Sincere questions for antis
If anyone feels like taking me up on it.
1. Where is the research on how media you consume can directly, negatively affect your values? Everything I’ve seen says that, on the whole, it makes you more empathetic and thoughtful, things which would be directly counter to the normalization of horrifying acts.
2. What is your basis for saying that what someone enjoys in fiction or fantasy is what they enjoy in real life, or would enjoy if they had a chance? You make fun of the argument “enjoying horror doesn’t make you a murderer”, but I’ve never seen a meaningful counter to that.
3. What is it about sex that makes something inherently bad? I’ve seen a lot of arguments along the lines of, “Portraying X is fine so long as it’s not sexual”, but isn’t being sexual a part of many people’s lives, good and bad? How are you coming to the conclusion that people universally endorse the reality of the ideas that they find sexually arousing?
4. Why do the needs of victims who are triggered by content overrule the needs of victim who find comfort in communities surrounding that content? Isn’t the solution to just keep the communities as separate as possible?
5. What is your goal? Do you really think removing all the content you find objectionable from a fandom is possible? Do you really want to leave a string of suicides in your wake of victims who blame their trauma on the fiction they chose to create and consume?
There questions are asked in good faith, and I’d love it if you answered in good faith. With reliable sources, if at all possible.
We have to talk. We have to. We have to come back to the middle, at least a little bit, or fandom and creative communities all over the internet are going to tear themselves apart. So: it’s possible that I’m wrong. I don’t think I am, but I try as hard and as often as possible to prove myself wrong, to combat confirmation bias. So: prove me wrong. How did you get to where you are, and what’s your evidence?
Fandom is a reflection of the real world, it isn’t what happens when “morally questionable” media is embraced.
When a movie or show has an inclusive cast of characters and fandom makes everything about white characters (and, for the record, this happens again and again across multiple fandoms, including Blade, Bright, and Orange is the New Black to name just a few), that says something about the real world. We know that something is harmful. The empathy gap – which can be summed up as feeling white pain but not Black pain – is real (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3108582/), and serious, and it’s on display every day in fandoms.
The Last Jedi didn’t make anyone more empathetic to Kylo than Finn. In fact, the narrative did not ask that of the audience at all.
Media does influence how we see the world, though. Decades of all white Westerns, for example, have acted as historical revisionism, causing people to believe that all real Old West “cowboys” were white. That is far from the truth (http://www.pkwy.k12.mo.us/west/teachers/boles/student_work/west_webfall08/DanB%20West/DanBDiversity.html).
And there have been studies showing that TV can, if fact, induce racism. (https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/research_digest/does_tv_make_us_racist). Findings of the Berkeley study include:
Researchers studied how viewers were affected by nonverbal behavior on 11 popular television shows, such as CSI: Miami. Characters on these shows displayed more negative nonverbal behavior toward African-American characters than toward white characters. Exposure to pro-white nonverbal behavior increased racial bias among viewers, as determined by a test that measures unconscious biases, even though viewers did not report noticing patterns of biased behavior on TV. This study suggests that subtle nonverbal behavior on TV can influence racial bias in the real world. —Kat Saxton
This is an interesting study, but the fact is, viewers will demonstrate bias against Black characters even without negative nonverbal behavior toward them. All they have to do is exist. (Citation: Many years of watching and participating in fandoms first hand.)
I think 1-2 have been answered by @diversehighfantasy or rather redirected to more relevant questions. To add on, my response to Question 3 is that I don’t have a problem with sexualizing a situation/relationship itself, but I do have a problem with being told that harnful behaviors are actuallly unobjectionable and is/should be canon. For instance, that a minor-adult sexual relationship is unharmful or beneficial, that torture and mass murder are justifiable acts of war, or that it’s not abusive to tell a woman she is nothing except to a specific man.
On Questions 4 and 5, my goal is not to remove shipping or shipping content, and I do not know any anti who thinks that’s a feasible goal. For the most part antis I know go to great lengths to avoid content we find objectionable, including filtering and blocking, and excluding some shippers from our own self-organized fandom activities like blog rings and Discord chats.
I think one main source of misunderstanding is that you as the op don’t see the difference between “This fandom trend is a reflection of real life biases and decreases the enjoyment of marginalized fans” and “This fandom trend must be forbidden altogether.” It is possible to criticize a thing without infringing on the right of others to enjoy it. Critique is not the same thing as prohibition, and the right to create and enjoy content doesn’t mean the right to be free of criticism.
Okay, I want to give an in-depth response to these points, but I wanted to first clarify something that may have gotten lost as this post left the context of my blog:
It is possible to criticize a thing without infringing on the right of others to enjoy it. Critique is not the same thing as prohibition, and the right to create and enjoy content doesn’t mean the right to be free of criticism.
I 100% agree. I’ve actually said the same thing multiple times, and I am vocally pro-criticism, especially regarding racism in fandom.
(As a side note: the original post was way more about sexual policing than racial criticism, as I think they’re different issues that need to be handled differently. To that end, I’m probably going to remove the anti-Reylo tag from the original post, as I’m not involved enough with the fandom to properly address any racial issues there. It was far more about the question of whether shipping enemies together is romanticizing abuse, but there’s years of discourse aside from that that I’m just straight-up not informed on.)
Honestly, this is the first moderately pleasant interaction with antis that I’ve had. To understand where I’m coming from, it’s helpful to understand that most of the antis who have sought me out – and therefore the extent of my exposure to this side of the fandom – have been people like this. Or this. Or this. Or the Halsey thing. Or this. Or – ok, you get the point. So that’s the perspective I’m coming from. I’m anti-harassment of creators, not anti-criticism of fandom trends and fanworks.
And in my view, right now, many creators aren’t even hearing the valid criticism over the harassment.
Further responses to @diversehighfantasy and @lj-writes specific points below the cut.
I’m glad you find the exchange productive. I think this is one of the few reasonable exchanges I’ve had with someone who is critical of antis, too. Both @diversehighfantasy and I are aware that there are antis who are harassers and speak against it. I see harassment as a simplification and degradation of social justice-based critique, but that’s a different subject.
I have two points I’d like to add in response to your answer. First: I think it’s a false metric to focus exclusively on whether fictional portrayals transfer directly to reality. The people who create and, more relevantly in this case, consume fanworks are real people. It negatively affects, say, a Black fan to be constantly reminded of racism in her fandom activities, or a transgender fan to have transphobic portrayals thrown in his face, and so on. It is not fun to see your real-life oppression celebrated in the spaces where you go to have fun. It’s long been pointed out that fandom, just like society at large, is extremely hostile to marginalized groups, and “antis” are often trying to make fandom more inclusive by raising awareness.
Second, on a related note, “tag/warn appropriately” only works when the content creator is self-aware enough to tag or warn. If I’m writing, say, a slave AU fic I am likely to add appropriate tags and warnings, but if I am, say, romanticizing emotional abuse in a fic I am probably not self-aware enough to include a warning for that. The people who create this content are the same ones who are likeliest to respond with angry denials if called on it. Implicit bias is difficult to tag or warn for because it’s, well, implicit. That’s where awareness raising and criticism come in.
This may also be an area where we come from really different contexts, by the way, since I think most sexual content and pairings are easily recognized and tagged. The complexities of social and psychological phenomena like racism, not so much.
I would argue that even tagging is an imperfect solution, though. If, say, the first 1,000 search results for fics including a character are pedophilic pairings, or–more likely–racist stereotypes and romanticization of abuse are rampant in fanworks, that sends a message. It has a cumulative effect on fans even if they can avoid objectionable fanworks.
On solutions, in addition to marginalized fans speaking out, fans also have implemented solutions like blocking and excluding fans of an objectionable ship (which shippers criticize as “gatekeeping”), circulating lists of objectionable fanwork creators, or circulating non-objectionable fanfic recommendations. I think a more curated fanwork database may be a solution as well, though it would be substantially smaller than free submission databases.



