Read on Twitter
[cw: Ana Valens, CSA, violations of consent, masturbation, et al]
So, here's a thing.
So, here's a thing.
I saw this take today, basically along the lines of,
"What she did was mostly 'fine,'
"or at least kind of functionally 'harmless,'
"because there's no way the other people playing could ever know what she was doing."
"What she did was mostly 'fine,'
"or at least kind of functionally 'harmless,'
"because there's no way the other people playing could ever know what she was doing."
Like,
because the players in Fall Guys are fully anonymized,
even if they read her piece, there's no way they could ever know if she was in their game or not.
because the players in Fall Guys are fully anonymized,
even if they read her piece, there's no way they could ever know if she was in their game or not.
Which, to me, basically sounds like,
"Predatory behavior is fine, as long as the people you're preying on don't realize it's happening."
"Predatory behavior is fine, as long as the people you're preying on don't realize it's happening."
Like, let's lay it out.
Masturbating to a thought, or a memory, or a fantasy of another adult is probably at least mostly fine,
barring especially gross or predatory circumstances.
Masturbating to a thought, or a memory, or a fantasy of another adult is probably at least mostly fine,
barring especially gross or predatory circumstances.
Like, it's definitely possible to do it in a shitty way,
or be shitty *about* it,
but the act itself is, in most reasonable cases, probably at least mostly harmless.
or be shitty *about* it,
but the act itself is, in most reasonable cases, probably at least mostly harmless.
*But* non-consensually *tricking* someone into saying or doing things
*just* so you can masturbate *to* them is clearly manipulative and predatory.
*just* so you can masturbate *to* them is clearly manipulative and predatory.
Handing someone the control pad for a sex toy that is currently *inside* you
and telling them it's a cute, fun video game
is clearly a violation of consent.
and telling them it's a cute, fun video game
is clearly a violation of consent.
It's a false pretense.
You're directly involving them in a sexual act that they did *not* knowingly opt into.
You're directly involving them in a sexual act that they did *not* knowingly opt into.
And, crucially,
even if they don't "figure it out," that fact is still true.
You still did that.
You did that *to* them.
even if they don't "figure it out," that fact is still true.
You still did that.
You did that *to* them.
In Ana's case, she did that to *dozens* of people,
all at the same time,
with reckless disregard for whether or not that group contained actual children.
all at the same time,
with reckless disregard for whether or not that group contained actual children.
And then she wrote a piece about it
where literally
her *own* fucking conclusion
is that it was creepy, and weird, and clearly unethical, and she's probably not going to do it again.
where literally
her *own* fucking conclusion
is that it was creepy, and weird, and clearly unethical, and she's probably not going to do it again.
I don't know how you *do* that
and that act "surprised" when people say,
"Hey, that was creepy, and weird, and clearly unethical, and I don't feel safe right now."
and that act "surprised" when people say,
"Hey, that was creepy, and weird, and clearly unethical, and I don't feel safe right now."
Like, the number of people
who now can't touch the game
because, the same way you can't "know" she was there, you can't know that she wasn't.
who now can't touch the game
because, the same way you can't "know" she was there, you can't know that she wasn't.
Like, even if you want to be purely fucking consequentialist,
the consequence of her *writing*
is that a *lot* of people with sexual trauma got pretty fucking severely triggered.
the consequence of her *writing*
is that a *lot* of people with sexual trauma got pretty fucking severely triggered.
Which is not a new thing for Ana.
Triggering people is what she does.
It seems to be the cornerstone of her entire online brand,
Triggering people is what she does.
It seems to be the cornerstone of her entire online brand,
which includes harassing actual children *and* deliberately abusing adult survivors of CSA.
It never ends.
It never ends.
Is this the worst thing she's ever done?
No.
Is it literally the equivalent of actual rape?
Also no.
No.
Is it literally the equivalent of actual rape?
Also no.
It's not the "equivalent" of anything.
It doesn't *have* to be.
It just *is*, on its own, deeply fucking shitty,
and also a small piece of a bigger, long-running, consistent pattern of shitty, selfish,
predatory, abusive behavior.
It doesn't *have* to be.
It just *is*, on its own, deeply fucking shitty,
and also a small piece of a bigger, long-running, consistent pattern of shitty, selfish,
predatory, abusive behavior.
And I don't like watching people I used to respect fucking look at how things stand and say,
"It's okay because no one found out."
"It's okay because no one found out."
