WE BATE THEM!!!

[kennahijja]

pornish_pixies

Fandom rocks *so* very much!
You've all seen the long-overdue post, I guess.

Ecstatic as I am, though, I have two - well, two-and-a-half - issues with things as they are:

1) Some fanfiction communities and fannish personal journals still remain suspended (you can see the details here). Though LJ might be working on those.

2) I won't breathe easily until there are safeguards in place to prevent something like this from happening again - I don't want to have to look over my shoulder (or want anyone else to) for fear of being targetted for writing stories/producing art.

2 1/2) I'm still pissed off over the way last week's "hoax" was laughed off publicly by LJ people, when they were in the process of setting up *exactly* what has been described. I would love to apologise to the brave soul who leaked this for disbelieving along with everybody else when the dementi came...

Of course what I'm still pissed about to no end (and have been for a long time) is the way people throw those of us who write about the darker/illegal sides of sexuality into the same pot with those who actually commit crimes. If I'm be interested in the discussion of incest, it doesn't mean I'll go and, heck, proposition my mother! The several hundreds of LJ users listing 'crime' in their LJ interests are not promoting the committing of it, nor will they shut off their computers and embark on mobster careers!

Sometimes I wonder if there's something more to this sort of thinking than just prudishness and a distinct inability to differentiate between reality and fiction, discussion and practice... Is there something so intimidating in women (and it is to a large degree women) exploring sexuality, light and dark sides, through fiction-writing that leads to such irrational responses? Because really, they talk about fandom escaping into a fictional/unreal world to hide from reality? Fandom at least has enough of a grip on reality (with some few exceptions, that is...) to distinguish between fiction and fact.

Comments

[elfflame]

Re #2:
Yeah, I'm not resting easy until they tell me what they're going to do regarding "interests" in the future, and give us a much clearer view of how they'll deal with this sort of complaint, too.

And I knew, last week, when everyone breathed easier, that it was too good to be true. And that's exactly how I feel now. That with pornish_pixies back, everyone will just go back to business as usual, and forget this all happened, which we really cannot afford to do right now. :S

[kennahijja.livejournal.com]

Exactly - I won't let my defenses down that easily again :(.

[mad_maudlin]

Re 2.5: The people who laughed off the hoax were LJ Abuse volunteer, who rightly believed it was ludicrous; they didn't know that 6A higher-ups were being badgered by WfI any sooner than we did. I, too, want to know more about the hoax and whether it was actually related to Strikethru, or just eerie timing; remember, though, that Abuse is staffed by volunteers who don't know must more about the ways and means of TPTB than us chickens, much of the time.

[kennahijja.livejournal.com]

Yes, you're right, looking into it a bit deeper it looks as if those who denied the rumour had possibility were as surprised to have it happening as the rest of us. Still, I find it hard to imagine it was just eerie timing... the parallels are just to specific, from 'outside pressure' to targetting interests, to the specific mention of incest and underage, to fannish pages being targetted... Of course I've seen huge coincidences since stumbling into fandom, but this massive?

But yes, I'd also want to learn more about this! There's an interesting link here, which narcissa_malfoy mailed me because of LJ glitches.

[snorkackcatcher]

2) I won't breathe easily until there are safeguards in place to prevent something like this from happening again - I don't want to have to look over my shoulder (or want anyone else to) for fear of being targetted for writing stories/producing art.

I doubt there can ever be thoroughly effective safeguards for this -- if you know you're operating near the edge of the cliff, checking over your shoulder from time to time is something you naturally want to do to avoid plunging onto the rocks, it's just common sense.


Is there something so intimidating in women (and it is to a large degree women) exploring sexuality, light and dark sides, through fiction-writing that leads to such irrational responses?

No, but I think that's a bit disingenuous. It wasn't the exploration of sexuality per se that caused the problem, it was the type of sexuality being explored. Anyone writing about (say) lesbianism or BDSM or orgies or all three at once wouldn't generate such a reaction. WFI in particular didn't seem to have a clue what the fiction comms were -- they were just collateral damage.

Basically, it's a Voltaire situation. It's important to defend this sort of writing on general principles, but it's also necessary to retain enough perspective to remember that it's a hard sell to anyone outside fandom (and it would be best in any future row to try to keep some of the loonier fen away from the front lines!)

[kennahijja.livejournal.com]

if you know you're operating near the edge of the cliff, checking over your shoulder from time to time is something you naturally want to do to avoid plunging onto the rocks, it's just common sense.

That's exactly the point that annoys me so - writing fictional stories should *not* place anyone at the edge of a cliff. And in almost any other context, it doesn't - anyone can write fiction (and get published) on anything from serial killers to the Mafia to war and the atomic bomb and whatnot. It's only illegality in a fictional *sexual* context that sends up the outcry.

Now I *am* a feminist, and I have huge issues with the exploitative nature of visual pornography, for example (not just the illegal stuff like child porn, that goes without saying, but also - to a lesser degree, of course - with legit porn in film/photograpy. Which, coincidentally, is produced mainly for men. On the other hand, *written* porn is produced (at least in fanfictive form on the net) largely (though not exclusively!) by women, for women. Visual pornography is exploitative because it's objectifying *real* people, while the feminine version is, well, focussing almost completely on the fictional *and* does not only see bodies, but pays attention to character.

I see that as a very good thing for two reasons: one, because no real people are harmed/degraded. No matter how dark stories get, they remain safely fictional. And two, because I see it as a reclaiming of pornography by women, who have, by the male version, been both objectified and excluded (as customers, or personalities). Fanfic porn is a non-commercial sharing between (not only, but mostly, you get it) women, and also a rejection of the (equally oppressive) concept of female purity/passivity/whatnot. I'm honestly not surprised that those stories can get dark, even very dark, because there's a lot there that simply hasn't been explored before to remotely such a degree. Especially since it takes the commercial aspect out of the issue, where the social pressures towards conformity would come in.

Though there's still a double-standard - I mean if John Norman's Gor novels could get published, why go up in arms against some Snarry rapefic on the net... (not saying you would - just comparing).

Ok, sorry for the would-be treatise - that's an issue I've been mulling over for a long time, and once it gets triggered I can't shut up :).

[snorkackcatcher]

That's exactly the point that annoys me so - writing fictional stories should *not* place anyone at the edge of a cliff. And in almost any other context, it doesn't - anyone can write fiction (and get published) on anything from serial killers to the Mafia to war and the atomic bomb and whatnot. It's only illegality in a fictional *sexual* context that sends up the outcry.

I'm not sure that's quite right, you know -- I'd say it's more generally illegality in (a) an emotive context where (b) that might be a reflection of the author's RL intentions that causes outcry. I think you'd need both (a) and (b) to get the effect. As a thought experiment, consider what might happen if someone wanted to publish fiction from the point of view of Al-Qaeda types, in which they were the 'good guys', their 'kill the infidels' mindset was treated positively by the author, and they succeeded in their goals in the story. The shitstorm that would follow would be immense.

More to the point, the nature of fanfic as opposed to published fiction is relevant here. If John Norman (or George RR Martin, for that matter) writes about these things, there may be a certain amount of concern, but the author is a known public figure to an extent. There's probably a tacit assumption that the publishers have determined that they are not in fact likely to do these sorts of things in actuality, or they would have been rejected. On the other hand, if some pseudonymous author on the Internet writes about them, it's hard to know where they might be coming from, especially if the story isn't well-written enough to be obviously 'literary' rather than personal. It wouldn't be an unreasonable attitude, even if we 'insiders' might identify it as merely fannish exploration or the kink-writing equivalent of a pissing contest.

[kennahijja.livejournal.com]

About your first point, yes, I see where you're coming from, but I'm still unable to make that jump fiction=author's real intentions (perhaps it sounds more outlandish to me than to others because I've been trained in literature studies, where the point author=/=narrator gets hammered into you from the start. And turned around, we've had tons and tons of positive depictions of 'kill the indians/commies/enemies of choice'... And there wasn't enough of a shitstorm (if much of any), over 'Silence of the Lambs', for example. I'm not saying you're wrong, but I still see a huge double standard when the issue of sex comes in (and not only with fictional portrayals of outright illegal things).

Of course you're right about one being unable to really distinguish between stories and intentions in anonymous net posts, but again, equating those seems (also from a personal pov) totally alien to me.

[snorkackcatcher]

I've been thinking about that off and on -- I probably shouldn't have got into this whole strikethrough'07 subject, as I have a number of different and often contradictory reactions to it -- but regarding the fiction=author's real intentions thing, well I suspect that's a perfectly reasonable assumption a lot of the time. It may seem alien to you because the field you're in doesn't habitually look at texts with that assumption?

All right, the author=narrator equivalence doesn't hold as a general result. It does hold rather often however, sometimes quite explicitly -- to use your 'kill the baddies' example, I happened to just be re-skimming a Tom Clancy story, and his authorial commentary is frequently quite obvious. From what I remember of Dickens, he's frequently the same (a standard Victorian style?). Even first-person in-character stuff can be -- if you read a lot of Dick Francis thrillers, although they're all first person, they all seem pretty much like the same person, having a sort of detached-observer feel (that can get irritating after a while). And as far as fanfic goes, there are certainly writers whose personal agendas scream at you from the text (including me sometimes, I imagine).

Therefore regarding anonymous net posts where you have little information but the post itself, and pornish_pixies specifically, well ... it does bill itself as 'The Community You Wank Off To'. Someone approaching it from outside could hardly be blamed for taking this at face value and thinking that chan/incest fics were included in that, and therefore that the comm contained some genuine paedophiles. (Among the 5000+ watchers, it very possibly does, but that's just bad luck.) As nineveh_uk said in a comment to my post on the subject, "re. the interest lists, part of me is inclined to think that if people choose to pour steaming yellow liquid into a swimming pool, they can't complain about being sent back to the changing rooms without chemical analysis being done first to discover that it's merely food colouring".

[melusinahp.livejournal.com]

I love this a lot. It spells out a bunch of messy thoughts in my brain. Would you mind if I quoted it on my LJ crediting you, babe? And, hey, do you still need me to do that beta? My hd_hols is all done and submitted.

[kennahijja.livejournal.com]

Well, it *is* pretty much a bunch of messy thoughts in my brain - which perhaps at one point I should turn into an essay, so that I don't waffle on every time I have the chance :). But sure you can quote!

Beta... *ducks*... I got a bit of extension, and it looks as if it'll be late (RL has suddenly turned into a vortex/rollercoaster, *shivers*). Would you still be willing if it comes in a couple of days?

[melusinahp.livejournal.com]

You should totally turn it into an essay so then I can just link to your post instead of bothering to write my own. Hee.

Send it over whenever it's ready. I'm doing loads of Sectus and autsim stuff, but I have no fic commitments at the moment, so it should be fine. :D

[ejab62.livejournal.com]

I honestly think that many of those people are very unhappy themselves. Really. When I look around in my own *real* world, the people who shout, try to control and are quick to judge are all unhappy and (dare I say it?) scared.
If you feel you have a sense of control over your own life, are pleased with yourself and the way your life has turned out to a certain level, you honestly couldn't care less about other people's lives. You'd be too busy living your own!

Just my humble opinion.

[kennahijja.livejournal.com]

Yes - that would explain a lot :).

[melusinahp.livejournal.com]

I can't tell you how many posts I've read during the course of all this that started out, "Well, I don't read chan or incest or non-con and think the people who write it are creepy, but still LJ is bad for what they did!'

Grrr. I sort of feel like despite the uproar some sections of fandom would happily sacrifice all the dark fic writers to keep themselves safe.

[kennahijja.livejournal.com]

Yes - that annoys me to no end as well! I'm not bloody creepy (only the most boring thing in the world), and I dunno... dealing with 'darker impulses' through fiction sounds saner to me than not dealing with them at all. Maybe that's what's behind the 'creepy' comments...

[snorkackcatcher]

I sort of feel like despite the uproar some sections of fandom would happily sacrifice all the dark fic writers to keep themselves safe.

No, because they wouldn't necessarily be that safe -- when a wave of moral panic strikes, it's important to try to stop it in the first ditch rather than the last before it builds up a head of steam. (Wasn't that a splendid mixed metaphor, eh?) On the other hand, I think it's useful for fans of this stuff to stop and take a good look at how far off-centre it actually is for most people -- if for no other reason than that there's a better chance of formulating a successful response then.

[melusinahp.livejournal.com]

Oh, I'm fully aware of how horrifying and weird some of the stuff I write must seem to the uninitiated. If I'd come across Harry Potter chan without any introduction to fandom, I'm sure I would have been totally outraged.
Now, I see it very differently.

But, you know? It still really bugged me to see a bunch of people on my Flist talking about how they don't respect people who write chan or non-con.

[snorkackcatcher]

One of the many things that depends on the person doing it, I think. There are some I don't respect, because they appear to be idiots.

[ex-ms-katoni171.livejournal.com]

I'm not hopeful that it won't happen again, I'm really not. Six Apart has proven dramatically that it doesn't care about LJ users, and it's got no scruples whatsoever about coming down on hard on things it or its advertisers don't like.

A year ago, I could never even have thought about leaving LJ. Now? Only the presence of my flist is keeping me here.

[kennahijja.livejournal.com]

Of course I've never operated under the illusion that Six Apart cares about LJ users - they care about profit like all good capitalists, nothing else.

I'm not attached to LJ in particular, but to fandom, but overall, I'm more in favour of fighting such challenges on LJ rather than mass exodus - because those things are bound to be happening again, and showing strength is always a better option than encouraging more of the same by evading conflict. Though really, it depends - if it keeps happening, it might be worthwhile to consider moving...

[narcissa-malfoy.livejournal.com]

Since LJ won't let me post my long, thoughtful reply, (though apparently it lets me post everything else. Again, so sorry :)), I'm just going to say: Word.

[kennahijja.livejournal.com]

Thanks for the long reply by email, though! :)

[narcissa-malfoy.livejournal.com]

Thanks for replying :)

[karaontai.livejournal.com]

I really could say a lot about this particular topic -- unfortunately I would upset people very near and dear to my heart with my opinion :-(. So, somethings shall be better left unsaid....
But if "Silence of the lambs" was written from Hannibal Lector's viewpoint -- it wouldn't not be published. That is just to disturbing -- but very interesting to profilers and psychologist in general. See how a disturb mind works.
The insight that can be gained through people's writing is for students of psychology really amazing -- and that's why it is best to always censor yourself (I know you guys don't believe in censorship), because what sounds innocent to oneself might be offensive to someone else at best -- at the worst giving someone else a really good luck into ones subconscious (it). And that might get one labeled in a not so positive way.
Know I will stop I have already said too much.......

[kennahijja.livejournal.com]

You know you can always slap me by email if you feel more comfortable with that than posting in public, right? :)

Admittedly, I haven't gotten very far into the novel version of 'Silence of the Lambs', but seeing the film(s) I had the strong impression that he was set up as, well, at least an antihero of sorts. But that the audience was - to a degree - invited to identify. Which, admittedly, made me pretty uneasy, but that's not saying it shouldn't be done just because of that. Or (you've seen 'Gladiator', right?) inviting quite a bit of the bloodthirstiness it condemned on the surface in the viewer...

The great advantage of fandom is that I *don't* have to censor myself :). And well, of course some things may be offensive to others - but would I stop following my political convictions just because someone else might not like them? Not likely. For me, one of the fun things about writing the dark stuff is *that* it gives me a quirky look into my own subconsciousness. Though I'm not sure how far it goes - I may enjoy to go very dark in writing, but it's still not remotely *me* - just things to play with... Which may not make sense :(.

[karaontai.livejournal.com]

" I may enjoy to go very dark in writing, but it's still not remotely *me* - just things to play with" --

Well let's put it this way -- I don't see a reason or benefit from exploring this particular kind of darker sexulality. Maybe that is because I have been "played with" -- and there is absolutely nothing sexual about it -- meaning it has nothing to do with sex. But control only -- the forcing of someones will upon a person who cannot defend themselves prpoerly.
Sex is about pleasure not control!
And I would gladly (and I am sure millions of other "victims" would do so too) change places with anyone seeing the slightest need to explore this in anyway.
They take our dignity, our feelings and our trust!! Things that can never be replaced!!!
Your political convictions are opinions -- they don't hurt another person. The things described in some fandom have been done and are hurtful to someone else -- in a mirrad of ways! Something each of us will have to deal with for the rest of our lifes -- something that still causes problemes, even a quater of a century late!!!

So, I am sorry if I don't cry myself a river for people getting suspended over incest or rape.....

[kennahijja.livejournal.com]

I think it's perfectly possible and acceptable to be interested in something, or write about something, without approving of it - otherwise, researching the NSDAP's rise to power would have made me a Nazi, or crashing a certain ship on the epetais Moredon and Rustazh would have made you approve of murder, or that coming up with several *very* dodgy family trees would have made us incest supporters. Not to mention that in this particular case, some of the journals originally suspended were incest/rape survivors' accounts.

Your political convictions are opinions -- they don't hurt another person.
My stories are fiction - they don't hurt a living soul either, and they carry enough warnings to make sure that anybody who might be upset/hurt by the content can *not* read. I'm not sure where the difference is, apart from that politics run a slightly greater risk of becoming dangerous.

I don't see a reason or benefit from exploring this particular kind of darker sexulality.
Which is a perfectly valid point, and exactly what warnings are for - to alert people to things that may be offensive or painful or plain uncomfortable, so they can avoid them.

What's unacceptable in my opinion is to argue that things that offend/bother/hurt me should not be written. Are you really saying that everything that has ever done harm to people cannot been written about? Which would kill about 95% of literature from Oedipus (incest) to Harry Potter (murder and torture) to the bible (all of the above and worse)? I'm totally with you on abuse being about power, not sex, of course, but not on making everything that we fight in real life a taboo topic for writing. I don't think it's possible, and definitely not desirable.

Call me paranoid, but I think that the step from that sort of argument to saying 'books that don't agree with my religious/political/moral convictions should not be outlawed', or 'information about sex ed or family planning should not be allowed' is pretty small. That's why I'm reacting so vehemently to censorship even in cases that seem 'reasonable' to mainstream opinion - as someone put it, free speech isn't there to protect the right to write about kittens, which nobody would object to anyway; it's there to protect the uncomfortable stuff that's *not* sitting well with mainstream opinion. Unless it's to incite political or religious hatred, where I'd draw the line. But fiction and creativity?

[karaontai.livejournal.com]

Alright point taken LOL. I don't think we can come to an greement on the topic of suspended incest accounts!!! So let's not!! To many hurt feelings on both sides.

"What's unacceptable in my opinion is to argue that things that offend/bother/hurt me should not be written. Are you really saying that everything that has ever done harm to people cannot been written about?"

No, it should be written about and I don't have a problem with that -- the way it is written is what I have a problem with. A factual written explanation/exporation of any terrible situation (Holocaust for instance) is very very useful and can help people avoid that such a thing will ever happen again! Now a glorification of the Holocaust is a totally different story, isn't it. A book about a camp guard and how he/she enjoys their work is very much wrong (lack of better word sorry), especially if it doesn't included at least the smallest mentioning of that person being uncomfortable with the situation at all.
I think it is not so much the writer/author or the topic that makes people feel uncomfortable, but what other individuals can use it for, or reading into it and will then go and do strange things. Of course this is in no way the authors fault or intend (I Know) and the author shouldn't be punished for that -- they just need to be really careful about what they say -- why else would we want to try and stop the production and sale of guns???? Guns don't kill people -- people do. But most people (but the gun lobby) think differently. Even here they are trying to get rid of the tool, not the actual perpurtrader (us). Now why is that???
And by the way what we did with our Klins stayed between us. Only if it becomes public, it becomes a problem (sometimes).
It is not that I do agree with cencorship, it is just that I (apparently) have a hard time grasping the real importance of this rebellion.... One has to pick and chose it's battles! There are soo many more important issues out there to start something over. Just go ahead and get another account and do it all over again. Eventually they give up and it will all blow over. They are just cleaning up, because they want to go public. After that is done -- everything will be ack to normal. Buisness as usual. Nothing ever changes!!!
And you do know that there is no such thing as "Freedom of speech" a lie by any other name to pacify people. Make them think they have rights even if they don't.....

So, still want to be my friend???LOL ;-)

[kennahijja.livejournal.com]

Sure :). What's wrong with a frank discussion between friends? :)

I'm pretty certain that we're disagreeing because this hits close to home for both of us (though more for you, most certainly), just from opposite angles...

Agreed that guns kill people... but rolled-up wads of paper? Not so much, although in the battle of Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix and the proverbial whale, I'd bet on the Phoenix...

Meh - now I'm back to reading up on HP and Marketing for tonight's session - and this is one of the *very* few instances I wish I had studied economy...

[karaontai.livejournal.com]

Alright then -- still love you too -- :-) XOXOX

Ecomomics or Buisness??? LOL But it does sound interesting though.... HP marketing I mean. Economics sucks!!! Baeh... boring!!!!
Good luck!!!