shipping kills puppies!

[xparrot]

I've seen a couple discussions about the negative turn SGA fandom has taken, re: McKeller, people, mostly Keller fans (or at least not anti-Keller fans) who are feeling actively driven from the fandom by aggressive character/pairing hate. They feel this is a recent trend, and I concur; while SGA had its share of past wank, I think it was one of the lower-conflict fandoms for its size. And if that's changed now, then I blame shipping. Or rather, canon shipping.

Every fandom I know of that has these battles, has these levels of anger and resentment between fans, is a fandom with canon ships. Witness Smallville, or HP. Ships going canon wreak havoc on a fandom. Nothing embitters your average fan as much as a ship that sinks their own, and an embittered fan can be eager to share their hate, wants the solidarity of all of fandom telling TPTB that they're wrong, wants all of fandom together seeking change. Even killing a character doesn't cause the kind of conflict that shipping does...

There are other things that get fans' backs up, but the majority of fen are shippers, and ships are often why they fan. There are exceptions, there are other types of fans - and other types of shippers - but in modern Western media fandom, the majority of fans (slash, het, even many gen fen) are in it for particular relationships. Mess with those relationships in canon, and you get fandom meltdown.

(I think there's a reason that a lot of the old fan shows, the big ones, were series that never had canon ships, never had any romances that lasted more than a single episode. Star Trek, Starsky & Hutch, The Sentinel, all those old episodic shows that never really progressed the character relationships - that never changed them, never pulled the figurative rug out from under fannish feet. The only series I know of with low-conflict canon ships are ships which were introduced in the first season, that the fandom grew up around, and even in those there's often little interaction between contrasting shippers. I also suspect it's a major reason why new female characters are viewed with such suspicion, because while male characters are often introduced for plot purposes, nine times out of ten a new female character is going to mean new canon ships.)

I don't blame shippers. I'm a shipper myself; I wouldn't fan without my ships. I need my OTPs to fic. And I strive to be reasonable and fair to all my fellow fans, but I still have been known to go utterly psycho batshit when I feel my OTP is "threatened," so it doesn't surprise me to see other otherwise reasonable types lose it over shipping. It's frustrating since the fandom used to be cooler about it - but then the fandom didn't have canon ships before. A fandom with canon ships has ship wars. It just seems to be a fact of fandom; it's why I tended to avoid Who fandom, or Avatar fandom, why I often keep wary distance from anime fandoms.

My OTPs aren't canon, generally (at least not in my fic fandoms, my active "Type B" fandoms - and I tend to avoid main fandom for my Type As, because I'd just as soon not get drawn into shipping wars.) But I don't need my OTPs to be canon to be satisfied, don't need my interpretation of the characters validated above all other interpretations. As long as they're never actually denied, I'm good. The more open-ended canon is, the more freedom there is for all fans, all different shippers, to peacefully co-exist, and I like it that way.

If I sound like I'm saying I'd rather not have canon ships in my ficcing fandoms - yeah, I am. Bring on the subtext and the UST, and leave the consummations to the fanfic. Maybe it's unrealistic and maybe it's boring, but I don't care. It's more peaceful that way XP

Comments

[horridporrid.livejournal.com]

That way it's "You're killing my squee, now shoo!", rather than, "You killed my squee, arrgghhh!". :)

It's not that simple. I've come to SGA from a combative fandom; I enjoy debate. I'm not looking for pure squee (though I do think harshing in a post labeled "squee", which has been par the course when it comes to Keller, is rude), I'm looking for thoughtful posts about a show I love.

But even if the meta is about... I don't know, the Freudian implications of the 'jumper going through the 'gate, there will be statements about how much Keller sucked and how she killed the show and thank goodness fandom is strong enough to beat her!1! *sparkly hearts*. Not something open for debate, just understood fact. And there's much nodding and some fist bumps and I get that this isn't a conversation that I'm welcome in. Even though it's not about Keller specifically or romance. Just you know, pro-Keller folk need not apply.

I mean, I do click carefully, but careful doesn't work in SGA fandom. Because hating Keller, especially hating McKeller is how SGA fandom is defined. So basically I feel like there's a bare handful of people I can fan with, but in general, SGA fandom is not a place that takes kindly to my sort.

[dovil.livejournal.com]

(though I do think harshing in a post labeled "squee", which has been par the course when it comes to Keller, is rude),

And squeeing in a post labelled 'rant'? :)

So you want people to what exactly? Not talk even outside of their own journal because it's a conversation you don't to hear - there are simple steps that can be taken - there are keller communities out there, why not make a post saying 'look folks, we notice that there is a fair bit of dissatisfaction about the character and it's not something that some of us want to deal with - how about when any of us here make a post about the show we explictely ask for no anti-keller comments and that our journals are 'safe spaces'' - and there, you've got a network that's a nice safe zone and all it takes is being a bit more pro-active about one's fandom experience instead of just sitting back and arm flailing, which isn't going to change things except to try to lay a guilt trip.

And seriously, a lot of those virulent OTT anti-keller comments are made by people who are barely literate, why would you take them or what they have to say seriously? They're not worth getting upset over, and if someone actually puts through a thought out arguement and if people can't just disagree and then move on, don't get involved in those conversations in the first place (as in general you, not you in particular).

And dude, you click on my posts - if you haven't worked out that I don't like the character and am going to talk about why I don't like the character... I'm not the most subtle person in the world. :D

but in general, SGA fandom is not a place that takes kindly to my sort.

Then make it. Rally the troops - go around the Keller/McKeller/RoKeller comms, people on your list or from other comments that pop up in journals, people that feel that same way - start up ficathons etc. Fandom doesn't just appear magically fully formed, its shaped by the individuals who participate - get people that you want participating, participating.

[sholio]

I admit that, although I think you're right in a general sense (that is, I'm a firm believer in creating the fan experience you want to have), I hate the idea of SGA fandom turning into a bunch of gated communities. One of the things I always liked about it was how open it was; I had people reading my fic who were gen people, slash people, het shippers, and fans of all the different characters. I liked that about SGA fandom -- you could meet a bunch of different sorts of fen and get to know them. The ones who weren't willing to live and let live were few and far between.

The current environment in SGA fandom, though, is one of aggressively policing ones' own boundaries, where if someone is rude to you, it's your own fault for giving them an opening. (And yeah, I do think that harshing on someone's anti-squee is as rude as harshing on their squee. I've done it, but only in cases where someone's either soliciting different opinions, or where I know them well enough that I don't think they'd mind me popping up to say "Yeah, but on the other hand ...." (see: half my conversations with xparrot XD). And while you're always going to have fans pursuing their own agendas to the detriment of the conversation, I'm boggled by the sheer number of them right now; I, of course, am noticing a certain faction above all else (like the people who comment on gen stories that don't include Keller at all with comments like "Thank you for not including Keller! I sure do hate her!" -- ACTUAL COMMENT (paraphrased) omg wtf) -- but, fans being fans, I would certainly believe you if you've seen pro-Keller people running around behaving badly.

It makes me tired and it makes me sad. Right now I feel pretty harsh towards canon as well, but one of the things making me back off from trying to get back into it is that I'm not sure if this fandom is a place I feel comfortable anymore.

[horridporrid.livejournal.com]

And squeeing in a post labelled 'rant'? :)

Rude as well, I suppose. :) (Oh. Are you suggesting I shouldn't have commented on this post? I wouldn't have usually, but xparrot is generally pretty cool about dialoguing.)

So you want people to what exactly?

I suppose I'd love for people to get the hell over Keller already. :D It'd also be nice if there was a recognition that hating Keller isn't a SGA fandom universal. It's not like all I want to talk about is Keller. I'd love to be able to take part in other meta convo's. But that's pure "want" as in "wishes and dreams", not "expect" or anything.

And seriously, a lot of those virulent OTT anti-keller comments are made by people who are barely literate...

Oh, if that were only true. But then, you and I probably disagree on the definition of "OTT" on this issue. (I'll admit to being a bit sensitized at this point. *g*) Oh! And then there's that sad fact that I rather enjoy McShep. It makes things difficult. :D

And dude, you click on my posts...

Erm. No. No I don't. I haven't clicked on one of your SGA posts for a long, long time. (I clicked and commented on something not SGA related because... well, you're funny and you're one of the not-illiterate people of the SGA fandom I'm not a part of. I missed you. *g*)

Then make it. Rally the troops...

That's been happening. And then massive amounts of anti-Keller folks show up to say how much Keller sucks. Why do you think we're getting upset? Boredom? But also, I'm not just about Keller. I'd love to discuss Rodney and John and Teyla and Ronon and Team and Woosley and such. But those are all dangerous waters because a lovely little conversations about those characters could end with me getting sideswiped by a "oh, and Keller totally sucked" comment. (Which leads to the sensitization...)

[sholio]

As much as I hate the idea of SGA fandom dissolving into a bunch of separate little fandoms, I'm halfway to the point of thinking that an invite-only community, or a special f'list filter for fic and meta, might not be a bad idea. I go through periods of being virulently anti-show, but most of it lately, I'm realizing, is directly related to what's going on in the fandom -- I don't hate the show as much as I sometimes think I do; I hate the fact that fandom is so good at making me see all its least attractive parts. I don't want to feel that way; and when I do feel that way, I want a warm safe place I can run and hide, which my f'list, in general, isn't. I would like to have a place to post fic and meta and episode discussions without having my hackles go up and my stomach knot into a ball when I hit "post".

[xparrot.livejournal.com]

Even before making a closed community - try laying out firm rules, maybe? If you post, start the post with a warning - PLEASE DO NOT COMMENT EXCEPT WITH SQUEE. Most people will respect that - those that don't, don't answer civilly (you try to argue way too civilly, you're far too kind a person! XP) Just ignore them - delete or freeze if you want, or just comment with a one line, "sorry, that's not how I feel but I don't want to talk about it." I think you might get more disagreement than some fans because you, like < lj user=horridporrid>, have always been open to discussion - and those discussing with you might not realize that they're actually upsetting you (case in point, my own super-argumentative self!)

So, warn them that you're not up for it. This is what I do whenever I want to squee about, say, Doctor Who - because I know how contentious an environment Who-fandom is, and my love of all three modern Companions is very much not the norm. It's great when your fannish love is enough to sustain you through a debate - but there's no shame in explaining that it's not, not this time.

It sucks that SGA fandom has become like this, when it used to be fuzzier for you. But while there's a few genuine flamers about (and yeah, I've seen a couple McKeller fans be just as flamey - no one here, but Lavvyan's drawn a few), I think most fans are still respectful - they're just not aware that they're overstepping bounds.

[sholio]

PLEASE DO NOT COMMENT EXCEPT WITH SQUEE.

See, I hate making qualifiers like that; it's why I'd rather post my stories with comments locked than say something like "No comments unless you say nice things!" On the other hand, I guess if the choice is between not being in the fandom at all, or running my LJ like a boot camp ...

And, yeah ... I do tend to be a bit of a pushover, and to let people debate me far past the point where I'm enjoying it. XD I know that most people aren't trying to harsh anyone; they're just upset and very up-front about it. And it sucks just as much to be the one having the show change to the point where you no longer enjoy it; it's happened to me with a number of shows (SG1, Lost, SPN kinda), and while I'm actually okay with those, I think it would be a different story if I were invested in their fandoms to the degree that I am with SGA.

[xparrot.livejournal.com]

I don't think you'd need to "boot camp" your whole lj - just particular posts. And hopefully you wouldn't need much enforcing; people would watch themselves. And look at it this way, there's quite a few fans who would really appreciate a squee-harshing-free environment!

And it sucks just as much to be the one having the show change to the point where you no longer enjoy it;

Yeah...I honestly suspect that some of the sploogey Keller-hate that fans have been getting is people so embittered by the show that they're angered by people who do still like it - they actually do want to ruin it for other fans, because it's not fair for someone else to be getting what they like, at (what they see as) the expense of their own enjoyment. It's not logical or nice, but it's all too human a reaction.

And yes, too - I've had shows change on me in ways I didn't like and I've let them go, but never when I was actively fanning on them at the time - it's been. Hmm. Unsettling. From my own experience, I think the virulent Keller-hate is from that, too - because I know that just as you are turned off of fandom by the hate, I'm actually comforted by it (well, not the actually misogynistic stuff, but knowing that I'm in the majority in disliking her character) - it feels good to know I'm far from alone in my opinions, even if TPTB are ignoring us. It drives me from the show but towards the fandom, knowing that the fic is not going to change the same way the show did. ...And then I want y'all to come with us, and try to convince you it's better on this side, that you'd be happier if you just gave in and hated...(I'm sure there's some great metaphor that could go here - perhaps I should write meta-fic...)

[sholio]

*snort* Be careful what you wish for; hating one character just tends to get me hating the whole show (that's more or less what happened to me in December, and in the meltdown comment below). Actually, I have a huge fannish contrarian streak, which means that having the rest of the fandom hate a character tends to make me paradoxically want to do justice to them in my own writing -- that was definitely true of, say, Yamucha in DBZ fandom, who I always had a big soft spot for. My deep and abiding love of Bulma, while at least in part because I'm just a total pushover for snarky geniuses of whatever gender, also probably had something to do with the number of fics that portrayed her as a shrill blue-haired harpy. (Actually, canon itself portrayed her as a shrill blue-haired harpy quite often ... which just gave me more incentive to write her as a more nuanced character!)

Anyway, I'm glad that you do get comfort from it, even if it's not my own happy place; I know that I've gotten my own share of comfort from snuggling up to like-minded fans and bitching from time to time.

I also know that I'm having to fight against the "ruin it for everyone else" impulse; I was thinking about that today, too, because I think that at least some of my most virulent show-hate is, at heart, driven by a vindictive desire to hurt other fans for having hurt me -- there's a bitter little part of me that wants to rip apart Rodney's flaws, say, until the Rodney-fans feel the same anger and hurt that I'm feeling. At least I'm mostly managing to control it; I think I'm hurting myself at least as much as anyone else by writing stuff like that, because I do believe it as I'm writing it, but once I get done venting and have some time to calm down, I feel more equanimous and much less like killing off the cast in breakup fic. XD

[xparrot.livejournal.com]

It seems like you're not alone in wanting to leap to the defense of hated characters; I've seen others express the same thing (I had that essay about "everybody loves X" and the reverse is true for quite a percentage of folks, it seems...)

I don't work quite like that, but I can sympathize because I walk my own fannish path, and quite often like what others don't. So I loved Bulma (and bore no animosity towards Yamcha - I didn't even know people didn't like him. I was never that active in DBZ fandom, what was the beef there? It wasn't like he was any threat to Bulma/Vegeta...oh, fandom, you so strange!) And Gnine and I once traumatized a good friend who expressed dislike of Nami on One Piece, and we were a bit, um, overly enthusiastic in our defense ^^;

The wanting to ruin it for others is a dangerous impulse, I think - not dangerous as in actually seriously harmful; but I think it can damage one's own fanning as easily as others'. I think some of this Keller-hate conflict is because there's these different impulses - some fans really are out to get the Keller-fans, try to ruin the show/char for them. Other fans aren't trying to ruin it; they just want other fans to see it their way. They're similar urges, but not quite the same.

And then, there's the differences in approach - there are few outright Keller-fans; most of the people who defend her don't love her, they just don't hate her and don't like the hate. But in absence of Keller-love, their tactics are more offensive than defensive - rather than explaining to Keller-haters why they like Keller and emphasizing her good traits, they're more likely to attack the other characters, insist that she's no worse than any of them. Which just ends up ruining everybody's fun, because it doesn't help the Keller-haters like Keller anymore, and it makes the defenders dislike everyone else.

Then, too, sometimes the debaters are just from totally different angles. To a non-OTP fan, it's hard to explain why OTP-breakage is so painful...

I'm trying to curb my own negative impulses, because I enjoy myself a lot more when I'm squeeing. But I do get frustrated (especially when I see blanket statements made about other fans; canon opinions bother me less for some reason.) And I do like debate and analysis to an extent. And then, sometimes I just lose it, and, yes, want other fen to be as upset as I am...

[elspethdixon.livejournal.com]

I know that just as you are turned off of fandom by the hate, I'm actually comforted by it... it feels good to know I'm far from alone in my opinions, even if TPTB are ignoring us.

Yes. This. Whenever I get really upset about Marvel, I go read the vicious, angry rantings of fanboys on message boards (where anyone who ever dares to suggest that a given plotline, character, or writer might not be a crime against God and humanity gets told that they're "a f*cking idiot," hate America, and are probably a terrorist), and it makes me feel so much better, OMG despite the fact that half of them are barely literate trolls. Whereas if I see anyone being positive about X horrible canon thing, it makes me so upset that it can ruin my entire day - I have this deep, utterly irrational conviction that if anyone out there doesn't hate X horrible thing and demand that it go away, they're doing the fannish equivalent of murdering Tinkerbell by declaring that they don't believe in fairies while the rest of us are do our best to try and clap, and that their liking of it will actively cause canon to get worse via some kind of sympathetic magic.

[copracat]

Hi, please do let me know it this is out of line. (edit: Actually, I deleted those bits before I posted.)

The fiction has changed because the show changed. I love McShep as much as the next girl, but many fans are now writing first to remove Keller, then get to the McShep and that's been a pretty big change.

[xparrot.livejournal.com]

This isn't out of line at all; it's totally true. But that's the exact problem. I don't want to read about getting Keller out of the way - relationship breakups just aren't my thing, and even though I don't like Keller, I don't particularly like character-bashing - but I don't want to read McKeller either. And I like canon-based fic. So now - I have zero options. The only way to write Keller-free McShep is to ignore canon. And I like sticking to canon as best I can; denial is a hard road.

I'm working on a fic now that I started mid s4 - Keller's not in it and not really mentioned (it's not set on Atlantis). But since it's a Rodney-centric story, this has been causing me conniptions - I don't know if I should casually reference a break-up, or not mention her at all...and any way I do it, I'm probably gonna annoy some fans. The rest of the story I can update to accommodate s5, but that aspect is stymieing me.

This is why I said that, as a ficcer, I don't want canon shipping. UST's fine - if the canon had hinted at McKeller but never actually shown them together (a la Sam/Jack), then I'd be okay with it. Some people could write McKeller and others could write McShep and some could write both depending on their mood. Now, if you're a canon-follower, you have to decide. (For that matter, I'd think the canon shipping is stifling to McKeller shippers - they can't write their own getting-together/first time stories (without denying canon), and that's the most popular kind of pairing fic...I honestly would never want McShep slash to have happened in canon, because I doubt I'd like the way these writers wrote it!)

[michelel72.livejournal.com]

The rest of the story I can update to accommodate s5, but that aspect is stymieing me.

Out of curiosity ... why not just set it S4? I mean, I know that's certainly not the solution for every story, but at least in some cases it would seem to at least avoid the question, unless there's something specific from later on you wanted to integrate.

(Myself, most of my plotbunnies naturally seem to slot into mid-season three, just because I liked the dynamic that included Beckett and Weir best. In fact, four of my seven (dammit!) WIPs are set then, and a fifth isn't time-specific but feels like it's in that same period so far. I suspect it's not a coincidence that I really started watching the show regularly in season three.)

I'm just wondering if you have a particular reason to set your story "current" -- I feel as if I've seen that sentiment before, and I'm wondering if I'm missing something or if it's just a preference thing ....

[velocitygrass.livejournal.com]

I don't like Keller, I don't particularly like character-bashing - but I don't want to read McKeller either. And I like canon-based fic. So now - I have zero options. The only way to write Keller-free McShep is to ignore canon. And I like sticking to canon as best I can; denial is a hard road.
Yes, yes, this exactly. Except I do like Jennifer as Rodney's friend--just like Katie for that matter--but I can't just ignore canon, except when I explicitly write AU. It's like going back to write fic for early seasons. I don't think I could write Rodney as openly gay in an early season 1 fic (let's ignore his stint on SG-1) because I know he won't be. Or John as having a supportive father who encouraged him to be openly gay.

I've seen a few people who are not happy with the way the McKeller relationship is sometimes being dealt with say that you don't have to break them up, just ignore it. Well, I wish that I could, but when I write canon-based fic, it's canon-based and that means all of canon. I won't pretend that John was never married and I can't pretend that Rodney didn't declare his love for Jennifer (and she for him). When I really don't want to deal with it (because let's face it, there are only so many fixits that you can write), I'll take the casually-mention-their-breakup approach, which still acknowledges what happened in canon.

I think there are a few reasons why McKeller is disliked more than other canon couples: Looking at both SGA and SG-1, I began to trust that shipping would only happen on the side between a main character and a recurring one (like Sam/Pete) or stay at a subtextual level and that it would never interfere with the sanctity of team as the center of the show (like Sam/Jack). I loved how they ended SG-1. Even though they put shipping in the last episode (very explicitly), they hit the reset button and much more importantly it still ended as team (and that was my personal impression of the whole show; it never stopped being about the team). SGA stopped being about team when TPTB discovered the beauty of only-two/three-character episodes (mid-season 4 or maybe even earlier). I think McKeller has the incredible bad luck of being the most visible symptom of a complete change in the premise of the show from team to individual character episodes (that have Keller and to a lesser degree Woolsey as equal or even more important than Teyla or Ronon or even John). Additionally the execution of McKeller was clumsy (to put it mildly) to me.

I actually have my own lengthy post about season 5 and Jennifer in particular brewing for months now and posts like these remind me of finally writing it up and posting, because I do find the discussion interesting.

And yes, I so wish they would have left McKeller as subtext.

[amalthia]

what you said, "I hate the fact that fandom is so good at making me see all its least attractive parts" is so very true. I remember watching other shows outside of fandom (back when I was in college and had no time for the forums/mailing lists) I pretty much watched all my shows without any outside input beyond what my friends and family thought if they watched it with me. I noticed that when you avoid the negative commentary and valid complaints even shows that have their not-so-great moment are still okay.

It wasn't until SPN that I realized reading the TWOP was really affecting my enjoyment of the show. So for Merlin I'm debating on avoiding the meta, episode reactions...because I really don't want my Merlin love to go the same way SPN and SGA went (though to be fair SGA kind of lost me in season 4? when they killed Koyla)

But at the same time I love the discussion and being in a fandom that's live.

[xparrot.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I am very careful about meta - I can only take it in limited doses, and in certain fandoms. I often enjoy debates, but I have some fandoms I avoid any hint of negative meta, because I know it'll harsh me. And TWoP I'm very cautious around, only reading it for shows I don't really like - I never read any of the SPN recaps, because the taste I got of them was too bitter; while I loved the SV recaps, since I was none too fond of the show anyway.

[sholio]

I think that's definitely something I need to keep in mind with SGA -- for a long time I kinda avoided SGA meta, especially harshing meta, and the more of it I read, the less I liked the show. Whereas something like, say, SPN, or Marvel/DC canon, where I'm kinda pissed off with canon anyway, I enjoy seeing it ripped apart. But I think maybe I need to put SGA back in the "do not read meta; it breaks my happy place!" box.

[horridporrid.livejournal.com]

I hate the idea that the only SGA-meta that can exist is harshing meta. :( I mean, I really do like the show. Sure it's got its issues, but it's also got a certain spark that made it a show I eagerly tuned into once a week. It's not that I ignored the bad bits (or at least, I'd like to think I didn't) but I either laughed at them (for example, the way they signaled a society's technical level with Western Civilization tells: "medieval" tech? there's going to be a castle!) or had a wistful, "come on SGA, you can do better than that!" attitude towards it.

I wonder if there's a way to do a warning that isn't necessarily "just squee" but maybe something like, "we actually like this show so if there's things to critique (and there will be) do so with love"? (Maybe that's hopelessly Pollyanna of me.)

[sholio]

I think it works best (and, sadly, in the current divisive climate, maybe can only be done?) with people who share similar attitudes towards the show -- I know that's true of me, especially lately. I mean, I've been talking about the show's faults all along, and discussing it with like-minded friends; my episode reviews have never consisted solely of squee. But it's always been a sort of nudging, affectionate "Okay, I know this sucks, but on the other hand, there's this other cool thing ...", or else trying to meta the sucky part to death in order to make it work with the rest, to make sense in terms of the whole show. And when it's an irrational emotional response and I'm not likely to be argued out of it, I always tried to be very clear that it was me being irrational and emotional.

Now that I'm thinking about it, in situations like that, I guess the only thing you can do is either commiserate with like-minded people who had the same emotional response, or agree to live and let live; you can't argue the other person around to your point of view, and they get upset if you try. I know for a fact, for example, that I wouldn't take kindly to someone vehemently trying to argue me into disliking Rodney -- there are people on my f'list who dislike him, I know, but we kinda agree to disagree on that. It'd be different if I came around on my own, but being involved in a discussion with someone who is arguing that, and presenting their reasons for hating him as the unbiased facts of the situation, is massively uncomfortable for me. It's not that I don't think they are entitled to that, it's just that I don't feel comfortable or particularly welcome in that discussion. And a lot of discussions around LJ have been making me feel that way lately. And the fandom has become divisive enough that, yeah, it might not be possible anymore to have meta discussions without establishing your ground rules beforehand -- I don't think it's that you can't have meta discussions, just that you might not be able to do it without stating up front that certain aspects of canon are being taken on faith for purposes of the discussion.

To use an example of a fandom that's very divisive in its ship wars and character support bases, you can't really have a generic discussion in HP fandom on something supposedly neutral like "what is Harry and Ginny's life like post-book 7?" without limiting your pool of respondents or establishing some kind of ground rules, or you just end up with endless arguments between people having such radically different views of canon that there's no way to get to any sort of rational place. I think SGA might be to that point now, where you can't just sit down and discuss canon without making sure that you're discussing it with people who see some of the more fundamental aspects of canon roughly the same way that you do.

[horridporrid.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I think you're right. On the one hand, it's too bad because it'll create separate little fandoms, as you pointed out above. But on the other hand, I get the sense SGA fandom has actually had various sects for a while now (those who dislike Rodney; those who like Rodney, for example). I think a big issue now has been formerly like-minded people suddenly disagreeing.

...you can't argue the other person around to your point of view, and they get upset if you try.

That's true. (And a lesson I often have to relearn to my chagrin.) It doesn't mean all conversation is curtailed, of course. But, like you said, ground rules are established with everyone coming at an issue from a similar stance. A discussion as to Rodney's fault level in "Trinity" between people who all quite like Rodney could be a fun thing. That same discussion between someone who likes Rodney and someone who doesn't? Not as fun (to put it mildly).

(Though I will add, I can enjoy a conversation with someone I disagree with as long as we both recognize we're in disagreement and are coming at the conversation to... not necessarily change each others minds but to maybe get an understanding of the whys behind our differing standpoints. That we each respect that there's a different pov at play. And, of course, recognize that there's a point where "agree to disagree" gets hit and that's it. IOWs, a conversation with certain ground rules being understood.)

[dovil.livejournal.com]

Going through posts the last bit of Keller meta I did (NOT including a story and a pisstake of Gero's interview), outside the cut-tag I started the post saying:

I diss Keller in this, this may not be the post you seek, move along. Star Wars reference for the geek win!

Your comment that you made to that post started:

Hee! ::jumps in with "I heart Keller" banner waving madly:: ;)

And proceeded to tell me about how Keller rocked. Again. And you know what, it's absolutely cool, because I get it, we get enthused about things and we want to talk about our viewpoints, and lets face it, unless the other person explicately says so we might not know that we're stepping on toes and that the other person is emotionally engaged with this and on a different page entirely ("these are my feelings on this topic, please respect them"). Have I done this myself to someone: I would say that I most definitely would have.

And people you are coming across are what? People who are making the comments are making them in an articulate fashion but in personal spaces where it's not appreciated and they've been made aware of this and are just that insensitive or rude to keep continuing on, or it's conversations between two individuals in a public space and there's the need to just keep on following that convo, or is it Qellar is a Hore! posts, which are annoying gnats but not really worth anyones time.

It's kind of like hearing 'what's wrong' saying 'nothing' and then getting pissed off that the person isn't reading body language that there really is something wrong - paricularly in lj when we only have the written word to rely on people have to articulate what they want from people.

Let people know in advance so they have the ability to comply to your wishes and most people will when in your own journal. And if they don't then you engage with that individual and then the name of 'fandom' doesn't have to be used at all, it's lj user x that needs the smack on the nose with the newspaper.

I took you off my flist not out of spite or because I was pissed off, I've enjoyed talking with you very much, but because I was in that position again (thanks Buffy fandom) of articulating thoughts behind cut tags that I knew had to be pissing people off and yet they were reading them. Which again, human nature. But I just want to have that bit of distance so I can be myself in my own journal or when interacting with lj friends, people can continue to be in their own happy space, whatever that might be, and we don't trip over ourselves and all end up on fandom_wank. :)

[horridporrid.livejournal.com]

Ah. Gosh, that was ages ago, wasn't it? (I'm only vaguely recalling the conversation, anyway.) But yes, I did totally miss the implied "this is a rant, please no opposing views" in your opening statement (I thought you were just giving a friendly warning). I do apologize for butting in. I honestly didn't realize that's what I was doing, but it is what I did and I'm sorry.

However, I do want to make clear that I haven't clicked on posts labeled as anti-Keller (in yours or others ljs) for a long while now. At first I clicked through because I wanted to know the whys and wherefores of the dislike. And where I thought dialogue was wanted (which, obviously my instincts on that need a bit of work *g*) I joined in. After a while though, feeling that I pretty much had the gist of the reasons behind the dislike, I stopped looking. Plus, it became pretty apparent that dialoguing wasn't generally wanted. (I'm always open to dialoguing in my own journal. It's the whole reason I'm in fandom.)

And people you are coming across are what?

Assuming everyone hates Keller. That hating Keller is just part of SGA fandom. So feeling free to put the hate everywhere. Even places where it's explicitly stated, "please not here". Which means, of course, that there's not a reliance on body-language going on. Explicit statements are being ignored.

Obviously just one or two instances like this can, and should, be ignored. But it's not just one or two instances and so there's been an accumulating affect. Hence the expressed frustration. And the sensitization.

...and all end up on fandom_wank. :)

Doesn't everyone end up in fandom_wank at one point or another? I thought that was the whole point of journaling... ;)

[dovil.livejournal.com]

That was the last bit of meta that I posted on Keller, because I have to admit I did get a little bit tired of people reading these posts and others like them and then heading for the fainting couch. It just seemed like people were going out of their way to put themselves in situations where they could get their righteous indignation on (not saying that this relates to you).

I don't assume that everyone hates that character and I would hope that anyone with any life experience also wouldn't make blanket statements like that. Unfortunately sometimes people can forget that others may not think the same way they do about things, that just because we share the same source material doesn't mean that we see the same things that happen on screen or that we're on the same emotional wavelength. An enthusiastic "Keller's done great things for SGA" is going to be like nails on a chalkboard to someone who loathes the character, just as much as the opposite would apply - but it would also be a completely innocuous statement to someone who is not that emotionally invested.

If someone labels a post "No character bashing" and someone posts a comment that bashes a character, surely, SURELY, it's a case of dealing with that individual rather than labelling all of fandom as insensitive jerks when you're actually talking about specific people. You can remind them, in case it slipped their mind and they otherwise don't seem like a person who would act rudely, you can freeze the thread and delete the comment, you can even ban them if they're being nothing more than trolls. Your journal, your power to control what goes on in it. Seriously, if you've stated that this is a "pro-keller zone" on your journal/post (or what ever wording you might use) and an ljer purposely ignores that, ban them. Because they are little more than a troll at this point.

Same thing for moderators in journals - hell if you want public space changed maybe take your concerns to the mods and get rules set up and/or enforced if they're of a sympathetic mind - or start your own! Carve out your own niche if you don't think that one exists and I'm sure you'll get people enthusiastically involved with you. I'm seeing a lot of complaining going on about how fandom is a bad vile space and how victimisation is going on, but nothing about actually changing it. Again, human nature.

If it's becoming truely a sensitive thing, take some time out, shake it off, come back again - it's my advice after going through the same thing - it really doesn't seem so important then and it shrinks back down to the internet, a tv programme and a bunch of fictional characters - ones that we can love, but not have it upset us.

And at this point I'm going to take my own advice and back out of this conversation. Unfortunately it is the case that sometimes people are just different (and I don't mean that in a negative way, it's really not) and that dialogue may end up de-evolving into arm flailing, and nobody wants the arm flailing. :D

[vida-boheme.livejournal.com]

I just wanted to thank you for articulating my thoughts on this subject in a far more reasoned and nuanced way than I would have. ♥

I have to say that I heartily agree with your opening "I did get a little bit tired of people reading these posts and others like them and then heading for the fainting couch. It just seemed like people were going out of their way to put themselves in situations where they could get their righteous indignation on" . That's certainly been my experience.