Jadey's Journal

A mod for a kink-free fic community (but not gen fic or non-explicit fic! Just no kink) takes a hardline approach and compiles a Complete List of Unacceptable Kinks. It's about as problematic (and occasionally hilarious) as one might assume (including a ban on all military-related kinkiness! So when she says that it's open to all fandoms, she means all fandoms where no one is in the military). And the community creator doesn't seem to have reflected upon the fact that reading and writing sexually-explicit stories about fictional characters is just a bit... kinky.

(In case anyone is wondering... yes, there was the requisite conflation of gender play and gender kink with gender identity and gender variance. No surprise there.)

Okay, my only possible response to ( this ) is ( this )

Keep asking those tough questions, Americans. It's okay -- Glenn Beck says you don't actually have to answer them.

(The quote on the macro comes from Gary Lemons' Black Male Outsider: Teaching as a Pro-Feminist Man, which is an incredible book that I recommend to all with an interest in social justice and anti-oppression pedagogy in the context of sex, race, and intersectionality.)

SUPPLEMENTAL: ( transcription under the cut )

I turned L&O:SVU off -- it was failing *way* too hard. ( spoilerville )

Bleh. Gimme more NCIS. Last week's ep was hilarious.

I finally found season five of The Wire! YAY. The only problem being that I am also watching Criminal Minds (I know, I know, but I love cheesy procedurals!), and, well... XD I am prone to crossovers anyway, but could they make it any easier? Yeesh.

As long as a petty officer doesn't get involved, I should be able to keep NCIS out of it, though DiNozzo did apparently start off in homicide at Baltimore PD...

...

Okay, goofy + gritty + creepy really doesn't match well.

So WHY did the surveyfailers decide to make this offensive comparison, instead of the more obvious comparison: "how is straight female interest in slash fiction like straight male interest in lesbian porn?" (Not that this question has the answer they assume it does either, but it is the more meaningful comparison.)

My guess: because that's the other half of their study.

The original posts have all been locked down down, but in their attempted explanations, the failers referred to comparison group(s) beyond fandom. I've gotten the impression that fandom was their target group for women, and their male comparison group was fans of the trans women-exploitive porn they kept mentioning, even when asked repeatedly to stop.

( Continued under the cut. )

In the end, all I can do is ( refer back to Mike: )

Some cognitive neuroscientists are trying to do bad, ethically-suspect research on fandom.

More info in posts from eruthros and thingswithwings.

EDIT: The Worsening, from jonquil.

So lately the two TV shows I've been watching are NCIS and Leverage. Interesting commonality: the threesomes just write themselves.

(Abby and I are getting married next week. Parker's gonna officiate.)

A friend of mine runs a blog that has been tracking and documenting instances of abuse under the guise of an absurd and horrific "therapy" that relies on physical restraint and verbal humilation among other tactics (read more here; warning: that link contains potentially triggering descriptions of child abuse), and has more than once resulted in child fatalities (not to mention physical and psychological damage). I want to emphasize that these are not validated therapuetic techniques and are not based on any sound psychological theory.

The blog is run by one woman on a tireless campaign to hold these "therapists" accountable for their actions and crimes against children (generally adopted children, children with physical and mental disorders, and/or children who have already suffered abuse -- the most vulnerable, in other words). One of the "therapists" in particular has begun making up false copyright infringement claims in order to shut down her blog. (The record of what happened the last time he tried this is here.)

Well, it seems he's back at it. The blogging service has suspended her abilities to post. She's working on getting everything re-enabled, but one of the major purposes of her blog is to ensure that when curious parents google "attachment therapy" or "reactive attachment disorder" (which is NOT in the DSM CORRECTION: I was wrong on this one; it is in the DSM. Apologies*) it's her blog they come across first, and not something absurd, misleading, and potentially fatal. (Currently one pulls up a Wikipedia article that notes and goes into some detail on the controversy, but link number 2 is for an attachment therapy clinic, complete with ridiculously inclusive and panic-inducing checklist for worried parents.)

In light of that, I am reblogging on this and asking others to do the same. You can read what's available on her blog here, including an article on how to help.

*I should say, however, that the actual DSM definition is much more restrictive and specific than the extremely inclusive and child-blaming definitions being put forth by these abusive "therapists".

I caved and set up a delicious account. Mainly I'm tracking fics, pictures, and possibly blog/meta posts that I feel must be shared with the universe. If I've talked with you recently about "something awesome on the Internet", it's probably on there. (Or will be.) Navigate using tags for fandom, character, and medium. I'll be adding to it (primarily Trek fic/pic) as I find stuff I like. To be clear, everything I include in this list is something I consider to be awesome. Not just nifty, but epically memorable. Everything is recommended.