on anti culture & how narrative influences reality - So look. A common point of discourse from anti-shippers is the fact that narrative influences reality, and therefore - they claim - depictions of harmful acts will have a normalizing effect...https://tmblr.co/ZPNIgwZsJLjJOy00 …
-
-
Replying to @fozmeadows
so basically, fiction affects reality, just not in ways you care about (bc they're not germane to dunking on anyone). got it.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Lecteronthelam
I... what? I pretty clearly care about the ways fiction impacts reality? I just also disagree with real people being harassed because someone else disagrees with their taste in fiction?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
-
Replying to @Lecteronthelam
if you're going to act like 'antis have harassed people' is a controversial statement with no evidence to support it, then I'm gonna go ahead and assume you're engaging in bad faith
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @fozmeadows
If you're going to use the term "antis" without defining it and without recognizing that it has been assigned to those who do not harass by ppl who have no argument but for the ad hominem, I'm going to assume the same.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Lecteronthelam
what's your claim, here: that people with the same beliefs as antis minus the decision to actively harass others ought to be exempt from having their logic critiqued unless "not all antis" is specifically stipulated?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @fozmeadows
my claim is simply that when you use the term, knowing that it has been applied to people who don't harass, who have legitimate critiques of fandom, that you're throwing them into the same grinder. and you know it. and apparently you don't care.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Lecteronthelam @fozmeadows
you can "critique their logic" all day. but critique *their* logic. not the logic of some rando who you decided speaks for them
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Lecteronthelam @fozmeadows
also - who are you to say who shares the same ideology or logic? i mean, genuinely. what is the criteria on which you base that conclusion?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
generally speaking, when a group of people self-identify using a particular name and state repeatedly 'here are the things we object to,' it's considered reasonable to refer to that group as believing those things without writing a second thesis about the name's misapplication
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.