Just A Warning For Anyone In The Ateez Fandom Who Might Be Using Omegle, Apparently Its The Latest Tag

Just a warning for anyone in the Ateez fandom who might be using Omegle, apparently its the latest tag in a number of fandoms (and seemingly, specifically kpop fandoms) to be under fire from a pretty vile bot.

The anon who brought this to my attention mentioned it just disconnects the second you send a reply, so my best advice would just be to immediately disconnect or use an alternative tag like the fandom name (Atiny) instead of Ateez.

Its highly unlikely the person programming these bots is into kpop at all; they're simply big enough fandoms to be easy targets with a wide potential reach. Please do not take this as an opportunity to instigate unrest with other kpop band fandoms.

For those who could use a reminder: escapist fantasy fiction encompasses more than, like, purely happy and wholesome stories. If you use 'escapist fiction' to mean, 'things that never make anyone uncomfortable,' then you might want to reassess your terminology.

An (incomplete) list of fiction that typically features 'escapist' elements would include:

-Weird/dark/kinky porn -Horror fiction -Romance novels (and all the unhealthy possessive relationships and dubiously consensual sex that occurs in them for the fun and pleasure of the reader) -Fantasy worlds like Game of Thrones

So when you see things that claim it is people who only engage with 'escapist stories' or 'escapist fantasies' who cannot tell the difference between fiction and reality, that's a pretty clear and immediate signal that this person either: a) doesn't know what they're talking about, or b) is being deliberately disingenuous.

Enjoying escapist fiction is not the same thing as never wanting to engage with potentially uncomfortable stories, and a person's ability to tell the difference between fiction and reality is independent of their personal preference in what type of fiction they enjoy.

While I understand how it could seem upsetting to you, as the disabled sibling, that your needs might be considered a source of negative impact, I implore you to listen to the voices of non-disabled people who have experienced genuine neglect and distress because of their parent's inability to properly balance having children of two different levels of need.

You, as a disabled person, do not have the right to speak over and demean the voices of non-disabled people who have been impacted by living with a disabled sibling, however.

If its upsetting to you to think about how your needs might be impacting someone else, think about how upsetting it is to be the person who's needs are dismissed and devalued because of your needs.

Not every sibling to a disabled person is a glass child. But there's a reason that term exists. And those people are just as entitled to help and validation as you are.

It is not your fault you are disabled. And you have the inherent right to care that meets your needs. But sometimes, parents are incapable of providing that and providing an equitable amount of care to their other children.

The term 'glass child' is not just some throwaway term for kids who are bitter their parents missed a football game or two. Your voice has an inherent right to be heard.

But so does theirs.

the term "glass child" makes me incredibly upset. youre not being neglected because you're disabled sibling needs extra attention. your sibling needing to go to a mental hospital or rehab center does not justify you whining about how you get 42% of your parents attention instead of 50%

I'd really like to address the Jaws part of this, because I actually have a post regarding that in my drafts ready to go, but OP makes a very valid, brilliant statement:

It didn't cause shark attacks to rise. It caused fear.

Jaws had no actual impact on sharks in terms of what the sharks did. Jaws didn't inherently increase the danger level of sharks. That stayed exactly the same. Sharks did as they've always done; existed in the ocean and occasionally hunted food that turned out to be a person. Because they're sharks and we chose to be thrashing, yummy prey in their natural habitat.

What Jaws did cause is a widespread misconception about that danger. Which resulted in voluntary human action. We, as people, actively chose to decide this risk factor was suddenly tenfold, and we had to mitigate it by immediately going out and killing as many sharks as we possibly could to reduce it again.

Except. It never changed. Because again; the risk was always exactly the same. And likewise; it didn't actually remove the risk at all. There's still sharks. We're still going in the ocean.

You choose to swim in the ocean, there might be hungry sharks that mistake you for brunch.

And that's not even touching on other arguments like intent and indirect influence.

I just feel like Pete Davidson’s SNL monologue shows the whole proshipping discourse boiled down to the most fundament difference between pros and antis.

Because like.

We have his sister, sitting down to watch GoT with him, and she is a person who has a very clear understanding of fiction vs reality. So when Pete starts getting all puritanical over how the villains are twincesting right in front of their eyes, she’s just like “well, it’s not real, you know.” And he jokes that he’s thinking “am I about to bang this chick?”

That is a direct quote from him, btw.

So there we have it. Sister understands that GoT is fiction, and that fucked up things happening in the fiction we consume does not mean we want to do those fucked up things. And Pete goes “oh, she’s ok with fictional incest in a TV show, clearly my sister would want to fuck me.”

And I get it, it’s a joke. But it’s a joke that so clearly shows the disconnect all this shipping discourse and dark themes in fiction discourse and… and it’s just. That disconnect.

And I don’t know if the antis will ever wrap their minds around “fiction isn’t reality” and before anyone brings up Jaws let me say I KNOW. But also: Jaws didn’t cause shark attacks to rise. It caused fear. Which is what a scary movie is supposed to do. It did it well because thalassophobia is fucking real. Not because sharks are wanton killing machines. Because it was tapping into a primal fear that most of us experience to some level.

Because pornography is still plot. Plot is merely the actual storytelling part of writing something. Plot is what happens within the story.

If my plot is the fact that my fourteen year old character rides my fifty year old character (hello, Starker) off into the sunset like the Lone Ranger's Silver, then that is the plot of my story.

What matters is that in real life, if I discovered a fourteen year old was sexually involved with a fifty year old, I would call the police.

Because one is fictional and one isn't. And we're capable of separating the fact that something that's enjoyable in concept isn't necessarily enjoyable (or morally sound) in reality.

imo theres a HUGE difference between writing incest and pedophilia as part of a story's plot and writing incest csa erotica, but coincidentally proshippers always seem to cite well known and popular stories that fall into the first category as reasons to be proship while they themselves always seem to write and indulge in the second category. why are those two things assumed to be comparable at all. theyre really not.

I wonder how many people would stop telling others to kill themselves if they were actually forced to watch them do it and had to tell their friends and families that they were the direct cause of that person committing suicide.