Intersectionality: you can has it.

[riseupwithfists]

Ugh, I've stopped and restarted this several times, and inside me there's a much longer version of this post in which I explore in depth the problems with navigating in the world that we live in and what that says about how we navigate fannish space, and also the problems I've been having lately with the concept of fannish policing, but I will say this:

Can we stop conflating not writing/shipping het pairings (or not writing/shipping an equal ratio of male/male and female/female pairings) with misogyny? Please? It's a lot more complicated than that, and I've been seeing a lot of very dense, difficult issues compressed into a dismissive simplicity that isn't necessarily accurate.

Not to mention the fact that I personally don't write or ship het (with a few queered exceptions) because I am queer and am in fandom partly in order to escape all that het stuff.

(Also, if you don't think this is about you, then it probably isn't. I just felt like I had to be cranky in my own space rather than wank it up in the spaces of others.)

ETA: To be clear, I thoroughly enjoy reading and sometimes writing what I call "queered-up het", and my scorn is most certainly not including this realm of fandom.

ETAx2: Jube, as usual, hits the nail right on the fucking head.

Comments

[gloss]

The idea that women are best celebrated in het shipping freaks me out.

[riseupwithfists]

It's... ugh, I can't even. Fandom as a whole has sorta been driving me crazy lately. I don't feel rational these days.

[gloss]

I'm so sorry.

(And if you were talking about me, please know that I'm trying, just having a shitty time expressing myself clearly lately.)

[riseupwithfists]

(oh god, no, it's not you, it is never you! most of this is from me poking my nose where i shouldn't and you have nothing to worry about.)

[gloss]

(oh phew thank hell. I worry!)

NOT TO MAKE IT ALL ABOUT ME OR ANYTHING.

[riseupwithfists]

(do not worry! I'm just having a bad day and feeling this kneejerk defensiveness about things and I think that means I need to step back from the computer for a few days until I can think clearly again. But you are a shining star and your fic made my month.)

[sohotrightnow]

I...feel like that is a bit of a false dichotomy? I didn't get the impression that rawles was saying anything about het being a more effective feminist alternative to M/M in the original post, just that erasure of female characters in the name of M/M is problematic. Admittedly, however, I haven't read all the comments, so she may have said something along those lines there.

(Or maybe I missed a step and this is a response to something else, not rawles's post. In which case, I apologize and will clear off, because that's not a discussion I'm familiar with or involved in.)

[riseupwithfists]

While rawles' post did not present that dichotomy, and while my post is more of a reaction to several different things that I have been reading than any one particular text, the undertone in some of the comments did seem to support hetshipping instead of m/m or f/f. It could have just been me being sensitive, which I'm certainly willing to admit and embrace, but, again, my post is more of a reaction to many different opinions and instances that I've seen swirling around fandom as a whole these past few months.

As usual, I seem to have brought confusion by not being able to state exactly what I actually mean. I have the unfortunate tendency to spout off obscurely and then refuse to cite my sources out of some sort of fear of confrontation? Which of course just causes me trouble.

[sohotrightnow]

Thank you for clarifying! That's totally fair, and I certainly think the false dichotomy is being set up on the other side, as well, so I didn't mean to attack you and I'm sorry if it came off that way.

[riseupwithfists]

No worries! It's my own fault for never just saying what I mean.

[gloss]

Re: citing sources - you're kind of damned if you do, and if you don't.

<3

ANYWAY HERE ARE MY FURTHER THOUGHTS WHICH I'M SURE YOU'VE BEEN AWAITING ANXIOUSLY. I think some of the friction in these issues comes from where one's alliances and identifications fall -- someone like you & me & probably Jube (though I'm not speaking for anyone but me) is queer-community-identified and looks for queer characters in source and fanwork. Someone else, who might very well be lesbian or bi (though Bitch magazine tells me all the cool young queer ladies are opting for "gay", WHICH BREAKS MY HEART HOSHIT *cough*), employing a traditonal 2nd or 3rd wave feminist lens, is looking for female characters first and getting their due involves, in part, allowing them their canon ship (cf. Ginny Weasley or Sam Carter or whatever), which is usually het, mainstream media being what it is.

I also think there's a distinction to be made between wanting queer stories and wanting to slash the two hot dudes, though frequently the result looks the same on the surface. The first is queer-community-identified, the second is/can be fairly traditionally heteronormative in its focus on masculinist narratives, erasure of women, and sublimation of a woman's desire through a masculinized avatar.

[riseupwithfists]

I always adore your further thoughts, don't you worry.

Yes, I agree that a *lot* of what's going on is the meeting of different political stances/experiences/what-have-you (or the lack thereof!). We're usually not privy to one another's non-internet private or political lives in this community, and while it drives many of us in what we do online, I'm not exactly wearing a badge at all times proclaiming my queer political beliefs and sensibilities. So I guess that it's easy to forget that we're all coming from different places, if that makes any sense. So what is "queer" to you and I and Jube isn't "queer" to others, and I don't always remember that and then get disappointed when people are coming from a different place/a place that I find problematic/a place that finds where I'm coming from problematic.

(though Bitch magazine tells me all the cool young queer ladies are opting for "gay", WHICH BREAKS MY HEART HOSHIT *cough*)
Bitch has been annoying me for a while now, as they fall into the same journalistic trap of ascribing a "trend" to, say, their boyfriend's roommate's cousin saying something. Sigh.

I also think there's a distinction to be made between wanting queer stories and wanting to slash the two hot dudes, though frequently the result looks the same on the surface. The first is queer-community-identified, the second is/can be fairly traditionally heteronormative in its focus on masculinist narratives, erasure of women, and sublimation of a woman's desire through a masculinized avatar.
Yes! Yes yes yes yes yes.

xoxoxo

[jubilancy]

Man, I think Bitch missed the fact that "gay" has always, always been a choice picked by women who are interested in presenting a "friendlier" face than "queer" or "lesbian" apparently show. Citing Ellen, for example.

[riseupwithfists]

Yes! Like, my mom *loves* the Ellen talk show, and that says nothing about the way that she's treated me since I came out.

[irrelevant]

Heh. I'm ace and every day, irl and online, I get smacked in the face with things like:


It's the assumptions that get to me, and that icon? Massive assumption. Yeah, it's a tiny thing, but lots of tiny, thoughtless things add up to one massive, hurtful thing. I'm good at laughing stuff off/letting shit slide, except for those times when I'm not.

Sounds like you hit your wall. My empathy and sympathy: you has it.

[riseupwithfists]

Oh, WOW. That icon is.. wow. My empathy and sympathy to you, too! I think this just means that I need to spend a little less time looking at anything not in my immediate circle.

[irrelevant]

It sucks that you feel like you *have* to stay, ugh, closer to home. I just wish more people would tell themselves, "We're all different, and that is okay." I think, "And that is a good thing," is too much to hope for at this point. D: *offers internet hugs*

(OT: awesome Cass icon.)

[riseupwithfists]

"We're all different, and that is okay."
Yes, yes, a thousand times yes. And I know that it's tempting to make sweeping judgments, it really is, and it's something that I've been struggling with a lot lately, so yeah, I need to embrace that as much as everyone else.

(aww, thanks! It's one of my oldest and all time favorites.)

[dancesontrains]

Yeaaaaah, that icon makes me cringe a lot as well. Not just for ace types like yourself, but people who are unable to have a sexual relationship due to past trauma or medical dysfunction :/

[shewhohashope]

Pretty much all the icons at kink bingo (on my network page) rub me the wrong way, and I don't have the justification of being asexual or anything.

[dancesontrains]

I don't think feeling uncomfortable about them needs to be justified by anything.

[softestbullet]

Yes! :(

[dancesontrains]

:( <3

[gloss]

That icon has bugged me for a while, but you articulated beautifully why and I'm so sorry you have to deal with that.

<3

[ex_troublesteady667]

Ouch. Just: ouch. One one hand I'm curious, but on the other I really don't want to know what keywords/comments people choose to use with this icon.

[msilverstar]

Can we stop conflating not writing/shipping het pairings (or not writing/shipping an equal ratio of male/male and female/female pairings) with misogyny? Please? It's a lot more complicated than that.

Too damn right! We're the fans, dammit, if we don't go around saying how awful women are (have seen this, trufax), we can write whatever the hell we want!

[riseupwithfists]

if we don't go around saying how awful women are (have seen this, trufax)
Yeah, that's the just as ugly flipside!

[shewhohashope]

I'm not going to assault with an IS IT ME? comment, but I do have ~thoughts~ about this that I should express in my own space when I am able to express myself properly again.

[riseupwithfists]

It's certainly not you! I'm feeling like a bit of a dope right now because my post is seeming to do more harm than good. I never meant for anyone who was actually reading this to become worried.

I would love to read any and all thoughts you have when you can express them, though!

[shewhohashope]

People get paranoid easily! And I kind of assumed it wasn't me because I'm generally easygoing when I am criticising people.

They're not very complicated thoughts! Just that writing women in romantic relationships with men has as many misogynist pitfalls as writing primarily about male relationships, but mostly that I wish people would write more about/place more importance on writing about women in non-romantic relationships with men and all kinds of relationships with other women. Also that it's not inherently woman hating to not write about women, but I do judge quite harshly when women always take secondary roles to (almost always white, able-bodied, middle class, cisgendered) men who are often not so much queer as playing out the writer's fantasies. And, in my opinion. it's not so much about being interested in writing men as being interested in writing about privileged characters and ignoring marginalised characters. Otherwise, why aren't non-white men ever as popular as their white counterparts?

[mona]

but I do judge quite harshly when women always take secondary roles to (almost always white, able-bodied, middle class, cisgendered) men who are often not so much queer as playing out the writer's fantasies. And, in my opinion. it's not so much about being interested in writing men as being interested in writing about privileged characters and ignoring marginalised characters.

I've read this multiple times and it never gets less incisively kickass. I've linked it to a bunch (okay, 2) people I was talking about fandom's normative (white, cis, able-bodied) guy love with, and they wish to declare their love for you, too. JUST SO YOU KNOW.

I am composing a longer comment that will (or will not, knowing me) be flooding your inbox momentarily, but I at least wanted to say...that.

[gloss]

women always take secondary roles to (almost always white, able-bodied, middle class, cisgendered) men who are often not so much queer as playing out the writer's fantasies.
Oooooooh, yes! Oh, my, YES.

[riseupwithfists]

I wish people would write more about/place more importance on writing about women in non-romantic relationships with men and all kinds of relationships with other women.
Yessssss. This is definitely something that I need to aspire to/aspire to more/whatnot. I don't know why it's so much easier for me to do this when I'm not writing for fandom? More food for thought, I guess.

And, in my opinion. it's not so much about being interested in writing men as being interested in writing about privileged characters and ignoring marginalised characters. Otherwise, why aren't non-white men ever as popular as their white counterparts?
Oh, absolutely. Like I said in my subject line: intersectionality is your friend, and part of my frustration is the assumption that this is all about marginalized women versus non-marginalized men, because it is so much more complex than that.

[jubilancy]

Yeah. While I think there are a gazillion really important things to be said about the masculinized template usually handed writers and readers and its negative effects on everyone, I am uncomfortable with the fact that moments of genderqueer/trans identification by the presumed-female writer writing about men are being submerged in a narrative about women's misogyny. I don't think our goal as gender warriors should be to force people to explicitly identify as trans before we give them the okay to one way they might be working out their thoughts about gender identity.

[riseupwithfists]

Unf could I love you any more I think not

[mona]

because I am queer and am in fandom partly in order to escape all that het stuff.

You know I identify with this! <3 I HAVE LOTS TO SAY I'm trying really hard to get it out we will see how it goessss but I love these discussions.

[riseupwithfists]

:DDDD

[ttindeed.livejournal.com]

Not sure I have much to productively add to this conversation, but I really appreciate this post as you and the wonderful commenters have articulated frustrations I haven't had the words to express myself. As someone who thinks that discussions about the reproduction and normalization of all types of social inequalities are important, it is endlessly frustrating when those debates are derailed by cheap, reductive discursive tactics that willfully ignore the seemingly obvious point that context matters. So, thanks for making that point.

[riseupwithfists]

Yes, yes! Context does matter! In fact, I'm starting to feel regretful for ever making this post, because context DOES matter and I feel like I've been operating in the same oversimplifications in this post that I've been criticizing, and while that is human nature that is also not very good of me. So there is that.

Your comment is good and you should feel good.

[ttindeed.livejournal.com]

Eh. The fact that your comments have resonated with so many people is a good indication that, even if an oversimplification in the specific case (whatever it may be), they are hitting at a common enough general phenomenon.

[glitterandlube]

The best and most entertaining part of this for me is that normally the people who say this the loudest then turn around and write anti-women het.

Otherwise, the only het couple who ever really got me going was John Critchon and Aeryn Sun because they were basically a slash couple who actually had a baby and got married. /happiest day of my fandom life/

I am less sure about the women erasing thing because to a degree, I probably do it, but it's not because I hate women but because the choices presented are frequently unfavorable to me. Also, when working with non-canon pairings for the most part, someone will get short-changed. [Which was inverted in The Sentinel come to think of it.] I will not force myself to shoehorn in characters I have no interest in just because they're female. I don't think that behavior is pro-woman. I've tried to work with characters I wasn't happy with before to flip over the general 'she's an evil whore dooming their love' trope with Harry Potter but I have no idea how well I succeded since it ended up mostly being about Harry's fantasy fulfillment.

I think it doesn't help me much that I identify more with the men than the women. I don't know what to do about that either. I just don't care about things that are supposed to be traditional women concerns plus since I am attracted to women, I sort of have that in common with dudes, and I am very afraid of growing up and being one of those crazy ladies on the View.

blah blah, no one cares. I'll give it more thought.

[riseupwithfists]

I really need to watch Farscape, don't I?

(aka I am so sleepy this morning and can't really form a coherent response to anything but that part of your comment but that does not mean that I am ignoring it! Just. Sleepies.)

[gloss]

PLEASE WATCH FARSCAPE PLEASE PLEASE

[glitterandlube]

Yes.

eh, I was mostly babbling anyways.

[ex_troublesteady667]

I'm sorry you see this perspective often enough to justify full-on "ranting". :( For the longest time I haven't been able to comfortably explore fandom, and limit my fic- and meta-reading to people I trust to not be ignorant, or people they link to.

In a different angle to what I think is connected to what your point, I have oft met with the opinion that not writing/shipping het is not only misogynistic*, it also alienates and discriminates against straight people. The horrors!

*) presumably f/f doesn't exist? Or doesn't celebrate female characters as m/f does? Or something?