May 16th, 2007
by
Yonmei
I wrote (Slash fandom and male privilege/hetero privilege) about an incident at a slash panel at Redemption, in which a fanboy disrupted a panel about slash because we weren’t interested in making him the centre of attention. A fanboy responded to that account with several comments about how fanfiction, but especially slash, is wrong.
I checked out the fanboy’s blog, which appeared to be fairly unread and uncommented on, and followed an approving link from it to another fanboy’s blog which trashes fanfiction, and especially slash, and thinking about this I wrote (This is our garden. We like it.) a follow-up blog post about how it seems to really aggravate fanboys that, for all their ignorant bloviating about how bad fanfiction is (and especially slash fic), the fans who enjoy reading, writing, vidding, discussing, critting, and talking about fanfiction and slash fic and the writers and the ideas and the source material are oblivious: fanfiction and slash fandom grows regardless of the fanboy’s tiny flames.
A new fanboy responded to that post, as obliviously lecturing. (As lavendertook noted: given the content of the post, the first comment was an obvious troll, and had I been online before anyone responded, I would have disemvowelled it accordingly.)
What’s the common theme here?
The fanboy who disrupted the panel at Redemption perceived a roomful of women, talking about men, and was infuriated to find that his opinion was regarded as of no value.
The fanboy who responded to Slash fandom and male privilege/hetero privilege is (judging by his previous comments on other blogs) in a perpetual state of irritation that he knows how worthless fanfiction is, especially slash, and yet these fanwriters never pay any attention to him.
The fanboy who responded to This is our garden. We like it apparently perceived a post about slash fandom as its own thing, not dependent on the approval of fanboys who don’t like what these women are writing about, as an opportunity to lecture women on what fanfiction ought to be.
This article at Salon.com (Does acting like “one of the boys” make you more likely to be harassed?) crystalised this for me. It’s about a paper published in the Journal of Applied Psychology, based on a series of studies of nearly 550 people, students and employees in male- and female-dominated organizations, run by an assistant professor at the University of Toronto, Jennifer Berdahl. The Salon.com article says:
Berdahl noticed that when previous researchers tried to explain the phenomenon of sexual harassment, they often assumed it was caused by sexual desire: A man was attracted to a woman and therefore made unwanted sexual advances toward her. Under this hypothesis, said Berdahl, women who were considered the most “feminine” — i.e., closest to “gender ideals” — were also the most likely to be harassed.
By that definition, slash fans and slash fandom get harassed because we are writing about sex. But in fact, many slash stories contain remarkably little sex, and what there is, is not written (well, not often) in a format that would be recognised as pornography. (It is, of course: it’s just a form of pornography that’s not targeted at men. It’s written for women to enjoy, and the timing, foreplay, descriptive detail, and climaxing in slash stories is different from the same in commercial pornography written, always, with the view of selling it to men.)
In the article at Salon:
Berdahl disagrees with this theory. She asserts that actually the opposite is true — women who act like men are the ones who get the most harassment. She thinks that this is because most sexual harassment has little to do with sexual desire; instead, it’s used to keep women in their place.
The idea that sexual harassment is about control and power is not that surprising. What’s interesting about Berdahl’s hypothesis is that it means that the women who act the most like men — which Berdahl defines as showing stereotypical characteristics like assertiveness, independence and dominance — are the most likely to be harassed. She calls this phenomenon “gender harassment” and defines it as “a form of hostile environmental harassment that appears to be motivated by hostility toward individuals who violate gender ideals rather than by desire for those who meet them.”
In fact, as I said in the second article in this series: fanboys hate fanfiction, especially slash, because fans who are writing fanfiction are behaving, according to stereotypical gender norms, “like men”: assertive, independent, and dominant. Slash fiction is primarily targeted because, although all fanfiction subverts the accepted norm in which we are the passive recipients of what the makers of the TV shows, films, and books choose to give us, slash fiction subverts gender and sexual orientation norms, both in the slash created, and in the fandom and fans who create slash. And this, to some men, is unacceptable: they respond with harassment.
![[Slashdot]](http://slashdot.org/favicon.ico)
![[Digg]](http://digg.com/favicon.ico)
![[Reddit]](http://reddit.com/favicon.ico)
![[del.icio.us]](http://images.del.icio.us/static/img/delicious.small.gif)
![[Facebook]](http://www.facebook.com/favicon.ico)
![[Technorati]](http://technorati.com/favicon.ico)
![[Google]](http://www.google.com/favicon.ico)
![[StumbleUpon]](http://www.stumbleupon.com/favicon.ico)
- More blogging by
Yonmei at
http://yonmei.insanejournal.com
Previous:
Bookswapping for a better world --- Next:
a few updates
Filed under Cons & Community, geek sexism, slash | Comments (53)
I think you’re spot-on about what’s wrong with objecting fanboys– they probably can’t handle the idea of people, especially women, taking liberties with characters whom they believe *belong* to them.
but i also see a good amount of slash that is pornographic (thank goodness), and i think it’s a further demonstration of how put-on-the-spot those same guys feel when someone, especially women, is writing about what they desire as fangirls, rather than what they *should* desire as fanboys.
and as a Black, gay, male, fan who sometimes identifies as a fangirl (i love the slash) and sometimes gets identified as a fanboy (i bag and board my comics– but come on, i’ve seen them get disintegrated by years in boxes) i don’t think all fanboys think alike– and having an explanation like gender harassment makes that point really well. it’s only the fanboys who feel totally inadequate and *need* to hang on to an egotistical view of their STR8 characters who get all uppity about slash.
and as a Black, gay, male, fan who sometimes identifies as a fangirl
*raises eyebrow*
i don’t think all fanboys think alike
It is another persistent theme that men who see posts pointing out bad behavior on the part of men make comments on those posts that explicitly call themselves out as not included in the condemnation of that bad behaviour.
it’s only the fanboys who feel totally inadequate and *need* to hang on to an egotistical view of their STR8 characters who get all uppity about slash.
No, I’ve run into gay fanboys who get annoyed about women writing slash, too.
I think your analysis of the anti-slash trolls is dead on, too. I wonder if the gender harrassment from the Salon article isn’t a form of hazing, too? Just a thought. But defining it as a way of keeping women in our places works too.
One of the male privileges female slashers are practicing is exclusion of the other, which in this case, is het guys (most guys, in fact, including many gay men, but definitely het guys), which must make it doubly frustrating for the fanboys. We’ve made a club that doesn’t include them, and we’re playing with their toys! Hey! Wait a minute!
Oh, the irony.
I’ve just found this blog from a link in LJ a few days ago–I plan to spend time this afternoon reading back over all the excellent posts I’ve missed. One question–whenever I click on the “RSS feed” (whether from home or work) over the last few days, I get an “error page not found” screen–I would love to be able to have the feed on my LJ flist for ease of reading if it’s at all possible.
The LJ feed is here.
I want to explain in detail why I think this post is so great, but words are failing me. I think I will simply have to link it at my own site and hope that people read. :)
Hmm s ts k t “vrsxls” nd mk nt “sxl bjcts” mn n slsh fnfct whr th prmr dncs r wmn nd hmsxls bt nt k t d th xct sm thng t wmn n mrkt whs prmr dnc s mn? Hypcrc gtt lv t.
Prsnll cld cr lss wht ppl wrt n thr fn fctn whthr slsh r nt, ll fn fctn s drck wrtn b ‘wrtrs” wh cnt sll thr wrk s fr s m cncrnd. Hwvr fnd th tttd tht “w cn d t bt y cnt sld prdctbl. Wmn kp syng th wnt qlt, bt th nvr ct tht w. sgh.
rational said:
Hmm s ts k t vrsxls nd mk nt sxl bjcts mn n slsh fnfct whr th prmr dncs r wmn nd hmsxls bt nt k t d th xct sm thng t wmn n mrkt whs prmr dnc s mn?
This is what I meant by irony. It’s okay with the fanboys when it’s women being objectified for their pleasure, but if the tables are turned it’s blasphemy. If that doesn’t make them think, nothing will.
I’m not even going to bother commenting on your opinion of fanfic. Why are you here anyway? Why do you care?
Why are you here anyway?
The answer to your question is “to troll”. It’s Yonmei’s post but I think disemvowelling is a good response to someone who hasn’t bothered to understand the discussion but feels like pissing on it anyway.
Off with his vowels!
Cuz, yeah, seriously, “rational” is basically adding nothing while taking the piss. No one likes that.
Rational: you’re disemvowelled.
Lee: Why are you here anyway? Why do you care?
I think Rational is here (and cares) for the reasons I outlined in the post Rational is responding to.
the angry black woman: disemvowelment tool.
Yonmei – omg that’s genius! Love it.
Fanboy? Fangirl? I can only assume you’re using these terms in a gender-neutral sense.
Loving slash is certainly not the province of women exclusively. Although men in slash are a statistical minority, they are certainly there–some of them even straight. I’ve also seen plenty of women who object strenuously to slash fanfic, whether on straight-up homophobic grounds or using the same “But it isn’t canon!” argument that “fanboys” seem to favor.
Thus, although I appreciate the slant of some of your arguments, I cannot agree with your entire essay. It seems to me that being for, against, or indifferent to slash does not specifically correlate to gender differences, but is more likely influenced by individual interpretations of canon and individual opinions of the use of fandom.
“No, I’ve run into gay fanboys who get annoyed about women writing slash, too.”
And yet you will often find that their unease comes from a different issue. Slash written by women, and then the meta-analysis written about slash fandom by women, very rarely cares about how gay men are experiencing the world. On occasion, I’ve seen pieces of analysis that feel no particular need at all to insert even a cursory “oh yeah, and the guys too, of course” into the essay (which would totally be adequate; I understand men are a minority on this side of the sandbox).
What is provocative about this attitude of slash as an entirely female space is that gay male writers who feel less of a connection with the gay culture or with gay erotica written for men end up trapped in a kind of no-man’s land. This aggressive gender split seems, well, weird… at least when it comes from a part of fandom dedicated toward appearing more liberal than thou. With the politics of homosexuality coming to the forefront in the past decade, and the proliferation of popular entertainment that commodifies queerness… well, to see a predominantly female group running away with the gay and then often not caring about the gay men who share their interests (not to mention any of the history of gays in the last century in the Western world, at the very least, and how that would affect whatever fanfiction is being written) is unsettling.
Basically, I see nothing wrong with women writing slash fanfic. I just object to shoving the gay guys off to the side even as you write about two guys having a relationship.
Kleenexwoman: Fanboy? Fangirl? I can only assume you’re using these terms in a gender-neutral sense.
If you re-read my post, you will see that I am not using the term fangirl at all, and I am certainly not using the term fanboy in a gender-neutral sense, but to refer to specific male fans.
Loving slash is certainly not the province of women exclusively. Although men in slash are a statistical minority, they are certainly there–some of them even straight.
But what does this have to do with the behaviour of fanboys who behave disruptively towards discussions of fanfiction, especially slash? Further, if you re-read all three posts, you will see that it is acknowledged that there exist men in slash fandom, though they are an extreme minority. It would be better to respond to what I’m saying, rather than complain about what I’m not saying, don’t you think?
I’ve also seen plenty of women who object strenuously to slash fanfic, whether on straight-up homophobic grounds or using the same “But it isn’t canon!” argument that “fanboys” seem to favor.
So have I: any slash fan has. But this post was about the fanboys and their reasons for disrupting discussions of fanfiction, especially slash.
Thus, although I appreciate the slant of some of your arguments, I cannot agree with your entire essay. It seems to me that being for, against, or indifferent to slash does not specifically correlate to gender differences
I’m not sure that you can claim to agree or disagree with my essay at all, since you do not appear to have read it with any care or attention. If you would care to re-read it and re-think your response, you can then try to comment again.
Seth: And yet you will often find that their unease comes from a different issue. Slash written by women, and then the meta-analysis written about slash fandom by women, very rarely cares about how gay men are experiencing the world.
I’d like you to go read the essay by Lucy Gillam, When Worlds Collide: Fandom and Male Privilege, that I linked to in the first essay in this series.
Slash is written by women, for women. Meta-analysis of slash is written by women, for women. Unless we see it as directly relevant, we don’t care: why should we? Slash is not written for gay men, and gay men are not able to judge what is and is not relevant in slash or meta-analysis of slash from their experience of the world.
On occasion, I’ve seen pieces of analysis that feel no particular need at all to insert even a cursory “oh yeah, and the guys too, of course” into the essay (which would totally be adequate; I understand men are a minority on this side of the sandbox).
An extreme minority, and a minority who are attempting to play in a sandbox which has been made for and by women. If that minority finds the sandbox they’re playing in uncomfortable because it is not made to suit them, they should not be trying to remake that sandbox for their comfort.
What is provocative about this attitude of slash as an entirely female space is that gay male writers who feel less of a connection with the gay culture or with gay erotica written for men end up trapped in a kind of no-man’s land.
And there is an obvious solution to this: you need to build your own sandbox. That is, after all, what slash fans did.
This aggressive gender split seems, well, weird… at least when it comes from a part of fandom dedicated toward appearing more liberal than thou.
Well, Seth, it’s up to you. If you find it comfortable to play in the slash sandbox, as is, I don’t think you’ll find any female slash fans telling you you can’t. If what you want to read is slash, no one can stop you. If what you want to write is slash, slash fans will want to read it. If you want to join in metadiscussions about slash, this is also possible – so long as you do so as a slash fan, and not as a gay man arguing that you know how gay men experience the world, and this or that in a slash story isn’t it. Because then you are not trying to join in metadiscussions as just another slash fan: you are trying to distort metadiscussions about slash with male privilege.
With the politics of homosexuality coming to the forefront in the past decade, and the proliferation of popular entertainment that commodifies queerness… well, to see a predominantly female group running away with the gay and then often not caring about the gay men who share their interests (not to mention any of the history of gays in the last century in the Western world, at the very least, and how that would affect whatever fanfiction is being written) is unsettling.
But how are we “running away with the gay”? You are gay: your experience as a gay man is not affected by the fact that some women – lesbian, bi, and straight – write stories about people of the same sex (usually, not always, both human males) who are passionately connected with each other. If you share this interest, you are welcome to join in. If you don’t share this interest, nobody’s making you join in. We aren’t going to change because you don’t like what we do the way we do it. There’s a section of Lucy’s essay I’d particularly like to draw your attention to:
Basically, I see nothing wrong with women writing slash fanfic. I just object to shoving the gay guys off to the side even as you write about two guys having a relationship.
Which is the same complaint that Lucy’s friend made to her: you don’t want to get together with us and be just another slash fan. If that was what you wanted, there’s nothing to stop you. You want us to write slash differently so that you can get to join in. But we don’t want to. It’s our garden. We like it.
When I first read seth’s response I interpreted it closer to how I felt about these meta posts, but then I read your response and I have no idea if he meant it that way or not, if he misunderstood you or you misunderstood him. Like him, I often feel shoved off to the side when participating in slash fandom, but I have never intended to tell anyone in slash fandom what they should or shouldnt write- i keep asking, am I saying things wrong? are they refusing to understand me because of gender?
No one should tell anyone else what to write or how- and when they do, the angry responses are more than justified, and I’ll gladly get behind them. Sometimes though, it seems that there’s an assumption that a guy will intentionally be disrespectful (or that if unintentional, he would have no desire to have it pointed out politely and given the opportunity to change the behaviour because he might actually have a sincere interest in getting along in a community, even if he didn’t have the socialisation to know all the appropriate things to say and do in advance). Merely having a slash fan be aware that you’re a guy and in slashers space, seems to evoke an immediate angry gut reaction, before we’ve had a chance to say or do much if anything.
If someone starts a discussion about “What do you find hot in slash?” and 20 people, presumably all women, reply with varied answers, and I add my own to the list saying something like , “Hm, I never thought of A, B, and C, those don’t it for me, but that makes such and such that I’ve seen in some fics make sense, thanks for this interesting discussion. Personally D, E and F (which several people above will have listed) really do it for me; I also sometimes put G in my fics since I like that (something no one else listed)” I would think that’s be fine- participating like everyone else- but half the time it seems I get jumped on for “We dont care if you like G! We’re not writing for you!”. I’m not telling anyone they should start writing G, I’m just saying I like it, just like I like a bunch of other things that they also like. People seem to look for differences they can find and use those to divide – instead of looking at the similarities. If people want to discuss the differences in an insightful way, that’s cool- maybe I like G because of gender, and D, E, F because of orientation… or maybe its not gendered- maybe its something in my cultural/ethnic/religious background, or something to do with age/generation, or whether or not one’s been a parent.
Another issue I’ve seen is where people take the “slash is by women for women” to the point of saying that IF a writer is a guy, his fic is NOT slash- even if they read it as slash before finding out the author’s gender, and all the major rec’ers in that particular fandom rec his work. There’s some discussions I just can’t join in on at all, no matter how cautious, because if one of those people are the topic poster or actively discussing, and they recognise me, it doesn’t matter how cautiously I speak, anything I say Is automatically invalid because of my gender. I know a lot of women have experienced that outside of fandom, and that sucks and needs to change, but other people treating you (generic, not you specifically) like shit, doesn’t justify your doing it to others- and in a community like slash fandom, that speaks a lot about equality and tolerance and liberal values etc (not just some fic themes, but slashers are often fwd’ing/discussing political articles, election info, etc too)- it stings more than discrimination I might get in everyday life which I can chalk up to ignorance.
Anyway, I’m not sure that point of all this rambling or if it will make any sense to the people here.
I like this garden, I planted those flowers over there in the corner, I appreciate all the other ones planted here, I like to discuss the flowers, I don’t want them changed…. but sometimes, I feel like the scratchiness of a wig is less a discomfort to put up with than trying to justify my liking the garden.
Alex wrote: There’s some discussions I just can’t join in on at all, no matter how cautious, because if one of those people are the topic poster or actively discussing, and they recognise me, it doesn’t matter how cautiously I speak, anything I say Is automatically invalid because of my gender. I know a lot of women have experienced that outside of fandom, and that sucks and needs to change, but other people treating you (generic, not you specifically) like shit, doesn’t justify your doing it to others-
Oh, here we go about reverse sexism.
*eyeroll*
Alex: I would think that’s be fine- participating like everyone else- but half the time it seems I get jumped on for “We dont care if you like G! We’re not writing for you!”.
Then I suggest you try to learn from how you manage to express yourself when you don’t get jumped on.
People seem to look for differences they can find and use those to divide – instead of looking at the similarities
Perhaps you could re-read this post, and the previous two posts in this sequence? None of these posts were inspired by “looking for differences and using those to divide” – they were all sparked by specific instances of fanboys waving male privilege around.
Another issue I’ve seen is where people take the “slash is by women for women” to the point of saying that IF a writer is a guy, his fic is NOT slash- even if they read it as slash before finding out the author’s gender, and all the major rec’ers in that particular fandom rec his work.
You’ll have to be more specific: as it stands it just reads like predictable reverse-sexism grumbling about some women not being as respectful of a man’s work as he thinks they ought to be.
(Oh, and FWIW: I would guess if you phrase a lot of your comments in this passive-aggressive just-because-I’m-a-man style, that would be why they get jumped on. It’s irritating.)
Then I suggest you try to learn from how you manage to express yourself when you don’t get jumped on.
Don’t hint at my masculine side? When I do that, I get a different response, even if sayign the same basic thing.
Perhaps you could re-read this post, and the previous two posts in this sequence?
Actually I did; I felt like commenting after seth and the replies he got. Please read my post more carefully- I did not accuse you of lookign for differences- I said that as an observation of a sub-group of people within the group known as slashers.
The guy that came in to the slash discussion at the con was an ass. I’m sorry that it happened and there’s no excuse for what he did, and it pisses me off just as much that asses like him maybe the first or only or most memorable interaction many slashers have with men in fandom and gives them a bad impression of all men. I appreciate when fellow fen remember that those assholes don’t represent everyone else of their gender, and some of us really love slash as it is and read and write it and have many similar ideals and interests as the rest of you.
…reverse-sexism grumbling about some women not being as respectful of a man’s work as he thinks they ought to be.
I didn’t say reverse sexism- people responding to my post did. I don’t think my writing and interest in slash deserves any more appreciation than yours. I think the anonomous nature of the internet is both a blessing and a curse- because if we don’t reveal our gender, we all get accepted equally- but when we do that, people (of all genders) don’t have their assumptions about others challenged.
*whistles, applauds, throws confetti*
Woo-hoo! Another man’s managed to make a thread ALL ABOUT HIM!
Well, maybe the ignorant guy at the con is indeed waving male privilege around. I don’t think you need go as far as it being a response to women being strong and assertive. Maybe he just didn’t like it.
I’ve read the by-women-for-women arguments, and that male-privilege essay many times, and I still don’t agree. It’s not for want of careful reading. The way I see it, slash is for slash fans. Most (but not all) readers and writers are women. It makes things untidy to include a small number of men but they’re definitely there. Slash – even defined as a female space – already encompasses different sexualities. We wouldn’t dream of saying that all slash readers are straight; why the dislike of including men? I’m assuming by-women-for-women includes straight and lesbian women who like to read f/f slash? So why not men who like to read m/m slash?
The men I’ve seen comment here are, I think, trying to explain why they feel uneasy at being edited out. I agree with what Seth and Alex have said about their experience. The minute they comment at all, they’re marked by their gender. You’ve slapped all of them down here, for example. I don’t think any guy active in slash is trying to change things any more than any woman would.
It’s a nice garden, but I’m not sure it needs the big fence and the padlocks.
*whistles, applauds, throws confetti*
Woo-hoo! Another man’s managed to make a thread ALL ABOUT HIM!
*Sigh* I thought this was a discussion about fandom, slash, and the gender issues of fanboys in a mostly female space? I am making an effort to dialogue about these issues in fandom. When one is a participant in the group being discussed, its difficult not to use at least some personal experiences as part of that discussion. That does not imply that I’m trying to make it all about me, any more than the original poster, in discussing their experience at a slash panel at Redemption is making it all about her as an individual. Some personal examples I think are necessary- theoretical discussion alone is alienating… people sharing stories about how they are affected by things is more moving and more illustrative. I’ve learned a lot and come to respect many things I previously had no/little knowledge or opinions about this way.
eta: I am assuming “it” = fandom/slash as a whole.
Alex, you are doing exactly what Yonmei has been describing. You are making a discussion about women slash fans issues with men’s privileged behavior in this space all about the needs of fanboys, which is an example of just such privileged behavior. Unbelievable. Except, not. Great examples that go on and on and on . . . .
Parthenia wrote: We wouldn’t dream of saying that all slash readers are straight; why the dislike of including men? I’m assuming by-women-for-women includes straight and lesbian women who like to read f/f slash? So why not men who like to read m/m slash?
When a genre, or a mode, of writing is defined by the power dynamics that lead to its creation, negating those power dynamics nullifies it.
When the members of a class of oppressors enter into a conversation between members of the class they oppress, it ceases to be the same conversation.
[...] (a great PiA post written by someone who isn’t me!), This is our garden. We like it., and So, why do fanboys hate fanfic, especially slash?. The common thread that I want to talk about (also addressed in So, why do fanboys hate fanfic, [...]
lavendertoo: You are making a discussion about women slash fans issues with men’s privileged behavior in this space all about the needs of fanboys
Ide Cyan: When the members of a class of oppressors enter into a conversation between members of the class they oppress, it ceases to be the same conversation.
Where am I making it about the “needs of fanboys”? I’ve said I don’t think anyone’s work deserves special attention. I said the guy at the slash panel was an ass. When the question of why do fan boys hate slash comes up, I thought it relevant to point out some guys do love slash the way it is, but its hard for us to be seen because it can be hard to participate when all guys are sometimes lumped together. Why is it wrong to jump into discussion about the group one is a member of?
Why does gender alone turn us into your oppressor? You don’t know if the men you meet online are held back by issues of race, sexual orientation, being transsexual or transvestites, having disabilities, religion, etc etc. I’ve had a lot of discrimination elsewhere- work, school, finding housing, violence etc… I know women have been given preference to me in jobs, etc.. I do not say this for pity or to imply my lot in life is any worse than anyone else’s here, only to point out that a man while not in the same boat (unless he was born a woman), might be in a rather similar boat.
Like many women slashers I’ve talked to have said, part of the appeal of slash fandom isn’t just about what is read and written, but being part of a community with progressive values and a shared interest/hobby where one can get away from all that oppressive crap in everyday life. If I had so much privledge in everyday life, that I am accused of having by some slashers, I wouldn’t need a place to “get away” to, I wouldn’t have felt it worth it to stick it out so long, and attempt to communicate better (even if clumsy and slow at it), in a community where my gender’s objectified and often excluded. And although I’m sometimes linked to things I don’t want to see in a community I love, I still do love it- I’ve made friends with a few other men, lots of wonderful women, learned a lot on issues and POV’s that I never would have been exposed to otherwise, and get to share in all that yummy hot slash.
I didn’t come here to fight. I thought I could explain something that seth’s post touched on, agree that guy at the slash panel was an ass and despite the obnoxious behaviour of him and others, not all fanboys hate slash or want it to change.
Parthenia: Well, maybe the ignorant guy at the con is indeed waving male privilege around. I don’t think you need go as far as it being a response to women being strong and assertive. Maybe he just didn’t like it.
If he just “didn’t like it” he could have done what the other non-slash fan in the audience at that panel did: shut up and listened. (We only found out she was a non-slash fan right at the end when she declined to join in the final wrap-up of everyone saying what characters they found sexy.) Instead he bothered and harassed the workshop, trying to prevent us from discussing what we wanted to talk about.
I’ve read the by-women-for-women arguments, and that male-privilege essay many times, and I still don’t agree. It’s not for want of careful reading. The way I see it, slash is for slash fans. Most (but not all) readers and writers are women. It makes things untidy to include a small number of men but they’re definitely there. Slash – even defined as a female space – already encompasses different sexualities. We wouldn’t dream of saying that all slash readers are straight; why the dislike of including men?
Why express it as a “dislike” of including men? While male slash fans may want, as Alex says, to be “noticed”, and because of male privilege, may feel they’re entitled to that notice, they are in fact the tiniest of tiny minorities in slash fandom – one in a hundred? Maybe less. I don’t think this is just a dislike of the subject matter, or a lack of attraction: I think that men in slash fandom, to participate, must give up all of their male privilege – and as Alex and Seth have both demonstrated, even men who want to be slash fans have trouble accepting this, and bemoan and complain about how they’re treated.
Some slash fans enjoy the community as all-women: some slash fans like it when male slash fans show up: but the fact remains – it is an all-female community with a few men here and there, who do not by their tiny minority ever make it a mixed-sex community.
It’s a nice garden, but I’m not sure it needs the big fence and the padlocks.
*sigh* No big fence, no padlocks. Alex and Seth are both free to write slash, read it, and join in fan discussions. What they are not able to do, which they evidently miss, is make slash fans pay attention to them by their maleness, or give them the respect that men are taught to feel they deserve.
Ide Cyan said:
When a genre, or a mode, of writing is defined by the power dynamics that lead to its creation, negating those power dynamics nullifies it.
When the members of a class of oppressors enter into a conversation between members of the class they oppress, it ceases to be the same conversation.
I’ve read those sentences several times with no clue what they mean.
The second one sounds close to: ‘Now that you’ve admitted that you talk to men, your opinion is of no value.’
Yonmei:
I think that men in slash fandom, to participate, must give up all of their male privilege
To the point of being entirely silent?
Actually, I think what I’m belatedly realising is that this blog has a political world-view which, like many religions and ideologies, involves interpreting everything to fit that view. Yes, the title should have been a clue, but there are many interpretations of feminism.
Personally, I don’t agree with the narrowness of your definition of the slash audience and I also realise that there’s really little point in attempting discussion if I don’t share your world-view.
I feel somewhat disempowered by being unable to understand the language that you’re using. I’ve tried to join in discussions like these because I’m unhappy at the way academic (or maybe academic-counding, I don’t know) fans attempt to represent the views of all fans, and I think it’s important that alternative views and philosophies are raised.
Parthenia: To the point of being entirely silent?
It would help if you responded to what I actually said, rather than re-interpreting what I said through your own world-view and responding to that.
Actually, I think what I’m belatedly realising is that this blog has a political world-view which, like many religions and ideologies, involves interpreting everything to fit that view.
That’s an odd comment, since your sole response to me indicates that you have a political world-view which interpreted what I said to fit your view.
I said: Alex and Seth are both free to write slash, read it, and join in fan discussions. What they are not able to do, which they evidently miss, is make slash fans pay attention to them by their maleness, or give them the respect that men are taught to feel they deserve.
You seem to have interpreted my pointing out that men in slash fandom are not able to make slash fans pay attention to them/show them respect by the usual exercise of male privilege, as “being silent”. Removal of male privilege does not silence men: it merely means they have to get attention by having something interesting/worthwhile to say, just like any other slash fan.
Personally, I don’t agree with the narrowness of your definition of the slash audience
*blinks a bit* If you’re trying to argue that male slash fans are more than a tiny minority in slash fandom, you’ll have to show me where you’re getting that from. I’ve been in slash fandom since 1983, and that’s not – never has been, still isn’t – my experience. Where is your experience of all these male slash fans coming from?
I’m unhappy at the way academic (or maybe academic-counding, I don’t know) fans attempt to represent the views of all fans, and I think it’s important that alternative views and philosophies are raised.
I’m not an academic. Nor am I trying to represent the views of all fans – any more than I assume you are. But I can speak from my experience – my 25th anniversary in slash fandom will fall in October 2008 – and in these three essays I am speaking from my experience, though you seem to want to set out to deny this.
A blog doesn’t have a point of view, but bloggers do … This blog actually hosts many different kinds of feminists. It resists definition and limitation by any of the individual feminist bloggers. And it also resists definition by commenters.
My thoughts for Parthenia or anyone else who is freaking out at being castigated or critiqued or disagreed with or excluded: I certainly don’t agree with everything Yonmei or Ide Cyan or other cobloggers are writing on this blog. But sometimes the answer is just to shut up and read, or listen.
alex, it’s not rocket science. If you want to prove that not all guys are there to be jerks, then DON’T BE A JERK.
This isn’t specific to slash communities, it’s good advice in general. If you’re a white person in a COC or a man in a mostly female community, then you need to deal with the fact that you’re not automatically going to be fawned over and given cookies. You might even be treated with suspicion, or not treated exactly as politely or deferentially as you might like, You might take a few lumps that you consider unfair. If you’re sincere, you’ll accept that and hang in there, not whine and complain and demand better treatment and respect for your stories about how you’re really oppressed too and all those women who took your jobs.
You’re talking about walking in to an already established community and it’s just not all about you. Like Laura says, stop being so defensive and shut up and listen. If you do not act like an over entitled jerk, then eventually people will realize you are not acting like an over entitled jerk.
And I know you’re going to say that you don’t act like a jerk in the forums, you’re just being picked on because of blanket hatred of anyone who isn’t female, but I really encourage you to consider that you don’t believe that you’re acting badly here, but a lot of people are disagreeing.
From my point of view, Alex has not behaved badly and has made some good points. The problem is that they aren’t really addressing the topic of the post: boorish domineering behavior by hostile men. I would like to hear some comments from a male perspective that take on that topic, rather than the variations of “I’m not that kind of guy, but [something not really related].” Any takers?
Thank you Therem. That I felt compelled to jump in after seth’s post may be the or part of the communication problem. I’m also more used to places like LJ, where at least the comms I frequent, tangental threads are common, so we might be clashing not just on gender issues but variations in social rules in the parts of fandom we participate in. The only thing I can think of to have done differently is to have made a much more brief post and asked if tangenting onto that topic would be welcomed or not at this time. Because this isn’t a discussion forum I’m used to, I probably should have thought of checking on a social rule like that, so I apologise for that.
I didn’t respond to the initial post because I didn’t have much to say about it, beyond what I did say in my comments- the guy was an ass. I’m not sure what else to say about it- I don’t know how to solve the problem and make outsiders understand/respect what we do- god, I wish I did! I agree with the article referenced about “gender harassment”, but I can’t think of how to articulate why I agree with it, without touching on personal experiences and I fear that would be interpreted as trying to make it about me.
If I had been at the slash panel, I’d have told him to get lost too. If it happened to people I’m close friends with in fandom, we’d rant together in IM or over pie and coffee, and then we’d go do something fun. I wasn’t at that slash panel, and don’t know the people here in a way where we could hang out and rant together.
so all I feel I can say on the topic is, that I agree with the article and applying it to the situation, and I think that guy at the slash panel was an ass.
Well, I think it’s important for guys to speak up and call other men on their male privilege. Just like it’s important for white people to call other white people on race privilege. So it’s good to hear that people like Alex (I assume Alex is a guy but am honestly not sure) can recognize assdom.
… fwiw, I should have been clear that I wasn’t really critiquing Alex’s behavior per se. More, I was trying to say that sometimes if people are getting pissy at you, whether rightly or wrongly, it is sometimes better all around to just let it go. It’s not always clear that someone is in the right or in the wrong, and letting it go is useful behavior.
cheers to all.
Hi Laura, I’m a guy, but I’m not sure if I’d be taken any more seriously than other slashers at a panel like that, since most likely I’d be wearing a skirt, and he’d probably mock that too. In offline situations when I’m not, or online when appearance doesn’t matter, I do speak up when I recognise it.
And thanks for clarifying on the “letting go” issue. I agree with that. A few years ago I would have keep at it. While I still have feelings about certain things, after a few exchanges, I can see this isn’t the time or place to get into them. That’s something I learned through fandom.
I hope we can all move on without any hard feelings on either side?
I’m loving this disemvowelled thing. Brilliant!
I wonder if the gender harrassment from the Salon article isn’t a form of hazing, too?
Not sure how you’re defining “hazing” here – I think the more modern “a fundamental violation of human dignity” version? Back before the word “hazing” was outlawed and limited to stuff that was dangerous or seriously demeaning, groups that indulged in hazing considered it a way to bond, in that someone who passed through the hazing was accepted as a member in full. A lot of (usually male, in my experience) groups still “haze” in the sense of hassling people and giving them some grief (often just verbal) to “see if they can take it” or otherwise test people to see if they can fit with the group. In my experience, female groups are maybe more likely to test new members by seeing if they “know the codes” or “speak the language”, which can often take the form of teasing as well, but it’s a far more subtle teasing easily countered by those “in on the joke.”
I wouldn’t call sexual harassment hazing because in the mind of the harasser there is no possible way for the woman to ever be accepted as a full member of the group – the sexual harassment is specifically designed to keep her out, not offered as an opportunity to join. OTOH, I think some guys who are willing to accept her as a member of the group mistake sexual harassment for a form of hazing and tolerate it when they wouldn’t if they understood what was really going on.
More often, perhaps, guys who are willing to accept women in their group feel sexual harassment is just something she has to accept in order to enjoy something she loves, which attitude pisses me off. I suppose most guys who take that perspective think sexual harassment is sexually motivated, and I should cut them more slack. But at the same time I’m faintly astonished that there are still females who apparently haven’t clued into the fact that sexual harassment is about power rather than sex – I had that figured out in high school in the 1970′s, and they’re only now doing studies that support it? What’s with that?
alex,
The first time I saw a guy reamed out for an “all about me” post on a thread about male privilege, as an observer I thought some of the posters were over reacting. But y’know, after you see five or six threads started on the subject derailed by a guy saying he deals with reverse discrimination, it does get pretty old. Not least because the guys always say the same thing, but mostly (for me) because the actual topic then gets neglected.
Don’t have a lot to say on the original post, but don’t want to neglect it either, so…
As a primarily gen fan (I do read some slash – mostly the God-Awful OTT stuff but also good stuff if someone I trusts recs it), I think it isn’t just the slash that sets fanboys off. Some of them are infuriated about gen fic as well. I think Lee Kottner comes closer to the fundamental issue with, “We’ve made a club that doesn’t include them, and we’re playing with their toys!” Yeah, they particularly don’t like what slashers do with “their” characters – but ultimately they are offended with the very idea that women are playing with their toys without inviting them, and without letting them lay down the rules of the game.
credit where credit’s due: I believe that Teresa Nielsen Hayden gets the credit for the concept of disemvowelling and someone else named it that.
shilohmm, I hear what you’re saying about it “getting old”, and that can also work against getting heard. That it’s brought up again and again, brings up a question of why?. I’d be interested in discussing it, but another post, not this one, would I think be more appropriate at this point?
I think Lee Kottner comes closer to the fundamental issue with, “We’ve made a club that doesn’t include them, and we’re playing with their toys!”
This seems to be moving in a direction of profic vs fanfic to me, commercialism vs community/culture; female pro-writers can be quite anti fanfic (Anne Rice, etc). Of course, I understand there’s the argument that the mainstream / media / commercial-world / politics / etc is male dominated, but I think the gender dividing lines aren’t so clear cut and that there’s a number of other issues overlapping here.
shilohmm: But at the same time I’m faintly astonished that there are still females who apparently haven’t clued into the fact that sexual harassment is about power rather than sex – I had that figured out in high school in the 1970’s, and they’re only now doing studies that support it? What’s with that?
It’s useful to be able to prove to men who don’t have that direct experience that sexual harassment is about power rather than sex.
A lot of “Well, duh!” research is useful in that way…
A lot of “Well, duh!” research is useful in that way…
Oh, agreed. I’m just amazed it took this long for anyone to do said research.
Laura Q,
Thankee for the info.
Therem: From my point of view, Alex has not behaved badly and has made some good points. The problem is that they aren’t really addressing the topic of the post: boorish domineering behavior by hostile men.
Well, yes. Alex wants – it appears – first of all to be identified as not a member of the group being slammed. Which is easy enough: all he has to do is not behave in a hostile, boorish and domineering manner. The problem is, while not worthy of disemvowellment, his comments on this thread have been mostly offtopic. Which is not a killer offense, by any means, but leads easily to the judgement that Alex is, while not hostile, boorish/domineering, as he doesn’t want to allow us to discuss the issue of boorish, domineering, and hostile men, unless we assure him that we do not consider him to be one of them. There’s another Dale Spender book which discusses this kind of male behavior: Reflecting Men At Twice Their Natural Size.
Alex: This seems to be moving in a direction of profic vs fanfic to me, commercialism vs community/culture; female pro-writers can be quite anti fanfic (Anne Rice, etc).
Fairly obviously, a writer only has to take a position on fanfic if fanfic is being written about their work.
Just off the top of my head (and this seems like an interesting topic for a feministsf post, I may sometime do the research) female writers tend to write the kind of books that inspire fanfic far more often than male writers do. Besides Anne Rice: Robin Hobb, Anne McCaffrey, Jacqueline Lichtenberg, Marion Zimmer Bradley, Lynn Flewelling. I’m sticking to writers who knew about the fanfic only, and writers whose books inspired fanfic without any movie tie-in. (J. K. Rowling, in all honesty, I can’t tell: it may be that her fans would have written fanfic with or without the movie, but the first panel on Harry Potter fanfic I ever went to was very explicitly inspired by the movie.)
Robin Hobb hates fanfic because it makes clear her fans are interpreting her books differently from the way she wanted them read. Anne McCaffrey and Jacqueline Lichtenberg did a “licenced fanfic” thing, inspired by Marion Zimmer Bradley’s attitude (and one well-publicised disaster that came out of Bradley’s happy attitude towards fanfic about Darkover). Lynn Flewelling has said that fanfic in and of itself is not the problem, but her fans must never put her in the position where she might have read it or officially acknowledge its existence.
Male writers? Arthur Conan Doyle, of course: Patrick O’Brien, though a lot of Master and Commander fanfic is definitely from-the-movie even if the fans have read the books. Likewise J.R.R. Tolkien. We can’t say, on this evidence, that male writers are more or less anti-fanfic than female writers: none of the male writers I’ve named would ever have known that fanfic was being written, indirectly or directly, about their books.
I remember first writing fanfic based on a book by Jules Verne when I was seven years old. I didn’t know what fanfic was — I called it “une suite” (a sequel).
Illustrated it and brought it to school and everything. I wish I could still find a copy of that.
Male writers whose work has inspired fanfic and who are alive in a position to give an opinion about it (though I can’t say what that opinion would be): Neil Gaiman, Terry Pratchett, Dan Brown, Philip Pullman, Lemony Snicket…
(J. K. Rowling, in all honesty, I can’t tell: it may be that her fans would have written fanfic with or without the movie, but the first panel on Harry Potter fanfic I ever went to was very explicitly inspired by the movie.)
Oh yeah, there was a significant amount of HP fanfic before the movies. The movies though certainly made it sky rocket though. The movies also made pairings or characters much more popular. Snape pairings got a huge boost once people saw Alan Rickman portray him.
(though I can’t say what that opinion would be): Neil Gaiman…
Gaiman discussed fanfic in his blog, saying he had “no opinion” as long as it was noncommercial, but seems to be more on the pro-side than on the fence, as he says that most of it seems to be a “good” thing and that he has to try to remember to not smile when he hears about someone winning a local writing contest using a character of his. http://www.neilgaiman.com/journal/2002/04/in-relation-to-current-burning-topic.asp
Okay, wait wait, I think I’ve got the gist of it: I don’t write slash. Everything in fandom must be set up into a largely false either/or dichotomy that has no practical basis in the real world.
I guess I agree with Parthenia, in that you’re evaluating slash and fandom discourse from one ideological standpoint, and it happens to be one that often makes little sense to me… which is odd considering how much overlap there is between our two ideologies. Of course you would accuse me of trying to, oh, make it all about me and my “male privilege.” Of course you would accuse me of trying to change things and have it all my way, or of trying to tell others what they should or should not do. When, to be honest, I don’t give much of a damn about getting extra attention for being male. (Seriously, what special attention was that again? I’ve heard about how, oh, gay guys get fawned over by female slash fans and that equals oppression, but I’ve yet to receive my government-allotted fawning. And actually, let’s keep it that way.) Nor do I think slash fans should change how or what they’re writing for my benefit (although, like most people, I have certain things that I like more than others and that I wish more people would write).
My main objection, I suppose, is not even entirely to the “exclusion” of men from slash fandom. You’re right, if we had more power and numbers, maybe it would make more sense to break away and half-heartedly thumb our noses. (“Splitters!”) For now, we don’t, so instead we stay and play in your sandbox; and, like it or not, the presence of people who don’t agree with you changes your sandbox. But no, I think my main objection is to the “they’re not gay and so gay men need not apply” theory of feminist-sanctioned manlove. That just doesn’t sit well with me, not only because I’m gay but because I evaluate fandom work and discourse from a queer perspective rather than a feminist one. To me, slash (at its best) is about re-characterizing heterosexual and mainstream society norms (as you said), and about redefining popular media in such a way that “queer” (which encompasses not just gays, but everyone who falls outside of accepted gender and sexual norms–yes, feminists too, by golly) audiences can relate to and identify with. It’s a re-imagining of the standard culture to make it our own… to say “they’re in a relationship but not gay” seems to be a little on the have-your-cake-and-eat-it-too side. That slash is generally described strictly as being “by women, for women” also strikes me as slightly odd just because I tend to concentrate on writing for an audience that’s not necessarily gender-specific. Of course there is writing that is targeted toward different demographic groups, so maybe this shouldn’t be so odd to me; it’s just that it tends to go against what I’ve personally observed of slash writers. And that’s a point unto itself: slash fans are not one large, cohesive unit. My tribe is not your tribe and vice versa.
In response to your belligerent fanboy, I wonder… is he offended for misogynist/male privilege reasons? Or is there an undercurrent of homophobia to be found among straight fanboys? I think the majority of human beings can become, well, assholes when we are confronted with something we don’t agree with (and I’m not excusing him, mind you, just observing). I won’t argue against the fact that even fandom has its “good ol’ boy” culture, which was influenced by the male-dominated sci-fi underground of the ’50s and beyond. And it tends to be the remnants of this culture that influence the laughable “this is what fandom should be” arguments. So, yes, I completely understand that there is a cultural set-up there that begets a dismissal of female fans and of activities that many (but not all) female fans participate in. I also have no doubt that some men also feel threatened by women who are their equals when it comes to being strong, angry, and argumentative. But is this solely a male vs. female argument? Or does the subject matter (that is, of homosexual male relationships) also come into play? Some fans come into fandom with a religious background that influences how they feel about and react to phenomena like slash. Some are misogynist. Some are homophobic. Some are simply not comfortable with deviations from what is considered mainstream or “accepted.” That deviation might be a homosexual relationship, women writing about homosexual relationships, or both. Some men who feel threatened react with harassment, regrettably, online and off.
Oh, and I happened to read that “Fandom and Male Privilege” article whenever it was first published. I understood it just fine on the first read, and while I don’t agree with all of what it says, I don’t disagree either. But I’m starting to like it less and less now that I seem to get a link to it every time gender in fandom comes up and there’s a disagreement. (Someone is going to tell me that I need to read it again, right? You know, until I agree with it. Strike up Ode to Joy and tape my eyelids open!) With regard to the particular quote you picked, I personally would have no problem hanging out at that slumber party. I would just find it weird if it were still considered to be “girls only!” while I was in the room.
Okay, let’s take Seth’s long comment piece-by-piece:
Begin by setting up a passive-aggressive straw man:
Okay, wait wait, I think I’ve got the gist of it: I don’t write slash. Everything in fandom must be set up into a largely false either/or dichotomy that has no practical basis in the real world.
I have never expressed an opinion about whether or not what Seth writes is slash. (Aside from his comments here, I don’t know if I’ve ever read anything Seth’s written.) The second sentence is a statement that corresponds to nothing I’ve said: classic straw-manning.
I guess I agree with Parthenia, in that you’re evaluating slash and fandom discourse from one ideological standpoint, and it happens to be one that often makes little sense to me… which is odd considering how much overlap there is between our two ideologies.
If what I’m saying about slash, from the basis of 24 years involvement in slash fandom, makes little sense to Seth, Seth asserts this is because I have “one ideological standpoint” and he has another.
Of course you would accuse me of trying to, oh, make it all about me and my “male privilege.” Of course you would accuse me of trying to change things and have it all my way, or of trying to tell others what they should or should not do.
Since in fact this is just what Seth is doing in this comment, it’s ironic that he presents it as a ridiculous accusation on my part.
When, to be honest, I don’t give much of a damn about getting extra attention for being male. (Seriously, what special attention was that again? I’ve heard about how, oh, gay guys get fawned over by female slash fans and that equals oppression, but I’ve yet to receive my government-allotted fawning. And actually, let’s keep it that way.)
When a man asserts that he doesn’t get any special attention for being male, which he identifies as being “fawned over”, he really needs to go read the Male Privilege Checklist. But he probably won’t.
Nor do I think slash fans should change how or what they’re writing for my benefit (although, like most people, I have certain things that I like more than others and that I wish more people would write).
And yet…
My main objection, I suppose, is not even entirely to the “exclusion” of men from slash fandom.
Let me repeat again, since Seth apparently hasn’t noticed: men are not excluded from slash fandom. They can read slash, write slash, go to slash conventions, and join online discussions about slash.
You’re right, if we had more power and numbers, maybe it would make more sense to break away and half-heartedly thumb our noses. (”Splitters!”) For now, we don’t, so instead we stay and play in your sandbox; and, like it or not, the presence of people who don’t agree with you changes your sandbox.
This is such a wrong-headed statement that it’s hard to untwist. Men are not excluded from slash fandom. There just aren’t ever very many men who want to hang around slash fandom on the only terms they can: without any male privilege. With only the right that any slash fan has: if they can find something interesting to say in a debate, they’ll be listened to. If they can write slash stories other slash fans want to read, they’ll be read. But if they’re accustomed to (and what men aren’t so accustomed?) entering a debate which is all or mostly women, and having their opinions listened to and their contributions valued because they are men, the absence of privilege is going to feel like exclusion to men who have nothing else. But wanting to change slash fandom so that what they have to say will be considered interesting, or what they have to write will be considered worth reading, just isn’t possible. They have to be able to contribute on equal terms with other slash fans: if they can’t do that, all the male privilege in the world won’t buy them in.
But no, I think my main objection is to the “they’re not gay and so gay men need not apply” theory of feminist-sanctioned manlove.
This is nonsense, as Seth would know if he were at all familiar with slash fandom. Slash stories sometimes deal with contemporary political issues, including LGBT equality: sometimes they don’t. Reasons for dealing with such issues or not is a whole separate debate – but it’s got nothing to do with the gender of the person writing the slash stories. This is just another straw man.
What is true – factually, statistically true – is that the vast majority of the people writing and reading slash stories are women. Seth cannot change that by arguing that it ought not to be so, or that somehow “feminists” in slash fandom prevent gay men from “applying” to write slash stories. (Repetitively: no “application” is necessary. No locked gate, no secret password.)
That just doesn’t sit well with me, not only because I’m gay but because I evaluate fandom work and discourse from a queer perspective rather than a feminist one.
This is probably true. And I evaluate fandom work and discourse from a queer perspective and a feminist one, along with many other slash fans. The two are, though Seth does not appear to be aware of this, not contradictory or exclusive. (See where he was arguing above that “Everything in fandom must be set up into a largely false either/or dichotomy”?)
To me, slash (at its best) is about re-characterizing heterosexual and mainstream society norms (as you said), and about redefining popular media in such a way that “queer” (which encompasses not just gays, but everyone who falls outside of accepted gender and sexual norms–yes, feminists too, by golly) audiences can relate to and identify with.
*swoons* I’m overcome to discover that Seth is willing to allow that a feminist can “fall outside of accepted gender and sexual norms”.
It’s a re-imagining of the standard culture to make it our own… to say “they’re in a relationship but not gay” seems to be a little on the have-your-cake-and-eat-it-too side.
Nevertheless, as any oldtime denizen of slash fandom can tell you, some slash fans do get off on the idea that two straight men are passionately in love with each other and bonking like Vulcans in pon farr. And many slash stories – often, though not always, those set in another time or place from 20th/21st century Earth – just don’t deal with contemporary sexual orientation divisions/identities at all. But they’re still slash stories.
That slash is generally described strictly as being “by women, for women” also strikes me as slightly odd just because I tend to concentrate on writing for an audience that’s not necessarily gender-specific. Of course there is writing that is targeted toward different demographic groups, so maybe this shouldn’t be so odd to me; it’s just that it tends to go against what I’ve personally observed of slash writers. And that’s a point unto itself: slash fans are not one large, cohesive unit. My tribe is not your tribe and vice versa.
But again: slash fandom is – whether Seth likes it or not – mostly made up of women. So if Seth is trying to write slash stories, he is writing for an audience that he ought to know is mostly female. He may not think of it that way (I admit when I’m writing I don’t) but it is a fact. Someone who is trying to write a slash story is trying to write a story which mostly women will read. I’ve never met a slash writer who was unaware of this: though it’s true that it’s such a given that most slash writers would never make a big deal of it. And of course slash fans aren’t ” one large, cohesive unit” – anyone with the slightest familiarity with the flamewars and tiffs and feuds over the past thirty years would know that. The more Seth writes about what he knows about slash fandom, the less he sounds like someone with much familiarity with it.
In response to your belligerent fanboy, I wonder… is he offended for misogynist/male privilege reasons? Or is there an undercurrent of homophobia to be found among straight fanboys?
Again, this false dichotomy. Of course the original Redemption fanboy’s belief that a macho parachutist like Bodie could not be gay was homophobic. But his belief that he had a right to walk into a room full of women and disrupt the panel discussion with his newbie questions, and his offense at being asked – then told – not to do this, was unquestionably male privilege. Which Seth, who is behaving as if he has a right to do the same thing, may not recognise as he himself has the same feeling.
So, yes, I completely understand that there is a cultural set-up there that begets a dismissal of female fans and of activities that many (but not all) female fans participate in. I also have no doubt that some men also feel threatened by women who are their equals when it comes to being strong, angry, and argumentative. But is this solely a male vs. female argument? Or does the subject matter (that is, of homosexual male relationships) also come into play?
Again with the false dichotomy. Actually, there is a trifold issue: the queer nature of slash, whether saffic or m/m slash; the male privilege issue of men feeling threatened by women doing our own thing and asserting that their judgement is unimportant to us (which is where Seth is coming from, I think); and the discomfort many men feel at being subject to the female gaze – what I discussed in this article that Seth is “responding” to: women taking what men see as the “male role”, and passing judgement on men.
. Some are simply not comfortable with deviations from what is considered mainstream or “accepted.” That deviation might be a homosexual relationship, women writing about homosexual relationships, or both. Some men who feel threatened react with harassment, regrettably, online and off.
As it appears Seth feels threatened by slash fans writing about same-sex relationships for other women: and by slash stories that don’t necessarily deal with contemporary gay issues, or deal with them from a queer feminist perspective.
Oh, and I happened to read that “Fandom and Male Privilege” article whenever it was first published. I understood it just fine on the first read, and while I don’t agree with all of what it says, I don’t disagree either. But I’m starting to like it less and less now that I seem to get a link to it every time gender in fandom comes up and there’s a disagreement.
[Note: it was first published on livejournal, 7th November 2005, and has gathered over a thousand comments since then. It was crossposted to The Fanfic Symposium, where I linked to it before.]
Which finally wraps it up: Seth is “okay” with having slash fans write about male privilege in fandom – but he’s evidently really unhappy with a shared understanding between slash fans that excludes him, not because he’s not allowed in, but because he is unwilling to accept the female experience as more valid than his own when understanding male privilege. And there’s another quote from that essay that seems relevant to Seth’s argument here:
What male slash fans have to “do” to get their interests represented in slash fandom is to be interesting, lively, contributors to debate and writers of excellent* slash stories. That Seth seems to feel this shouldn’t be necessary, that gay male slash fans just ought to have their interests represented… is more than slightly emblematic of the male privilege he earlier disavowed.
*”excellent” having a highly variable and subjective definition. Ahem.
I’m finding this an interesting discussion, and I’m mostly agreeing with your argument, but I’d like to take issue with one of your earlier comments;
If you want to join in metadiscussions about slash, this is also possible – so long as you do so as a slash fan, and not as a gay man arguing that you know how gay men experience the world, and this or that in a slash story isn’t it. Because then you are not trying to join in metadiscussions as just another slash fan: you are trying to distort metadiscussions about slash with male privilege.
Why? Because being a member of a small demographic group that gets a lot of attention from storytellers who are not members of that group does feel somewhat unsettling. Sometimes it feels exploitative. Which isn’t a problem so long as you accept that a belief in freedom of expression entails a belief that it’s okay for people to write things that make you feel bad, and that it’s your responsibility to respond to these things by writing what you feel should be written.
It’s a bit of a double standard to say you enjoy the literary frisson of male homosexuality but would rather those pesky male homosexuals kept their feelings about your writing to themselves. I definitely agree that they should plant their own garden if they’re unhappy in ours (though the slashbois I know have never voiced any discomfort about their position in slashdom), but I don’t think ‘shut up and go away’ is the answer I’d personally give in response to such concerns. I know I’d feel pretty hurt if a writer responded to me that way if I express concerns about portrayals of my fringe demographic (namely people whose mothers died when they were children – lots of eyerolling at sf/fantasy to be had there).
It’s a bit of a double standard to say you enjoy the literary frisson of male homosexuality but would rather those pesky male homosexuals kept their feelings about your writing to themselves.
I didn’t say that, though.
Look, as a for-example (similar things have happened, but I’m making this one up to avoid any personal embarrassment): a fan writes a story about Jim and Blair from The Sentinel, in which – a typical slash story scenario – one of them thought he was straight till he realised he was falling in love with the other, and the other had a tragic affair in the past with a man who was killed, and the two of them talk at length about their feelings for each other to each other and to Jim’s boss in the police force and to Blair’s mom, and there’s a lot of staring across the room and Jim zones out thinking about Blair and they don’t actually have sex till two-thirds of the way through the story and then they both have angst about it and then they don’t have sex again till five pages before the end, when they have great sex that lasts for four and a half pages. Then they declare undying devotion to each other and fall asleep in each other’s arms and the last paragraph makes it clear they’re going to be together forever, totally monogamous, pair-bonded, spiritually at one.
(I’ve just made that story up. Any resemblance to an actual slash story, TS or not, is purely coincidental.)
I read a lot of gay porn and a lot of fiction about/by/for gay men, and I know a fair number of gay men, and I can practically write in my head the critique that could be written about that scenario from a gay man’s perspective, whether as a porn story (not enough sex! Not enough loving description of the penises! Wholly unrealistic physical descriptions of how two men have penetrative sex!) or as a fictional depiction of the lives of gay men in a small US city in the late 20th century, one of whom works for the police force, or even just as a gay romance novel. Indeed, I have both read (and listened to!) a number of similar criticisms by gay men about individual slash stories or about slash as a genre: and in fact back when I was writing Blake’s 7 and Professionals fanfic (the 1980s) when I would have identified as a gay activist (I’d identify as a LGBT activist or queer activist now, 20 years later) I made similar criticisms myself – that stories about Bodie and Doyle as lovers didn’t deal realistically with the issues that two gay men in the security services really would have faced. A close gay male friend has pointed out to me things he’s sure are just wrong about slash stories I’ve written, because he knows (and he’s undoubtedly right!) that two men together negotiating sexual contact for the first time don’t behave like that.
But, here’s the thing:
Slash stories are not written for gay men.
They are written for slash fans.
Slash fandom includes gay men – and lesbians, and bisexual people, and pansexual people, and trans men, and trans women. You can write stories that are identifiably slash and represent accurately the social experience of two gay men in the security services, or in the police force (I like to think I managed to do it) but some slash stories simply aren’t about the 20th century experience of being gay (Picard/Q; Spock/McCoy; Avon/Blake) unless the writer wants to use that as a metaphorical structure for her story. (M. Fae Glasgow did, very successfully, in some of her Blake’s 7 stories. But other writers – including several of the lesbian B7 fanfic writers – simply ignored the 20th century experience of being gay because they were writing stories set in the 30th century.)
Slash fanfic is recognizably different, in structure and in emotional emphasis, from gay porn. It’s also recognizably different from most fictional depictions of gay men by gay men. Slash is it’s own genre: it exists on its own terms: and gay men who want to impose their own notions of how men behave on characters in a slash story, may be right about the gay male experience, but are attempting to impose non-slash expectations on a slash story using male privilege to justify it. They can’t do that.
(It is interesting that two people, so far, have assumed that when I say gay men can’t have male privilege inside slash fandom, but must operate in slash fandom simply as slash fans – if they can – have assumed I meant that gay men must “shut up and go away”. Is this the general experience – that a man denied male privilege will not want to participate as an equal?)
… the difference being that slash isn’t really about teh gay male experience but about women’s experiences and fantasies, “using” male/male sex. it’s drag.
however, while it’s true that there are lots of newbies who don’t get that, and those newbies can be men coming in to a predominantly female community with privilege underlying their newbie interrogations … and while it’s true that slash, as currently “defined” both by production and criticism is a female-produced drag of male homosex … IMO (1) those truths don’t wholly negate the original interrogation, and (2) the language of “shut up and go away”, “impose”, etc. (used by all parties to this discussion) is an unhelpful metaphoric description of the actual activities of reading and writing.
on the first point, just briefly: there’s no way that writing slash doesn’t raise questions of “writing the other”. drag, even if not intended to be an accurate representation or even a representation at all, nevertheless is taken by some to be an intended representation. in appropriating the form of gay male sex, there is some representation of “other”. that representation is inflected by the fact that, as opposed to most problematic “writing the other” situations that involve a majority culture doing a minority culture; in slash, it’s a minority culture writing about another, orthogonal, minority culture. but i don’t think we can honestly dismiss the questions raised simply by defining them out of the discussion. (especially since the genre of slash is rather more self-defining than most.) … this issue hasn’t really been raised here for the most part, but i’m putting it in because yonmei’s last comment strikes me as a rather broad brush.
the other thing i wanted to flag is that a lot of space-based language has gotten used in this and similar discussions. we are 3-dimensional creatures and space/place is a comfortable metaphor, but it seems to me that the thinking through that metaphor also carries the risk that we trigger our space-protective anxieties. we’re talking about the activities of communication: speaking, reading, writing. … gardens, toys, places, “in”, “out”, exclusion, control, take-over are metaphoric language based on walls, land, physicality, excludability. it doesn’t really work with communications, which are viral and reproducible and mutable. in other words, nobody is being “excluded” and nobody is being “taken over”: people are talking about works of art (also a type of talking). … not to deny that socio-economic-political positionings inflect our communication styles, but simply to pull out, very clearly, what yonmei and other commentators have sometimes pointed out: that none of these “definitions” or “critiques” are about excluding or taking over; they are about communications.