On April 14, 2015, a nonny asked:
I know it was alluded to, but I want the juicy deets. Something about a panel on noncon fic and how everyone who presented it are all rape apologists? I know graceebooks has been wanking about it, anyone know what happened?
In a nutshell
221b Con, a convention for all sorts of Sherlock Holmes–related fandoms and other activities, was held in Atlanta, Georgia the weekend of April 10-12, 2015. On the Saturday evening, a clique of The Johnlock Conspiracy (TJLC) fans, led by Graceebooks, crashed the 18+ panel titled "The Gender Politics of Fandom” and derailed the topic from "the revolutionary implications of fan works created by women for women” to noncon fanworks and how "problematic” their creators are. One panelist, who had just talked about her status as a survivor of sexual violence and her enjoyment of noncon fanworks, broke down crying.
During the panel, one of the group took video without the consent of anyone else in the room. It was eventually posted to YouTube and embedded on Tumblr. (YouTube has Sherlock 221b Con Wank 2: The Chafening.
Sherlock fandom background
As discussed here and here, TJLCers like Grace and loudest-subtext-in-television have been accusing "Toplockers” (fans who headcanon Sherlock as topping John) of being "rape apologists” and "pedophiles” for a while now, especially when they attain BNF status. One fanartist in particular, Archia, caught flak because she draws youthful-looking characters; at least some Sherlock fans have claimed that her John looks about 12 years old. (It is not clear if Archia is the fanartist being referred to in this comment as having been attacked for drawing John and Sherlock without wrinkles, making them look "weirdly young.”)
Archia is dating with Michi ("Traumachu" on Tumblr), whose shota kink is "pretty well known in the fandom… since they're easily the two biggest proponents of the toplock portion of the fandom, some members of the bottomlock portion of the fandom latched on to them as representational of all the toplock fans.” Archia, Traumachu, and another fan called pretty_arbitrary run a bottom!John blog together, and Archia has also created a fanart book titled Toplock.
The TJLCers initially didn’t object to Toplock itself but to the "Dark Fuck Prince” meme: "Basically, people running away with Sherlock's claim that he's a ‘high-functioning sociopath’ and making him into this cold, dark, rapacious top who hits poor vanilla John's arse like a Category 5 sex hurricane.” However, "the vast majority of TJLCers now have their heads shoved so far up their asses that they think all toplock is DFP.” (Another nonny picturesquely described them as "all joined mouth-to-ass so it's one long chain of spewing their shit into each other's mouths.”)
The 221b Con wank was foreshadowed in the wank around Sherlock Seattle 2015, held in January. Per this nonny, who links to several relevant Kinklock posts, Grace's crowd was buttdevastated that Archia, Michi, BNF Emma Grant, and fanartist Rutobuka hosted a panel they'd wanted to host themselves. Their response was to throw around accusations of "rape apologism," call their nemeses "crusty old has-beens," and wring their hands about "rape kinksters shaping the minds of the young." Another nonny later informs meme that this panel was the genesis of The JohnLock Possibility (TJLP), to which TJLCers took offense.
More foreshadowing came in March 2015, when one TJLCer posted photos of the doujin they had just burnt after realizing it contained dubcon. Nonnies discussed this, pointing out that the artist benefited from this act because of the money spent on the book, and that even though physical books are overvalued and the fan had every right to burn the copy they owned,
That doesn't make book burning a value neutral act, or one that doesn't have specific symbolic weight… It's one thing to disagree with art, and another thing to publicly deface or destroy it to make your point. That's making very specific statements about censorship and moral guardianship that people rightly find very uncomfortable and worrying.
Michi/Traumachu’s account of the panel
I’ve experienced this sort of harassment firsthand from the exact same group of people, and I’ve watched them do it others. They’ve formed a pattern, and their behavior is escalating. … Several people overheard a group of artists and some well-known Sherlock fandom trolls and troublemakers literally plan to go into [the Gender Politics and the Mary Morstan] panels for the sole purpose of trying to fuck them up. They were targeting one person in particular for the GP panel.
That person was Michi/Traumachu, who was moderating the panel. After she replied to an ask warning her to be careful (FFA discussion) — "These people are considering going on some crusade to start reporting people THEY deem rapists or pedophiles to the police now” — she followed up with her account of what happened at the GP panel:
[R]ather than being able to give [her fellow panelists] the credit they deserve for their amazing work and perspectives, I am instead forced to preserve their anonymity to save them from harassment. There was talk of blogs calling for the doxxing of the 221B Con organizers.
Michi called out Graceebooks, Ivorylungs (a/k/a Mannaneedstoshush, aka tintenfischjohn), Vellium, Katzensprotte (a/k/a Yourfalkaisproblematic), Taikova (a/k/a Dustbintai), Joolabee (a/k/a Joolaweed), and Kumbricwitch as the troublemakers who had attended the panel just to "watch it crash and burn.” As proof, she put up a series of social media screencaps demonstrating their glee in disrupting the panel.
(Here, also, is here is a screencap of Taikova declaring on Twitter, "the reason any of us went onto that panel w/ the aim to be confrontational was bc we knew exactly the kind of panel it wanted to become. we knew exactly why we were there and it was for a really fucking good reason. wake the f up.” Meme discussion.)
The names of these fans, Michi said, "have popped up in fandom wank again and again, especially in the harassment of other members of Sherlock fandom … where fandom issues are broken down into extremes of black and white morality.”
About half an hour into the panel, one audience member asked about survivors of sexual violence writing noncon and dubcon for therapeutic purposes. Michi, a rape survivor, feels very strongly in the therapeutic value thereof and in speaking about it whenever possible to diminish shame and stigma. Before the discussion began, she announced a trigger warning so that those who felt uncomfortable/unsafe with the topic could leave first. (Kumbricwitch, among others, left the room.)
The ensuing discussion was protracted and hostile: "[T]here were members of that group that would not let the subject drop. It was very difficult to move on, unlike previous panels I have been on. Every single point made became a debate, like they were demanding some sort of concession. Like there was a ‘winning’ point. … The previous open and sharing atmosphere started to feel tense. Contentious, even. … It became more like an interrogation than a sharing of ideas and fun discussion.”
One panelist who had outed herself as a survivor who enjoys noncon began to cry a few questions later, due to the tension in the room. "This shows me that this is not about support for survivors, even though that is the line that is often spouted by those attacking fans and calling them ‘rape apologists.’ This is not about protecting the children (of which there were none at the panel). There was no real consideration or kindness for the feelings of survivors shown by this group.”
The panel ran half an hour over. Because no one individual’s behavior could be identified as harassing, neither Michi nor the con staff could shut things down. She points out that one has to look at the larger context of their behavior, including past wanks they’d been involved in, to understand their motives. "After this tense panel and painful experience, I was later informed that they were celebrating their ‘victory.’”
Later, Michi discovered that "Vellium had recorded the panel on her iPad without any of the panelists’ or the audience’s knowledge or consent.” As other Tumblr bloggers and some nonnies would later point out, this is against both Georgia law and the con’s harassment policy.
The next morning, Michi discovered that Ivorylungs (Manna) and Katzensprotte (Falka) — former close friends of hers — had repurposed an old blog she used to share with them. They retitled it "traumachuisapedophile” and posted her real name and her photo on it. "There were no posts on it, and they didn’t publicize it anywhere, but they knew that I would see it. I can see no motivation for this other than the fact that they wanted to hurt me.”
TheGreenIrene’s account of the panel
The panelist who broke down and cried is a fan who cosplays Irene Adler in a green dress. To protect her privacy, she created a separate Tumblr account named "TheGreenIrene" to discuss the events at the GP panel from her perspective. (Nonnies discussed her post here, here, and here.)
Irene applied to be on the panel "because I am passionate about feminism, about queer theory, about fandom.” Quoting her panelist application, she notes it does not mention noncon fanworks "because [that] wasn’t supposed to be the topic of the panel.” Once it came up, "a group of people sitting at the front of the room derailed the discussion and kept it on the topic of rape/non-con in erotic fanworks for probably forty-fifty minutes of a panel that was only supposed to be an hour’s duration (we went over time)."
She says there is value in debating these topics in good faith. "But what happened at that panel was not about debating non-con, or about making fandom a safer space for survivors, or protecting young fans. What happened was that a group of people came in intending to intimidate and kinkshame the panelists.” And she rebuts their claim that "there wasn’t enough diversity of opinion on the topic among the panelists. ... [O]nly two of five panelists were defending the legitimacy of of depicting rape/non-con as a form of self expression.”
Various people in Grace's crowd have claimed that their comments at the panel were "not that bad. They were polite, they say. They were respectful. Even one of the panelists said they were civil.” In actuality, one panelist out of the five "said that the discussion was civil before any of us knew about the bullying going on in the background. I have spoken with my fellow panelists about the events since, and not one of us condones these individuals’ behavior.” Irene urges people to stop debating the semantics of what was said and pay attention to the larger context of harassment.
The tension and hostility in the panel room were such that Irene "felt attacked" and began to weep. (Some of Grace's friends have claimed that either she did not cry at all or was crying in response to something other than them.) During the noncon discussion, Irene "outed myself as a survivor of childhood sexual abuse. I shared my story and my feelings with them in an attempt to get them to relate to me as a human being. They responded by violating my privacy and my trust.”
My feelings were confirmed when I left that panel, and people began to come out of the woodwork and tell me what they’d heard about these people going to the panel with the intention of "watching it burn." Person after person came up to me and told me that they had been bullied, or worse, that they knew someone who had been bullied out of fandom, and it wasn’t all about non-con. People were attacked for speaking about TJLC, for shipping Sherlolly, for being pro-Mary, for writing or drawing top!lock.
...When a friend sent me a link to that video, I was triggered, and I don’t use that word lightly. It was bad enough to be brought to tears in a panel by people who admitted they came to kinkshame and intimidate. It got worse when I realized that I had fallen into a trap set by a pack of bullies willing to doxx people. I was so afraid that I spent almost all of Sunday in friends’ hotel rooms, or off hotel property, for fear of encountering these people. I felt unsafe to participate in the events hosted by a convention I’d paid for. I felt I couldn’t even squee about the good things that had happened, the wonderful and supportive people I’d met and the fun I’d had before that panel. I asked my friends not to tag me in photos for fear these people would target me. And then to cap it off, after I came home, I discovered that video of me in a vulnerable moment had been posted online.
Grace's crowd, Irene says, have claimed that "no one was calling for all-out censorship, or saying that every place in fandom has to be safe for minors." However, the video covers only 24 minutes of a panel that ran for 90 minutes and a noncon discussion that ran for nearly a hour. "All I can say is; they professed more extreme viewpoints earlier in the panel than are shown in the bit of footage they released.”
If they actually cared about survivors, they would not have snuck a camera into a venue where survivors were sharing their stories. If they actually cared about protecting children, they would not have taken footage of an event that the con said was 18+, and at which attendees were required to show ID to get in, and put that video up where minors could see it. Additionally, they posted a video of a discussion of rape/non-con fanworks without tagging it as such or warning for content.
Accounts of the panel from nonnies
A nonny who attended the GP panel at 221b said that Irene
broke down crying after a ... dude essentially questioned the responsibility of non-con/dub-con fanwork creators in perpetuating rape culture by writing these stories, coping mechanism or no, especially with how easy it is for minors to access. He'd done a term paper, you see, on marketing media targeted towards minors, so he had thinky thoughts on this (even though this kind of fic is IN NO WAY TARGETED TOWARDS MINORS). He mentioned how easy it was for him to find that kind of erotic fic when he was a minor, how normal it seemed to him, and how he looks back on it now and how what was a turn-on for him back then scares the shit out of him now, and what do you think of THAT.
It was essentially a mansplainy THINK OF THE CHILDREN AND DON'T WRITE YOUR RAPE APOLOGIST FILTH lecture with no solution offered except, presumably, for never writing works like it again. The panelist broke down into tears because it was such a personal issue for her.
(Note that although the above nonny mistakenly identified said "dude" as white, due to having only seen his hair, he is in fact not white.)
Either this nonny or another who attended the con reported that they left not long after he asked his question. "[G]lad I did as I heard someone ask why they call it non-con and not rapefic and someone sneered TO KEEP IT SEXY before the door shut behind me." Judging by this exchange, that snide comment probably came from Grace.
Finally, a nonny who watched the video while it was still up said,
[T]he crying panelist was at the very start of the video, apparently predicated by whatever happened before filming started. Later on, an audience member also mentioned being a CSA survivor during a question, while the camera panned around to show as much as every speaker's face as it could. These people need barred from as many cons as possible, and I say that as another CSA survivor who A. avoids noncon and underage stuff B. doesn't talk about it C. wouldn't want it filmed if I did and D. certainly don't want to bring it up to be considered a valid contribution to fandom discourse, which is how half this shit seems to be going.
Grace's initial post about 2221b Con was described thus on meme: "There is not a single apology in that long ass post. A list of excuses. A refusal to acknowledge the widespread hurt she and her sycophants cause. Trying to make her victims respond to her (an implying that if they don't, THEY are being the unreasonable ones). I hope none of them respond, she's being completely disingenuous."
Another nonny wrote, "As one of her victims (who wasn't acknowledged in that post) I am literally sick to my stomach. That is the most classic example of gaslighting I have ever seen in my life. I do not believe for one second that she's acting in good faith. She's not sorry. She's sorry she's getting shit now for what she's been doing all along.”
Grace's response to Michi/Traumachu was to accuse her of accusing Grace of things that Michi had not, in fact, accused Grace of. (FFA discussion.) It is worth noting that Grace has used this strategy more than once. Here, alluding to how she had not-at-all creepily used Leelah Alcorn's suicide as an excuse to invite trans* teenagers to stay at her place (see the "Grace's minions" section on her wiki page), she implies that people criticizing her for this have hinted that she molests minors. Nobody on FFA, at least, has ever made such a claim; the criticism is that this is one way to put kids in her debt and make them easier to manipulate as pawns in her fandom wars. A nonny points out the massive amount of projection in that post as well, as Grace and her crowd have been accusing others of victimizing children.
And her response to Irene was a marvel of passive-aggressive outrage and "How could you do this to me" high dudgeon that attacks Irene's character and attempts to "rebut" facts with outright lies:
This is one of the most egregious hatchet jobs I have ever read in my entire life. How can you possibly ask others to vouch for your character, to agree that you are a conscientious person of all things, when you have created a post - strike that, created a blog - specifically for the purpose of demonizing me as a person, assigning the absolute most egregious possible motivation and characterization to every choice I and anyone who has ever expressed affection or support of me has ever made with regard to 221B Con? How can you think you are posting something meaningful and credible at all when you are explicitly justifying my banning from the convention by citing a list of things I did not not do? How can you expect people to see this anonymous, newly-created-for-this-specific-purpose blog and give you the benefit of the doubt as to the reasons for that choice when you are so unbelievably unwilling to give the benefit of the doubt to any of our choices or intentions whatsoever? This is unbelievably hard and unfeeling.
….I truly hope that you all are able to access enough healing and self esteem someday to realize that you don’t have to eradicate people and viewpoints you don’t agree with off the fucking planet in order to feel secure in yourself and your own perspective. Cheers.
Nonnies discussed Grace’s reply to Irene in detail. At least one considers Grace's last paragraph to be "a dig at thegreenirene for being a survivor of child sex abuse." This comment provides a long, blunt, point-by-point rebuttal, for those who want one, ending with "I think her response actually reveals how hard she's trying to twist events to paint herself in a better light." This nonny specifically rebuts Grace's claim that the video was perfectly legal. But this one probably sums it up best:
Grace's reply is more of the usual "But what about ME? I'm the victim! I have done nothing!"
In a later post, Grace writes, "how the fuck can we have this conversation when these people have no qualms whatsoever about telling and "confirming” blatant, utter, complete, wholesale-invented lies?" Nonny: "It's a conspiracy, clearly!"
Pretty much everybody in Grace’s kinkshaming contingent has created, reblogged, and/or complimented fanworks that are problematic in terms of real-life consent:
- Many of them are into "Fawnlock,” an AU in which Sherlock is "a faun or otherwise humanoid deer with the mental capacity and ability to express himself of a child of less than 5” — in other words, "babyfur.” As another nonny says, "I'm finding the arguments extremely rich coming from people who get off on baby deer anilingus.” When called out on this, johnwatso, one of Gracee's clique, claims, "none of us condone or support those [babyfur-themed Fawnlock] works." Except that they totally do, going by what they reblog and tag. Oops!
- Joolabee has written and bookmarked fic that crosses the line into noncon (and then lied about it). Joolabee (as Joolaweed) defends her writing of somnophilia fic because Sherlock giving a sleeping John a blowjob is "clearly depicted as consensual in the next scene." Nonnies point out that giving consent afterward does not actually make this a consensual encounter.
- This "masterpost of pedophilia supporters within the sherlock fandom for your blocking and unfollowing convenience” was created by a Tumblr user with the telling handle of "sugirdaddy.” Per nonny, "that particular user reblogged lolicon gang rape fanart before.” This nonny links to four other posts of Sugirdaddy’s indicating interest in shota, infantilization, and teen sexual relationships.
- "ivorylungs is waaay into the animal!Character thing with Sherlock,” in various permutations. The same nonny then put up a much longer comment full of links to various people in this crowd kinking on such quasi-bestiality, as well as somnophilia, a/b/o that fetishizes lack of consent, and John and/or Sherlock as young children.
- This nonny provides this fanart of child!Sherlock lying on the floor pulling up his shirt so adult!John can tickle or fondle him. "I think this picture is perfectly innocent, but given every indication of how they'd interpret a picture of young child-sized John pulling up his clothes so that adult!Sherlock could touch him ... "
- "Writemeastoryofsolitude (aka solitary_endeavor on AO3), one of Grace's more marginal sycophants, wrote a long-ass fuck-or-die story in which Magnussen uses his evil blackmail powers to compel John and Sherlock to have sex with each other. In response to a kink meme prompt clearly labelled ‘non-con.’”
- Kumbricwitch, the member of Grace's group who left the panel when Michi declared the trigger warning, posted this: "john playing with Sherlocks peeper 🙈🙈🙈 and every few minutes asking "is this still okay?” and Sherlock like saying yes over and over and then the next time john asks Sherlock 💦💦" Nonnies were squicked by the implied infantilization of "peeper." That said, this subthread headcanoning Sherlock as keeping tiny frogs is delightful, and "Sherlock: The Greatest Peeper Story Ever Told" is a heartbreaking work of staggering genius.
- As alluded to at the start of the "Grace’s background” section, mothscarf — formerly princeowl — "changed urls after their ex accused them of being emotionally manipulative and coercing/manipulating them into sex.” This post by Grace seems to be a dig at them for this. "Even if it isn't, there's something deeply hypocritical about being friends with an accused abuser (accused by a real person, that is) and yet acting like people who write fic about sexual abuse are the worst and deserve to be shunned.” Additionally, Mothscarf has reblogged semi-explicit yaoi of the characters from the children's show Ed, Edd & Eddy.
- Per nonny, Grace and her friends are big fans of Rutobuka (NSFW), who draws very youthful Hobbit art, as well as Fawnlock. (As for Rutobuka herself, while "she hasn't reblogged some of the more inflammatory posts” by Grace’s supporters, she has reblogged this one and liked other such posts, including sugirdaddy’s "master list of pedophiles” and Peyton’s post about how survivors should avoid 221b Con.)
- "You can tell how much the issue of rape truly matters to her when you remember she fiercely defended Martin Freeman after he made blatant rape jokes.”
- Falka (aka yourfalkaisproblematic/Katzensprotte/
thunfischlock), now 31, claims that she was into hentai and rape porn at 16, yet had never heard of "shota" or "non-con" until 3 years ago. Nonnies think she's full of shit.
- Falka has also reblogged several examples of infantalized animal!Sherlock art along the lines of Fawnlock (NSFW!), all while decrying all shota as illegal.
- therealmartinsgirl posted that "Writing non con to get off, because you think it’s sexy... makes you someone who thinks hurting people against their will is okay. And it’s not. Not in fic, not in reality." Nonnies find it super ironic that she's written a explicit hooker!Sherlock fic tagged with "Rape/Non-con" AND TopLock.
Various of these fans have "started pulling and making private their questionable things. Which is hilarious because it proves that on some remote level at least they realise they're being hypocritical jackasses. I wish that remote part of their brain would move a little more to the forward.”
Ivorylungs, specifically, has claimed that she wasn’t to blame for the shota blog she co-ran with Traumachu, because she was just 17 at the time and she was trying to make her older friends happy, and she thought shota meant "cute chibi-ish art,” and only after she quit the blog did Michi "post actual sexual shit to it.” As this nonny summarized, "Ivorylungs’ self used to do the same bad things as Michi, but it was only because Michi influenced her so much. THIS is on the contrary to Michi's treatment solely the fault of Michi, not Ivorylungs's at all, and so she shouldn't be held accountable about it, at all.”
Yeah, you can be pressured into [doing what Ivorylungs did]. Though I'm not sure pressured is the right word. There are people who can't form a single thought of their own, and need to be told what to do and think, and idk, to go from running a shota blog when that was the cool friend liked to bullying that same person when she has a different cool friend...I think she's the kind of person who just needs to be in with the cool kids. Which isn't quite the same as being pressured. Sure, people want to be liked. But that's not an excuse.
I'd say she reminds me of a reformed alcoholic becoming a bar-smashing Prohibitionist fanatic, except her other stuff is tame as shit, she was never an "alcoholic" so she's more like a college kid who got really sick on Long Island Ice Teas the first time she EVER drank and puked in a dumpster and felt like shit afterward, so that particular morning she was really prone to falling in with a shouty self-righteous crowd that calls everyone who has a glass of wine with dinner a drunkard.
It turns out that Ivorylungs had an old deviantart account from which she forgot to delete all her old pictures of young boys being fucked. Enterprising anons managed to grab some screencaps of Ivorylungs' art featuring 5 Times John was Fucked By A Teacher and the One Time It Was A Nurse Instead" by SailorChibi; Manna/IvoryLung's comment on said fic) before Ivorylungs removed it. When this information came to light thanks to FFA, Manna/IvoryLungs complained that nonnies were "trying to drag [her] for shit [she] made when [she] was about 17…. yikes" and lamenting about nonnies' lack of lives, jobs, and pets. These jobless nonnies quickly did some elementary math and pointed out that, based on her stated age and birthday, both publicly available on her blog, Manna/IvoryLungs was actually 19 when the image was posted.
On Thursday, April 16, Grace posted a screenshot of an email from 221b Con's organizers: "Due to a number of complaints about your behavior at 221B Con 2015, the Board of Directors has decided that you will not be allowed to register for our future events." Nonnies discussed it here. It is likely to be true:
My friend and I went to the con, and this has been playing on her anxiety enough that she e-mailed the directors about graceebooks et al. earlier (whereas I've just been keeping my head down). So I'd assume that others have done the same, and therefore that this is genuine, since the con runners are pretty proactive about feedback. Last year one panel in particular drew a lot of complaints (the trans issues one, iirc?), but seems to have done much better this year.
In her disingenuous response to TheGreenIrene (discussed above under "Grace's responses"), Grace claimed that her banning was because
people hate me so much more intensely and violently than is even remotely justified that my very existence itself is enough to make them angry. You say: "You can, as the excerpted blog says, intimidate with your mere presence.” ARE YOU KIDDING ME? You are openly advocating the idea that it is intimidating and inappropriate FOR ME TO EXIST AND ATTEND FANDOM EVENTS.
Nonny: "Her newest tack: Being barred from a con means they literally want her to not exist!"
Grace emailed the BoD back, asking them "earnestly" what she might have done to get banned from the con. As of April 21 they have not answered her, and "She is pressed." She has apparently "self-reblogged that same post at least 4 times since she posted it.” (She also "reblogged her banning email like 40 some times in two minutes.”)
On April 19, Joolabee posted, "what if we just turned it around and did everything in our power to ban roane from the con". This refers to Roane72, for whom Grace & Co have a serious hateboner. (Meme discussion.) They got a reply from a user named Pyrotope: "That's my plan". (They got another reply from abundantlyqueer: "why don’t you get her to film people at a con without their knowledge or permission, while they discuss really sensitive, intimate stuff, and then get her to put it on the internet. surely that would be enough to get anyone banned.")
The sequence of events seems to be that the iPad which was used to record the video of the panel belonged to Vellium, who lent it to Ivorylungs and then left the room. Ivorylungs admits to having recorded the panel:
I guess i need to say this again? I am the one who recorded the video… on a giant ass ipad that was not ‘snuck’ in…. there were plenty of people around me and i know one of the con staff members sitting near the door had a VERY clear shot and did nothing about it. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
(On a side note, Katzensprotte/Falka claims in her tags to her reblog of that post, "#also no one had intentions of uploading it until people tried to drag us through the mud by lying about what happened #and i know no one in that room or on that panel would have tried to set the record straight for us lol")
When Vellium got the iPad back from Ivorylungs, they asked Grace, ”Do you want me to upload the video [to YouTube]?” Grace responded with an enthusiastic "YES,” then reblogged the video once it was uploaded — ensuring that it would reach a much wider viewership — with the comment "horrifying”.
(Plexippa posted a screenshot of the YouTube removal notice, linked at the top of this page under "In a nutshell.")
In her response to Irene, Grace had stated that she neither took nor uploaded the video. Keyz-Padlock retorted,
You did, however, request the video be put up by those who had taken it and were the one who posted and promoted the video to Tumblr under the sarcastic title "horrifying”.
"I didn’t take the video. I didn’t upload the video. Oh but I did tell Vellium to upload it and I did promote the video on my blog but it wasn’t ME you guys omg!”
I have no idea why you think this type of response is helping you. It just isn’t. It’s just getting really sad at this point that you respond in such ways. Your arrogance and flippant attitude is disgusting. You continue to make jokes about this. You continue to reblog others’ jokes about this. If you can’t see how you’re digging a bigger hole for yourself, how you are ruining your own credibility, than I don’t know what to tell you.
Grace’s response to Keyz-Padlock was a marvel of baffled faux-earnestness, asking for "receipts” because "i literally do not know what behavior at the con [the Board of Directors] could be referring to … there seem to be countless people who DO know and just are just keeping the specifics secret. if i knew what i had done, i would better be able to react to what is going on here. thanks!! xx”
Nonnies, on harmful ideas being circulated in this wank
Nonnies have criticized the wankers in this wank for promoting ideas that ultimately will do more harm to victims of sexual abuse:
- God, whoever's putting forward "survivors are more likely to become offenders!" into this mess in support of Graceebooks and co.'s bullshit is fucking vile. It's statistically untrue, and it's the kind of thing that's seriously, genuinely damaging for abuse survivors to hear, it's not just a quippy comeback. I hope these assholes alienate all their followers and get left alone to fester.
- I know that people keep saying this, but I feel the need to reiterate it - the idea that in a relationship involving two adult men, having the 'wrong' one of those adult men bottom is considered pedophilia is both ridiculous and really really REALLY abusing the term - in a way that is dangerous when it comes to actual fucking pedophilia
- One of the creepiest things about the particular argument they're using is the way it lines up with the beliefs of actual pedophiles. Normal people know that actual pedophilia remains pedophilia regardless of who is in what position or what sex act is being performed. Pedophiles, on the other hand, frequently come up with ideas like "it's okay if the kid is the one doing the penetrating!" If they're thinking of John as a child, it shouldn't be okay for him to have sex at all in their minds.
- …it's really fucking sad that they think reading something and being into it made their abuse happen/go on longer than it would have otherwise/be worse than it might have been. No, dudes. Your abuse is completely, 100% the fault of the people who abused you and maybe, depending on individual circumstances, there might have been someone who could and should have helped you but didn't, but that person is NOT YOU. And the people behind this shit are PROMOTING this idea on top of blaming other abuse survivors for abuse. They keep coming around to this idea that it's a victim's responsibility to stop abuse. Current victims are responsible if they read the wrong fiction and "let" their abusers hurt them; survivors are responsible if they don't cope appropriately. That's fucked up.
In response to Grace's fetishization of queer men (see the "Grace's SJ fails" section of her wiki page for more information), a nonny who is a trans man writes that he is on sugirdaddy's list of "pedophiles" (see "Hypocrisy" on the Sherlock 221b Con Wank page for more details) — and is also a CSA survivor "who uses writing as an outlet to deal with the shame and disgust I feel about what happened to me when I was a little boy.” He continues:
This is just... Icing on the cake, in my opinion. Grace's fetishization of people like me feels like another way for them to silence me. My abuse doesn't matter. The fact they are literally accusing me of being the same as the man who molested doesn't matter. My gender doesn't matter.
I'm a straw man argument to them. I'm an effigy to be burned.
And apparently to Grace I'm also some sort of mythical perfect boyfriend and human being because I'm trans.
Can you see the disconnect here? To her I'm a monstrous pedophile and rapist. To her I'm perfect.
This whole debacle disgusts me.
Nonnies, on making all fanworks safe for children
Grace’s trolling of FFA (see her wiki page for more details) produced a couple of succinct comments from nonnies about where she and her friends can shove their Helen Lovejoy-esque ideas about fandom.
Things have been age-locked since the dawn of the internet. And teens have been lying about their ages to get at it for exactly as long. It has been factually shown to be about as effective as the condom-less PIV method of birth control.
Why the fuck should adult fans spend their time moderating their activites so that kids don't see it? If it freaks the kids out, well fuck--it was labelled and rated. Maybe they should have fucking read the tags. How is it the author's fault unless they've specifically hunted down the little bastards so they could link them to their porn?
Like, thirty seconds with google and I can get a live action video of a woman being fucked by a chimpanzee, no questions about my age even asked. Give me ten minutes, and I can find you a video of a legit serial killer dismembering a corpse. These flailings about 'won't someone think of the children!' have forgotten that kids have access to way worse, and they always have the choice to not participate in fandom if it makes them uncomfortable.
Fandom isn't obligated to be kid friendly. (because fuck 'em)
It does not go over well to inform a woman-heavy fandom that they must think of the poor babbies. We have been told since the dawn of time to think of the babbies. We no longer care about babbies. We want our OWN safe spaces. We are not babbie machines. Do you fucking get that? I don't give a shit about kids, yours or anyone else's. I lock my fics and I warn so survivors can choose to read or not. Beyond that, you don't get a say in what I write. PERIOD.
A nonnie asks, "Is there a fucking TJLC Wanker Bingo Card yet? Because I'm sure I have bingo." A brilliant nonnie provides one, which now has its own wiki page.
More wank: Sherlock 221b Con Wank 2: The Chafening