Let’s talk about the kind of response that these points engendered from @lord-kitschener and @benefitscrounger.
If you follow my blog then by now you know that one of the things I like to do is break down someone’s argument to see if we can identify where it went right, where it went wrong, and where it’s out and out malfeasant.
First, let’s look at how @lord-kitschener tries to reframe the argument. Reframing is when you essentially recreate the argument, misrepresenting positions and recasting statements to make it sound like the argument favors your point of view, without actually saying anything at all.
To do this, they start by describing everything above as ‘all of that shit’ and then suggest that the argument is that antis are damaged and crazy due to strict parenting. This both dismisses everything that’s been said while also fabricating things that weren’t said in order to have something to be offended about.
Or, to put that differently, neither I nor @freedom-of-fanfic described antis as damaged or crazy and neither of us describe anti behavior as the result of strict parenting. Instead, we talked about how antis behave in ways that demonstrate authoritarian behaviors and that they were likely raised by authoritarians who taught them to behave in this way. That’s fairly likely, because the anti problem is a mostly US problem, and we’ve had issues with a rising tide of authoritarianism for decades now.
In addition, @lord-kitschener also describes antis as 'people who think it’s wrong to write pedo shit’, to make it sound like they’re virtuous. In reality, the antis attack anyone in fandom that doesn’t conform to their particular brand of purity culture. They’ll attack people writing about LGBTQ+ relationships, people writing about adults having relationships, and just people writing about ships they don’t like.
By phrasing everything antis oppose as 'pedo shit’ the intent is to make you think that antis represent some sort of pure and noble opposition to a predatory culture that abuses children.
This is either a misrepresentation or an outright lie.
Antis rather famously don’t do anything to oppose pedophilia, as they attack people for shipping ships they don’t like and then use accusations of pedophilia to make their attacks especially harmful. They’ll attack survivors that use fic to deal with their survival, or just adults writing fic about other adults. The common factor has nothing to do with protection of children, it has to do with attacking anything that they decide is unacceptable. If antis decided to align against queer couples then tomorrow you’d see them arguing that anyone who writes lesbian fic is a pedophile. Somehow. They’d find a way.
Next, let’s look @benefitscrounger is attempting to completely substitute the arguments provided. This is a stronger kind of reframing than what we just looked at, sort of a full throated attack instead of the half-hearted one earlier.
First though, some context.
In the past, @freedom-of-fanfic wrote a great post about the way that 9/11 greatly amplified authoritarianism in US culture. We’ve always been a country struggling with authoritarianism in the form of racism, white supremacy, and other kinds of conservatism, but 9/11 really gave it a shot in the arm. After 9/11, the US became a much more paranoid and authoritarian place. We passed the Patriot Act. We invaded Iraq. We did so many terrible things. And it’s accurate to say that it was a sweeping cultural change for US citizens.
So of course, @benefitscrounger has to start off by mocking that analysis by reducing it to the idea ‘antis were created by 9/11′ despite it not saying anything of the kind. All it shows is that if you if you suck all of the nuance out of a conversation, turn it 90 degrees to the right, and then squint really hard, you can pretend it says some pretty ridiculous things.
Next, they go full bore trying to argue that the only reason anyone argues against them is in support of child porn. This is another way in which antis try to control the conversation. It’s also a lie, but hey, at this point who’s counting?
Essentially, this is a lie meant to make you think that anyone who opposes antis is a pedophile. They think that, despite it being a lie, if they tell the lie enough times they think people will start to believe it. Because, unfortunately, that does sometimes work.
It also has another benefit for antis. If you describe everyone who doesn’t agree with you as a pedophile, you don’t have to bother defending your own malfeasant actions…even when they support the actions of actual pedophiles.
Here’s a hint, the anti community has had problems with having real, actual pedophiles in their community that use the anti community as cover to groom and abuse children. But again, it’s like the Wizard of Oz. Antis don’t want you to look behind the curtain or you might see that everything they’re saying is bullshit.
That highlights everything I wanted to discuss here. These are pretty typical examples of the way that people will try to manipulate arguments. We all learn how to do this, it’s part of normal human social interaction to learn how we respond to various influences and what not, and people arguing like this are actively trying to shut down your rational thought. If they can make you base your judgment on emotions rather than logic, then you may not notice that they’re full of shit.
Remember, when it comes to something that you believe, rather than know, you might care more about winning than actually being right. And despite being very very wrong, antis don’t care as long as they win the argument.
That said, knowing how to see these things for what they are is really useful in opposing them. The kind of people that do this sort of thing usually aren’t very skilled when it comes to making logical arguments and their behavior helps them disguise or rationalize away the harmful things that they themselves do. Learning how to recognize this behavior helps keep you safe from it, so you can continue to make the best, most rational, most compassionate decisions you can.
