Snape Would Probably Think That Fandom Was Full Of Gryffindors

[kerravonsen]

There's been a lot of fail and outrage in fandom recently.

1. There is FAIL.
2. OUTRAGE ensues.
3. Failer becomes defensive and perpetrates more FAIL.
4. OUTRAGE doubles.
5. Failer's friends protest and perpetrate additional FAIL.
6. OUTRAGE triples.
7. Optimistic fools wonder aloud why we can't all just be friends.
8. OUTRAGE quadruples, this time directed at those who are outrageous enough not to join in the OUTRAGE.

I wish, I just wish that for once, the cycle would be cut off before step 3. Six words: "I'm sorry. It won't happen again."

I am not an optimistic fool, but in many things I am a pragmatist. Or perhaps I simply have different goals. I would hope that the goal of the OUTRAGE is to prevent FAIL. To change behaviour. Anger is a legitimate reaction to FAIL. When it becomes excessive, however, it not only becomes unreasonable, but it becomes ineffective, indeed counter-productive at the goal of preventing FAIL. And we get Step 5 and beyond.

We also get a chilling effect on others.
There is a story on my bunny-list which is set during the aftermath of an earthquake in the 1970s. I am having second thoughts about finishing it, due to fear of OUTRAGE being directed at me.

There's another reason I'm wary of participating in OUTRAGE. It's the pragmatist in me, again. Peer pressure is a common social tool for changing behaviour. But I am not a peer of these particular Failers. I am a stranger, they don't know me from Adam, they don't care what I think. Me joining in the OUTRAGE would not help.

The other side of that is that, well, I don't care what they think either. Why should I care what a complete stranger says anyway? Really. Someone is WRONG on the Internet. Big deal. Fail happens. Stupid happens. It will keep on happening. I am not going to fix the world by yelling at it. Keep calm, be polite. Lose your temper, lose the argument.

Take the latest round of FAIL. So someone made an insulting remark about people "being off their meds" because they disagreed with them. Yes, that's stupid and insulting. I'm "on meds" myself, and guess what? I am NOT taking that remark personally. I am not taking it as an insult to every person on the planet who is "on meds" either. (Or every person on the planet "on meds" who doesn't ship Doctor/Rose). I don't care. I simply don't care what this random stranger said. I don't give a stuff. Who is this person? Do they have a lot of influence or responsibility? No?(*) Then the potential for harm from their attitude is small. Why should I waste my time on something so unimportant in the scheme of things, then?

(*) Or, at least, they didn't until the OUTRAGE brought fandom's attention to them.

Perhaps this is bringing out the inner Slytherin in me.

ETA: Due to this post being linked to by metafandom and becoming a classic example of Step 8 of the above cycle, this post has been f-locked.

ETA 2: I've changed my mind after calming down and some positive advice. This entry is no longer f-locked, but comments are frozen, and new comments are screened.

Comments

(frozen)

[tptigger]

So I guess I'm a typical Ravenclaw for having missed said Fail altogether? Nose buried in a book? (I agree with your analysis though. I see stuff like that, and just make a not to ignore those people until they go away.)

(frozen)

[jaythenerdkid]

Honestly, I think I need to listen to my inner Slytherin a bit more often when it comes to fannish stuff. (I listen to her all the time in RL! Why can't I do the same on the internet?) I've decided I'm just going to chill with my flist for a while until people stop failing quite so much.

(frozen)

[kerravonsen]

I suspect that the rate of Fail has remained constant, it's just that the reportage about Fail has increased.

(frozen)

[jaythenerdkid]

I don't know, it really does seem as though people have been at each other's throats even more than usual lately. I've got a couple of Ten/Rose shippers on my flist, and the mood in their flocked entries is really, really tense - just like the mood in my flocked entries, actually. I could have sworn it wasn't like that a couple of weeks ago.

(frozen)

[boosette]

I wonder sometimes whether the OUTRAGE isn't intended to change the behavior of the failers, but to pre-emptively change the behavior or the onlookers within the group of the outraged.

(frozen)

[kaosalchemist]

When fail happens I sit back and laugh for the most part. Because its always so ridiculous.

(frozen) Here via metafandom

[sashajwolf]

Often it's just a genuine expression of the pain and anger the Fail caused someone, not particularly designed to achieve anything. That kind of expression can be useful in itself for the people affected by Fail, and I don't think they should be required to hold back from that kind of expression if they do find it helpful.

Whether it also changes behaviour depends on the recipient, I think - I certainly think I've made more progress in addressing my own racism since I started hanging out on communities where it was clear that POC were not going to be discouraged from expressing their anger about race-related Fail, and from there I've made progress on other forms of prejudice as well. Some people do better with calm, reasoned arguments, but some need to be confronted with the emotional impact of what they've done, or need a combination of both. Often one of the ways allies can help is to do the calm, reasoned stuff, because they don't have the same strength of emotional response.

(frozen) Re: Here via metafandom

[kerravonsen]

(golly, I've been mentioned on metafandom)

Often it's just a genuine expression of the pain and anger the Fail caused someone, not particularly designed to achieve anything.
You have a point there. But... it's one thing to express the pain and anger in one's own space. It's another thing to invade someone else's space (I mean, somewhere one doesn't normally hang out) and express one's pain and anger all over complete strangers. Because that tends to escalate the OUTRAGE/FAIL cycle.

Some people do better with calm, reasoned arguments, but some need to be confronted with the emotional impact of what they've done, or need a combination of both.
That is also a good point. Some people do react primarily to emotion rather than reason. Such people baffle me, but I can't deny that they exist.

(frozen)

[kerravonsen]

Oooh, now I really know this post has been mentioned on metafandom: I just had to delete an anonymous troll comment. Does that mean that I've Made It?

(frozen)

[kerravonsen]

I guess... the tension has increased because the OUTRAGE/FAIL cycle is happening, rather than the Fail going unremarked and stopping at step 1. That's what I meant about the reportage of Fail increasing.

(frozen)

[jaythenerdkid]

Ah, yes. That makes sense. Though it seems to have died down a bit now? Or maybe I've just become wilfully ignorant.

(frozen)

[jaythenerdkid]

Yes, I saw that! Did you get an IP?

(frozen)

[kerravonsen]

Yes, but I forgot to make note of it. What exactly would I have done with the IP if I had?

(frozen)

[jaythenerdkid]

Since it was in reply to my comment, I was going to ask for it so that I could compare it to the IPs of people posting on my LJ and DW. I probably wouldn't have gotten any hits - I can't see anyone I know well anonymously trolling me on someone else's journal - but I thought it might have belonged to one of the strangers who've commented on my LJ recently. Also, since I'm fairly sure the meme has IP logging on at the moment, if the meme mods are happy to give away IP information, you could have maybe compared notes with them and seen if the troll was a meme regular or something?

(frozen)

[jackandahat]

It's got to the point where I won't write my own minority, because I know some people won't approve of how I do it, and I'm tired of getting accused of having internalised ableism/"able bodied privilege" for disagreeing with folk.

That said, I don't think fandom has got worse, it's just ten years ago I didn't have as much net time, so I didn't get chance to read the dramas.

(frozen) Re: Here via metafandom

[merisunshine36]

(here also from metafandom)

I agree 100% with what lizw said. Also, in response to....

But... it's one thing to express the pain and anger in one's own space. It's another thing to invade someone else's space

Am I correct in interpreting this statement to mean that, if someone writes something that I find deeply hurtful, I should only be angry on my DW, and I am not allowed to express my anger to the OP/ in other public journal entries commenting on the subject in a way I find hurtful? If that's an accurate reading of your statement, I disagree. I think a big part of change-making work is speaking truth to people, and as lizw said, that works in a number of ways, both angry and calm. I don't think it's right to say that public declarations of your pain at something must be confined to your personal space. And even if it *does* lead to an outrage/fail cycle, who's to say that no one will learn something from that?

(frozen) Re: Here via metafandom

[kerravonsen]

I tried to be careful in making that statement so that people would not misinterpret it in just the way that you have, and I have obviously failed. (sigh) Perhaps I should just give up now.

But since this is my own journal, I will give it one more try.

Suppose Person A makes some remark in Community X. Person B, who is also a regular reader/contributor of Community X, is outraged, and expresses anger directly to Person A, whether that be in Community X, or privately to Person A, or publicly in their own journal. I am in no way, shape or form saying that these are wrong things to do.

Then suppose that Person B, having expressed their anger in their own journal, the incident catches the attention of Person C, a regular reader of Person B's journal. Person C has never participated in Community X, indeed, Person C has never heard of Community X before. But, nonetheless, they hare off to Community X to express their anger at Person A. That is the kind of thing that I feel is inappropriate. That's why I used the phrase "invade someone else's space".

Then again, I am the kind of person who believes that if Fred has a beef with Joe, if Fred starts ranting to me about how Joe did him wrong, I will say "Fred, why aren't you talking to Joe about this? You shouldn't be talking to me, you should be talking to Joe." I have learned the hard way, with disputing housemates, that it only makes things worse if one tries to talk to Fred about Joe, or Joe about Fred. Because if one tries to point out to Fred that perhaps Joe isn't so bad, then Fred gets angry and says that I'm taking Joe's side. And if I am sympathetic with Fred about how bad Joe is, then Fred gets even angrier about Joe, since he is dwelling on all Joe's worst points.

Perhaps you feel that comparing Fail-and-Outrage to a personal dispute is not fitting, but why not? All the parties involved are people, are they not? And whatever the incident, the first spark of it is always going to involve two people. Thus, a personal dispute.

(frozen) Re: Here via metafandom

[merisunshine36]

Thanks for the clarification! I understand your point, but I think I still disagree. I think that your example is a good argument of Person C not getting involved on an interpersonal level in certain instances. But on the other hand, when we are talking about wide-ranging societal effects, such as then I think Person C should still get involved. Because sometimes fail in fandom X is not just a fandom X issue, it is a issue effecting all of humanity. Person A's class/race/ability fail does not end when they log out of DW and go to sleep--it will manifest itself in all of their IRL interactions as well. And that takes it from being a fandom problem to being a human problem, which makes it my problem/Person C's problem, too. And I think this even works on an interpersonal level--if roommate Fred makes a vile remark about roommate Joe's disability, then I would hope that the third roommate in that situation would speak up against that even if it isn't their specific problem.

It's like in that Niemoller poem: "In Germany, they came first for the Communists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist;/ And then they came for the trade unionists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist;/And then they came for the Jews, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew;/ And then . . . they came for me . . . And by that time there was no one left to speak up."

On the other hand, if the fight is about Fred pulling Joe's laundry out of the washer and throwing it on the floor, then maybe it's a better idea to stay out of it. On the fandom level, if Person C is going into Community X to yell about how so-and-so's OTP is totally stupid, then I think that's also an argument best left alone. I think it's a matter of choosing your battles. There are some fights where it makes sense to get involved and be a good ally for the hopeful betterment of humanity, and others where it's better to stand to one side and let things blow over. But I don't think it's valid to say that going into a space not your own to express anger is always a bad thing.

(frozen) via metafandom also.

[mullenkamp]

Perhaps you feel that comparing Fail-and-Outrage to a personal dispute is not fitting, but why not? All the parties involved are people, are they not? And whatever the incident, the first spark of it is always going to involve two people. Thus, a personal dispute.

Here's where I think that argument not only falls flat, but is downright offensive: Fail is never merely a personal dispute. Ever. Because, as a woman of color in fandom, when Racefail happens in fandom? I am personally affected by it whether it was personally directed at me or not. That's the way racism works, for crying out loud. Because every time shit like this happens, we as marginalized people get our daily reminder that we're the Other and that our feelings don't fucking matter, our pain is trivial, and we don't get to join in the reindeer games. Every time there's racefail in fandom I think back to when my ignorant assed ex-roommate giggled and told me I was more of a white girl than she was, that I wasn't really black I was "transracial" (because I didn't fit her stereotyped understanding of what black women are like). I think of the "whoa, don't piss M. off, she'll get ghetto on you" comments from a "friendly" guild member on World of Warcraft, and people deliberately mispronouncing my Death Knight's name as "Shenehneh" (it's Shinayne, a Drow name from Forgotten Realms). I think of the weird looks I got when I cosplayed Integra from Hellsing, and the snide comments that I should just "stick to people who look like me" (I guess all those 5 foot tall white girls dressed as Sephiroth are just fine). In short, I get reminded that even in my hobby, when I am just trying to relax and have fun, I have to deal with the same kind of hurtful, malicious ignorance that I have to deal with at work, at the grocery store, at school--that there is no fucking respite anywhere, not even in a place that is ostensibly fun and frivolous. I am so tired of clueless white people acting like racism is simply about personal one-on-one interactions between people rather than a systematic, institutionalized cancer that permeates every aspect of PoC's lives. None of this shit happens in a vacuum. Your analogy about feuding housemates is way the hell off. Racism (or any other kind of -ism for that matter) isn't about Joe being mean to Fred, it's about Joe having had every sort of unearned advantage over Fred from the day they both moved into the house, proceeding to punch Fred in the face, and then getting angry, defensive and starting to cry when Fred tells Joe that his nose is broken and bleeding. And then Joe asks what the big deal is and tells Fred he's just imagining that punch to the face. And that Joe didn't really mean to make him bleed or break anything so why is Fred so upset? Especially when people have been punching Fred in the face almost from the time he was born and people have rarely come to his aid offering to take him to the ER or something.

As an aside--I'm really rather weary of people's melodramatic ~ woe, but I should just give up~ statements when people dare to challenge them on these things. Beyond weary, actually. That kind of foolishness doesn't help anything, and just comes across as petulant, childish, and insensitive to the point of privileged. Guess what? I don't get the option to "just give up now", as a black woman, as a queer person. Marginalized people in fandom "just give up" by getting the hell out because it's just not welcome for us, because we have to fight just to get basic respect as human beings in a setting that's not even serious, when we're just trying to have fun like everyone else. I understand the frustration of feeling like people aren't understanding what you're saying, (LAWL, NO RLY, it's kinda like trying to explain to oblivious white fans why the shit they did was racist!) I mean I hear that. But if you really feel like you miscommunicated something or someone didn't understand what you were trying to say, apologize and try to clarify. There is no need for the tragic Scarlett O'Hara routine, I don't care if it is on your own journal. Especially when you're coupling it with the four billionth tired iteration of the Tone Argument.

(frozen) Re: via metafandom also.

[dancesontrains]

THANK YOU.

(frozen) Re: Here via metafandom

[boosette]

Ah, I should have specified, or possibly not posted at dark thirty at night.

Often one of the ways allies can help is to do the calm, reasoned stuff, because they don't have the same strength of emotional response.


This is what I was attempting to get at, that Outrage on the part of allies sometimes feels like they are reacting as if there is an expectation of outrage on their part -- that if they are not Outraged, they are not true allies. This leads to the appearance that there is more interest in looking like a Good Ally than in changing the behavior or worldview of the Failer. (And that there is more emphasis in changing the behavior or worldviews of the people watching than of the Failer hirself, because Failer may already be a lost cause.)

(frozen) "I like the way you think and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter"

[morgandawn]

"I just want/need/deserve/have to express my pain and anger" and "let's make the world a better place through action/advocacy/change" are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Or they do not have to be. In many ways, it is easier to express pain and anger than to communicate and persuade and those who are in the midst of their pain/anger cycle do not want to hear that they may be undercutting themselves and others in prevention.

And at times, I've have been on both sides of the spectrum. What frustrates me is that there often little recognition in our current public debates (and let's face it, even posting in your blog about your cat is part of the public debate) that there are people with differing POVs and motivations. And that's the real breakdown, IMHO. It would be so much easier if we could knock politely on the door and ask: "Ms. AdvocacyCommunication? Oh, you're Ms. AngerPain! So sorry. Moving on. Have a nice day."

PS. "This is Abuse. Arguments are down the hall." :-)

(frozen) Whoa, didn't Snape call Lily a mudblood?

[jazzypom]

Dunno why that thought struck me. Carry on.

(frozen) Here From Metafandom (and not to crucify you ;-)

[(Anonymous)]

As someone who is thinking of dropping out of fandom because I am tired of the fail debates, I pretty much agree with you. It seems to be a way to vent anger which isn't constructive for either side, the people venting or the people being vented at.

It also seems that in fandom there is one true way to think of things, and if you deviate then you're going to get tarred and feathered. I have a disability, but I don't agree with a lot of the rhetoric out there, but I know I would get crucified if I spoke my mind about it. And really, I enjoy being able to speak my mind.

I also think some of the people above are way off base on comparing things people said to the situation in Nazi Germany. Outrage can be helpful if Congress is going to pass some discriminatory legislation or the whatnot. But some Joe Shmoe on the internet saying something offensive is better off being ignored like a troll. In fact, by drawing so much attention to what someone said I think we're giving that person more credit than they're due. Whether the attention is positive or negative, they get their time in the spotlight. Why not put people doing something constructive and good in such a spotlight for a change? A lot of people feed off negative attention. It's better than being ignored.

That, and if we highlight what people are doing correctly, then we give people information on how to deal constructively and respectfully with racism/sexism/ableism, etc. Sometimes people simply never learned how to deal with it well, and yelling at them for doing it wrong is not going to help.

I learned a long time ago that I'm a lot happier when I stopped associating with people who say offensive statements by trying to change them or expressing anger at them. Contrary to pop psychology (I am a psychologist) anger just begets more anger. It isn't cathartic. You get stuck in it. I'd much rather focus my efforts on positive change than to remain mired in anger. You can't control what other people say, think, or do, but you can control how you react to it.

(frozen) Re: Here From Metafandom (and not to crucify you ;-)

[kerravonsen]

Yes. This.
THANK YOU.