Log In

Home
    - Create Journal
    - Update
    - Download

LiveJournal
    - News
    - Paid Accounts
    - Contributors

Customize
    - Customize Journal
    - Create Style
    - Edit Style

Find Users
    - Random!
    - By Region
    - By Interest
    - Search

Edit ...
    - Personal Info &
      Settings
    - Your Friends
    - Old Entries
    - Your Pictures
    - Your Password

Developer Area

Need Help?
    - Lost Password?
    - Freq. Asked
      Questions
    - Support Area



Yeah, whatever. ([info]photosinensis) wrote in [info]fandom_wank,
@ 2004-04-21 15:00:00


Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Back by popular demand...the FA Petition Wank
Everybody knows about FAP being the wankiest place on the internet. However, this one takes the cake.

Appearantly, some people have started a petition to rid FA of cross-gen, incest, and beastiality ships.



xray starts the petiton saing:

Cross-Generation ships (adult with minor) are pedophilic in nature and pedophilia is illegal.
Incest is illegal and highly immoral.
Bestiality is illegal and highly immoral.

In that pedophilia, incest, and bestiality are illegal and are averse to education, that impressionable minors are not prohibited from viewing such material at this website, I respectfully request that all cross-generation, incestuous, and bestial ships and their related material be disallowed.

xray


Of course, the next response comes from FA head honcho [info]heidi8, in order to defend these fics, bringing up jokes of bestality in the books, noted incest in other literature, and the legitmacy of stories about cross-generation romance. It's not really wanky, but just more of an official line.

However, Prongs, Sr. feels that the ickle children are too sexually impressionable:

I agree, except that the youngest posters allowed here are 13 and that is an impressionable age in sexual and emotional development. There is a big age gap in maturity from 13 thru 18. An eighteen year old should be able to understand the moral implications of illegal relationships, while a 13 year old may not, which is why I agree with XRay, that illegal and immoral relationships should not be a part of FAP, especially at SCUSA.

As a parent myself, I absolutely agree with this which is why I don't allow him at FAP, especially SCUSA. However, if FAP is claiming to be an educational site for 13 and up, it should show the moral responsibility in having educational material that is appropriate for the young age group. If not, then perhaps FAP should raise the age level that can post here.


Of course, Stinky Wizzlehats questions whether xray is indeed fandom_scruples. Makes sense to me.

And Patil raises a few points about censorship and personal responsibility, even invoking Janet's boob and Howard Stern:

I am very, very tired of the way some people here don't seem to want to take responsibility for what they read and don't read. I am tired of a sensitive minority thinking it has the right to deprive the majority their right to discuss ideas--even weird and icky ones--simply because they don't like it or because they want to "protect the children." This kind of crap is happening right now in the so-called "free" United States, with the FCC acting like it is now the Morality Police and forcing radio stations and TV stations to pay huge fines and ban certain programming, all because a small but vocal minority of people had a cow about Janet Jackson's boob or Howard Stern's racy shows. For heaven's sake, just turn off the TV or radio, or change the station.

But Prongs, Sr. doesn't want to give in:

Patil, I believe that the questions raised here are legitimate. Firstly, I'm not questioning FAP's educational purposes out of spite and "troublemaking", I like this site and have a curiousity on what their policy is regarding this issue. Secondly, I, as a parent, genuinely care about the welfare of the younger posters on this board. So, I apologize for actually being a nice, caring and concerned member of FAP!

One of the joys of free speech is being able to express alternative opinions without fear of personal attack. I feel your above post to me borderlines on that, as you don't know me personally, and are making many assumptions about my character, political beliefs and parenting skills. An apology is in order here.


And even further, Prongs goes to talk about SCUSA being seperated into canon and non-canon discussion!

I also would like to add a suggestion that I know some members have talked about before (privately), that is to separate the fanon discussion with potential canon discussion at SCUSA. This would enable parents (like myself) to let our kids enjoy the ships without having to worry about them being exposed to brother/sister pairings or adult/child pairings, which I believe are inappropriate for my kids.


Of course, deciding on what can be considered "canon" or "fanon", might make the old DT look tame! </i>

Of course, others ridicule xray and Prongs as being quite idiotic in their quest to eliminate fics they don't like from FA.

But xray continues to state that it's "all about the children":

The main reason for this request is not because of what offends me or what doesn't offend me or you or the other guy/girl… it's how these things are perceived by the minors who read it.

Heidi I was told about this website many months ago by members of another message board. I came strictly for the DT. Once that got shut down I started exploring a bit and found some things I didn't like but, as it wasn't my cup of tea, I just ignored it and participated in the threads that interested me. A few days ago I saw a show on TV that talked about pedophiles and some tricks they use to lure in their prey and what law enforcement was doing about it. I was sick. A couple of days ago while exploring various ships in SCUSA I came across a few thread titles that made me nauseous. What does a 13 yr old think when they come here and see these ship titles:

(Remus/Ginny): Blood, Chocolate & Naked Werewolves
(Remus/Hermione): Something There That Wasn't There Before
Threesomes, Moresomes and Love Triangles of all shapes

Oh… adult with child… that must be ok then. Maybe Mr. Wierdo down the street was telling the truth when he said it was ok.

Blood, Chocolate, and Naked Werewolves? Threesomes, Moresomes and Love Triangles of all shapes? What is the message here?

I was affected me enough to contact a few fellow shippers via owls and emails about their thoughts and everyone I talked to agreed that there was no place for this. Hence, my petition.



quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Heidi
The age of consent in the UK is 16 for both males and females.
Most of the main characters in the books are at least sixteen, or will be so in the first pages of the next book, and accordingly, the characters are not considered underage per the UK's laws
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

But they aren't right now; is it ok anyway? What about 14? If that's ok, then what about 13? or 12? when do we draw the line?

It is so very true that parents have a responsibility to monitor their children. I do not contest this and I am a firm believer in parents being responsible for their children's upbringing but there's only so much a parent can do.


That post just drones on and on, getting even wankier.

Then, Prongs, Sr. and phoenixwriter start in debating R/Hr vs. H/Hr!

Prongs: As a serious H/Hr shipper, doesn't it bother you a little that the discussion at SCUSA is more fan-based and does not engage in more debate and discussion (between H/Hr's) on how, when, and why JKR would write H/Hr? This is actually what we mostly discuss over at Orange Crush. Of course, I know you have other websites you can have a more canon discussion and debate about H/Hr, but isn't the idea appealing to you to have a forum which is based on "potential" canon ships and not ships that we "know" aren't going to happen like the adult/child pairings that I'm pretty sure JKR is not going to write or the incestuous brother/sister, etcs. pairings, which, I'm equally confident JKR is not going to write.

Phoenixwriter: Prongssr, true be told I don't post on SCUSA much. You can even say 4 of all my posts were ever in SCUSA posted but I don't need to post there since I have little to no interest in HMS Pumpkin Pie. My personal interest lies in HMS Harmony a canon ship which is there to debate H/Hr based on canon. The reason for that is I have a different background. Different as some shipper I do ship because I read it in canon and not because one Fic was so amazing. But I understand it and accept it that they like more to ship like that. If it would bother me more and I had a desire for a ship which debate H/Hr on FA as canon then I could start an own ship but I don't.

Of course, tybalt-quin tries to bring sanity and rationality back in, but when do such things work on wankers?

t-q: Just to ask a question - but why would a 13 year old be any more affected by a teacher parent 'ship' than a 'same gen' ship between underage characters? For example, if your concern is that such ships 'normalise' potentially abusive behaviour then why not abolish the underage ships as well? After all, if you're going on canon timelines then Draco/Ginny, Hermione/Harry, Hermione/Ron and so on and so forth are all under the age of 16 which (in the UK - and recognising that different countries have different ages of consent) would amount to the equivalent of statutory rape.

Patil makes a long response on page 4, but I'm not going to C&P...I'm just lazy.



Ah, Harry Potter Fandom, how I love thee!

Edited because I am an idiot and forgot to put the URL to the wank in.



Page 1 of 2
<<[1] [2] >>

(Post a new comment)


[info]ari_o
2004-04-21 11:03 pm UTC (link)
Did the caffeine kick in?

We are cool now. Thank you.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]photosinensis, 2004-04-21 11:06 pm UTC

[info]sagralisse
2004-04-21 11:05 pm UTC (link)
If you delete this post I'm going to come to your house and nail you to your furniture.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]photosinensis, 2004-04-21 11:10 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]phosfate, 2004-04-21 11:13 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]franzi1981, 2004-04-22 12:35 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]littlest_lurker, 2004-04-22 05:29 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-22 03:34 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]littlest_lurker, 2004-04-23 03:08 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-23 03:14 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-23 03:24 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]littlest_lurker, 2004-04-23 04:18 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-23 04:23 am UTC

[info]phosfate
2004-04-21 11:14 pm UTC (link)
Stinky Wizzlehats?

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]lillyv, 2004-04-21 11:18 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sorchar, 2004-04-21 11:21 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]lillyv, 2004-04-21 11:23 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]phosfate, 2004-04-21 11:27 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]nicolae, 2004-04-22 12:37 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]phosfate, 2004-04-22 12:43 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]nicolae, 2004-04-22 12:49 am UTC
Woo-hoo, JF is back - [info]loafing_oaf, 2004-04-22 03:07 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]littlest_lurker, 2004-04-22 05:37 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-22 05:38 pm UTC

[info]tybalt_quin
2004-04-21 11:38 pm UTC (link)
Of course, tybalt-quin tries to bring sanity and rationality back in, but when do such things work on wankers?

Goddamn it! When did the sanity and rationality creep into my post? I'm going to have to be more careful in future ....

Show me the spooge! Show me the spooge!

Ahem. I'm going back to my due diligence reports now.

Incidentally, this is the third time I've had a mention here - can I get a rosette or an icon or something? Anything? Just for the recognition ...

:grin:

t-q
Who lurks here more than she ought to.

(Reply to this)


[info]nicolae
2004-04-21 11:39 pm UTC (link)
Ah, yes. The children, who at the age of thirteen, do not know anything about sex.

The children, who at the age of thirteen, do not realize that being hit on by a neighbor is ooky.

The children, who at the age of ten, ask me what my vibrator is.

I mean, um.

At least I told her honestly.

But good grief, children are not as stupid as these people think they are!

(Reply to this)(Thread)

No no no! ASSHAT! - [info]ari_o, 2004-04-21 11:55 pm UTC
wah! - [info]ari_o, 2004-04-21 11:55 pm UTC
Re: wah! - [info]nicolae, 2004-04-21 11:59 pm UTC
Re: wah! - [info]ari_o, 2004-04-22 12:02 am UTC
Re: wah! - [info]nicolae, 2004-04-22 12:03 am UTC
Re: wah! - [info]ari_o, 2004-04-22 12:06 am UTC
Re: No no no! ASSHAT! - [info]nicolae, 2004-04-22 12:00 am UTC
once again sorry about asshat subject line. *sporks netscape* and my failure to fucking proofread an - [info]ari_o, 2004-04-22 12:04 am UTC
Re: once again sorry about asshat subject line. *sporks netscape* and my failure to fucking proofrea - [info]nicolae, 2004-04-22 12:09 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]ari_o, 2004-04-22 12:11 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]nicolae, 2004-04-22 12:14 am UTC
Re: - [info]ari_o, 2004-04-22 12:24 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]nicolae, 2004-04-22 12:29 am UTC
Re: - [info]ari_o, 2004-04-22 12:24 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]nicolae, 2004-04-22 12:30 am UTC
Re: - [info]ari_o, 2004-04-22 12:40 am UTC
Re: No no no! ASSHAT! - [info]moonjaguar, 2004-04-22 10:30 pm UTC
I've said it before - [info]iczer6, 2004-04-22 02:40 am UTC
Re: I've said it before - [info]littlest_lurker, 2004-04-22 06:02 am UTC
Re: I've said it before - [info]nicolae, 2004-04-22 02:17 pm UTC
Re: I've said it before - [info]monkeywrench, 2004-04-22 05:42 pm UTC
Re: I've said it before - (Anonymous), 2004-04-22 09:47 pm UTC
Re: I've said it before - [info]littlest_lurker, 2004-04-23 04:25 am UTC
Re: I've said it before - [info]nicolae, 2004-04-22 02:17 pm UTC
Re: I've said it before - [info]monkeywrench, 2004-04-22 05:47 pm UTC
Re: I've said it before - [info]iczer6, 2004-04-22 06:28 pm UTC
Re: I've said it before - [info]liarliar, 2004-04-22 09:52 pm UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2004-04-23 03:48 am UTC

[info]ladysorka
2004-04-21 11:45 pm UTC (link)
Ah, yes. The fact that I was completely innocent and ignornat in the ways of "making babies" is why I got in massive, massive trouble for explaining it all, in detail, to a girl who had "the stork come" when I was in 1st grade. During recess. At Catholic school. (ah, memories)

Or why we used to make up really bad sex stories, that often included rape, BDSM, and having sex during church to tell at sleepovers. When we were 9.

Or why we always tried to sneak to the back of the one store in town that sold sex toys.

It's all becoming so clear to me now!

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]nicolae, 2004-04-22 12:01 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]nicolae, 2004-04-22 12:01 am UTC
Ah, memories - [info]doctorcal, 2004-04-22 02:35 pm UTC
Re: Ah, memories - [info]starherd, 2004-04-22 11:35 pm UTC
Re: Ah, memories - (Anonymous), 2004-04-23 12:45 am UTC
Re: Ah, memories - (Anonymous), 2004-04-23 03:51 am UTC
Re: Ah, memories - [info]vadalia, 2004-04-24 01:52 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]notjo, 2004-04-22 12:09 pm UTC
(no subject) - roxannelinton, 2004-04-22 02:13 pm UTC

[info]triestoohard
2004-04-22 12:05 am UTC (link)
xray: These fictional characters aren't of age yet! Someone, please think of poor, suffering, Hermione!

prongs: You called me sensitive and that's a personal attack! Call the free speech police!

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]soloset, 2004-04-23 04:45 am UTC

[info]feloniousfeline
2004-04-22 12:08 am UTC (link)
One of the joys of free speech is being able to express alternative opinions without fear of personal attack. I feel your above post to me borderlines on that, as you don't know me personally, and are making many assumptions about my character, political beliefs and parenting skills. An apology is in order here.

Ah, but the biggest joy of free speech is never having to say you're sorry.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]nicolae, 2004-04-22 12:11 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]xturtle, 2004-04-22 12:33 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]nicolae, 2004-04-22 12:37 am UTC
(no subject) - coreopsis, 2004-04-22 12:44 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]tianxiaode, 2004-04-22 11:44 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]nicolae, 2004-04-22 02:15 pm UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2004-04-23 10:30 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]squib, 2004-04-24 11:17 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]rewind, 2004-04-22 08:24 pm UTC
Don't mind me, I'm in a crappy mood - [info]llama_treats, 2004-04-22 12:30 am UTC
Re: Don't mind me, I'm in a crappy mood - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-22 12:36 am UTC
Gah - [info]hermiones_hymen, 2004-04-23 02:21 am UTC

[info]beccastareyes
2004-04-22 12:16 am UTC (link)
It's posts like these that make me think that I need to make those Logical Fallacy Bingo cards. I spotted 'Slippery Slope' wihtout even trying. And 'Ad hominem' is a given - it is fandom.

That being said, <http://www.livejournal.com/~ficbitches">Slap to the Head Fanfiction</a> has taught me that even writing about normal het couples can produce some pretty squicky stuff.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - smirnoffmule, 2004-04-22 02:08 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]moonjaguar, 2004-04-22 10:36 pm UTC
Re: - [info]beccastareyes, 2004-04-22 11:22 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]moonjaguar, 2004-04-22 11:42 pm UTC
Yes - [info]ruaha56, 2004-04-23 09:29 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]starherd, 2004-04-22 11:39 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]big_bad_wolf, 2004-04-23 01:49 pm UTC

[info]nicolae
2004-04-22 12:16 am UTC (link)
Speaking of incest, real life incest spotting:

I was at a high school softball game, because I have no life like that, and one blonde girl turns to the other, her cousin, and says, "I really wanted to lick you right there," and points at a spot on her throat. I crack up and say, "That's incest," and she says, "No, it's craving."

I could not stop laughing.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]nicolae, 2004-04-22 12:21 am UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2004-04-22 06:14 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]starherd, 2004-04-22 11:42 pm UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2004-04-23 03:53 am UTC

rachelthedemon
2004-04-22 12:19 am UTC (link)
Am I the only one who doesn't find this wanky in the slightest? Seems more like quite civil discussion as opposed to wank, since both sides are making good points. Nobody is personally attacking anyone, and the issue of adult fiction being available to minors isn't easy to resolve. Neither is the canon vs. fanon territory.

*shrug* Maybe it's just me, but this just doesn't seem all that wanky. The suppositions about the impressionability of 13-year-olds is pushing it, but from where I'm standing, that's the only wanky thing about it.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - ataniell93, 2004-04-22 12:27 am UTC
Re: - rachelthedemon, 2004-04-22 12:46 am UTC
(no subject) - ataniell93, 2004-04-22 06:53 am UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2004-04-22 09:29 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]nicolae, 2004-04-22 02:15 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]lush_rimbaud, 2004-04-22 08:25 pm UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2004-04-22 08:54 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]kkscatnip, 2004-04-23 03:27 am UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2004-04-22 02:17 pm UTC
OKAY! - [info]muffinbutt, 2004-04-22 03:39 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]squib, 2004-04-24 11:21 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-22 06:19 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]bastet, 2004-04-22 07:16 pm UTC
(no subject) - angkgriffen, 2004-04-23 07:35 am UTC
(no subject) - ataniell93, 2004-04-22 08:44 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-23 01:47 am UTC
(no subject) - ataniell93, 2004-04-23 06:07 am UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2004-04-22 09:40 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]liarliar, 2004-04-22 10:02 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-23 01:51 am UTC
Re: - [info]liarliar, 2004-04-23 04:38 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-23 04:42 am UTC
Re: - [info]liarliar, 2004-04-23 04:58 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-23 05:03 am UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2004-04-23 03:58 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-22 06:23 pm UTC
Yeah, but - [info]llama_treats, 2004-04-22 12:33 am UTC
Re: Yeah, but - rachelthedemon, 2004-04-22 12:35 am UTC

(Reply from suspended user)
(no subject) - [info]zozma, 2004-04-22 02:20 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]cmikhailovic, 2004-04-22 06:15 am UTC
(no subject) - ataniell93, 2004-04-22 06:59 am UTC
Well... - (Anonymous), 2004-04-23 11:56 pm UTC

[info]maryavatar
2004-04-22 12:20 am UTC (link)
Yeesh, if kids want to read bestiality fiction, they'll find it. I know I read whore-porn at 12. And who decides what's 'immoral' anyway? My father was a generation older than my mother, and their marriage was a happy one. Okay, so my mother wasn't 14 when they met, but the point stands. There are places in the world where it's legal for a 12 year old to have sex, I may consider that wrong, but I'm not sending petitions to the UN asking them to do something about it.

Actually... maybe we should let the wankers know about the real 12 year olds having sex? If they get that wanky over imaginary sex, imagine what they'll be like about the real thing!

(Reply to this)


[info]gal_montag
2004-04-22 12:28 am UTC (link)
Cross-Generation ships (adult with minor) are pedophilic in nature and pedophilia is illegal.

Uhm. No? Because while yes, pedophilia is illegal, relations with a 13 y/o are not pedophilic. Immoral? Yes. Illegal? Yes. But not pedophilia. Sorry. And I've never actually come across anything in HP that was anything like that (except a MST of a very poorly written Neville/Harry/Ron/Draco and maybe Seamus was in that mess somehwere... And they were all I think.) Although I could just be y'know, heeding warnings and whatever.

After all, if you're going on canon timelines then Draco/Ginny, Hermione/Harry, Hermione/Ron and so on and so forth are all under the age of 16 which (in the UK - and recognising that different countries have different ages of consent) would amount to the equivalent of statutory rape.

Er no. I mean, I get what was trying to be said here, but that's not how statutory rape works.

Incest is illegal and highly immoral.

Maybe. But writing about incest isn't illegal. Additionally, you can marry your first cousin in most US states (without gene counseling, even) and last I checked, marrying your cousin is still incest.

Bestiality is illegal and highly immoral

Maybe immoral, HOWEVER, not illegal. (Not everywhere anyway... I don't even think most everywhere.)

Besides, what the hell do people care if the proper warnings are there? You can't accidentally stumble on this stuff. Although I *do* understand what they're saying about kids finding this stuff and being traumatized or whatever, but I seriously doubt it's the children they have in mind since rape fic and graphic porn aren't included in the list. It's their own tender little sensibilities, the children are just an excuse to be asshats.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]gal_montag, 2004-04-22 12:33 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-22 12:42 am UTC
Re: - [info]gal_montag, 2004-04-22 04:12 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]sistermagpie, 2004-04-22 04:16 am UTC

(Deleted post)
Re: WILL SOMEONE THINK ABOUT THE PUPPIES!? - [info]sistermagpie, 2004-04-22 06:49 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]panthea, 2004-04-22 05:34 pm UTC
(no subject) - smirnoffmule, 2004-04-22 12:48 am UTC
Re: - [info]gal_montag, 2004-04-22 05:04 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]meatfight, 2004-04-22 08:54 am UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2004-04-22 10:18 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]hermiones_hymen, 2004-04-23 02:38 am UTC
Genuinely curious - [info]loafing_oaf, 2004-04-22 03:35 am UTC
Re: Genuinely curious - [info]gal_montag, 2004-04-22 04:23 am UTC
Re: Genuinely curious - [info]diamonde, 2004-04-22 05:18 am UTC
Re: Genuinely curious - [info]gal_montag, 2004-04-22 05:23 am UTC
Re: Genuinely curious - (Anonymous), 2004-04-22 02:01 pm UTC
Re: Genuinely curious - [info]gal_montag, 2004-04-22 07:38 pm UTC
Re: Genuinely curious - [info]ohwhataworld, 2004-04-22 07:48 pm UTC
Re: Genuinely curious - [info]gal_montag, 2004-04-22 07:52 pm UTC
Re: Genuinely curious - [info]ohwhataworld, 2004-04-22 08:00 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]ruaha56, 2004-04-23 09:37 pm UTC
Re: Genuinely curious - (Anonymous), 2004-04-22 05:25 am UTC
Re: Genuinely curious - [info]darkrose, 2004-04-22 07:58 am UTC
Re: Genuinely curious - [info]diamonde, 2004-04-22 08:17 am UTC
Re: Genuinely curious - [info]vixen, 2004-04-23 10:30 pm UTC
Re: Genuinely curious - [info]nicolae, 2004-04-22 02:14 pm UTC
Re: Genuinely curious - [info]dexwebster, 2004-04-22 07:06 pm UTC
Teen POV?? - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-22 10:26 pm UTC
Re: Teen POV?? - [info]diamonde, 2004-04-23 05:23 am UTC
Re: Teen POV?? - [info]ladybirdsleeps, 2004-04-23 09:25 pm UTC
Re: Teen POV?? - [info]diamonde, 2004-04-26 09:43 am UTC

(Deleted post)
Re: - [info]gal_montag, 2004-04-22 05:24 am UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2004-04-22 06:16 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]combledore, 2004-04-22 08:15 am UTC

(Deleted post)
(no subject) - [info]yankthewank, 2004-04-22 09:49 am UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2004-04-22 06:17 am UTC
Re: - [info]gal_montag, 2004-04-22 06:22 am UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2004-04-22 07:26 am UTC
Re: - [info]gal_montag, 2004-04-22 07:32 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-22 12:04 pm UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2004-04-22 06:00 pm UTC
Re: - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-22 06:42 pm UTC
Re: - [info]gal_montag, 2004-04-22 07:34 pm UTC
Re: - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-22 07:42 pm UTC
Re: - [info]gal_montag, 2004-04-22 07:50 pm UTC
Re: - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-22 08:03 pm UTC
Re: - [info]gal_montag, 2004-04-22 08:16 pm UTC
Re: - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-22 08:35 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]big_bad_wolf, 2004-04-23 01:58 pm UTC

[info]xturtle
2004-04-22 12:28 am UTC (link)
What does a 13 yr old think when they come here and see these ship titles...

Probably the same thing I do: "you'd have to be a damn fine writer to sell me that pairing." See, cause it's fiction. And thirteen year olds living in the same culture I do would probably recognize a cultural taboo against adult/minor relations, and have a hard time relating to a story that wasn't written so as to allow suspension of disbelief at the breaking of that taboo. That's right, a cultural taboo, not a universal "illegal" relationship, oh Americentric (ok, possibly Eurocentric, but more likely the former) poster. Somewhere on the internet, someone just might looking at your post thinking "but there's nothing illegal about that... what's this person on about?"

Why the hell am I wasting my time?

So. God bless America. Preferably by removing our sense of moral authority over the rest of the world. And a clear notion of the difference between real life and fiction.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2004-04-22 02:44 pm UTC

[info]thwackboom
2004-04-22 12:37 am UTC (link)
However, if FAP is claiming to be an educational site for 13 and up, it should show the moral responsibility in having educational material that is appropriate for the young age group. If not, then perhaps FAP should raise the age level that can post here.

I hate idiots who think the internet is going to censor itself so they don't have to keep tabs on their kids. ::smacks all stupid parents::

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]harukami, 2004-04-22 01:57 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]yankthewank, 2004-04-22 09:54 am UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2004-04-22 03:00 pm UTC
(no subject) - marianne_malone, 2004-04-22 11:11 pm UTC
Warning: Incoming rant... - [info]littlest_lurker, 2004-04-23 03:52 am UTC
Re: Warning: Incoming rant... - [info]xeno4eyes, 2004-04-23 08:41 pm UTC

[info]selene_avis
2004-04-22 01:56 am UTC (link)
Ooo, wanky! The whole "incest is highly immoral" part made me snigger. Funny how immorality changes over time, ain't it? Funny how just over a century ago, incest was just fine. Sure, I find some incest squick-worthy, but each to their own. I mean, I was reading the Bible the other night...

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]diamonde, 2004-04-22 05:26 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]selene_avis, 2004-04-22 10:19 pm UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2004-04-22 11:21 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]cairea, 2004-04-22 11:47 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]panthea, 2004-04-22 08:03 pm UTC

[info]mydruthers
2004-04-22 02:16 am UTC (link)
Now he dead from Weasleycest.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]elanor_durall, 2004-04-22 05:40 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]marks, 2004-04-22 07:59 pm UTC
YOU FORGOT MY FAVOURITE PART!
[info]erinmiran
2004-04-22 02:20 am UTC (link)
b) Guidelines that state that FAP wishes the discussions that are sexual in nature, i.e. kissing, etc. occur when the child characters are of consensual age. I realize this is different in many countries, so for the sake of this topic, perhaps you could follow the UK guidelines of 16 and over, as the characters "live" in the UK;

*SPORFLE*

(Reply to this)(Thread)

Re: YOU FORGOT MY FAVOURITE PART! - [info]ari_o, 2004-04-22 05:11 am UTC
Re: YOU FORGOT MY FAVOURITE PART! - [info]zorb, 2004-04-22 06:34 pm UTC
Re: YOU FORGOT MY FAVOURITE PART! - [info]hermiones_hymen, 2004-04-23 02:47 am UTC
Re: YOU FORGOT MY FAVOURITE PART! - [info]panthea, 2004-04-22 08:04 pm UTC
Re: YOU FORGOT MY FAVOURITE PART! - [info]littlest_lurker, 2004-04-23 03:57 am UTC
Re: YOU FORGOT MY FAVOURITE PART! - [info]panthea, 2004-04-23 04:04 am UTC
Re: YOU FORGOT MY FAVOURITE PART! - [info]littlest_lurker, 2004-04-24 01:12 am UTC

[info]guinevere33
2004-04-22 02:28 am UTC (link)
I love that the "think of the children!" police never stop to think that maybe, just maybe the same generation, of age fics can and DO have just as much squicky stuff in them as Harry/Snape. Oh yeah, and don't forget that children are *really impressionable* by the gays! No more slash.

Clearly we must rid FA of all TEH DIRTY PR0N! For the children.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]iczer6, 2004-04-22 03:11 am UTC

[info]misty
2004-04-22 02:45 am UTC (link)
Ah, the wankiness of FAP.

...*snicker*

I really can't get over that pun, you know.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]kkscatnip, 2004-04-23 03:45 am UTC

tocomfortyou
2004-04-22 03:09 am UTC (link)
Wait, wait, what? 'Illegal and immoral relationships should not be a part of FAP'? I think it's immoral for the Goyle family to breed, man. Who gets to decide immoral? Oooh, ooh, I bet it's you, right? Where's SuperNanny when you need her?

You don't want your kids exposed to incest or pedophilia? Don't teach them history! For God's sake man, don't even mention the Tudor household! Or the Bible! Keep that smut-peddling out of your family's house, for the sake of your children! The children! That very same book preaches holy wars! Read that book and the terrorists win! Let's not mention the Greeks! And the French Revolution, how bloody was that? Think of the impressionable children and curb any impulses towards violence! Where will the madness end, I ask you?!

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]iczer6, 2004-04-22 03:16 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]big_bad_wolf, 2004-04-23 02:02 pm UTC

[info]persephone
2004-04-22 03:53 am UTC (link)
It's about time we got back to some Harry Potter wank.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]mydruthers, 2004-04-22 05:48 am UTC
Idea: Anti F_W petition
[info]khym_chanur
2004-04-22 03:57 am UTC (link)
This is probably wanky in and of itself, but I find the idea amusing: go to one of those online-petition sites, and make a petition like thus
Do you think that JournalFen's Fandom_Wank is a cesspit of mean bullies? Well then, sign this petition to get them banned! However, before signing, you should note that:
  1. Online petitions never actually do any good.
  2. The operators of JournalFen will laugh at any petitions given to them.
  3. This petition itself was created by Fandom_Wank, to see how many whiners will waste their time on a futile effort.
So, if in the face of all logic, you still want to sign, go right ahead!
Then we advertise it, not via posts, but by adding a signature-type line to the ends of comments, saying something like "Want to waste your time? Then go sign this anti-Fandom_Wank petition!!"

Of course, this probably also violates the TOS in some obscure way...

(Reply to this)(Thread)

Re: Idea: Anti F_W petition - [info]princessdot, 2004-04-22 06:09 am UTC
Re: Idea: Anti F_W petition - [info]also_not_a_pipe, 2004-04-22 09:11 am UTC
Re: Idea: Anti F_W petition - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-22 06:30 pm UTC
Re: Idea: Anti F_W petition - [info]liarliar, 2004-04-22 10:36 pm UTC

(Anonymous)
2004-04-22 04:52 am UTC (link)
What I love is the wankers going to one of the few places that TRIES to stay clean for the kiddies and wanks about the possible not more than R (or Pg-13) discussion of sex between a teacher and student, or a werewolf and a man (ow . . owowowowo).

I want to know what school they went to because at 13, not even catholic school's free of _much_ naughtier talk than what goes on at FAP.

And as for the innocent children. My brother dear, underaged brother got one of my paswords to an adult fic site by HACKING my own computer. These kids find a way. (ok, granted my brother hacked the grade books at his school too so he's good . . .)

Anyway *shakes head* I can just picture this person lurching over from the driver's seat to shield their precious child's eyes as the go by "Condom Sense" and then plows right off the road or something.

And please tell me places other than Texas have Condom Senese stores.

-Ani

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]beccastareyes, 2004-04-22 07:49 am UTC

(Deleted post)
Necrophilia HP fics - [info]redina, 2004-04-22 05:01 pm UTC
Re: The America in the Prongs 11!! - [info]hermiones_hymen, 2004-04-23 02:52 am UTC



Page 1 of 2
<<[1] [2] >>

 
   
Privacy Policy - COPPA
Legal Disclaimer - Site Map