Read on Twitter
(1/?) this is *also* why many anti-shippers conclude that nuanced arguments are & #39;just made-up excuses for predators/rapists/[csa offenders/csem]& #39;
(also bc nuance is boring, hard, and scary) https://twitter.com/freetofic/status/1273452364150853638">https://twitter.com/freetofic...
(also bc nuance is boring, hard, and scary) https://twitter.com/freetofic/status/1273452364150853638">https://twitter.com/freetofic...
(2/) if an anti-shipper thinks that outsiders think the EXACT OPPOSITE of them & everyone who agrees must (at least confess) TOTAL agreement
then any concession that some part of the anti-shipper worldview is correct = admitting anti-shippers are 100% correct about everything.
then any concession that some part of the anti-shipper worldview is correct = admitting anti-shippers are 100% correct about everything.
(3/) & if a person admits anti-shippers are right about everything ... then there& #39;s only 1 possible reason for not instantly & #39;switching sides& #39; & joining the good fight.
they must be a Bad Person - willfully & knowingly *choosing* to be Bad instead of Good.
they must be a Bad Person - willfully & knowingly *choosing* to be Bad instead of Good.
(4/) this is why those Big Anti-Shipper Threads are full of accusations that & #39;Anti-Antis& #39; Don& #39;t Care About Kids.
on the occasion a b&w-thinking anti-shipper *does* absorb some nuance from a pro-shipper thread, they absorb the parts that make sense to them but make up the rest.
on the occasion a b&w-thinking anti-shipper *does* absorb some nuance from a pro-shipper thread, they absorb the parts that make sense to them but make up the rest.
(5/) if anti-shippers say [problem] needs solution [x], a nuanced objection looks like this to b&w thinkers:
pro-shipper: I agree [problem] exists, but I think the solution is [y], not [x].
anti-shipper *hears*: I agree [problem] exists, but I refuse to do anything to fix it.
pro-shipper: I agree [problem] exists, but I think the solution is [y], not [x].
anti-shipper *hears*: I agree [problem] exists, but I refuse to do anything to fix it.
(6/) a b&w thinking anti-shipper can& #39;t hear the nuance of offering an alternative solution [y]. they can only comprehend that the pro-shipper has objected to solution [x].
b/c the b&w thinker believes no solution BUT [x] exists, they completely block out hearing solution [y].
b/c the b&w thinker believes no solution BUT [x] exists, they completely block out hearing solution [y].
(7/) this phenomenon can also be witnessed when arguing with members of other cultlike social movements, such as neo-white supremacists, TERFs/SWERFs, & Christian Nationalists.
many members of these groups build a moat around their worldview to prevent nuance from damaging it.
many members of these groups build a moat around their worldview to prevent nuance from damaging it.
(8/) the moat itself is a mental shutdown & selective hearing that shuts nuanced reasoning that threatens their worldview out, drowning it before the member can weigh its logic.
building this anti-nuance moat is a mostly unconscious process-->
building this anti-nuance moat is a mostly unconscious process-->
(9/) -->shored up by group loyalty exercises (praising each other for staying strong in the face of Insidious Lies, putting down outsiders/the Chosen Enemy as pathetic & foolish, & reinforcing the dangers of acknowledging outsider opinions).
(10/10) this is necessary bc the worldview of a cult-like group is usually based on feelings of fear rather than reason or logic.
tl;dr: many fandom anti-shippers literally cannot comprehend nuanced objections to their worldview b/c they& #39;ve trained themselves to avoid nuance.
tl;dr: many fandom anti-shippers literally cannot comprehend nuanced objections to their worldview b/c they& #39;ve trained themselves to avoid nuance.
