Who gets the benefit of the doubt in fandom?
One way that the racial empathy gap shows itself in fandom is that fans often straight-up make things up about some (read: white male) characters to be able to call them marginalized--somehing ![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
lb_lee has pointed out--while making interpretations and inventions in the other direction about characters of color to "justify" their own lack of interest/sympathy.
This is endlessly hilarious on its face because, for one thing, you don't need some social-justice-based reason to obsess over, or rationalize your disinterest in, a character. It's even more laughable when the effort to be enlightened in your preferences so transparently favors RL privileged groups while disfavoring people who are marginalized IRL.
Here's an example from SW sequel trilogy fandom: I have seen people say about Kylo Ren, the main villain of the trilogy (his hardcore fans dispute this characterization), that he is "femme-coded" and his detractors are mysoginistic. I've seen people say they relate to him because he is so emblematic of trans male experiences. His fans say he has BPD and is not responsible for his actions, that he is a victim of child abuse, etc. etc.
And of course, these same fans tend to do the reverse for Finn, the Black male lead of the trilogy (also a disputed characterization, sigh). Finn is unrealistic because child soldiers can't tell right from wrong (an outright and hurtful lie, of course), Finn is a sexual harasser because he took Rey's hand, Finn is mentally stable and well-adjusted (really?) and therefore unrelatable as a victim of abuse, Finn killed more people than Kylo, Finn is abusive to Rey and so on and so forth.
I have seen this in other fandoms that I am not as much involved in. In the MCU, for instance, Loki gets described as a child abuse victim with PTSD while Valkyrie is dismissed by some fans as being "male-coded" and having a stereotypical male veteran's story.
So why is any of this a problem? Can't people imagine things for the characters they like, or might not care as much about for that matter? Isn't that the point of transformative fandom?
They have every right to, of course. I have as much of a ball as anyone else theorizing and imagining about fictional characters. What fans are not entitled to is freedom from criticism, especially when their imaginings touch on real life. If you're making a statement like "child soldiers can't have a conscience" or "people with BPD can't be held responsible for their actions" you are making statements about real-life people and not simply being fannish.
You are entitled to your opinions. You are not entitled to agreement. You are entitled to be free of harassment. Disagreement is not by itself harassment. I hope these parameters are clear.
It also becomes a problem when people convince themselves that their headcanon is actually canon and come at people for not subscribing to their headcanon--one that was repeatedly debunked by the unwitting originator, in this case. These headcanons can take on such a force in fandom that large numbers of fans can convince themselves of their canonity, prompting the creators themselves to confirm that some popular headcanon is, in fact, just a fan theory.
Most fundamentally, though, it shows the gap between the characters fans are willing to do the work of imagining oppressed identities for to make them more relatable, and the ones they are not willing to do the same work for, and in fact take efforts in the exact opposite direction. Again, I can't believe this even needs to be said but this doesn't meant they don't have the right to their own imagination, or that people who do this are Bad People who need to be bullied. It does mean that this gap in empathy can make fandom a hostile place for many fans of color, and yeah, it's kinda racist.
lb_lee has pointed out--while making interpretations and inventions in the other direction about characters of color to "justify" their own lack of interest/sympathy.This is endlessly hilarious on its face because, for one thing, you don't need some social-justice-based reason to obsess over, or rationalize your disinterest in, a character. It's even more laughable when the effort to be enlightened in your preferences so transparently favors RL privileged groups while disfavoring people who are marginalized IRL.
Here's an example from SW sequel trilogy fandom: I have seen people say about Kylo Ren, the main villain of the trilogy (his hardcore fans dispute this characterization), that he is "femme-coded" and his detractors are mysoginistic. I've seen people say they relate to him because he is so emblematic of trans male experiences. His fans say he has BPD and is not responsible for his actions, that he is a victim of child abuse, etc. etc.
And of course, these same fans tend to do the reverse for Finn, the Black male lead of the trilogy (also a disputed characterization, sigh). Finn is unrealistic because child soldiers can't tell right from wrong (an outright and hurtful lie, of course), Finn is a sexual harasser because he took Rey's hand, Finn is mentally stable and well-adjusted (really?) and therefore unrelatable as a victim of abuse, Finn killed more people than Kylo, Finn is abusive to Rey and so on and so forth.
I have seen this in other fandoms that I am not as much involved in. In the MCU, for instance, Loki gets described as a child abuse victim with PTSD while Valkyrie is dismissed by some fans as being "male-coded" and having a stereotypical male veteran's story.
So why is any of this a problem? Can't people imagine things for the characters they like, or might not care as much about for that matter? Isn't that the point of transformative fandom?
They have every right to, of course. I have as much of a ball as anyone else theorizing and imagining about fictional characters. What fans are not entitled to is freedom from criticism, especially when their imaginings touch on real life. If you're making a statement like "child soldiers can't have a conscience" or "people with BPD can't be held responsible for their actions" you are making statements about real-life people and not simply being fannish.
You are entitled to your opinions. You are not entitled to agreement. You are entitled to be free of harassment. Disagreement is not by itself harassment. I hope these parameters are clear.
It also becomes a problem when people convince themselves that their headcanon is actually canon and come at people for not subscribing to their headcanon--one that was repeatedly debunked by the unwitting originator, in this case. These headcanons can take on such a force in fandom that large numbers of fans can convince themselves of their canonity, prompting the creators themselves to confirm that some popular headcanon is, in fact, just a fan theory.
Most fundamentally, though, it shows the gap between the characters fans are willing to do the work of imagining oppressed identities for to make them more relatable, and the ones they are not willing to do the same work for, and in fact take efforts in the exact opposite direction. Again, I can't believe this even needs to be said but this doesn't meant they don't have the right to their own imagination, or that people who do this are Bad People who need to be bullied. It does mean that this gap in empathy can make fandom a hostile place for many fans of color, and yeah, it's kinda racist.
no subject
To which I say absolutely nothing because why bother. But, like...
1. False assumption (that a given person who critiques *ist fandom trends doesn't also critique the same issues in mainstream entertainment)
2. Different circumstance. The creators of mainstream entertainment are not all up in the fandom grille directly interacting with fannish people on a peer-to-peer basis and, e.g., "coming at" individuals for disagreeing with them
(2b. Mostly, anyway. Anne Rice type situations are... Extra Badde with Side of Yike...)
no subject
I would argue the false assumption goes even deeper, however. It's something
Absolutely it's true that white men got and continue to get the lion's share of the good writing and central roles in Western media, which deserves a lot of criticism and analysis. However, the pattern of white men getting more fannish attention hasn't changed even while we started getting women leads, leads of color etc. Meanwhile even extremely one-note and flimsily written white male characters--Hux and Mitaka in the SW sequels, for instance--are frequently the subject of obsessive fannish speculation and creation.
Mitaka is an interesting case in point, actually. If you don't know, and I don't blame you for not knowing, he is a bit character who showed up in one scene of The Force Awakens to get strangled by Kylo Ren. His name never even comes up in the movie proper. Imagine the amazement and amusement when we learned that he has a fan creation week dedicated to him. And let's not even go into Hux, the space Hitler analogue who had 2-3 minutes of screentime in two movies and has a humongous, and to me disturbing, following.
That's the level of work fandom is willing to put toward white male characters, at least the young, skinny, able-bodied ones. The fact that these characters are a whole lot of nothing on screen doesn't deter them, which shows that it's the obsession that comes first, not the canon material. Where there is a will, fandom will find a way. If they "just don't see it" with a character, chances are it means they're not interested enough to put in the fannish work.
And that's fine, fans have a right to their disinterest as well as their interests. It's just disingenuous to pretend that fandom at the mercy of canon when the entire point of transformative fandom is that it is anything but a passive yes-person of canon. This argument also erases the existence of well-written female characters, characters of color etc.
Anne Rice is like the result when someone made a wish that the creator of their favorite franchise would be more involved in fandom and got exactly what they wished for. Be careful with those wishes indeed.
no subject
Sorry dont really have much to add aside from that!
--Hikaru
no subject
no subject
That... is one helluva take. Even by Star Wars Hot Take standards. o_O
Also I'd bet anything it's lifted whole-cloth and unexamined from the same argument that used to get made about MCU Loki (where it at least has some mythological underpinnings, so it's not just like "lawlz long hair, long robe-dress-coat = femme!" or whatever). >_
no subject
Not only would you win that bet, the very article that called Valkyrie male-coded also said Loki and Thor are more feminine than Valkyrie, which... yaigh do not want.
no subject
Wo-oo-oo-oo-ow that's some fresh piping-hot misogynoir right there, no matter which way you fucking slice it. o_O
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
For a little while, I was kinda on the edge of Pacific Rim fandom. Now, my favorite character in it, hands down, was Marshal Pentecost. (Probably not a huge surprise.) I found it awesome to see this character, this chronically ill, TERMINALLY ill character, surrounded by angry loose cannons. He wasn't the boss because he was the biggest cowboy; he was the boss because he had discipline and control and sheer force of personality. I feel like that's a character type I don't see very often in American action movies; there, the bosses are usually antagonists, the Man keeping the loose cannon from flying free.
But I didn't get to see many representations of him as a disabled character. Folks seemed to focus more on the two scientists, Gottlieb and Geiszler. And sure, Gottlieb totally is disabled, but as far as I knew, with Geiszler it was entirely headcanon. But I saw so many people projecting their own experience onto Geiszler--oh, he's autistic, he's ADD--when for me, Marshal Pentecost jived more with my image of myself as a disabled person. (Or more accurately, the kind of person I would LIKE to be.)
When I think about it, a lot of the disabled characters I saw myself in tended not to be white. And it seems kinda weird to think about, because how many canon disabled POC are there in media, right? That seems like it'd be a pretty small piece of the pie. But it seems odds are decent, somehow, at least with cyborgs. Cyborg from Teen Titans, Em from the Portals Series, Honesty from Miles and Honesty... I guess maybe cyborg stuff could be used as an analogy for racism, so it was considered a natural combo. (Sometimes with gross results--looking at YOU, 'Almost Human.')
I also find myself thinking about how I've never been deep into fandom, but I've kinda pulled away from it recently. I find myself impatient; I want REAL trans or queer or disabled characters, not headcanons and fandom twists on existing characters. As much as we'd like to pretend, Marvel is NEVER going to allow Captain America and Bucky to kiss--except maybe in some Elseworlds mini-special. And I'm lazy! I don't want to have to do all the work of imagining the demographics I want to see represented! That's what FICTION is for, eesh!
no subject
Also agreed, fuck fans having to do the work of representation for media companies especially when amazing works that have great representation actually exist, e.g. Broken Earth. But oh wait, when fandom talks about wanting trans representation they mean yet more skinny cis white boys they can imagine as trans, not canonical trans lesbians of color! Gotcha gotcha.
(I'm not being strictly fair here, since stuff like, say, Marvel movies have vastly different levels of exposure than even Hugo Award-winning science fiction novels, and I certainly don't want to turn into one of those "how dare you sleep on this" killjoys. But then again queer white people are eminently capable of racism and I am tired of giving fandom a pass as inherently progressive just because they are fandom. A much fairer comparison is what you have done here of course, between characters that appear in the same work.)
no subject
Wait, what's Broken Earth? I've been totally out of the loop! Sell me!
And yeah, I probably wouldn't have admitted it if you hadn't first, but the juggernaut that was Geiszler/Gottlieb kinda turned me off the fandom too. (Though I did find one FtM!Pentecost fic and it scratched itches I didn't even know I had. I'm totally that bitter bastard who's just bitching because he's not getting the free fandom content HE wants, bespoke and instantly, haha.) Also a lot of people seemed to adore Chuck Hansen and... no. (I saw a trans headcanon for him and I was just like, no, let's NOT do that thing where trans men are allowed to be raging douchebags because dysphoria is hard.)
Also for real, I would've loved to see some politics fic about the Wei brothers and how they manage being a three-man Jaeger team and surely the intense political pressure that would put on them to perform as China's superstars. I was totally into the Russian husband/wife team too, but... I don't think it's any coincidence they got way more fandom attention than the Weis.
I was totally into Pacific Rim for the Pentecost/Mako adoptive family relationship. That was totally the core of the movie for me. I totally wish they could've piloted a Jaeger together!
--Rogan
no subject
(I've been nattering so much about BE on Tumblr, I forgot I said Jack Schitt about it here lmao)
I'll have to make a separate post about it later but Broken Earth is a trilogy by N.K. Jemisin. It is the first trilogy in history to win three Hugo Awards for Best Novel, one for every book. The books take place on a continent plagued by earthquakes, ironically called The Stillness, and starts with the triggering of a Fifth Season which is their term for volcanic winters. (Which, you know, makes a fuckton more sense than A Song of Ice and Fire as a setup for potentially civilization-ending irregular winters. Just saying.) Essun, the heroine of the series, is an orogene--think an Earthbender on steroids, a group heavily persecuted and enslaved in this world. The series' treatment of imperialism and oppression is absolutely fascinating. The vast majority of main characters are nonwhite (race is another subject handled with nuance and novelty in the worldbuilding), many of them queer--a trans lesbian and her girlfriend, a bisexual woman, a gay man, and a bisexual man just off the top of my head. PLEASE READ THE BOOKS THEY ARE SO GOOD
Also saaaame on your PacRim fandom feels. The Wei brothers looked so interesting and unique, but received disappointingly little attention in the canon and fandom. I would have had a heart attack right there in the theater if we got to see Jake and Mako pilot a Jaeger together. PRU was such a wasted opportunity just what the fuck.
no subject
Yeah, I never actually saw the second movie! I uh. Kinda live under a pop cultural rock lately, so a lot of movies just totally pass me by unless my friends go, "DUDE YOU SHOULD SEE IT" and then possibly physically cart me off to see them together. It sounds like I didn't make a bad choice either. Did del Toro do that one too?
--Rogan
no subject
You made the right choice not seeing PRU. It's not by del Toro but a guy named DeKnight. IMO it's better not to see PRU and imagine a much better story between Jake and Mako :/
no subject
Oh, pft, ha, yeah, if there's no del Toro no wonder I didn't feel any deep inclination to see it! (Also, I mean. My favorite character is dead. And I felt the first movie kinda had its story so self-contained that I felt satisfied just as it was.)
Jake's Pentecost's son, right? So what even WAS the story of PRU?
--Rogan
no subject
Also, Jake supports a random white girl (who I couldn't care less about but the story tells me is the protagonist) through her sorrow at losing her family, without dealing with any of his trauma from losing his family members. It's really bad.
no subject
Rogan: Though what you describe with random white girl protag sounds pretty close to how I felt about Raleigh Beckett, hahaha.
no subject
At least Raleigh didn't pop up to take the protagonist position from a character who was set up to be the protagonist. But then again Mako should have been the protagonist of PacRim so I guess same old same old.
Edit: I see where I misread. When you said "my favorite character is dead" I carelessly translated that into my head as "Mako died in PRU," when in context it was CLEAR that you meant Pentecost's death in PacRim.
no subject
Rogan: I agree that Mako should've been the protagonist. I was more invested in her story; Beckett just felt... same old, same old. Man, no WONDER I didn't hear any rumblings about the movie at all, except maybe some stuff about the two scientists! It sounds like kinda a mess!
no subject
The scientists' plot was SO MUCH TRASH I don't even know where to start. Ugh. I get tired just trying to untangle it in my mind. "White boy gets himself possessed by demons from his own hubris and gets a bunch of people killed, but he's the innocent victim who needs to be protected" might sum it up.
no subject
And oh god, what you describe is... just exactly why I loathed Geiszler in particular. While seeing the first movie, I remember hoping he'd actually get killed off, which made his fandom popularity especially jarring; clearly I had gotten a VERY different idea of his character from my viewing than the majority of fandom.
--Rogan
no subject
no subject
--Rogan
no subject
no subject
I mean, holy fuck. When I checked the ships tags, it was the #1 tag with over 3K fics. The #2 pairing had something like 800. (And it was Raleigh/Chuck Hansen??? WHAT IS YOUR OBSESSION WITH OBNOXIOUS WHITE BOYS GUYS? Chuck is awful! The trans guy Chuck headcanon I saw made me actively angry! Why would I want a guy like THAT as my representation, seriously?! Couldn't y'all have chosen a... a NOT awful guy?)
--Rogan
no subject
For real, why does it always have to be the DOUCHEY white guys who get the big followings? Like, Chuck Hansen is a DICK. That's it. No ifs ands or buts, and... I can't even remember if he had canon tragic backstory (dead mom?) but even if it did, I am really not fond of the whole "tragedy makes you a dick, boohoo" thing. (For real, I've been through a lot; that doesn't magically make it okay for me to be a fuckwagon to everyone around me! I'm kinda offended by the implication that a shitty childhood means I can't NOT be a dick! And I also hate the idea that misery is a checkbook and as long as your douchery equals your misery, it's okay. That is a thing people do in real-life in super-hurtful ways! I don't think it does ANYBODY any favors!)
Like, it'd be one thing if folks glommed onto super nice characters. But it always seems to be the Draco Malfoys, the Kylo Rens, the raging douchasaurus-es. And I'm like, why? What is the appeal of these jerk characters in specificity?
If it was JUST racism, than why not latch onto white heroic characters? I mean, I wasn't a big fan of Raleigh Beckett (loose cannons are meh to me), but he and Hercules Hansen were you know. Not total douchewads.
So what's the appeal of these guys? Is it the Cookie Monster thing of seeing characters allowed to act on things they're not supposed to? But then why the tragedy? Is it folks wanting justification for their own worst impulses, and tragic history is just the best way to get it right now or what?
no subject
And there's so much else that follows from that, like the fantasy of being that special girl who turns a bad guy good and the idea that you are the exception to his shitty treatment of others because he lurves you and and and. As they say, there's a lot to unpack here but let's throw away the whole suitcase.