(no subject)

[solitary_summer]

I'm not all that comfortable posting this, because while I generally follow the big fandom ---!fail debates, most of the time I'm too scared to offend someone or make a fool of myself to speak up, but between aviv_b's (now locked) RTD-finds-out-about-homophobia story, and the recent debate about (straight) women writing m/m fiction I have this sort of theory why TW fandom blew up so spectacularly after CoE, and it has a lot to do with this slightly uneasy alliance between gay people and the straight part of slash fandom, since both want the same thing, more gay storylines, and there's strength in numbers, and numbers count when it comes to TV. On the other hand that common interest doesn't mean that gay people (fans as well as those involved in the creation, especially in the age of the internet and fandom becoming increasingly mainstream and public) aren't aware of the more problematic aspects of slash fandom (fetishisation/appropriation), or that straight fandom doesn't tend to forget that for gay people it's also very much a matter of identification and representation, and not just, and that's putting it as politely and generally as possible, of fanish squee. (Cf. the 'But It's not about gay men, it's about female sexuality' argument.)

And for the straight side it all worked rather well ('Yay! Canon slash!'), and I'd hazard a guess that even after Ianto's death the greater part of TW fandom would probably have got over it after a while, if RTD hadn't spoken up about what he thought was problematic about—straight, beecause 'people picking up gay rights as an issue' clearly doesn't refer to gay fans—fandom, and suddenly it wasn't one happy family any longer.

So, yes, the 'hysterical women' comment was sexist and misogynist, everyone can agree on that, but after six months fandom can maybe start to look beyond that, and realise this was also coming from somewhere, namely a gay writer thinking he wasn't just dealing with straight women fetishising homosexuality and making judgements about what gay relationships were supposed to be like, but straight women now explaining homophobia to him. Now clearly the situation was more complex than that, clearly there were gay people as well as straight people who disliked CoE for a wide variety of reasons, but I think this was the main impression that came across, and I doubt anyone involved in TW fandom can honestly say that it was wholly unfounded in reality.

And considering that he stated this very explicitly more than once (here and here and probably elsewhere, too, but I wasn't following media that religiously and only picked up what was generally linked in fandom) I find it a bit worrying how this got swept aside almost unanimously by the straight part of fandom. Admittedly emotions were running high all round, and no one was thinking very clearly at the time, but after half a year maybe it's time to acknowledge that among other things there was also a lot of hurt privilege and entitlement in the post-CoE fallout. Because when straight people are gleefully writing RPF subjecting RTD to homophobia they honestly believe he doesn't know about, and are convinced they're doing it in the name of gay rights and karma I think this is a problem that isn't just limited to one writer, but symptomatic of the wider state of TW fandom.


*breathes* Okay. Now everyone tell me how hard I've failed.



[Obligatory disclaimer: I don't consider myself straight, but I'm also too not-much-of-anything-sexual to feel justified claiming any kind of queer label.

Obligatory disclaimer the second, for those who aren't on my friendslist and don't know me. Yes, I cried. Yes, I cared. Click the tag.]


ETA: I'll be at my sister's for the afternoon, so if I'm not replying to comments it's not that I'm ignoring anyone.

ETA2: Addendum, sort of.

More ETA, since my brain is slow and some things only untangled themselves in my head replying to the comments. If I wrote that post now, I'd phrase it a bit differently, because even while I thought I was being clear, different issues did in fact get jumbled together. The 'hysterical women' comment— and while we're at it, I was getting curious and looked for the exact source, and now I'm left wondering, was this ever said more publicly than (possibly off the record?) to the AfterElton writer who put it into his editor's note without giving the context or even a full quote? In any case, that comment is one thing, and I'm not going to tell anyone they can't be offended by its sexism, even if personally I can't bring myself to be very outraged, given the context, situation and the fact that we're all human and fuck up occasionally.

OTOH, the two interviews I've linked where he is clearly pissed off about straight people lecturing a gay man about gay rights and homophobia—that's a separate issue and a legitimate concern about what was happening in TW fandom, and something I don't think straight fans should immediately react to with outrage and discard as nothing but hurt vanity. It's an issue that deserves consideration, whether or not someone is willing to forgive killing Ianto or the 'nine hysterical women'.

The one is about male privilege and prejudice, the other very much about straight privilege, as is using the sexism as an excuse to ignore the anger, lumping it all together; and they don't cancel each other out. This is essentially what I should have made clearer from the start. And I'll really shut up now; but on some level I keep naively hoping that attempting to untangle this whole mess might also eventually help a little bit towards making TW fandom a less toxic place again. I know, I know. *sigh*

Comments

[alex-beecroft.livejournal.com]

I agree wholeheartedly with you. I think the more mainstream m/m becomes, the more obvious it gets that it's trying to hold in tension the needs of two different sets of people, each of whom have been oppressed by the other (in different ways) throughout history. That's a difficult tightrope for any writer to tread, and it doesn't help that it's one where neither side is really familiar with the history, language and issues of the other.

Which is me saying "I was just thinking this morning that it was time I forgave RTD for his "hysterical women" comment. He was feeling hassled and attacked at the time, and he knows a lot more about homophobia than his straight viewers, and he probably didn't even mean it the way it came across (he probably doesn't even know it's one of those no-go phrases for women). If I look at his work, I see that he writes very good female characters. What more do I want? Not much, tbh.

[solitary-summer.livejournal.com]

I know you've just gone through an exhausting discussion about all this and appreciate you took the time to comment, so I'm a bit reluctant to even say this, but you'd have to go back as far as Ancient Greece to find a time where you could maybe say that women have been oppressed by gay men as a group, and even then it'd be a problematic claim, because the whole concept of sexual orientation/behaviour was so completely different and gay men who didn't play by the accepted rules were oppressed, too... I know this isn't what you meant to say, but it could be misread.

And I think the problem was from the beginning that fandom filed Jack/Ianto under slash and expected it to play by these rules, when in the end TW is SF/drama that has gay characters...

I suspect RTD pretty much meant it, minus the historical baggage he probably wasn't aware of, but since I don't see a lot of sexism in his writing, and given the circumstances and provocation at the time, I have to say it never bothered me all that much. If it did, I'd probably have to throw out a whole shelf of Thomas Mann books first. *rueful smile*

[alex-beecroft.livejournal.com]

I wasn't thinking that gay men *as gay men* oppressed women. I was thinking that gay men *as men* almost certainly have the same attitudes and beliefs about women that straight men do, and those attitudes and beliefs are supported by the oppressive mechanisms of the sexist society we live in. In a conversation with a gay man, a woman cannot assume that she is not going to be facing the same sexism, male entitlement, belittlement and dismissal that might happen if she was talking to a straight man. Does it make a difference that these attitudes are in the person of someone who is also disenfranchised in our society? Yes, of course it does. But I don't think that means it's not a factor at all.

(This is a general statement and not a statement about Torchwood. I don't know the state of play in the TW fandom any more, as I've not been participating in it for months.)

[solitary-summer.livejournal.com]

I know you weren't thinking that, I was just pointing out that the way you phrased it, it might be misunderstood by others, especially since it looks like as if this post is going to be linked in all kinds of places.

[alex-beecroft.livejournal.com]

Thank you! And yes, I put it very badly. I should probably also say that I'm not for a moment saying that I think all gay men are sexist. I know that's not true! I'm all for deciding on each person's particular makeup and reaction to any situation individually rather than trying to categorize them in groups.

*Groan*. Everything is so complicated, and as you say I am feeling kind of flattened and inarticulate at the moment. And with all of this I don't even have anything to say about Torchwood except that for my own part I've stopped thinking about it altogether.

[kelpietree.livejournal.com]

nope. i think if you go to the 70s you will find that the reason the women's lib groups separated from the gay rights group was exactly that problem. there rose a very obnoxious misogynistic pro gay male (incorp aspects of the mens movement) that was definitely anti women. There is also the problematic nature of drag to consider.

[solitary-summer.livejournal.com]

I can't really debate this, because I'm simply not well informed enough about that period, but very generally speaking, I'd argue that misogyny doesn't equal systematic oppression.