case: (Default)
Case ([personal profile] case) wrote in [community profile] fandomsecrets2014-07-01 06:38 pm

[ SECRET POST #2737 ]


⌈ Secret Post #2737 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.









Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 041 secrets from Secret Submission Post #391.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Sometimes it makes critical conversation impossible

(Anonymous) 2014-07-01 11:31 pm (UTC)(link)
One thing I absolutely despise about Tumblr is that, although it's great for sharing art and fan fiction, there is absolutely ZERO way to write any in-depth criticism of one's fandom without getting dog piled. I say this because a few days ago, I saw a great Tumblr user I follow write a post on Uhura and basically get called a racist because of it. All she said was that a problem in new rebooted Trek is that although Uhura has been made part of the new group of three, she wasn't given McCoy's humanism and didn't get her own independent plot line.

This poor user was absolutely torn to shreds by some other users on the site. They completely misrepresented her statements and accused her of attacking Uhura because she "gets in the way of" Spirk.

And it's ridiculous because a ten-second google search of that person's site revealed that there is absolutely zero Spirk on it. She doesn't ship it and she said as much. But because she wanted Uhura to get an expanded role, suddenly she's being portrayed as a "white fangirl" who is using "white feminism" to shit on black fans. It honestly makes discussion impossible because as soon as you tag anything with Uhura, these assholes come down and start screaming at you and accusing you of being a bigot.

Just to note, it's by no means all Uhura or Spuhura fans -- but there's a contingent that is so fucking aggressive that they'll take any criticism of the films and find a way to spin it into a personal attack.

Re: Sometimes it makes critical conversation impossible

(Anonymous) 2014-07-01 11:38 pm (UTC)(link)
Yup, this kind of thing. There are no conversations with actual back and forth on tumblr -- and the few that do exist are very unwieldy, since they usually take the form of reblogged response essays. And even those only happen between a very few fans.

Re: Sometimes it makes critical conversation impossible

(Anonymous) 2014-07-01 11:39 pm (UTC)(link)
This is exactly my problem with it. Fandom doesn't seem to thrive without earnest discussion andsomething about Tumblr seems to deter that and instead encourages dogpiling.

Incidentally I agree about Uhura. She was badass in TOS and it felt like she'd become more 2D in the reboot.

Re: Sometimes it makes critical conversation impossible

(Anonymous) 2014-07-01 11:48 pm (UTC)(link)
That and Tumblr has a REALLY nasty habit of turning everything into a personal attack. Disagree with someone? Hit them with ad hominems. Instead of actually discussing someone's post, people's characters are attacked ALL THE TIME. And it's ridiculous for a site that preaches tolerance to use "white fangirl" as a way to shut conversation down.

If someone actually says something racist, then quote the part of the post that is racist and EXPLAIN WHY IT IS RACIST. Because that actually facilitates discussion and understanding. But making assumptions about a real person's race and motives is just utter bullshit.

Re: Sometimes it makes critical conversation impossible

(Anonymous) 2014-07-01 11:54 pm (UTC)(link)
Precisely. People just seem to loe their heads. All I can think is that it's the format - the posts and notes system.

Re: Sometimes it makes critical conversation impossible

(Anonymous) 2014-07-02 01:07 am (UTC)(link)
I just think it's where all the trolls went. They are having a marvelous time.
allkindsoffur: (Evil)

Re: Sometimes it makes critical conversation impossible

[personal profile] allkindsoffur 2014-07-02 03:18 am (UTC)(link)
Where have all the tro-ho-lls gone? Under bridges everyone...;)

Re: Sometimes it makes critical conversation impossible

(Anonymous) 2014-07-02 05:36 am (UTC)(link)
Bad ass in TOS?

Re: Sometimes it makes critical conversation impossible

(Anonymous) 2014-07-02 06:09 am (UTC)(link)
Absolutely badass in Mirror, Mirror for example. Not only confronting Sulu but disarming another member of the ISS Enterprise. Or in I, Mudd when her acting (pretending to have given in to the promise of immortality) is crucial to the success of the team's plan -- along with her contributing role with Chekov when they dance.

Yes, her part was disappointingly small. But she was, nevertheless, badass. A lot of the credit is due to Nichelle Nichols who was, for example, able to turn a line about being an "illogical woman" into a bit of teasing towards Spock rather than denigration of her character.

off-topic, but...

(Anonymous) 2014-07-02 01:46 am (UTC)(link)
Spirk? Really. Is that what they call it?
I would use Kock myself.

Re: off-topic, but...

(Anonymous) 2014-07-02 03:27 am (UTC)(link)
No, no, no, Kock is the assbaby Kirk had after Spock shot his photon torpedo into Kirk's warp hole.
ellensmithee: (Default)

Re: Sometimes it makes critical conversation impossible

[personal profile] ellensmithee 2014-07-02 07:19 am (UTC)(link)
I'm sad that nu!Kirk/Spock fans apparently don't call them Kock!

Re: Sometimes it makes critical conversation impossible

(Anonymous) 2014-07-02 05:33 pm (UTC)(link)
Not that I disagree with the sentiment of your post, but I'd like to try to explain the frustration of Uhura fans.

There are more problematic characters in the reboot than Uhura, but Uhura is the character who gets the majority of discussion about how terrible she is. Kirk, for example, is much less than he was in the original series, but you see a fraction of the posts about that.

Many people explained that it isn't racism, it's sexism, denying the possibility that it could be both; however, enter Carol Marcus. Although her character does catch some flack, it is still a fraction of the amount that Uhura gets.

Now, people often try to suggest that it is just shipper stuff -- Uhura is disliked because she is with Spock, and many people believe that, but some see it as a racial issue.

I am not trying to suggest that everyone who dislikes the Uhura character is a misogynist bigot, but that their are racial and sexual issues at play that are so ingrained, people refuse to consider them.

Uhura is not as problematic as some others but she gets exponentially more negative discussion. People who live that experience, recognize it when they see it.

Does defensiveness = aggressiveness?

Re: Sometimes it makes critical conversation impossible

(Anonymous) 2014-07-03 12:24 pm (UTC)(link)
Sorry this is so late, but I wanted to respond to this. In my experience, whenever someone makes a post critical of the other characters, most people end up either agree or calmly disagree and explain why. With Kirk, for example, I've seen a lot of people lament how horribly he treats women in the reboot and how they dislike that the way he insults Spock -- making fun of his ears for instance. Also, basically no one will challenge you if you bring up that Kirk didn't deserve his captaincy and hadn't DONE anything. With McCoy, I've similarly seen people lament that he has a smaller role and has basically been reduced to Kirk's friend and a machine to spout off charming Southern phrases. And Carol's role I've seen criticized as well for being a damsel in distress and being introduced in importance through her father. Not to mention her underwear scene which got a ton of flak.

In each of these cases, most people will gladly consider your opinion and there's no accusations of racism or sexism made. It seems to me that the reason, in large part, that these don't get discussed as much is because almost everyone AGREES that these are flaws in the writing. So there's really nothing to discuss as everyone's in accord.

With Uhura, though, it's the complete opposite. And it's annoying because that same subset of Spuhura fans that will call you racist/sexist at the drop of a hat will also defend the BS that was done to other characters. For example, I've seen them defend Kirk peeping at Carol saying that it wasn't that bad. And I've also seen them suggest that reboot Kirk is better written than TOS Kirk because at least he has a reason to act the way he does given that his dad died. As though Kirk in TOS didn't witness a massacre when he was 13…

And, to be quite honest, I do think that shipping is a big reason. I've been in other fandoms and the way that Uhura's character is twisted in fanfic is basically exactly the same as the way Ron Weasley and Aang's characters were twisted in my other fandoms. It is not at all uncommon to read a fic where Ron is abusive towards Hermione to make way for Harmony or Dramione. Heck, the trope is even called "Ron the Death Eater." And yes it's mean and character bashing, but how the heck do you get misogyny or racism out of that? It's just that people are immature and characters that make up a canon pairing when there's a fanon pairing that's overwhelmingly more popular tend to get bashed.

But unless people are actually saying things that are racist or misogynistic, it feels like that fraction of Spuhura fans is trivializing real issues for a stupid ship war. Being defensive is understandable, but attacking people is not. That's what I mean by aggressiveness. It would be one thing if they defended the writing. But instead they try to shut conversation down by making implications about people and questioning their motives.