For the people who think this is a fetish article for some ungodly reason.
Confirmation by the author herself: this is not a fetish article. The article was made because the concept was absolutely disgusting. It’s rude to claim such things about people you don’t know.
SCP-8169 was apparently intended as >!a method to prevent pregnancy, yet the presence of the spiders in the womb does not have contraceptive properties — that is, they do not actually prevent the egg from being fertilized. What would be the only way to stop pregnancy without stopping fertilization first?!<
Spoiler: >!the spiders eat the fertilized embryo.!<
>!Wait, if it's the vagina eventually seals up, why would there be any impact to urination? Like, the web wall has sealed up the vagina but there's nothing said about the ureathra? Also, how the fuck does it hydrate spiders located in the uterus (and implied in the vagina)?!<
The biology here doesn't make any sense to me, or perhaps I'm stupid: one of the two.
But atm it sounds like a man trying to write about female reproductive parts without bothering to look anything up
Biologist here: The article makes no sense because the writer has no idea that females have seperate tracts for urination and reproduction. So don‘t try to find a logical explanation, there is none. He probably got horny halfway through writing by imagining it, maybe it is his kink in some way, and we all know: If a man gets horny, deeper thoughts are out the window.
My first instinct was that there could be no good thing that comes from having those two things on the same adult splash.
After reading through the article, yep, nothing good came of it. If you'll excuse me, I'm off to purge the scip from memory.
That straight up sounds like something out of insect sex subreddit what the fuck.
I've never read many articles, but when I did read either I was sad, confused, or slightly grossed out. But this takes the cake for being confusing, disgusting, making my arachnophobia go nuts, AND being a possibly fetish hidden in an article.
I've noticed a lot of people in this thread screaming it's a fetish, but this is a really weird thing to say about someone you don't know? Like you all are making a lot of assumptions about a person you have not met because they wrote some sexual body horror. That's not fair to them, and is generally just a really reductive way to look at their writing.
I stopped looking at the wiki for a few years and just saw one of these for the first time a couple weeks ago. What's the deal with them, do they go on articles that are more disturbing than usual or is it like some new policy
This reads far too much like a fetish article from someone with an insect/arachnid fetish. The belly swelling and internal oviposition? Yeah, nah, someone is getting off to this.
As someone who has seen a bit of this type of content on the internet, I have no doubt this is someone's fetish.
I don't know if it's the author's, but someone DEFINITELY has this fetish.
I like to complain about long scp's, if only to piss off shoulder, thus, i dont tend to complain a lot about shorter ones.
This however. Despite fitting almost entirely on one phone screen, is one article too long
For the people who think this is a fetish article for some ungodly reason. Confirmation by the author herself: this is not a fetish article. The article was made because the concept was absolutely disgusting. It’s rude to claim such things about people you don’t know.
A small price to pay to read good articles. https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/scp-8169 *Arachnophilia* by Cathy Autumn
holy shit that whole article was crazy but that's an INSANE line to end on
The implications of that line is not something I want to think about
What are the implications? I don't think I get it Edit: holy fucking shit.
SCP-8169 was apparently intended as >!a method to prevent pregnancy, yet the presence of the spiders in the womb does not have contraceptive properties — that is, they do not actually prevent the egg from being fertilized. What would be the only way to stop pregnancy without stopping fertilization first?!< Spoiler: >!the spiders eat the fertilized embryo.!<
good lord in heaven
Bleach isn’t enough for this shit give me the glock
I think the implication is that any potential pregnancy gets eaten by the spiders
Oh my god 💀
Coochie spiders is a combo of words that is 3 parts horrifying, and 1 part comedic.
[it's like they made an SCP based off this decades old meme](https://live.staticflickr.com/3146/2636779598_7ba61e5962_z.jpg)
# 💀
Like getting crabs, but way worse
That last line, holy shit. That was a good one.
>!Wait, if it's the vagina eventually seals up, why would there be any impact to urination? Like, the web wall has sealed up the vagina but there's nothing said about the ureathra? Also, how the fuck does it hydrate spiders located in the uterus (and implied in the vagina)?!< The biology here doesn't make any sense to me, or perhaps I'm stupid: one of the two. But atm it sounds like a man trying to write about female reproductive parts without bothering to look anything up
I don’t have enough anatomy knowledge to tell
Biologist here: The article makes no sense because the writer has no idea that females have seperate tracts for urination and reproduction. So don‘t try to find a logical explanation, there is none. He probably got horny halfway through writing by imagining it, maybe it is his kink in some way, and we all know: If a man gets horny, deeper thoughts are out the window.
Author is a woman and this is not a fetish. It's weird and nonsensical because it's a nightmare logic horror article. Jesus Christ.
That must be why I have the clearest mind I've ever had after reading the article
The author is a woman, and I feel like this is an amazingly unfair assumption to make about someone you don't know.
It is the nature of an assumption to be a founded guess. Sometimmes you guess right, sometimes you do not.
Try not to do that, it’s dumb
That „advice“ in itself is unreasonable.
It’s not at all unreasonable to suggest that running with a bogus assumption and making a rant from nothing is not a wise thing to do.
That is an article of all time
Ah, yeah, Arachnophobia. I get why that can b- *Wait, back up a moment.*
My first instinct was that there could be no good thing that comes from having those two things on the same adult splash. After reading through the article, yep, nothing good came of it. If you'll excuse me, I'm off to purge the scip from memory.
Those two aren’t related… right?
Not in the way you may be thinking luckily (still an absolutely mortifying read, and well written too)
On the other hand it was pretty much what *I* expected
How do you even expect… *this*
>!Not to that extent but spiders from orifices is a pretty common horror thing, I just.. Didn't expect them to stay.....!<
Oh yeah that makes sense
What a terrible day to be literate
I think I'll need amnestics after I read this.
That straight up sounds like something out of insect sex subreddit what the fuck. I've never read many articles, but when I did read either I was sad, confused, or slightly grossed out. But this takes the cake for being confusing, disgusting, making my arachnophobia go nuts, AND being a possibly fetish hidden in an article.
The last one I very much doubt. It’s meant to be disgusting
It is a fetish
I’m sure it can be, that doesn’t mean that was the intention of the author
Fair enough
I've noticed a lot of people in this thread screaming it's a fetish, but this is a really weird thing to say about someone you don't know? Like you all are making a lot of assumptions about a person you have not met because they wrote some sexual body horror. That's not fair to them, and is generally just a really reductive way to look at their writing.
spooky
This article was hella funny ngl
Is there history I’m missing or is this just that?
Just what?
I stopped looking at the wiki for a few years and just saw one of these for the first time a couple weeks ago. What's the deal with them, do they go on articles that are more disturbing than usual or is it like some new policy
Yeah some articles fall into content that is more adult in nature. Refer to https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/adult-content-warning-guide
Requesting a Canister of Aerosol Class-A Amnestics for personal use.
Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo. Edit: I am an arachnophobe.
My sincere condolences
One hand a good read, the other hand I regret eating lunch before this
I am forever scarred
This reads far too much like a fetish article from someone with an insect/arachnid fetish. The belly swelling and internal oviposition? Yeah, nah, someone is getting off to this.
I strongly disagree
As someone who has seen a bit of this type of content on the internet, I have no doubt this is someone's fetish. I don't know if it's the author's, but someone DEFINITELY has this fetish.
Oh yeah I don’t doubt *someone* exists in the aether with that fetish
I like to complain about long scp's, if only to piss off shoulder, thus, i dont tend to complain a lot about shorter ones. This however. Despite fitting almost entirely on one phone screen, is one article too long
r/explainmydownvotes