I don't know. I'm pretty sure I know why you're ranting and if that is the case, then I feel almost the exact opposite of how you do. The line was crossed the moment people started to post requests based off the Sandusky abuse scandal where children were raped and when real children were named as desired participants. The same stories would be fine if they didn't involve real kids or were based off of the suffering of real kids, and I'd agree with you firmly if that were the case.
But unfortunately, that isn't the case. And I can't agree that people's ability to read kink fic is somehow more important or sacrosanct than for Sandusky's victims to not have their stories cheapened in such a manner or for new parents to be written as raising their real life baby as a sex slave from infancy onward and sharing him with their friends before he hits double-digits.
Kink is fine. But the same kink can be satisfied without involving real kids, the prompts rewritten to involve OCs or generic coach/student situations. It isn't kink shaming or censorship to feel that certain things should be offlimits. Censorship is what SOPA is trying to do. Respecting the privacy of rape survivors and not using it as titillating material to jerk off to is something completely different.
I view it in the same light as I view the American First Amendment protecting disrespectful assholes like Westboro Baptist Church. My initial response is "What the fuck?" My secondary and third responses are rarely better. However, that same thing protects Landover Baptist, which I think is hilarious and I know many groups are trying to shut down.
Do I think they're in the right? Fuck, no. In my viewpoint, it's disrespectful and sick and they cross lines when they do things like that. But I'm afraid the only way to censor things like that would be to keep going and censor many other things. Is it a good solution? No. Sometimes I think you can only keep going.
It may be an issue we have to agree to disagree on, but whether it's allowed or not isn't censorship. Blindfold removing a prompt isn't the same as the government denying access to information.
As for the American First Amendment, I'm American myself, but I don't see why that has any bearing here. Blindfold isn't a community only for Americans and there are plenty of other comms that don't allow real children to be used or their stories of abuse glorified in such a manner. They still manage to have plenty of prompts and activity. Most kinkmemes in Supernatural don't allow real kids to be used. Blindfold is unusual in this regard. It wouldn't hurt them to follow suit.
I really don't buy the slippery slope argument, not when there's been so much proof that disallowing one prompt doesn't mean the others aren't allowed. In this case, it's not even disallowing underage, it's disallowing underage that touches on real children's lives and exploits their rape.
I'd rather side with those who doesn't allow this sort of disrespectful and sickening behavior and deal with the risk of having too many kinks banned if it comes up. I'll speak up then too. It doesn't have to be one extreme or another.
But unfortunately, that isn't the case. And I can't agree that people's ability to read kink fic is somehow more important or sacrosanct than for Sandusky's victims to not have their stories cheapened in such a manner or for new parents to be written as raising their real life baby as a sex slave from infancy onward and sharing him with their friends before he hits double-digits.
Kink is fine. But the same kink can be satisfied without involving real kids, the prompts rewritten to involve OCs or generic coach/student situations. It isn't kink shaming or censorship to feel that certain things should be offlimits. Censorship is what SOPA is trying to do. Respecting the privacy of rape survivors and not using it as titillating material to jerk off to is something completely different.
Reply
Do I think they're in the right? Fuck, no. In my viewpoint, it's disrespectful and sick and they cross lines when they do things like that. But I'm afraid the only way to censor things like that would be to keep going and censor many other things. Is it a good solution? No. Sometimes I think you can only keep going.
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
As for the American First Amendment, I'm American myself, but I don't see why that has any bearing here. Blindfold isn't a community only for Americans and there are plenty of other comms that don't allow real children to be used or their stories of abuse glorified in such a manner. They still manage to have plenty of prompts and activity. Most kinkmemes in Supernatural don't allow real kids to be used. Blindfold is unusual in this regard. It wouldn't hurt them to follow suit.
I really don't buy the slippery slope argument, not when there's been so much proof that disallowing one prompt doesn't mean the others aren't allowed. In this case, it's not even disallowing underage, it's disallowing underage that touches on real children's lives and exploits their rape.
I'd rather side with those who doesn't allow this sort of disrespectful and sickening behavior and deal with the risk of having too many kinks banned if it comes up. I'll speak up then too. It doesn't have to be one extreme or another.
Reply
I'm also all for "agree to disagree." This is just my viewpoint, and I definitely can understand yours.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment