#anti comship

[skrunklivflour]

can both sides of the proship argument please stop accusing the entire other side of death threats n stuff. those are pro harassment and they're on both sides, stop generalizing because most people on either side are against telling people to kys. not all of us/you are pro harassment.

only post of mine proshippers can interact with bc message needs to be spread, start saying if you're pro harassment or not so people can know if they want to interact with you or not, anyways some of yall gotta learn what a block button is and how to use it cause it will save you so much headache

[ironasss]

"its just a fictional character, i can sexualize them if i want!" doesnt apply to children btw!!

[leostarred]

icky emoji combos to look out for :(

-🌈🍖 (proship)

-🍓🍰 (proship)

↑Someone who supports/likes romantic relationships in media that is considered "problematic" as well as supporting fanworks about said pairings.

-🌸🌙 (comship)

-🕊️🍋 (comship)

↑Similar to Proship, someone who indulges in complicated ships, things that are socially/morally unacceptable in reality, they do not endorse these things irl, but still triggering.

-🍋🌈 (profic)

↑These people don't really care what others ship- which is fine, they basically just stay out of the way of others, and don't really argue over their ships being correct, or others being incorrect (while this is probably one of the least bad ones, that still means they are okay with icky/illegal ships)

-🐰🎀 (l0licon)

↑A type of media fixated on younger looking women in a sexual or erotic sense, probably the people who say "but she's a god!!!!" when she looks like 5.

-🍯🧸 (sh0tacon)

↑Someone who is attracted to fictional characters under the age of 16... so fictional p3dos. Icky.

-🕊️⚰️ (deaddove)

↑Enjoyer of darker media, things that are violent or vile in general.. sometimes being things like necr0ph!l!a.

-🥀☁️ (n0n-c0n)

↑Enjoys fictional tropes with lack of consent; like r@pe.

-📚☕️ (agegap)

↑Pretty self explanatory, they usually enjoy ships with a biiiig age gap, the reason this is problematic is because usually one of the people in the pairing is super young.

-🌸💫 (gr00ming)

↑Someone who enjoys grooming in media, essentially, grooming is preparing someone younger for sexual purposes, or abuse.

.

.

.

These emoji combos are associated with things like pro shippers or dark media lovers, if you don't want to interact with these icky people, look out for these !

Here are some ANTI emoji combos 2 use!

-🍡💫

-🧋🎀

-🥛💎

-🌹👻

-🔥🍄

-🥩🧸

-🦴🫙

-👽🍦

-🫧🪷

-🧼🍰

-🍫⛓️

-🍤💣

-🧁🦠

-🌈🫘

-🍭🪓

-🧇🎈

-💊🌱

-🍬🚬

-🍪🪦

-🪄🍩

-🥞💫

also reminder that "🌈♾️" means autism.. please do not block autistic ppl in mistake for proshippers. 😭

[flagsandtags]

proshippers actually fuck off no one loves u and ur actually fucking gross

[trippy-maskow]

peoples kinks arent about you. get over urself. its not YOUR trauma. you dont have ownership over all trauma.

it doesnt mean that I need to be ok with it??? esp when its shti like incest or pedo shit?? if ur gonna fantasy abt it with online sutff, it will eventually shift into reality. Also, it actually IS a trauma of mine, as a proshipper who shipped not only incest but pedophile tried to groom me. so actually yes. I DO have a say in teh matter. and I DO have a say in the matter as a verbal abuse and sa victim THANKS. this isnt something that just I say. its something that THOUSANDS of trauma victims say. and trying to FORCE your "Kinks" onto others wont make them accept you bucko. It will make them hate you more. And I never said I had ownership of others peoples trauma. just that more often than not, proshippers use trauma as an excuse. I WILL SAY that there ARE people who have been groomed into this, as I neaerly have. So kindly, do NOT telll ME to ACCEPT the same people who tried to groom me. thanks

[theasexual-jackson]

Am I the only one who have noticed that proshippers and related will always blame the person for stumbling upon bad content and getting upset because of it, until the person throws out an argument that makes them look bad? It goest like:

"Blud, I have the right to be upset, I literally came across gloryfied rape fanfiction."

"So? It's not our problem, you inflicted that upon yourself, don't whine about it."

"Nigga, I was literally 8 years old, how can you blame a fucking 8 year old for getting traumatized because of gloryfied rape?"

"Actually, I don't blame you, I blame your parents instead."

An I find that real fucking weird...

[talisman975]

BelosFansTakeover Update

Just a warning that I want to clear up since I’ve been seeing this happening BUT

This event ABSOLUTELY DOES NOT SUPPORT COMSHIPS IN ANY WAY

So comshippers, please stop using our tag for your ships like empgold, beluz, beleda, and so forth.

We Belos fans are getting enough bad rep as it is and we don’t need you guys making it worse.

[naquey]

I'm not going to censored myself, ever. Now, I get that sometimes I write problematic content, and that proshippers or comshippers don't cause me mental duress, but, that being said.

If sebaciel shippers or any proshippers interact I'm blocking you on sight. No ifs, ands, or buts ab it. I don't like it, and cannot separate my morality when I'm dealing with fiction, I feel a strong sense of morality. And yes, ik the internet is full of all sorts of fucked shit, but I DO NOT want to see adults shipped with minors or siblings being shipped together.

It gives me the ick. Regardless of if this happens all the time in any fandom Im in, I'm not saying cater to my needs, I'm saying I do not like it and you will be blocked. If you think I want you to cater to my needs, read this again.

I am not a safe space for you.

[zombxie]

Just a reminder that the difference between proshipping and toxic/disgusting/illegal/whatever relationships in media is that proshipping treats those tropes like they're okay and romanticizes them (regardless of if the argument "only in fiction" is used.) and relationships like that just existing in media without proship involved shows that they are real and those things do happen without treating them like they're okay.

Proship is disgusting end of story. no healthy coping mechanism feeds into the problem.

[humixalex]

STOP INTEREACTING IF YOURE PROSHIP!!

I'd really love to mention that this blog is run by a minor who's also a SA survivor. by interacting with this blog while being proship/comship, you're not helping. I don't care if for some people, this type of disturbing media helps them. here it's a genuine trigger and you should be aware of how much of an impact this has over a person.

I block and avoid any media I'm disturbed by, it's safe to say that I did what I'm supposted to do to protect myself. but I always check out the people who interact with my posts, just to be sure that my media dosent become comshipper bait.

please be normal for once

[tabbyrocks]

friendly reminder to my new followers that i dont like proshippers!!!! get the fuck off my blog if you think that stuff is okay!!!!!

[sallyastral]

I'm feeling extremely disgusted by the fact I discovered FlowerFang aka Miguel x Miles is a thing and is even one of the most popular ships in the community.

Do me a favor, if you ship them block my account and never come back, thanks.

[unicornlovers10]

One reason why I don't like talking about proshippers, and the discourse related to it, is that proshippers will still try to interact with you even if you explicitly tell them to not do so. It's really frustrating at best.

(Proshippers/comshippers DNI, I will block you on sight)

[l0gic1]

Opinion: Lolicon/shotacon isn’t pedophilia, but it’s still bad.

Loli/shotacon isn't pedophilia, as it doesn’t involve the attraction to real-life children. Regardless, it’s still disgusting, as adults should not be attracted to or sexualizing minors in any context. At the same time, though, it’s not okay to say that the attraction between real children and fictional children is the exact same. I am definitely not one of those people who is like, "It's just fiction!"; I literally have spoken out against people who spew that rhetoric (like comshippers, for example). However, to say that the attraction towards fictional children is completely equivalent to the attraction towards real children oversimplifies a complex issue. Saying that a paraphilic disorder that involves the attraction to real children and typically results in permanent harm towards real children is the same as an attraction towards fictional children that is still disgusting and potentially harmful is the very same is not only regressive but is damaging to CSA victims. I am in no way in favor of lolicon or shotacon; it sexualizes minors, often romanticizes CSA, can be used to groom vulnerable individuals, can offer a safe space for genuine pedophiles or give them free content to get off to, and can cause distress to survivors of child sexual abuse or just people who find that content rightfully upsetting. So, while I absolutely do not support lolicon or shotacon for the harm it inflicts and the inherent immorality I find in it, I think it's erroneous to assume that all individuals who consume this content are pedophiles or support child exploitation. It's a false equivalence to claim that people who experience attraction towards real children and typically harm them are the same people that do not experience attraction towards real children but do to fictional children. Many individuals engage with these materials without any attraction towards actual children. That does not mean that lolicon, shotacon, and other genres that sexualize minors are okay, as they are not; it just means that if we wish to educate pro/comshippers, lolicons, shotacons, dead-dove, and profic people on the potential harm and ethical concerns surrounding genres such as lolicon, we need to approach the conversation with nuance and understanding instead of relying on logical fallacies. If we wish to be taken seriously, we must engage in respectful and informed discussions that address the complex issues at hand. What I see a lot of people do on my (the anti-loli/shotacon and anti-pro/comship) side is simply refer to people who engage with this content as pedophiles. While it is important to acknowledge the potential harm and ethical concerns surrounding genres like lolicon, it is crucial to avoid labeling individuals who engage with this content as pedophiles without concrete evidence. By resorting to such generalizations, we undermine the opportunity for meaningful dialogue and understanding. Instead, we should focus on raising awareness about the potential impact of these genres on society and promoting responsible consumption of media.

Tldr: Lolicon, shotacon, and other forms of media that sexualize minors are unethical and deleterious, but not everyone who consumes such content is a pedophile. Calling every single person who likes that content a pedophile is unfair, fallacious, and intellectually dishonest. We can point out the harms of such content without resorting to addressing the people who enjoy it as people who like real children.

[talisman975]

Quick BelosFansTakeover reminder!

Forgot to mention this but it’s very important that I say it now.

Once again, this event DOES NOT allow proshipping/comshipping! So please DO NOT tag this with Beluz, Empgold, Wittecest, etc. This event is NOT for you!

If you proshippers/comshippers have a problem with that, then make your own event, I don’t care.

Just leave mine out of it. Thank you.

[caughtonwebcam]

Aren’t you the person who doesn’t understand censorship

lmao what is my name getting passed around in the comshipper community? listen, my stance on it is that you can write about whatever you want however you want and nobody can stop or censor you because it’s free speech, even if it’s blatantly abhorrent (and not just to me, but to like thousands of other people.) That’s just the law. But just because you can doesn’t mean you should. You’re really gonna sit here and tell me drawing or writing nsfw of child characters getting incest raped for sexual gain is normal and fine because it’s “not real..”? ... okay. I personally don’t like it, but you can do that, but if you paint it as a ship or call it cute, I have the right to assume weird things about you. That’s just how it is and I’m not gonna change my mind on that. So with that being said, ig I’m “proship” in the sense that you CAN ship something cuz nothing is stopping you, but I REALLLLLY don’t think you should because you shouldn’t romanticize something like a child/adult relationship (and to those in the sp fandom or my followers, I’m talking to you randy/stan and kenny/his siblings shippers.) I know that there are many reasons people write about dark or gross topics, including trauma coping . It can be good to help shine light on a serious experience or topic, such as sexual content involving minors, rape, abuse or incest, which should not be left in the dark. It’s how you handle it that really matters, which can vary, as there is no one way to do it. The bottom line is that none of that stuff is “cute” or “romantic.” For example, let’s say you like the movie “Thirteen”. I believe that movie tackles serious topics in an honest manner that gets its point across without featuring child porn. Not to mention that the movie was actually co-written by a 14 year old girl sharing some of her experiences, which shows the purpose of the movie. However, if you are an adult and like the movie because you like the scene of Tracy and Evie kissing, two 13 year old girls in a heavily toxic friendship, and you find it “cute,” I’m going to assume weird things about you. Or let’s say you like the book “Lolita” for its insight into the mind of a predator. Now compare that to liking the book because you too find Dolores attractive, and you relate to the pedophile. I know these probably arent the best examples, but hopefully this clears some things up a bit. A lot of the time it’s not the media’s fault, it’s how people view it, so I don’t believe in censorship. Like banning “The Catcher in The Rye” because one guy read it and killed John Lennon is stupid. But at the same time, look more closely at the media you are consuming. Think of the movie “Cuties”. Sure, the director claims in was not made to exploit children, but definitely exploits children by using suggestive angles of their child actors twerking. And guess what? Pedos loved it, even if that wasn’t the intention. What I’m trying to say is be unapologetic, but don’t cater to those who gain a certain gratification from it either. For the love of god, normalize a topic, but don’t NORMALIZE IT in the way it’s viewed as okay.

(and before you call me a hypocrite for liking South Park, I am fully aware of the gross people in the fandom. i am fully aware that the child characters in the show are put in suggestive situations. But it’s so absurd that you can’t take it so seriously, and those who do have a problem. It’s done for comedy and satire. Just because it is normalized in the show does not normalize it in the real world. Don’t copy cartoons silly. But making shota/lolicon is trying to normalize other forms of child porn by using the work around of “it’s not real”. See the difference?)