those within it.

Also, having intrusive thoughts does NOT mean you have a paraphilia, so if you have OCD or BID, this post does NOT refer to you! This post also does NOT refer to people who ONLY enjoy fictional depictions of something that would be harmful in real life (I'm also proship!)

[proship-bad-takes]

Context: Someone OP was arguing with called themself queer and OP called the word "disgusting" and tagged it as "q slur," and used their own status as an LGBT+ person to deflect responsibility when called on it. They claim to have no issue with people reclaiming the term, but continued to use harmful and stigmatizing language regarding the label

(Admin note: I feel like people have a right to feel however they wish about words that may have been used against them as a slur. However, that does NOT permit someone to refer to the label as disgusting, gross, etc., especially directly to someone who has reclaimed it and has strong feelings about their label. My account is very pro-queer as a queer person myself, so yes, this is a bad take from a proshipper. We do not support anti-queer rhetoric here, especially given its historical roots in radical feminism AKA terfism)

[proship-bad-takes]

Imagine condoning pedophilia under the guise of being proship

(Admin Note: The post is old, but this person still makes questionable posts to this day)

[proship-bad-takes]

This is still an issue! Please send submissions ONLY if you want me to see something, but not post it! Otherwise, PLEASE USE ASKS OR DMS

Just so everyone knows, my submissions are NOT WORKING! I can recieve them, but I can't post/edit/etc them right now for some reason

[proship-bad-takes]

Agreed! They're still not queer, but I do support most paraphilias, which is why I consider myself para-critical instead of anti-para. I've said it before, but I have a few paraphilias of my own! My lack of support goes ONLY to those that cause inherent harm, and those that involve an inherent lack of consent

Reminder that MAPs/necros/zoos/allies are in my DNI for a reason. That includes radqueers and their supporters (NOT to be confused with radinclus!)

[proship-bad-takes]

Paraphilias are not queer. Fantasies to abuse others are not queer. Bigotry is not trans. I am very radically inclusive, but NOT of abuse or bigotry. Hope that clears things up for you!

(Edit: I absolutely support self-ID and non-socially approved queerness. But the things anon listed above, quite simply, are not queer)

Reminder that MAPs/necros/zoos/allies are in my DNI for a reason. That includes radqueers and their supporters (NOT to be confused with radinclus!)

[proship-bad-takes]

Reminder that MAPs/necros/zoos/allies are in my DNI for a reason. That includes radqueers and their supporters (NOT to be confused with radinclus!)

[proship-bad-takes]

Reminder that all posts on this account are submissions, unless I state otherwise. Most people who make submissions censor the usernames before sending them to me, for the sake of the person's privacy, so even I don't know who is saying what's in the screenshots most of the time. I will sometimes make a note on the post to add my own thoughts, but otherwise, EVERYTHING SAID HERE is quoted from either the submitter, or someone else who had spoken on the matter if I saw them (all of whom are anonymous for their privacy and safety).

A bad take is a bad take, no matter who says it, and will this be featured here if submitted to me and said by a proshipper. I have an account for antis as well (@antiship-bad-takes) if that matters to any of you.

If you don't like that a specific person is featured on this blog, I'm sorry, but no amount of badgering will change my mind so long as they remain anonymous. If YOU end up being featured on the blog, you may request a take-down, but I will ONLY take it down if your identity was leaked, and you are getting harassed for your take because of my post. I WILL NOT take down posts that feature predators, nazis, or other actively dangerous people.

This blog isn't supposed to make you angry, it's meant to inform you of what people in proship spaces are doing/saying that may be harmful. If you disagree with a take being bad, you're entitled to that opinion, but don't bother me about it. This is a SUBMISSION BLOG

[proship-bad-takes]

Nobody said you had to be nice to the anti, and anon even agreed that the anti in question was horrible. That doesn't give you an excuse to sexually harass them or refer to them with pet names after they stated clear discomfort. There are other ways to make an abusive person uncomfortable that DON'T excuse other forms of harassment, especially sexual in nature. Calling someone a pet name once is fairly harmless, but NOT repeatedly doing so after someone tells you about a clear boundary regarding them

(Admin note: Consent matters for EVERYONE. The moment you pick and choose who it's okay to sexually harass, EVERYONE is free game. Block and move on, or at least find non-abusive ways to counter abusive antis. That doesn't mean the anti was right, it means you're going beyond self-defense and moving onto mutual wrongdoing that affects more than just the person you're trying to hurt back)

[proship-bad-takes]

Hey I was previously an anti but I've noticed a lot of antis are really weird and seek out proshippers to harass them and even call them irl pedos/abusers I don't think proshippers are abusers and I even made a separate account to understand their point of view on the matter but I must know why exactly do some proshipers like messed up things sometimes? I've seen some that like creepy dynamics and I don't understand how they can consume it and say it has no effect on them in reality. Does fiction really not effect reality? Fiction has effected me a lot, I am very attached to certain characters and they've shaped who i am, where is the line drawn? I genuinely want to learn I honestly don't understand. I've seen some of them say that they use it to cope but is it a good way to cope? Tho of course I can't judge them if it isn't that is there business to figure out but I'd just like to understand. I thought antis were just people who weren't into certain media and that's fine but a lot of them police what people can like so I think I'm gonna leave.

This is really not what this account is for, but if anyone wants to answer them in the notes, feel free

All I'm gonna add is that it's different for each person; what affects one may not affect another. What hurts one may help another, and vice verse. There is no single answer to this question

However, the "fiction doesn't affect reality" argument is a strawman created by antis, and is not a belief proshippers hold. The REAL phrase is "fiction isn't reality" which is objectively true

[proship-bad-takes]

@ the anon about the writers:

So, at first, I was going to report the accounts you'd mentioned, as you led me to believe that the people you listed were making sexually explicit content of real minors (which would be CSEM [which, btw, you should NOT be sharing if that were the case]).

However, I just...am not seeing it? I definitely think sexual RPF is overstepping people's boundaries and should not be posted publicly online, but from what I'm seeing, the actors for the characters are all adults...Not kids.

If I simply missed what you were referring to, then I apologize, but all I'm seeing is people writing fanfiction about people who are adults in real life. And at least one of the writers is actually YOUNGER than the people they are writing about (and that writer is also an adult)

[proship-bad-takes]

I think this has been said so many times but I just wanna say it again. I hate how many "radqueers" have entered into the tags. Attempting to escape the trans race/transid feels impossible. It's uncomfortable to see as a trans BIPOC. What's even worse is that the community already has a really bad race problem. I've been called more slurs by other proshippers than I have antis. I worry people use the title to just excuse their shit.

I've answered a number of asks like this before, so here's my concise thoughts:

There is nothing radical or queer about bigotry or abuse. And neither of those belong in proship spaces

[proship-bad-takes]

Just so everyone knows, my submissions are NOT WORKING! I can recieve them, but I can't post/edit/etc them right now for some reason

[proship-bad-takes]

the amount of proshippers who have no problem with minors looking at nsfw is incredibly concerning tbh...i feel like it's mostly the "radqueer" types but it's still gross and terrifying

I feel like minors are going to look at nsfw regardless of what anyone says. I think it becomes a problem when it's ENCOURAGED (such as adults ahowing nsfw to kids, interacting with them from nsfw accounts, etc) or when it's made difficult for kids to avoid (such as putting nsfw content into the main tags of media made with kids as the intended audience [such as disney cartoons]). I don't really see it happening a lot in proship-specific spaces, and I think it's more of a general fandom issue

So minors simply seeing nsfw is fine I think, as long as the adults aren't intentionally showing it to them, or being irresponsible with the tagging system. Knowingly interacting with minors regarding nsfw is the real problem in my opinion