Thoughts on "On the Prowl" [VVC vid] and wider fandom.

[beccatoria]

I'm not entirely sure it's a good idea to post this (all the best posts start this way...) but in the interests of not having my head explode with thinking, I figured why not. I was going to flock it but that seemed kind of cowardly. Not that I feel particularly brave right now. I'm not trying to be a jerk, but...I have an opinion, so I'm going to try and state it, hopefully without it seeming like I'm the type of person who likes burning kittens for fun.

I would also like to acknowledge that my opinion is based on the discussions I've seen around fandom regarding this vid, but I would be shocked if that were anything approaching exhaustive. If I've missed anything or am labouring under some misapprehension, I apologise and welcome further information.

So, to get on with it, On the Prowl is a VVC vid that got heavily recced around fandom, so I watched it. It deals with the sexualisation of violence against men, and was completed for the "self-portrait" challenge.

When I first saw it, it didn't really connect with me, basically because that's not a portrait of me, or of an area of fandom I find particularly interesting. I don't find men getting beaten up hot, and generally I identify with and am more invested in female characters. Which was fine, because I know that there is a large chunk of fandom that likes pretty boys and hurt/comfort and that's who this vid was for. But I didn't get it, and frankly, wasn't sure I was well-enough versed in the tropes and "language" of that section of fandom to be equipped to get all its nuances. Which again, is as it should be - I certainly don't expect every vid I love to mean something equally deep and compelling to someone unfamiliar with either the source or the fandom to which it's speaking. This is especially true with meta vids which are often part of, or in response to, larger conversations.

So, that's cool, it's a vid that's not really aimed at me. The reason I'm posting this though, is the general tone of wider discussion of the vid, and the presentation of its arguments and the nature of its importance in wider fandom. And here's where we get to the bit I'm slightly afraid of posting, especially since I'm not a VVC attendee and therefore am not overly familiar with the conventions of that culture either, but equally I want to say something.

In general I've felt the overall tone of fandom-wide discussion has presented this vid as:

1) a socially important issue that we need to examine and that shows a need for self-examination.
2) an Important Vid that You need to watch even though it will be Uncomfortable; essentially, a vid that comments on fandom; an equation of people for whom this vid does function as a portrait with fandom at large.

I have a few issues with this. All of which tie in with some issues I have with fandom and its attitudes to gender generally, so I own that, which is why it's the way this vid plays in wider context that I'm commenting on.

The Socially Important Issue Thing.

To address the first point, there's an awful lot of self-questioning about why brutalised men are sexy, whether this is acceptable, whether women are cast as the perpetrators of violence, whether the shows are allowing or encouraging that. Whether it's acceptable to be turned on by it. I've seen it compared to the flip side of "Women's Work" (a famous vid by one of the same vidders about (arguably sexualised) violence against minor female characters as a matter of course in SPN) in several places. Likewise, I have seen several comments about how this is a long overdue criticism and it's high time we took a Good, Long, Hard Look at Ourselves.

Now, there are a boatload of ways this can spin out regarding gender in the wide world and how chicks get the short end, and whether this is reclaimation, if two wrongs make a right, or if it even counts because LJ is largely female, or if LJ being largely female is the only reason it's a space where this reclaimation can occur and sure, I have opinions on all these things, and I'm not trying to say it's not a conversation to have, especially not for those who watched the vid, and did get it, and are now moved to wonder why they feel this way and whether they're comfortable with it. But I do think it misses a really big point:

Brutalisation of major male characters to further their own storylines and our sympathy for them =/= brutalisation of minor female characters to further the storylines and our sympathy for male characters.

That's a fundamental difference in the way most male and female characters get beat up on TV.

So while I'm not against anyone wondering what this pattern of violence to male heroes (or their attraction to it) means, I guess I am very much against equating it with the very real representational issues regarding women as victims of violence in our media. Or that a priority for fandom (which already spends an extraordinary amount of time and effort on male characters - in turn perhaps because of what we're offered, but again, this is another, complex debate), should now be to turn around and defend these male characters who are already privileged both narratively and in terms of fandom's attention.

The Fandom Portrait Thing.

I think maybe I can be a bit more succinct on this bit.

I am in fandom. This vid is not a portrait of me. I am not particularly unique in my interests within fandom. I did not need to see this vid to learn anything about myself. I did not need to see it to know that a certain section of fandom appreciates violence in its h/c boyslash.

Above I detail why I'm not sure the way a certain wider reading of this vid is a valid social criticism of fandom attitudes (i.e. because I do not think the arguments about what this says about the unfair treatment of men by the media/fandom hold water).

But here I'm trying to say...even if they did hold water, I don't think they'd be as broadly applicable as is being suggested in places.

The Other Important Things Thing.

There are a few other things I think it's important to say:

- I have seen various responses to this vid; I absolutely don't want to present the prevalent "vibe" I've been getting as the only discussion out there. And it's great that people are discussing it: hey, look, here I am doing the same thing!

- I really, really have no issue with this vid as a self-portrait, or with people fascinatedly trying to find their own line within it. I know I already said this, but it bears repeating. I really do understand why, to people who identify with it, it would be a fascinating vid.

- I do not want to assume the intentions of the vidders in making this vid. As far as I'm aware it was always presented by them as a self-portrait and I would not want to presume to ascribe any further motivations to them.

Comments

[jo-lasalle.livejournal.com]

Hmm, smelling crispy in here...

I actually think it's a good thought to want several takes on what seems to be becoming a pretty famous vid. I watched it when a lot of the VVC vids came out, and found the general response to it interesting, because it left me rather cold. Not 'uncomfortably made aware of my Issues' backing away cold, just 'doesn't speak to me' cold -- I've had essentially a reaction very similar to yours, but coming from a different background. I wouldn't say I'm a h/c fan, though for me it varies hugely from fandom to fandom (one with plenty of boywhomping, others where it didn't appeal to me in the slightest) and the thought is less distant than it appears to be for you, and I still didn't come away from this thinking I should Take A Long Hard Look At Myself. Which could, of course, just me be. :-)

(I also, like you, don't have an issue with this vid. I just didn't connect to it at all.)

I don't have much of a point but I liked the thoughts you raised. And I'd like my kitten with mint sauce, please.

[beccatoria.livejournal.com]

Thanks for the response - I'm really glad I came across as rational rather than aggressive. It's certainly interesting to hear that, as someone who does share at least one fandom where these issues are common, you did not feel it applied to you either. That's starting to get to some of my other thoughts that I did not feel entirely comfortable articulating because they are both unformed and also about people for whom I do not speak - but I did wonder whether this was a vid that would even speak to everyone who did enjoy this kind of thing, because I'm not sure that there's a solid reason why they should, seeing as it's both fictional and not indicative of horribulous social attitudes? But equally, it makes me super uncomfortable SO. Behold as I manage to draw no conclusions either about the issue or the vid. ;)

But, um, have a kitten with mint sauce! :D

[jo-lasalle.livejournal.com]

That's starting to get to some of my other thoughts that I did not feel entirely comfortable articulating because they are both unformed and also about people for whom I do not speak

I'd have been curious, but I understand the reluctance! What makes you uncomfortable, the vid or the issue of h/c?

I like a lot of the other comments you've gotten here that made it even clearer than I was in trying to give enough context in a one-line summary of 'me and h/c'. Which is really not about liking it as long as it's 'mild'; the one guy in the one fandom I do like to torture frequently has a really miserable time of it, AND YET watching a vid like that, or even not watching a vid like that, I don't feel compelled to examine myself like there's anything wrong with that. I might find it intriguing sometimes to poke at why this in particular is working so well for me, and under which circumstances, but I don't feel I have to for the good of society. I, personnally, simply don't see the harm. (Fictional characters, my voice not exactly setting mainstream trend...)

Mmm, and just in time for lunch too!

[beccatoria.livejournal.com]

What makes you uncomfortable, the vid or the issue of h/c?

Neither per se, mostly I would just be uncomfortable presuming to know how people more affected by the issues than I would respond to them? Like, I suspected that not everyone who occasionally likes to torture boys would feel as though they needed or were being told to self-examine after seeing the vid (as you say and go on to detail here), but I wasn't comfortable making generalisations about people in that community would respond since it's something I don't know much about? I hope that makes sense?

Lunch! *roasts another kitten* ;)

[coffeejunkii.livejournal.com]

yeah, i had a similar reaction when watching this vid, i.e. looking in on something that does not represent my fandom experience, even though i certainly like both boy slash and h/c. but i'm squeamish and a fluffy bunnies person for the most part so anything overly violent or bloody makes me run for the hills. even seeing the clips used in the vid in their original context would have been over the top for me and not at all sexy.

i thought the vid was interesting in how it accumulated a lot of violence in one place, and from that point of view, it reminded me of another vvc vid that did something similar for female characters (i'm fuzzy brained right now so i don't recall the name). but i agree with you that the two are not the same because male and female characters occupy different position in television.

[beccatoria.livejournal.com]

I'm really glad to know I'm not the only one who didn't identify with the vid or its content. As you say it's not even indicative of the entirety of boyslash h/c fandom.

I do absolutely agree that the sheer accumulation is an interesting point in itself, I'm just not sure that I see the same thing in that pattern that others might (which, obviously, is fine). The main thing being, yes, the vid you saw about the women (which may well have been Women's Work?) does something very similar but to reach a very different point - at least to me while watching it. They are both interesting observations, but different ones, even if the method is superficially similar?

[bluerosefairy.livejournal.com]

*throws things at Firefox*

Okay, I had this long and detailed reply to this post typed up and was about to hit send when Firefox hiccuped and deleted it. I think it went something like this:

- I don't see myself in this vid either.
- I don't see what's so "problematic" about enjoying hurt/comfort fic or sexualizing blood and violence.
- I completely agree that brutalization of major male characters =/= the brutalization of minor female characters.
- Their use of the Sam/Gene introduction scene from Life on Mars confuses me because it's not hurt/comfort related, it's not violence for fetish purposes (like the shot of handcuffed!Sam), nor does it have the explicit D/s overtones of other scenes from the pilot.
- The whole "omg I'm a terrible person I like bleeding men" thing doesn't impact me; I got my "blood = badass, blood =/= woobie, violence =/= hot" wiring a long time ago as a result of liking professional wrestling.
- The last shot being of Indy and Marion from Raiders doesn't impact me the way it is supposed to because my focus was never on Indy in that scene, it's on Marion and how hilariously awesome she is.

In short, you are not alone and I'll take my kitten with some curly fries.

[nicole-anell.livejournal.com]

Their use of the Sam/Gene introduction scene from Life on Mars confuses me because it's not hurt/comfort related, it's not violence for fetish purposes (like the shot of handcuffed!Sam), nor does it have the explicit D/s overtones of other scenes from the pilot.

I don't think everything in the vid connected or was intended to connect specifically to hurt/comfort. I can't speak for Life On Mars, but the other shots in that segment (Mulder vs. Krycek, Peter/Sylar fighting on Heroes, shirtless fighting in Fight Club and Sherlock Holmes) were also more in the sexy aggressive fighting theme. I saw it as part of the vid's progression through various tropes, from the totally harm-free (as in, no fictional guys being harmed) "guys showering" montage to increasingly violent kink.

I can guarantee that whoever Sam and Gene are, their alpha-male shoving each other into walls has been read as hot and slashy by someone. Again, CLEARLY not a universal reaction. :p

[bluerosefairy.livejournal.com]

Oh, trust me, I read Sam/Gene as slashy (hello, icon). It's very difficult to watch LOM without shipping them. I just don't see that particular scene as emblematic of their slashy sexy aggressive fighting. It seems to me there were better scenes to choose from, but that's just my personal preference.

[beccatoria.livejournal.com]

Firefox has done that to me too in the past. *shakes fist at it!*

Thanks for taking the time to retype the Cliff's Notes version though. It's certainly interesting to hear that others shared my reaction even when they might not share my corner of fandom. I did watch LoM but a long time ago, when it originally aired, so I'm afraid the context of that scene was lost on me, as was, unfortunately, a lot of the footage since it wasn't from shows I watch (although I did recognise almost all the characters). Which in itself I'm sure contributes to my reaction to it, as it's yet another way in which I do not have the proper context to understand the vid. So it's interesting to hear from those who know more than I do.

One of the points you make was something I was circling but did not want to say outright because it doesn't concern me directly and because I'm genuinely still considering it, but basically it boils down to your assertion that even if someone finds it hot, there's really nothing necessarily wrong with that since it's fictional characters and not part of a wider serious social issue (i.e. violence against women or other oppressed groups). That said, I do still completely appreciate that it's a pattern and there's nothing wrong with wanting to examine it if one is so inclined. I just...don't think it's a clearcut issue.

ALSO WRESTLING! Ahhaahaha, dude, I spent most of my teens watching that shit! Back when it was still the WWF! People who know me now usually boggle, but dude, it was like a soap opera but with fighting and NO PRETENCE TOWARD SANITY. I loved it. I was totally in it for Triple H and Stephanie McMahon to RULE THE WORLD.

[bluerosefairy.livejournal.com]

Which in itself I'm sure contributes to my reaction to it, as it's yet another way in which I do not have the proper context to understand the vid.

That's a good point. I recognized many of the fandoms included, but by no means all of them. Which begs the question - do you need to know every fandom of a multifandom vid to "get" its message? I don't know that I have an answer for that.

even if someone finds it hot, there's really nothing necessarily wrong with that since it's fictional characters and not part of a wider serious social issue (i.e. violence against women or other oppressed groups).

Yeah, I can see how we were both circling that point. I think my stance is - violence is a tool in media. It can be used to show pain and suffering, it can be used to show consequences of previous action, it can be used in the context of poverty or war or athletics. Context is important. But by and large, the fetishization of male-directed violence is less "problematic", less worrying, than the fetishization of female-directed violence.

it was like a soap opera but with fighting and NO PRETENCE TOWARD SANITY. I loved it. I was totally in it for Triple H and Stephanie McMahon to RULE THE WORLD.

Ahahahaha, right there with ya. I was in it for DX (the awesome, back-in-the-day, potty-mouthed version) and ECW, which I was raised on, being from Philadelphia. Blood and violence does not quite bother me.

[nicole-anell.livejournal.com]

As I don't come from a hardcore H/C fandom, but I do have tendencies toward that kink in my own consumption of media, I did identify with that vid a lot. However it was mostly on a personal level and it only *vaguely* resonated with me as a comment on Fandom as a whole. (And even then, totally not my primary fandoms.)

(Plus I admit it didn't provoke *deathly serious* introspection from me, but it did provoke recognition, and fleeting oh-shit-isn't-that-interesting introspection, combined with a viddergasm for how awesomely it was put together.)

So... do I have a point? I like that you posted this! I've been a wee bit uncomfortable with a certain attitude from some (not all) people discussing "On the Prowl", like this is some kind of Disturbing Social Trend among fangirls that must be addressed, or some kind of a counter-balance toward claims of violence against women in the media. To this point:

Brutalisation of major male characters to further their own storylines and our sympathy for them =/= brutalisation of minor female characters to further the storylines and our sympathy for male characters.

Trust me you're not the first person to say that! I mean, that's JUST ONE aspect of the difference, but as giandujakiss specifically mentioned here: every male character in that vid is The Hero whose pain is in service of his journey, while every female character in "Women's Work" was a minor and unimportant damsel whose victimhood only served to further the plot or someone else's story.

I'm also disappointed in the "yes finally someone has said this about fandom!" attitude because there's so much... shaming going on in there. So much *guilt* from people who feel it's directed at them, and so much condemnation from people to whom it doesn't apply.

Honestly, I do find it interesting that a significant segment of female-dominated fandom can bond and get off to the pain and suffering of fictional menz, and I like that this vid has provoked Thoughts about that. But your post is a good reminder that well-meaning meta can get out of hand. This is NOT a Universal Treatise on Fandom and Female Sexuality, y'all.

[beccatoria.livejournal.com]

Thanks so much for commenting. It's really interesting to hear from someone who did identify with the vid, and I can completely understand why because, yeah, it absolutely is an interesting pattern to notice - even more so if it's one that you find personally interesting, and there's always space to recognise great editing!

So I'm really glad that this post comes across as not critical of anyone who liked it or found interesting stuff in it, and also glad that there is space within the vid to watch it, like it, and not feel the pressure to engage in deadly srs introspection.

And also glad I'm not the only one who noticed the pattern in wider fandom of being concerned it was a Disturbing Social Trend.

So? I like that you posted this too? ;)

I have actually seen giandujakiss's post and it was primary the one I was thinking of when I added that I'd seen a few other opinions. I seriously considered linking to it, but it was a fairly low key discussion from what I remember and I wasn't sure if I wasn't going to come across as a jerk and didn't want to be seen as co-opting or presenting her opinions as the same as mine were that the case (why yes, I can worry about EVERYTHING!)

But it's definitely a link I had ready for further-reading-comment-linking, so thanks for mentioning it.

And I'm definitely relieved I'm not the only one who gets the uncomfortable shaming vibes from the discussion. Guilt and shame are...so rarely useful, because it doesn't change anything it just makes everyone hide away or feel shit about themselves and nothing changes. It's especially frustrating when viewed from a vantage point that the shame is unnecessary in the first place.

Honestly, I do find it interesting that a significant segment of female-dominated fandom can bond and get off to the pain and suffering of fictional menz, and I like that this vid has provoked Thoughts about that. But your post is a good reminder that well-meaning meta can get out of hand. This is NOT a Universal Treatise on Fandom and Female Sexuality, y'all.

Thank you, (though obviously it's not just my post saying so!), and I pretty much agree with everything there. It's interesting, but it's not universal, it's not everyone, and it's not...a really big, horrible, scary issue.

[pellucid.livejournal.com]

It says a lot about my fannish circles that this is the first I've heard of this vid! And a lot about my fannish tastes that my reaction to watching it was back and forth between "yawn" and "eww!" Boys: still boring, whether there's blood or not.

On the other hand, I do see what the vid is trying to do, and I know the audience at which it is aimed, and I see why it would be an effective way to poke at the proclivities of that audience. But I can't quite manage to work up a strong opinion about any of it, I'm afraid.

Meanwhile, back I go to the world of female character-centred fandom. :)

[beccatoria.livejournal.com]

Hee! Well, you're not a vidder or in said fannish circles so it doesn't really surprise me you haven't heard of it before. ;)

*runs off after you into the world of female character-centred fandom*

Sorry for a lack of more substantive response but essentially I just agree with everything you've said. :)

[daybreak777.livejournal.com]

What an interesting post. I read your post because I just rewatched On the Prowl yesterday. Someone in a comment to a recent post asked me about it and I always rewatch a vid that I link to.

I didn't realize that so much discussion had been going on about the vid. I have to say I was much more interested in the VVC vid, Stay Awake, about women than this one. Mostly, I haven't watched a lot of the shows or movies in On the Prowl so I didn't know all of the male characters.

It took a while for me to understand the 'self-portrait' part of On the Prowl but there can be such a broad definition of self-portraits. While this particular vid may not represent me, I do remember feeling this way watching shows sometimes. When I watched Dollhouse I remember feeling this way. The show made me so uncomfortable at first and at a certain point I began to wonder if I was sexualizing women and violence against women just by watching the show. I ended up liking Dollhouse but I didn't always feel comfortable liking it. It was an interesting relationship I had with that show.

Maybe that's how others feel about hurt/comfort and watching bleeding men. Uncomfortable but unable to not watch, either. Maybe even titallated by it too. Hey, again it's not me but to each their own.

I recently had a series in my journal about films about alien-human hybrids. One commenter on my list remarked that she was uncomfortable with such storylines because what of what was done to women to get those hybrids. I'm fascinated by those stories but uncomfortable what such stories do to women too. Maybe that's how some fans feel about On The Prowl? I can't speak for them, but I wonder.

brutalisation of minor female characters to further the storylines and our sympathy for male characters
Or brutalization of major female characters to further the storylines and our sympathy for male characters. You make an interesting point. One self portrait-like question I ask myself is not just about the fetishizing/victimization of women furthering sympathy for male characters, but 1) Why do I watch such things? and 2) Doesn't it further the writers' agendas, and what exactly are those agendas?

Do people write such things because they think the audience wants to see it? Or does the audience watch it because people write it and put it on screen? Hmm.

[beccatoria.livejournal.com]

I only saw Stay Awake for the first time the other day - and yes, it's very fascinating and I agree, far more interesting to me. It plays into your points about alien/human hybrids later in your comment. The concept is interesting but then there's the question of what attitudes are being brought to bear in the way the story is conveyed on screen. How culpable is an audience in this? Why do we watch? Do the writers have an agenda or is it simply "the way the world works" because no one questions it? Certainly all fascinating questions that can be applied to a number of things I do like.

But as you say, On the Prowl doesn't represent us so it's not something that makes instinctive sense.

Do people write such things because they think the audience wants to see it? Or does the audience watch it because people write it and put it on screen? Hmm.

I think that people write these things because they do think it's what the audience wants and then that becomes what the audience wants because it's what they're used to? It's circular? The writing reflects the (messed up) world and we all end up thinking that world is normal - each thing reinforces the other and creates a situation where no one has to question the uncomfortable stuff that goes in there?

[chaila.livejournal.com]

I love this post! I would co-sign it, but I feel that would be presumptuous because I could never have been half so cogent. You do a great job being clear about what you're criticizing and what you're not. My reaction was much the same. Initially: bored, this vid is not about me and has nothing to say to me. But then I started seeing all the recs and discussion, but even so, I sort of am used to people in fandom conflating "fandom" with "slash" or "boy-focused stuff", so it wasn't really until I started seeing discussion or comments about how It's About Time We Started Talking About This that I got a little disturbed. It's one thing that there are apparently a lot of people to whom this vid and discussion is interesting and I would never want to tell people not to explore this if it's interesting to them, but the presentation of it as an endemic social issue (even in fandom) kind of makes me want to poke my eyes out. Probably this is a bad analogy, but I sort of feel like it's those people who say "but women sometimes hit men too!" in discussions about domestic violence. Like, okay, sure that does happen sometimes and it's bad and should be dealt with in those individual instances. But it is not an endemic social issue at all on par with the reverse and talking about it like it is is just incredibly dismissive of the real issue, which is that our society does not at all appropriately deal with violence against women. The same point is that there are huge issues with representation of women in media and violence against women in media, and flipping it and making it about violence against men does NOT make it the same issue in the least.

And I admit that partly I just deeply resent being told that this is something I Need To See, even if it makes me uncomfortable. I think mostly it's because, again, I do get tired of the conflation of "fandom" or even "female space in fandom" with boycentricness, what that vid ACTUALLY makes me think is the real issue worthy of discussion (or at least one that deserves at least as much attention) is why so much of fandom is focused on the boys at all, torture porning them or not. Why, to use an easy example, fandom can have so much discussion about how sexist SPN is and then...go back to making slash vids and reclaiming Sam and Dean. Because the tropes on display in that vid and the fannish proclivities it relates to are all still about boys. And now, what the discussion of On the Prowl has done is suggest that it's now time for fandom generally to focus on *meta* energies on the boys too and on its treatment of *men*. Which I think is a problematic statement, and that's what the vid and reaction makes me want to talk about.

[beccatoria.livejournal.com]

Probably this is a bad analogy.

Ahahahaa. Okay, you win the comments. ;) But yes, I get what you mean, which is, I think, where this whole post stems from? Because, due to the fact they're (a) fictional and (b) not part of a disturbing media trend, I'm not sure I feel that anyone needs to self-examine anyways, BUT, to use your example, things that are not part of a larger trend don't get a pass just because of that. Male victims of domestic violence are victims of a far lesser (in numerical terms) global issue but that doesn't mean it's not worth consideration. So if - going back to the world of fandom - this type of violence is part of a fandom trend that's nonetheless prevalent in certain parts of fandom, then okay, cool, that's still a worthy topic for discussion (albeit a discussion I imagine is not clearcut).

But it's the conflation of the issue with other issues, and the conflation of the issue with a fandom-wide issue in some quarters that annoys me. Which in itself is partially because, like you, I get tired of being conflated with slash fandom because I'm a straight girl. And...then we get into murky waters of personal bias and personal response and I'm sure there are loads of slash fans out there tired of getting mistaken for het people (*wistfully thinks of a day when ANYONE will get default mistaken for a gen fan...* :p)

Which, to get back to the point, it's not so much the vid as the social response to the vid which is reminding me of an awful lot of my deep-seated annoyed-feelings about fandom in general. I don't think the fact my response is tied up with personal experience and bias makes it totally dismissable or irrational, but I do think it's worth noting that a lot of this is basically me going, ARGH. WHY IS IT ABOUT BOYS AGAIN. ALWAYS WITH THE BOYSSSS.

[chaila.livejournal.com]

But it's the conflation of the issue with other issues, and the conflation of the issue with a fandom-wide issue in some quarters that annoys me.

Exactly! Re: the vid itself, I'm just not interested. Re: the whole issue of kinks and shaming, I'm...also not that interested, because I don't understand the issues or community enough to really muster much of an opinion. But when people do start to politicize the response to the effect of "yes, fandom should think about how it treats men" as, like as fandom-wide moral or political issue, I get a bit peeved.

And the whole thing where I'm irrationally annoyed at being told to THINK ABOUT THE BOYS, whether it's by VVC/slash fandom who enjoyed the vid or by the people raising the Treatment of Men as an Issue, is sort of separate. Though I do realize it does sort of conflate all the issues into: BOYS BOYS AGAIN WITH THE BOOOYYYYS, WHYYYYY. But my brain can't really help it.

[emmiere.livejournal.com]

This is interesting to read because, like pellucid, I hadn't actually heard of this vid before now. And it's very well put together and, as far as I can tell, seems to do an excellent job at what it aims to do, but I don't think it would have left a large impression on me without the discussion (which I only know a very, very small part of now). Vaguely fascinating to me--yet quickly crossing my personal comfort zone of violence and 'ew'--as something a large part of fandom is into that isn't part of my general experience though. I'm not sure I have the energy right now to pick through it more, since by being determinedly ignorant I don't yet feel any fandom pressure to Look Inward, but I like your thoughts, you. ;)

I also like how you navigate between talking about points of the debate and presuming intentions. Kittens might survive another day, hurrah!

ETA: All of which sounds very waffly, but to the extent I know what the hell I'm talking about at any given time, I agree and wish to subscribe to your newsletter. :)

[beccatoria.livejournal.com]

I love waffly! Mostly I'm just glad I don't come off as totally irrational and have been managing to separate the issues from assuming intent, which was my primary concern. But it's also really gratifying to know that I'm in good company in terms of people to whom the vid did not really speak deeply.

*pets the kitten* ;)

[bop-radar.livejournal.com]

I'm so glad you wrote about this as a different perspective on the vid (which I totally loved as a con experience vid--I doubt I'd have enjoyed it nearly so much at home but it was fascinating to be in the live audience for it). I do think it was an important vid for the Vividcon audience (which comes originally from the heartland of slash fandom), and as someone who's been in slash fandom (and even betas a m/m slave AU) for many years, I found it powerful and cathartic to have the issue explored. Also, personally I do come across a lot of hypocritical attidues in fandom (and not just slash fandom) vis a vis torture and consent issues for men versus women.

That said, I am glad someone is saying 'this is not a reflection of me'. The thing I kind of love most about the vid is it's prompting people to define where they position themselves--even if that's 'yeah, this is not about me'.

I get the frustration with VVC assuming that it is all of fandom. Having been there, it was totally LOLZy how much there was a collective sense that we were at the centre-of-the-known-fannish-world was. And I say that having loved every second of it. But LOL, there is so much more to the fannish world than that, and trust me people are talking about a very small, very specific, if admittedly very vocal/influential group when talking about that vid in the way you describe.

[beccatoria.livejournal.com]

Thank you - I'm very relieved that it doesn't come across as overly aggressive to someone of a differing opinion.

I absolutely imagine that it was an extremely different thing to see it premiere in a group of people, particularly if it was relevant to a large number of them - and there's absolutely nothing wrong with knowing your audience!

Likewise your perspective is really useful to me here as I honestly do not have much information at all about slash fandom, especially not the more, err, hardcore aspects of it. Your information about attitudes toward consent and how that relates to men and women is something that's interesting to know and I very much see how it would be cathartic for you to see the issue addressed in a clear, unambiguous way.

The thing I kind of love most about the vid is it's prompting people to define where they position themselves--even if that's 'yeah, this is not about me'.

Indeed - as I said at the end, I have seen a few differing responses and this is just one more. Hooray for discussion! :)

But I do really appreciate your confirmation that I'm not manufacturing stuff when I sometimes feel that there's a bit of a skew in terms of the perception of where the "centre" is and what constitutes the fannish mainstream. So like fandom is here as a playground (an educational playground, sure, but then, what good playground isn't?) but it's nice to take a moment every now and then to remember that it's a big playground and the kids on the swings aren't doing the same things as the kids in the sandbox?

Anyway, thanks for your thoughts and for providing a perspective not otherwise represented in the comments.

[bop-radar.livejournal.com]

there's absolutely nothing wrong with knowing your audience!
I'm going to write a bit about this because I had a LOT of insights about why certain VVC vids make a big splash at the con but those of us at home sit and scratch our heads thinking 'really?!' I've done that for YEARS and thought it was me who was crazycakes (which is why it's been interesting/a relief to see people like you and chaila43 talking honestly about how your reactions were a bit different). I used to ask people about this a lot but never got a straight answer about what was so different about viewing them at the con versus viewing them at home. I scribbled notes on this at the con and I have my own thoughts on it. They may be semi-controversial to people, I don't know, I hope not, but a lot of it comes down to: VVC is a really specific audience. At the con it's obvious that everyone knows this and is playing hard to it and it's got such a strong community feeling but it's also kind of bubble-like? Like I literally found it really hard to speak to anyone outside the con after three days there! (I know that sounds nuts but it's a really intense experience.) So I think people come out of the con and they're still really IN the con experience and talking to the people that were there a lot when they post about it. Probably for most people they figure that is the same as talking to people not at the con or they don't stop to think about it at all. Having been mystified by the whole thing for years to me it's really NOT the same thing. I'm eventually going to rec vids but I'd already thought I was going to mark out 'vids that were awesome con experiences' versus 'vids that I think people at home will enjoy/get a lot out of'. Because to me personally those are still different things.

do not have much information at all about slash fandom, especially not the more, err, hardcore aspects of it
Count yourself lucky?! ;) I have a love-hate relationship with slash fandom that started when I was 15. I can really really get into slash under the right circumstances and it was totally my gateway drug to fandom but I think it can at times be problematic and sometimes the community makes me feel deeply uncomfortable, especially when people start talking about it being socially empowering to read torture fic... there's a line, you know? Or there is for me. ;) Enjoy your kink but respect PEOPLE. It's kind of like how some forms of feminism become really unattractive to me if they cross a line into constant malebashing without any constructive dialogue (which isn't true feminism to me). Does that make sense?

the kids on the swings aren't doing the same things as the kids in the sandbox
Right! :) And there were plenty of people at the con who felt the same way (notably there were only 1 or 2 slash vids in premieres this year--there's a shift occurring in the community) and that's ALSO part of why the vid was interesting--because it felt critical of (hardcore) slash fandom and people who attend the con but feel uncomfortable with those aspects got a chance to go 'yesss! I've never been comfortable with this thing about you guys!'

my kink is not your kink but your kink is ok

[metatxt.livejournal.com]

YES! MEDIA CONTEXTUALIZED!!! The gendered service of violence within the source text(s) is a huge disparity, but I think this needs to be applied more broadly to who is being critiqued within these vids.

"On the Prowl" is a critique of fangirls' desires. "Women's Work" is a critique of television writers (mostly male) using violence against female characters as male character plot-advancement. While I see the stylistic similarities, the vidders are operating from different positions of relational power.

Critique vids always play with the dangers of reproduction (the danger being unintentionally reasserting the subject of ire by not effectively communicating the critique), but "On the Prowl" lives on this line, creating a vid that purportedly elicits desire from the viewer while critiquing the viewer for these desires. As the viewers would never be limited to the vidders themselves, I think it's safe to say this critique was always intended to be received by a larger corner of fandom, a corner of fandom to which the vidders belong. So as much as it's a self-portrait, the text of the vid itself, as well as how it is being discusses now, assumes the critique to the shared identity of a community* (singular because I am describing one of many within livejournal).

All this said, it is the critique itself I find utterly unpalatable and the method of sharing this critique coercive and shaming. This vid is an indictment on sadistic desire, questioning whether it is "ok" to feel these desires, and if we are irresponsible by expressing them. What this point fails to encompass is the context in which these desires occur and the common means of expression: these are sadistic desires aroused by media and these are desires commonly expressed through transformative media -- vids, fic, icons, picspams, etc. Characters and real people (as characters) played with in these fanworks are not actual, but representations. AND THERE ARE MANY COPIES. *ahem*

Fangirl sadistic desires and their expressions do not in fact: cause the characters any further suffering, in spite! of the fact that these feelings of desire are not necessarily (though sometimes -- LEGEND OF THE SEEKER I'M LOOKING AT YOU) consistent with canon narratives.

Sadistic desires have their place in the world in an actual non-imaginary playspace, known as kink communities and BDSM. In these social spheres, there is an understanding of how these desires can function in ways that are positive for all involved, under a general guideline of safe, sane, and consensual.

There are enough places in the world that take issue with female desire, and particularly female sexual desire, demonizing all lady boners. Fandom is a place to celebrate and wank off with lady boners.

This vid elicits lady boners and then tells you you're bad for having one, tells you it's dangerous to have one. It's not. This vid is shaming. And it shames on no solid ground, but by conflating reality and fantasy and with no substantive support for its cries of danger.

Re: my kink is not your kink but your kink is ok

[beccatoria.livejournal.com]

So, as usual, I love your words and intelligence. You offer a far more concise explanation of why critique vids have these issues (the question of when failure to communicate a critique renders it simple reproduction of the offending material), as well as a powerful argument about why a shameful reading of the vid is extremely problematic.

I'm still slightly reluctant to necessarily say that the desire-shaming reading of the vid is the only one possible, given that I have also seen comments celebrating the vid (albeit far, far fewer), and a fair number that simply responded with curiosity at where their line was - at how far their kink went before it was no longer their kink - without it seeming to elicit any particularly shameful self-criticism.

That's kind of why I tried to root the post more in terms of how I felt the wider vidding community was beginning to frame the vid as it spread - what social narrative was forming around this vid.

And in that context, I cannot agree with you more. Whether or not it was the intention of the vidders, the vid is, by now, quite strongly rooted in critique that, as you say, elicits lady boners and then shames them. If this were some endemic real world social issue that media-endorsed fantasies were complicit in normalising (such as sexualised violence against women) then perhaps there would be leeway and a basis for self-examination. As things stand, it does end up playing far more as something that proclaims kink fantasies to be dangerous and shameful.

I also imagine that if this were in any way my kink, I would feel far more strongly about this than I do, and completely respect both your passion and your articulation of the issues.

And now, in retaliation, I'm off to watch a certain TV show to take some notes for a certain vid about a certain girl we might have discussed. :)

Re: my kink is not your kink but your kink is ok

[bop-radar.livejournal.com]

I'm still slightly reluctant to necessarily say that the desire-shaming reading of the vid is the only one possible,
For the record, that seemed to be a very minor reaction at the con. Some people felt it to be shaming, many people I spoke to found it celebratory and completely hot from start to finish, some people were relieved to see it addressed and most people found it interesting as a benchmark against which to position oneself. Of course it's a completely legitimate reading to feel that the vidder is shaming others/themselves--I'm not saying that's incorrect, but it certainly isn't the only reading.

To me the vid is clearly a vid from slash fandom talking to slash fandom (and not meant to be read in a context wider than that). I suspect the discussion around it has grown muddled from what you've said above (I've been away--this is the first I've read about it).

And re. the 'your kink is still ok' thing? Yes, totally. I am close friends with people that found that vid HOT HOT HOT and completely unproblematic from start to finish. I respect and love them, I just don't agree with them. These things are personal. :)

Re: my kink is not your kink but your kink is ok

[chaila.livejournal.com]

To me the vid is clearly a vid from slash fandom talking to slash fandom

I'm somewhat interested to see you say that, I think. I've always felt that VVC is really closely tied to its slash origins and traditions, or at least can't really be understood outside that history and context. Not really in a critical way, but just by virtue of the way it understandably wants to protect its very specific history of a specific subset of a fandom that has recently grown much larger than that. I always felt like most participants would disagree though?

Re: my kink is not your kink but your kink is ok

[bop-radar.livejournal.com]

can't really be understood outside that history and context
Clearly this is just my personal opinion, but I believe that to be 100% true. And exactly what you say: it's proud of and protective of its history (IMO somewhat damagingly so).

I think you're spot on--it has grown a lot in the last five or so years (I talked to people at the con who discussed a marked shift beginning in 2005). Online I saw a lot of mixed feelings about that expressed, but AT the con, I only seemed to run into people who found the evolution a good thing. (Probably virtue of the fact that I hung out predominantly with the 'new' crowd!) The really really marked thing for me at the con though was the con comm were overwhelmingly in favour of evolution from what I could tell. It seems like there IS a state of tension between preserving the con's origins (legitimately so! it has a proud tradition and I wholeheartedly respect the need to maintain that, and learning more about it was a positive part of the con for me) and embrace change and reach out to a much wider vidding and fannish world. So maybe the fact that it's evolving beyond its slash roots may be the reason you feel participants may disagree. Though IMO I think that would be a minority of attendees. Really! There's a high level of consciousness about this (and deep respect for the slash origins) at the con.

There was also much conversation at the con about how the way VVC is portrayed online is very different to the reality once you're there. Summation: a lot of bullshit and very little straight talk occurs online. ;) You have no idea how good it made me feel to find heaps of con attendees who felt the same way I did!

(Also: HI HONEY! I am back on the internet! Which is very yayful and means I can actually, like, talk to you again! JOY!)

Re: my kink is not your kink but your kink is ok

[chaila.livejournal.com]

Oh yeah, it's not that I think it's sekritly a slash con or something or that most participants are, like, actively not wanting new people or ideas to come. Or that I have some uncharitable vision of it from online discussion, b/c I really don't (i.e. it's not like I'm not interested in going b/c I think people would be unwelcoming or something). It's more that...I wholeheartedly believe it's great fun and full of great people, but at the end of the day it's still...130 people in a specific multi-fandom setting that largely appreciates particular aesthetics presented as the center of a vidding universe. Like it's perceived as a different "level" of vidding in some way, when really it's just for a different type of audience? Obviously that's because for participants, I think they do often save their "best" stuff for VVC or because they plan their VVC vids all year, so it's understandable how it happens, but it's a rather cramped view of vidding and rather limiting/frustrating for those who can't or don't want to go/submit. And I don't think the answer to that conundrum can be: just go, you'll love it! (Not that you were saying this). Because that doesn't really help much with the larger collective presentation of it, which will always exist because, hell, it's a con of 130 people?

Welcome back online! It's nice to hear you happy to be online. :)

Re: my kink is not your kink but your kink is ok

[bop-radar.livejournal.com]

b/c I think people would be unwelcoming or something
LOL, that makes one of us. I *TOTALLY* thought people would be unwelcoming!

Like it's perceived as a different "level" of vidding in some way, when really it's just for a different type of audience?
*nod nod* Trust me, plenty of con participants hate that. Yes, exactly, it's just a SMALL con with a small, specific (if vid-obsessed) audience (and that was said almost verbatim by the con comm in the welcome session). And well, you know that whole discussion in my journal a year ago was all about that. I think there are some people who really do believe/peddle the theory that it is the best of the best. I don't think it's as many people as it seems online (one thing I've really learnt from going to a con is that the loud people online are not representative of a community even if they make themselves out to be). Also I honestly believe half the problem is that it's the only known, dedicated vid con. There should be more. :)

Thank you! I am excited. :) I get to read your posts and watch your vids. :) I know it sounds absurd but I couldn't even reply to your last email (I'M SO SORRY!): I just went into complete shutdown. :(

Also, sympathy on the 'just go, you'll love it!' message. I had that for years and it was frustrating. I decided to go on my own terms but I still recall the frustration, believe me! I could easily have taken another path and having been I feel doubly validated in that--like going CONFIRMED to me how small and specific (if also AWESOME) it was and therefore that it was completely fine to ignore it if I chose to. For me personally, this made me far more comfortable with it and had the reverse psych effect of then making me really in to it. *does not respond well to perceived coersion* :p