If you're here from Tumblr I'd prefer to know who you are before I grant access to locked posts/do the equivalent of follow you back, but otherwise go ahead. :-)
And yeah, that's more my problem than the ban. Like I said I would have preferred an AO3like TOS because it aligns more with my personal views, but I wouldn't have left over it. I don't have any need for that content.
But I've run afoul of TOSes before and my big problem with them is that very often they have policies that come across to me less as "we thought about this and decided to ban X because Y" and more "well, some content sort of like that might be okay, but don't be TOO on the nose," and that doesn't so much come across to me as "don't glorify this" as "don't talk/think about this."
Like, I remember when I was a college student and curious about kink, and I looked up the obscenity statutes in my area to see what I could and couldn't post on the webspace at me dot wherever dot edu, and the specific wording I still recall was "depictions of sadomasochistic abuse." And... knowing how conservative a lot of this state is, that probably meant "we assert that BDSM is inherently abusive" but my brain kept going "but what if you don't think all sadomasochistic activity is abuse? what then?"
So I'm usually wary of TOSes or laws or whatever else, because very often they boil down to "we're not going to ask what the context was in which you created or presented this, we're just going to assume you are motivated by whatever we're afraid of."
When humans typically have very varied reasons for engaging with any content, controversial or upsetting content especially.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2018-12-20 04:07 am (UTC)If you're here from Tumblr I'd prefer to know who you are before I grant access to locked posts/do the equivalent of follow you back, but otherwise go ahead. :-)
And yeah, that's more my problem than the ban. Like I said I would have preferred an AO3like TOS because it aligns more with my personal views, but I wouldn't have left over it. I don't have any need for that content.
But I've run afoul of TOSes before and my big problem with them is that very often they have policies that come across to me less as "we thought about this and decided to ban X because Y" and more "well, some content sort of like that might be okay, but don't be TOO on the nose," and that doesn't so much come across to me as "don't glorify this" as "don't talk/think about this."
Like, I remember when I was a college student and curious about kink, and I looked up the obscenity statutes in my area to see what I could and couldn't post on the webspace at me dot wherever dot edu, and the specific wording I still recall was "depictions of sadomasochistic abuse." And... knowing how conservative a lot of this state is, that probably meant "we assert that BDSM is inherently abusive" but my brain kept going "but what if you don't think all sadomasochistic activity is abuse? what then?"
So I'm usually wary of TOSes or laws or whatever else, because very often they boil down to "we're not going to ask what the context was in which you created or presented this, we're just going to assume you are motivated by whatever we're afraid of."
When humans typically have very varied reasons for engaging with any content, controversial or upsetting content especially.