kmclaude:

“Amen. Antishippers are abusers. Anyone who says otherwise willfully put their head in the sand (and that is it’s own disgusting behavior.)”

Critiquing fiction for glamorizing pedophilia/abuse/incest/etc. isn’t abuse, we’ve been over this already. Instead, I’d like to draw everyone’s attention this part of the original post:

“This isn’t hyperbole. Just yesterday an anti boasted about sexually harassing his 11-year-old sister because he caught her searching for Voltron porn, and about how he’d tried to convince his parents to abusively restrict her internet access.

For those who are hesitant to click that link, an anti shipper was venting his frustration over how easily his 11-year-old sister could access pornographic Voltron fan art on Tumblr. He never harassed her or did anything to hurt her.

The fact that Claude uncritically reblogged a post citing this as an example of harassment proves he knows nothing about actual harassment. It also indicates he’s okay with minors viewing pornographic content, which is really disturbing in light of how he fetishizes them in his artwork (Porn/gore warning).

Edit: I should probably add that the person being falsely accused of sexual harassment is only 16.

Advertisements

kmclaude:

“But then again, LiveJournal’s Strikethrough happened in 2007 and back then, the Warriors For Innocence were the soccer moms Daddy touched in their no-no places (No seriously, I’m not exaggerating, though I am being rude and frankly don’t care, fuck censorship and the cunts who uphold it), and they were the HATED MINORITY in fandom which told them, ‘Uh, fuck off’.

And that was after years of Bush crap, whereas now fandom has mostly kowtowed to those same types. Like if there was a Strikethrough now, I don’t think there’d be the same outrage and push-back. And again, I and many others were kids and teens in the Bush Era and we aren’t like these fuck-headed cunts who get wet at the thought of censorship and abusing others because, ‘It’s only okay to bully and harass when I do it to people I deem acceptable targets’.”

Yikes.

  • The statement, ‘…Were the soccer moms Daddy touched in their no-no places’ kinda sounds like a dig at survivors of incestuous rape and sexual abuse.
  • Telling people not to glorify rape, abuse, pedophilia, etc. isn’t censorship, abuse, or harassment.

“Roachpatrol and Claude are like, ‘What’s wrong with sexualizing stuff?’. You fucking know why it’s wrong, you just wanna sea lion people into going with your bullshit.”

(Anon is referring to this post)

K. M. Claude and Roachpatrol are missing the point. When people complain about sexualization, they’re complaining about:

  • People, particularly marginalized people, being oversexualized and reduced to fetish objects.
  • Portraying harmful things such as rape, pedophilia, or incest as sexy.
    • I’d like to remind people that both Claude and Roach have made pornographic fiction about minors being sexually abused. Claude has also created a lot of rape/incest-themed porn involving their adult characters.

PSA: K. M. Claude Richard

Aliases:

Content warnings for explicit pedophilia, sexual depictions of children, child abuse, rape, sexual abuse, blood, gore, necrophilia, and incest, as well as harassment, bullying, self-harm, victim-shaming/survivor-shaming, transphobia, transmisogyny, dyadism¹ᵃ/perisexism¹ᵇ, and misgendering.

Continue reading

“Many adults who are abuse survivors can be manipulated by cruel kids/teens who can pull the ‘You Don’t Want to Hurt My Feelings Do You?’ card. Also, really ableist to assume the adult can’t be mentally ill and pushed around by little shits dear Anon.”

kmclaude:

Frankly it’s the similar ass backwards logic that says men are always the agressors or that women can never abuse/rape a man. It’s this idea that one demographic group by virtue of being in that demographic can never do wrong. Which is…really…fucked up, to be honest. It’s how really heinous abuse goes unreported – because the victim is seen as incapable of being a victim by virtue of their mere being (with contrast to their abuser). Hell, why you think clergymen in many religions get away with illicit sex? Because we socially want to believe that by virtue of the profession or vocation they would NEVER, would somehow be UNABLE to. It’s dangerous thinking to presume some group is inherently predisposed to be an abuser or to be abused (exclusively, no overlap!) by virtue of age, race, gender, sexuality, profession, etc. That’s how you get abusers flying under the radar.

Sorry but a child cannot abuse or rape an adult. That is literally an excuse used by child abusers and rapists to justify harming their victims. Also, having a mental illness/being neurodivergent, being a survivor of trauma, or being disabled doesn’t justify abusing or raping minors (or anyone else for that matter).