Quidditism - 🪷💫

The Daddy's Little Toy author situation just goes to show how anti ideology has hurt people. Like an author is in jail for fiction fucking fiction! From what I know the author is placed in prison or is being held in jail awaiting sentencing currently. For from what I'm gathering a completely fictional story. You don't have to like what she's writing to think that people shouldn't go to jail over fiction. That the thing. Also who the hell gets to decide what is and isn't simply vent or awareness spreading and what is and isn't titillating. Also many trauma survivors create vent art that may sexualize their trauma but it's still vent art. I understand Australia's free speech laws are different than America's but this is the same country that's forcing people to upload their ID to access any social media site essentially. You don't have to like the story to essentially say "you shouldn't go to jail for that". Fiction is not and never will be equivalent to actual CSAM. And supporting obscenity laws will never be for the benefit of the public. And it's harmful to equate real CSAM with fucking fiction. You cannot be anti-censorship for fiction and then draw the line at things you don't like . Like imagine if your horny Sebaciel fanart put you in JAIL under CSAM charges. With the same cell as real people who actually exploited real children or wanted to look for and use real exploited children. "Stop imposing your American views on everything!". How is it imposing my American views to say that free speech should be a right for everyone not just people on America and that thought crime isn't real and shouldn't be normalized. Studies don't show a causal link between consuming dark romance media and actually committing abusive acts or consuming fictional depictions of CSA and actually harming people if anything artistic expression can get out some pent up frustration. People with intrusive thoughts may have intrusive sexual thoughts about inappropriate things and write them down what if those are found and it's considered CSAM even if it's fiction? Like thought crime as a concept should not be normalized. Fiction is fiction. I've only seen the snipbits going around social media. But like I hated it thought it was gross so I refused to listen to it anymore and went about my day. No one should go to jail over fiction yes even if that fiction has problematic themes. For example I am. Trans person I don't think anyone should go to jail for writing a transphobic book. I might hate the author but I won't advocate for their arrest and imprisonment. Like I've seen and stumbled upon much horny Sebaciel fanart and I don't think any of those artists should go to jail or be on a register with people who've actually exploited or aides in the exploitation of REAL CHILDREN. Obscenity laws are bad things and we shouldn't normalize them. From what I've heard the book doesn't even talk about sexual contact between an adult and minor it mentions the audit man listing I've the character when they were a minor but many non-banned dark romance books have that and the writers aren't jailed. Obscenity laws are bad. No one should be in jail over fiction.

I wondered why green is so associated with hope and then I remembered being 8 and seeing a little plant sprout after a few days of waiting and. Yeah. I get it now.

Normalize not liking things for no reason or for stupid reasons.

Normalize disliking things others like and still treating them (the person and the thing in question) with respect.

Normalize not having an opinion on things.

Normalize not knowing things and asking others about them.

Normalize doing research.

Normalize disagreeing with your friends' tastes.

Normalize having mixed feelings about things.

Normalize being proud and loud about things you're into.

Normalize trying to emphasize with those you have opposing views with.

If something doesn't HURT anyone

It's okay.

We're only human!

We are not perfect and nobody should expect us to be.

Allow yourself to be you and let others be themselves.

Quidditism discord emoji combo + flag colored version.

Very valid concerns! We do have an alternate flag that differs a lot from theirs if that's of any interest! /info

so i was browsing for a bit and found these

two radqueer ideologies that seem similar at face value due to their aesthetics but are actually starkly contrasted, quidditsm and consistent progressivism i think both of these provide an interesting and cohesive look at how radqueer liberation might be achieved so i made this chart to compare and contrast them

just to clarify i'm not taking a side on either of them, i just wanted to analyze them alongside each other

what are your thoughts on these?

One of the things that make us personally uncomfortable with the notion that child-appearing or young-appearing headmates can never consent:

We have a genetic condition that makes our body look a lot younger than we actually are. We didn't look like an adult til our late twenties/early thirties and even then, just barely.

But we WERE an adult when we got married. And there was no harm in anyone, including our ex, being attracted to us. Or our current partner, who's several years younger than us but looks several years older.

When we got married, our headmate Sunni Willow felt about 16, though we were bodily 21. She could give consent because our brain was that of an adult.

Our ability to give informed consent matters. And is the only thing that matters.

It's so telling that the 3 main arguments against consanguinamory are birth defects, assault, and personal disgust.

"What if the babies are born disabled?!"

What if they don't want kids? Hm? What then? Also, even if they did want kids, that's also fine because it's take generations for a debilitating disability to form, and the chances of that only increase by 3% and since I'm gonna wager most people aren't consanguinamorous, I don't see why that matters. Non-relatives give birth to disabled kids all the time. Being disabled isn't a bad thing. Being inbred doesn't mean you're automatically going to be born disabled. They use the whole think of the children bullshit to shut down the conversation.

"But my relative assaulted me/there are relatives out there who assualt their family, therefore consanguinamory is bad!"

If it isn't consensual, it's not consanguinamory, it's abuse. This is like if someone said, "Gay men are bad because some gay men have assaulted other men." Oh, wait, they do say this, don't they? And y'all keep reinforcing it with this kind of thinking.

"I just think it's icky."

That's fine, but your personal disgust shouldn't dictate how others should or can live their lives. No one is forcing you to date your relative(s). Not everything is for or about you. If people are happy and aren't harming anyone, then it's fine. It's fine, y'all.