Sunday, August 24, 2014

Is io9 enabling fandom's child porn problem? Plus a Gawker SJW moment.

A few days ago, I left this comment at If You Don't Understand Why People Love Erotic Fanfic, Watch This Now:
Agreed. Linking joyful consensual sex to enjoying child porn is all kinds of wrong.
It hasn't come out of their "pending approval" setting. It's possible the words "child porn" made them think the comment would be "triggering". But it's also possible they didn't like criticism of this video which Lauren Davis praised:



Now, I completely agree that young people are sexual beings, and I think no subject should be taboo. But SJWs who call out racism in fiction in a second are surprisingly comfortable with child porn, and while they'll happily link the names of fandom's pedophiles to anyone they dislike, they give a pass to the adults among them who fetishize the sexuality of the young in words or pictures. Brenna Twohy doesn't mention it, but "Potterotica" includes nonconsensual sex, sometimes with adults. Here's a definition from 2004 at Urban Dictionary: Potterotica:

Erotic fanfiction featuring characters from the Harry Potter series of novels.
They updated the Potterotica section with a Harry/Draco/Snape/Hedwig/jar of baby oil slash!
by SpiffyCEO January 22, 2004

Another comment at a Gawker site hasn't come out of "pending approval" either, perhaps because the first one is still there. At What Black Parents Tell Their Sons About the Police, I said,
My dad gave me the talk about cops. Everyone should get it; based on the numbers we currently have, 1/4 of police killings involve a white officer and a black victim. The remaining 3/4 are for the rest of us.