I just wanted to say again that I'm sorry for sounding like (well, "sounding like" hell, I guess I was) condemning your and a lot of other people's style of fanning, and I need to shut up about it before I lose every last slash-inclining fan-friend that I have. ^^;; I swear I'm not sitting around in fandom feeling unappreciated and miserable; I do not resent slashers for having something I don't, and of course I think people are entitled to feel any way they please about canon. Obviously, though, I had a bit of a pent-up whine. ^^;;
Regarding the rest of your comment, I find it completely fascinating because it is so very counter-intuitive to me. For me, writing romance (slash or het) has nothing to do with securing a happy-ever-after for the characters (which, in my head, they already have) and everything to do with exploring feelings and character dynamics that aren't possible in a platonic relationship. The idea of sexually pairing off two characters who already have a close and satisfying relationship in order to assure their happily-ever-after is so phenomenally UNlike how I view sex and romance that I have trouble even wrapping my brain around it. I mean, from a sociological standpoint, it makes perfect sense to me, considering our society's emphasis on happy-ever-after and romance as the pinnacle of human relationships. It just doesn't really work for me on an emotional level.
It does make a whole whopping lot of sense out of the whole "we're not gay" phenomenon, though -- which I never really believed existed (I don't really think it does in SGA fandom) until reading some meta that pointed to stories of that nature, and my brain had to do MAJOR pretzel-twisting to comprehend it! The way you explain it, though, makes more sense out of it -- that it's basically friendship given the social seal of approval to be friendship forever, which comes by way of sex ... basically, exploiting a loophole in society's standards for love and foreverness. That is ... odd. ^^ And I can see why actual gay people are rather offended by it. But yeah, I can see why people would put the two together in that way.
(WTF, LJ's spell checker claims "foreverness" is a real word, but not "fandom"? Hi, spell checker, confused much?)
no subject
Regarding the rest of your comment, I find it completely fascinating because it is so very counter-intuitive to me. For me, writing romance (slash or het) has nothing to do with securing a happy-ever-after for the characters (which, in my head, they already have) and everything to do with exploring feelings and character dynamics that aren't possible in a platonic relationship. The idea of sexually pairing off two characters who already have a close and satisfying relationship in order to assure their happily-ever-after is so phenomenally UNlike how I view sex and romance that I have trouble even wrapping my brain around it. I mean, from a sociological standpoint, it makes perfect sense to me, considering our society's emphasis on happy-ever-after and romance as the pinnacle of human relationships. It just doesn't really work for me on an emotional level.
It does make a whole whopping lot of sense out of the whole "we're not gay" phenomenon, though -- which I never really believed existed (I don't really think it does in SGA fandom) until reading some meta that pointed to stories of that nature, and my brain had to do MAJOR pretzel-twisting to comprehend it! The way you explain it, though, makes more sense out of it -- that it's basically friendship given the social seal of approval to be friendship forever, which comes by way of sex ... basically, exploiting a loophole in society's standards for love and foreverness. That is ... odd. ^^ And I can see why actual gay people are rather offended by it. But yeah, I can see why people would put the two together in that way.
(WTF, LJ's spell checker claims "foreverness" is a real word, but not "fandom"? Hi, spell checker, confused much?)