Mock. Mockmockmock. Mockity-mock-mock

12:51am: Old lesbian wankage
Someone reports "Arisugawa's Locket" to GAFF. People complain about the premise, the "everyone's gay!femslash", the non-canon pairings without backstory and explanation.

Then the author addresses the GAFF report in the story.

Small, but heated.

11:05am: fangirls, like rape in a way.
Posted for a mousie who seemed to put a lot of effort into this. I tried to fix your html as best as I could. Some of your links lead to wrong posts, but I can't do anything about that cause I can't find what you're talking about. But this is a pretty good wank but verrrrrrry long. Will cut some of this for you.


It's time for emo user names and lots of old-school vs. new school wank! Here's a fandom that hasn't been on F_W to my knowledge: the band 30 Seconds to Marsand their crazyass, hardcore fans, The Echelon. (Editors note: Yes they were or at least Jared Leto was.

It all starts with "old timer" Proxen dissing fangirls. He calls out oen particular group, the "Shannon Mafia", that is, girls who are particularly fannish over drummer Shannon Leto.

Lots of folks say, "word" and some ask, "what set you off on this subject?" Proxen points out a thread that is now sadly inaccessible, that had pictures of some of the girls posing in pictures with Shannon, and surrounding posts from other fans saying what "chemistry" said girls had with said drummer.

( People abandon their kids for the band, all women are whores and some grammar wank. )

( The drummer looks like he hates you, someone think of the children, old school was better, fangirls intimidate real fans. )

More fighting happens for a few pages, then...

( Fangirls have a personality disorder, Jared is asking for it. )

( Can't we all just get along, a sound file FTW, and if fangirls are okay, then scaring rape victims and masturbating under the bleachers should be okay too. )

The moral? Don't judge :30STM by their batshit fans. The music is actually good.

11:48am: Snape's always right! I know! I had teachers just like him!
Over on potter_cliche, marionros posts a rather interesting view of Harry and Snape.

theregoesmygun responds:

Hmm. On the one hand, I think Snape can often be very astute about situations. On the other hand, he is completely revolting to Harry from the first day they meet for no reason, and he often executes his prejudice against Harry in a way that disadvantages him greatly and unfairly.

I think Snape is a great example of a character who provides a more negative commentary to Harry, but I wouldn't go as far as to say that he's spoiled. Like Ginny, who probably gets a bit more slack than others due to her traumatic possession, I think people cut Harry a bit more slack similarly out of sympathy. It's not particularly fair, but his case is quite extraordinary in comparison to that of other students too.

And marionros proceeds pull out the stops..

In the middle of a long reply: So, disregard Harry's feelings on matters. Disregard what the narrator thinks about matters. Look at what really *happens* and you'll get another story.


And from that same reply:

McGonagal snubs Neville several times, and in such a way that the other children laugh at him. Snape snubs Neville several times, but no one laughs at Neville. Read the scenes where he does this again, dispassionately. If that's bullying... I grew up with a bully. A bully wants to see his or her victim cry, in total shambles. But what does Snape do? He berates Neville for botching his potion, telling him *why* (didn't put in porcupine quills or something like that - I don't have the text in front of me at the moment), then he turns on Harry next to Neville, berates Harry for not telling Neville about the quills, takes five points from Gryffindor and strides away. If this is what is meant by 'bullying Neville' I can only say that Snape is a lame bully.

Snape's and McGonegal's method of 'come on boy, grow a spine' has been fruitful. After three years Neville has grown into a fine wizard.

Um. Okay. I'm backing away slowly, now.

ETA: More WTFery insight from marionros:

I'm a historian. We get trained in our first year to question our sources. Who wrote/said that? Why did s/he write/say that? Is this a reliable source or not? Is this hearsay or experience. Is this experience coloured by political preference or by ignorance of the facts? Etc. Etc.

I'm also, like JKR, very fond of Agatha Christie mysterie novels. You just know that you can't go by first impressions. Link to full comment

I think in marionros' case, we can make an exception on the 'first impressions' thing.

7:33pm: if my brain hurt less, i'd give this a witty title
I'm surprised this didn't get mentioned here since its a few days old, but it did take a mouse on wankreport for me to see it so..meh. *shrug* ANYWAY, the never-wanky comm of fanficrants  had a post that was unwanky in itself here.  The spunky goodness came from a deleted comment that went:

"Just say, "well, you realize when you write ANY yaoi pairing, unless the couple is specified gay by the creator; it's going to be ooc anyway, right?" you'll probably get attacked, but some smart people (if any left in the world :\) may realize this too and stop attacking other author's and the like for writing about their preferred pairing in a way that's comfortable to them."

You can see the result just by scrolling down a bit and how EVERYONE came down on her like a sack of bricks.  Because psycho_gemini decided to take the path less traveled and just flip out on everyone over and over again.  Not only that, but she becomes so angered by des_butterfly that she follows her home to troll her journal.  And brings a friend along to help her wank as well.

Oy @_@

7:52pm: Ganked from clairvoyantwank.

aadler_ writes about his experience at writercon, particularly his bad experiences with slash oriented events. To sort through the irrelevent, boring stuff, you get:

There was a three-hour break scheduled for lunch. I thought there would be time to manage lunch after watching a Firefly vid made with action figures … but there were problems with setup that took some time to work out, and the vid itself was almost an hour long, so when it was over, so was the lunch period, and I just had to wait.

(I got some unpleasant vibes during the showing. Not from the vid itself; actual thought and plotting had been put into it, and there were some genuine comic moments. However, the story involved Mal and Jayne having sex with each other while under the influence of a pheromone-based drug, and then dealing with the aftermath, and I think my son and I may have been the only males in the room, and raucous reaction from the wholly-or-predominately female audience was unsettling and frankly seemed to have some hostile undertones. Left me in a sour mood.)

The mood was not improved by the next panel, “Who Are You People? Characterization”. Okay, note this: there were five panelists, and among them they had slashed Xander with Spike, Xander with Andrew, and Xander with Larry; in addition to which, one of them observed casually that she wrote a lot of Real Person Slash … and these were the people posed to us as authorities regarding accurate characterization. Just as a matter of form, wouldn’t attention to characterization include NOT habitually homosexualizing a major character who had been canonically presented as exclusively heterosexual? There’s no denying that slash is a major current in fanfiction … but, damn it, heterosexuality really is the human norm (not just a presumed standard, but the actual stance of the majority of the human race), and I’m getting almighty weary of having slash automatically assigned the default position in fanfic discussions.

It did, however, feature a moment that definitely got my attention. nwhepcat, not one of the panelists but offering an observation from the audience, related that there had been a lot of recent turmoil in DC fandoms, with the predominantly male population which had characterized the fandom until then being swamped by a huge new influx of interested females … and the ‘old guard’ pleading with the newcomers, “Don’t gay up our fandom!” nwhepcat related this without sympathy but likewise without glee; the others in the room, however, responded with a giant laugh. There are a couple of different ways to interpret this. If those hearing nwhepcat’s comment interpreted ‘gay up’ as simply the introduction of a less masculine viewpoint, then their response is understandable and justifiable. On the other hand, given my own recent experiences at WriterCon itself, it doesn’t seem far-fetched to see the plea as having come from a distaste for seeing an established fandom suddenly inundated in male/male slash.

Taken in its rawest form, that situation would go as follows: the people who formed and maintained a fandom for years, purely from love of the world and its characters, find themselves invaded by a new crowd enthusiastically producing (and celebrating) a mass of stories built around a premise revolting to the original fandom group and glaringly OOC for the fandom characters involved. (Imagine Buffy fandom being swamped by hordes of fifteen-year-old males who thought rapefic was the swellest thing ever, especially when the women — Buffy, Willow, Dawn, and let’s not forget Tara — discover they had actually wanted it all along.) The fandom is being flat-out ruined for its builders by something utterly alien and utterly incompatible with everything they originally loved in it … and when they beg for some relief from this to-them-horrible transfiguration, their distress is not only disregarded but seen as a source of hilarity.

That would indicate not just selfishness, but active meanness. And, even if the slashers in Buffyfic maintain that they’re not motivated by the smug satisfaction that comes from rubbing someone’s face in something that appalls him, it still feels, to those subjected to it, exactly like gleeful oppression.

The comments bring us:

I respectfully suggest that perhaps the fault lies in your own issues with sexuality, not in the faulty characterization or "smugness" of a certain set of writers.

So I don't get how that's any more "oppressive" than walking in a bookstore that has a big section on a subject you're not remotely interested in--you walk in, you look at the section sign, think, "Huh, not my cuppa," and you go browse another section.

Dunno that I'd automatically assume that the blurb quoted means that Mal & Jayne would have sex with each other. It could have been more clear. I especially would have wanted to know if I'd been attending with my child.

I do think that it must be a strange and slightly daunting experience to participate in what is a predominantly female, and predominantly queer-friendly culture if one is neither female nor queer.

And my personal favorite!

Which is to say, at the most simplistic level straight men pretty much think of sex in terms of getting to put one's penis inside someone else, and getting to have an orgasm. The potential for being violated, or even simply getting shagged and not being aroused/having an orgasm isn't part of that visceral concept of sex in the same way that it is for women.

9:32pm: There are many legitimate reasons to dislike gay people.

Longtime lurker, first-time wanka. Bear with me if my html goes wacky on us.

Over at scans_daily , kirke_novak  posts a panel from Ultimate X-Men #70 in which Nightcrawler (a visibly mutant hero) confides in comatose teammate Dazzler that he can no longer be Colossus's friend after learning that the latter is a homosexual.

Readers are naturally upset by this, since Nightcrawler's description of Colossus as an 'abomination' and the suchlike is pretty much exactly what people have been calling Nightcrawler himself for much of his life, simply because of his demonic appearance.

Some people think it's an unrealistic depiction of the character, because of this, while others think it's a fairly natural reaction for a very religious teenager without past exposure to such a thing. But overall, everything is very civil.

Then sir_montag  shows up to laud Nightcrawler for 'telling the truth', and proclaim that there are 'many legitimate reasons' to dislike gay people. Especially the part where their sexual behavior is 'devastating' in terms of the spread of AIDS.

Small as yet, but it's already taking off.