fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #3519 ]

[ SECRET POST #3519 ]

⌈ Secret Post #3519 ⌋

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

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 41 secrets from Secret Submission Post #503.
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.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Speaking as someone who has shipped a few things that tumblr would undoubtably attack as "problematic" if the fandoms were big enough, but fortunately has mostly managed to avoid that ugliness...

I think the OP's point is that in modern shipping discourse, well-meaning SJW types manage to interpret statements like " I think these characters/actors have interesting chemistry and dynamic. However, I recognize that it would probably never work out healthily in canon, and so am perfectly fine with that" as "Omg...they are in tru luvvvv!! Why can't I have a relationship as perfect and romantic as Bella and Edward, Harley and Joker, Phantom and Christine..."

Granted, there are a few fans that do view things in that way. But they typically grow out of it without the purity police on their backs. ( I had a few villain crushes myself but I quickly recognized that they would not be appealing in real life).

You see a lot of the same discourse with Rey/Kylo (which I don't ship btw but some of my mutuals do). People assume that "these characters have an interesting dynamic and it will be interesting to see the narrative impact they will have on each other" translates as "Kylo Ren is an innocent lamb who will flourish in the light because of tru luv," when really what most shippers are going for is "Kylo Ren is currently a shithead who nevertheless displays moral complexity enough that he may eventually tiptoe towards the light."

^ Which is like exactly why I was all about Rebecca/Sir Brian from Ivanhoe when I was 15. Even though I recognized even then that I never want a Sir Brian irl

But a lot of SJW like to infantalize shippers and assume that everyone is either

(a) a naive child who is danger of being taken advantage of because of their youthful romanticness

(b) an abuse survivor who is attracted to the dark characters because of childhood trauma (and they always want proof of this)

(c) all of the above.

I feel like that is what the OP is getting at. Not whether or not Harley/Joker is abusive (since most people would recognize that it is), but that one can no longer have a conversation about their dynamic without automatically being accused of being an abuse-apologist/abuse-romanticizer.

Oh, I'm a ship and let ship person, generally speaking.

^^^ Yes, I can completely agree with all of what the other person said.

But I think it's also interesting to note that het ships (and to a lesser extent femmslash) are far more often accused of being "problematic" or "abusive" than slash ships--even when they are comparable.

Some examples that come to mind are: Doctor/Female-Companion-of-Choice (co-dependent), CaptainSwan ("abusive" b/c he used to be a villain)

Compare...

BBC!Sherlock/Moriarity (stalkery, abusive, co-dependant), Blaine/Kurt (co-dependant, possessive)

This is even true to a lesser extent with femmslash ships (even though femmslash is rare in fanon and even rarer in canon ). OUAT's SwanQueen ( abusive b/c Regina was a villain) and Rose/Luisa from JTV (co-dependant/ abusive ) have much more ugly discourse surrounding them than Valjean/Javert (co-dependant/ potential to be abusive/enemies) or Merthur (co-dependant/unequal)

A particularly interesting example is Doctor/Master. 10/Master is just as "problematic" as 12/Missy and just as interesting narratively. Yet somehow when the Master re-generated into a woman, all of sudden there was some "12/Missy is abusive and gross" drama.

^And before I get accused of being an apologist, it's important to note that I don't ship any of these pairings. I just find it scary that we can't even seem to have ship- conversations without being tarred and feather as "apologists" and that so much of it seems focused around ships with female characters.

This is a very good point.

I'm only really familiar with your OUAT examples, and don't ship CaptainSwan because (among other reasons) sorry he's still a douche, and while I can see the potential in SwanQueen I won't ship it until the show addresses what Regina did to Henry (her son, not her dad) and especially Graham (so, never, basically) I really can't see shipping Sherlock/Moriarty unless it was rival hatesex/pschological warfare (which would also be interesting to see for SwanQueen and Captain Swan, but I never see either shipped as dark ships. The few shippers I saw acknowlege that Captain Swan had potentisl to be a dark ship were pretty much driven underground. Not sure about SwanQueen; "lesbian true love fairytale" was already going strong as the dominant theme when I started watching.

Wait... which one in 12/Missy is supposed to be the abuser?

I would assume Missy? (Although I'm sure there are some stans out there who believe that she is perf and a kween because she's a woman. The fandom is old, and full of crazy.)

The Doctor/Master thing might be at last partly attributable to fannish attitudes.

The last time there was a Doctor/Master pairing was 10/Simm!Master, in the very beginning of 2010. While there were people who were pointing out that it was abusive, most Doctor/Master shippers were going "yeah, that's what makes it interesting" and writing our fucked-up porn.

Now, sadly, the fandom culture has shifted to where pointing out "problematic" ships is a mainstream activity.

This. The 10/Master fics I used to read were *very* aware that it was extremely fucked up.

I mean, you are probably right that fandom is more protective of female characters and treating them more fragile whereas similar behavior in m/m ships is seen as 'normal' guys being guys, but I'd say m/m shipping attracts just as much bullshit and ship shaming. Even lots of ship wars between m/m despite the very low probabilities of a homosexual ship ever happening. Shipping isn't fun anymore.

On the double standard, I agree. I often see Ivy/Harley presented as the 'healthy' alternative, even if in many comics she's smacked Harley around, verbally degraded her, left her to be caught, etc.

MTE

I love that you loved Rebecca/Brian de Bois-Gilbert, too. <3

Did you ever make a secret about it, by any chance? I remember a secret waaayyy back, maybe 10 years ago now, about their relationship. I even saved it on my old laptop, because I was so glad to know someone else shipped them, and which might still be around here somewhere...

This is so true. I am so over tumblr trying to """"protect"""" people they have no responsibilities over and shame people for liking relationships that are fucked up, less than perfect, or even impossible. Some people just might find some stuff aesthetically pleasing or the character interactions interesting, and you're right about the younger people eventually growing out of romanticizing it... but even if they don't it's their own business and their own life choices to make.

I really hate how now tumblr even has a hate boner over rival shipping. Apparently any sign of competitiveness between two characters or two characters not agreeing or being super nice and supportive to each other 100% of the time is somehow super abusive and good enough reason to shame shippers and bash characters.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

[ SECRET POST #3519 ]

no subject

no subject

Is there also a double-standard? (Not OP)

Re: Is there also a double-standard? (Not OP)

Re: Is there also a double-standard? (Not OP)

Re: Is there also a double-standard? (Not OP)

Re: Is there also a double-standard? (Not OP)

Re: Is there also a double-standard? (Not OP)

Re: Is there also a double-standard? (Not OP)

Re: Is there also a double-standard? (Not OP)

Re: Is there also a double-standard? (Not OP)

no subject

no subject

no subject