[emo] "absorb and swallow what's being pushed"

[glossing]

Bandom has made a lot of people on my flist very happy. I'm all for the happy. I just wish that there were room to disagree without being accused of Cheerio-pissing.

At the end of the day, it comes down to this: Like whatever you like. Please, though, pause for a moment before dismissing others' offense and attacking those who are offended

Comments

[oneangrykate]

Thank you. just thank you.

[glossing]

See that first tag up there? Thank YOU.

[marginalia]

well, you know. that's exactly my issue, the utter dismissal of any sort of dialogue, and the deeming of any offense as ridiculous and harshing squee. guess what? not helping.

[glossing]

*nod nod*

Thanks, you.

[lostakasha]

*word* to all of it, but...

the vast majority of slash sucks and, in my reading, exists to satisfy largely heteronormative ends -- by erasing female characters, focusing largely female-identified readers on male bodies, and fetishizing reinscribing the preeminent importance of male homosociality.

yes, that's it, right there. Thank you.

[glossing]

Oddly(?) enough, that passage was the easiest for me to write in terms of "fear of provoking wank". I'm not sure what that says about my fannish journey, but there you go. :P

Thanks, you. ♥

[ficbyzee]

I'm not laughing at you. I'm really upset, too.

However, borrowing characteristics from an oppressed group and then profiting by performing those characteristics for a mainstream audience where -- by definition of "mainstream" -- the oppressed are not welcome sounds like blackface and stagegay to me.

None of these bands are *profiting* from any gay shenanigans they pull, though. The gay is only a selling point within fandom, and fandom's demographic is pretty damn far away from the mainstream audiences for these bands. This is why the arguments against these bands have been so frustrating for me, because it seems to come from a belief that these bands are actively pulling in profits because they act gay, which, plain and simple, is really far from the mark. *Within fandom* I might pimp Fall Out Boy to someone by telling them how much Pete and Patrick are in love, but that's not how the bands are marketing themselves. I think it's interesting that people keep pointing the finger at Pete, because Fall Out Boy's stagegay isn't

[glossing]

I'm sorry you're upset. And what I know about the bands is derived from my flist, of course, though I did try to concentrate on what it is about *bandom discourse*, rather than the bands & members thereof, that's been bugging me. Like, besides what you've told me about FOB, all I know about The Wentz is that he dated a Simpson and appeared on OTH.

they're *not* making any money from Teh Gay
See, I didn't mean to suggest that there's some lavender dollar flowing into their accounts so much as -- these are bands that, within the confines of mainstream music, garner publicity *in part* from these behaviors, which to my eyes are part of a long rock tradition of acting outre just enough to climb the charts. It's not a dollar-to-dollar ratio so much as the fact that Pansy Division or Kids on TV, bands who are highly entertaining & catchy but are also out, *aren't* headlining Honda tours or whatever.

I think on that point we're going to have to agree to disagree? But this one really caught my attention: *Within fandom* I might pimp Fall

[ficbyzee]

but part of what I'm talking about *is* the fannish reception.

But I just don't see where bandom is doing anything different than any other slash fandom. Asking us to only be fannish about/support Out bands is like asking every slasher out there to only follow QaF and The L Word fandoms. I love Pansy Division and Tegan and Sara, too, but they're not the bands I choose to write fic about. And really, my choosing to be fannish about MCR instead of Pansy Division has nothing to do with stagegay--my current OTP and the main pairing I'm writing about barely touch each other onstage.

hese are bands that, within the confines of mainstream music, garner publicity *in part* from these behaviors, which to my eyes are part of a long rock tradition of acting outre just enough to climb the charts.But what if that's just the way they are, the way they express affection? Most of these bands were acting this way and dressing this way long before they got big, and I don't see any evidence of them 'gaying it up' to sell themselves. It's

[thenyxie]

the vast majority of slash sucks and, in my reading, exists to satisfy largely heteronormative ends -- by erasing female characters, focusing largely female-identified readers on male bodies, and fetishizing reinscribing the preeminent importance of male homosociality.

What? *sigh* I am hopelessly, hopelessly stupid when it comes to social issues regarding race/gender/sexual preference. Someday, someone's going to have to sit me down and explain to me what I'm missing, because I'm reading your post and I still don't understand. The whole stagegay/blackface debate baffles me. All I know is the comparison is inept and offensive. But I don't know "why", and that frustrates me.

[glossing]

I'm not sure that right now I'm capable of translating/explaining that passage? Which is all me, and nothing to do with you. I'll get back to you, if that's cool.

[kindkit]

Me being me, I think that the vast majority of slash can be heteronormative and re-inscribing of hegemonic structures, while simultaneously been incredibly subversive and supportive of queer re-inscription of sexual norms.

I really like this formulation. While I recognize that slash (boyslash particularly) has some problematic aspects, I'm really uncomfortable with any across-the-board claim that slash is just heterocentrism in sneaky disguise. (Which is not the claim Gloss was making, but I have seen it made, and it always upsets me.) Partly that's just my own intense emotional investment in boyslash speaking, but it's also that I think the claim is a brutal oversimplification. Some things just aren't either/or; they're both/and.