Case (
case) wrote in
fandomsecrets2017-09-25 06:35 pm
[ SECRET POST #3918 ]
⌈ Secret Post #3918 ⌋
Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.
01.

__________________________________________________
02.

(Dance Moms)
__________________________________________________
03.

[Star Trek: The Next Generation]
__________________________________________________
04.

[In Treatment]
__________________________________________________
05.

[Life]
__________________________________________________
06.

[glee & buffy the vampire slayer]
__________________________________________________
07.

[Hinterlands]
Notes:
Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 29 secrets from Secret Submission Post #561.
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.

Re: Is this right?
(Anonymous) 2017-09-26 05:46 am (UTC)(link)FWIW this is basically the substance of my issue with the phrase in general. it seems to me like it is used primarily if not exclusively with that sense. even if it's usually not as explicit as calling them locusts.
I don't remember what I had in mind when I used the word structural, exactly. But talking in terms of migratory fandom is a massive simplification that elides a ton of different things, and i'm not sure that the use of being able to describe faddishness in fandom outweighs the connotation and all of that side of things.
Re: Is this right?
(Anonymous) 2017-09-26 06:07 am (UTC)(link)I also get the irritation with the generalisation - generalisations are, after all, only useful up to a point if they are useful at all. And if there's a bunch of cultural baggage attached to migratory fandom I'm interested in a better term as well.