*listens to crickets chirping*
Someone in the Spock/Uhura community linked to this post:
Who is the ultimate HBIC?I thought it was kind of fun, so I nominated Cate Banfield from ER (on page 11 or so), though there were lots of HBIC’s I could have voted for: Lisa Cuddy, Lt. Uhura, Cordelia Chase, Buffy Summers, Laura Roslin, Kara Thrace…too many to mention. Saw Hermione (there ( Read more... )
Who is the ultimate HBIC?I thought it was kind of fun, so I nominated Cate Banfield from ER (on page 11 or so), though there were lots of HBIC’s I could have voted for: Lisa Cuddy, Lt. Uhura, Cordelia Chase, Buffy Summers, Laura Roslin, Kara Thrace…too many to mention. Saw Hermione (there ( Read more... )
Sounds reasonable, and I still feel that way. I've 'met' a few real crazies in the fandom!
Apparently somewhere along the line you started drinking the Koolaid, and that's relevant
And that's flat-out wrong. Negative about Ginny and the (final) HP books, yes. I guess I don't know what 'koolaid' is - I thought it was a soft drink - but more than rationally negative - no. I refute any hand-waving fuzzy "it's all Brad's fault, he's irrational/trollish/unreasable" excuses, thanks. If you wind up deciding that you don't want negative talk about Ginny ... it's your blog, you make the rules. No need to try and shift unjustified blame onto me.
it found me when I was reading something on Fandom Wank the other day.
Really? What's the reference, please?
I can't recall a previous comment in which you referred to Ginny as a bitch ...
I don't think I ever have, I'm not that 'zealous' a shipper. She's just not very nice IMO.
... but you've done so here.
Okay, I searched this entry, I never said 'bitch'; I was cute at one point and said that she matched the 'B' in 'HBIC'. That's what you're referring to? Rather tenuous. If that's the nadir of my shipping discourse in my six years of HP fandom I guess I'm content.
it's all about what a heinous bitch Ginny is
For the record, you're madly exaggerating all over this latest entry; I've never called Ginny a bitch other than indirectly this once. So all these mentions of me and bitch-calling are drastically inaccurate and deceptive. Please don't deceive yourself in making me the 'bad guy' of this exchange.
No Ginny bashing. By calling Ginny a bitch and an aggressive little bully, you're bashing her.
I was going to ask - without dragging things out in pseudo-lawyer fashion - as to whether my comments here would have been acceptable had I not said that the 'B' fit Ginny (!), but, for all of the 'Brad/bitch' exaggeration, I see when it came down to it that you inserted 'aggressive little bully' here at the end as well. So I'll err on the conservative side and assume you're basically not accepting of any negative talk about Ginny, or her negative traits, at all.
I don't think it's possible to have reasoned or unbiased analysis of a literary character when one is forbidden from noting any of the flaws in that character, so that puts an end to any debate at all about Ginny in your blog. Which will save us both some frustration. I'll leave you to your version of Ginny!
Reply
Saying "she's not very nice and this is why" is a far cry from saying "she's a B" and "she's an aggressive little bully." The latter are name calling. Maybe it is the first time you've resorted to name-calling here. But you'll note I didn't say anything about you being a troll until after you resorted to indirectly calling her a bitch.
What *in this post* led you to think I was interested in analyzing Ginny's character in this post or reading an analysis of Ginny's character in anyone's comments in this post? Please re-read. I didn't even say "no one has mentioned Ginny *yet*" as if I expected she should be nominated. I simply mentioned some other Potter women who had been mentioned and mentioned that Ginny had not been nominated, and that is all. You are the one who felt it necessary to jump in about unworthy Ginny is of the designation. Blame me for posting all you want - you could have chosen to respect my 'ship leanings and fondness for a particular character and not commented negatively about her, especially to the point of name calling.
I'll reiterate that I've seen enough negativity and name-calling in fandom, and I'm sick to death of it. If you aren't capable of participating here without running Ginny down, so be it.
Reply
Thanks for the reference to the Leaky Cauldron discussion; nothing I wrote there to be ashamed of. Actually, nothing about Ginny either?!? The Tartanboxers thing I know about, of course; that was terrifically instructive as to the thinking/behaviour of some members of the pro-Jo neck of the woods. You talk about the 'zealots'!! :-) But, gosh, that was 15 months or so ago?
Could you supply a URL to this 'Fandom Wank' thing, and the 'links back to LJ'? I was referred to the Leaky Cauldron discussion by a friend entirely out of LiveJournal, I think, and didn't know that it was linked back somewhere?
The latter are name calling. Maybe it is the first time you've resorted to name-calling here.
There's absolutely nothing wrong with name-calling as far as I can see. If the shoe fits, and all that. If my saying this startles you then perhaps we have a cultural misalignment here.
Calling people various vulgarities is not on. As you've noted, I've never called Ginny a bitch; not only do I generally not swear but that would be going overboard (too 'zealous'). But I saw nothing wrong in the other appellation, since I felt that it was merited at the time (I retracted it after you focused on the definition of 'bully', you'll recall).
But that doesn't matter - you don't want *any* negative things about Ginny, 'name calling' or otherwise. Just don't try and justify the edict by landing blame for uncivil or irrational behaviour at my door, that's all.
It was interesting to read your quick synopsis of my posting history here at chez Delylah, but I'm not surprised that my posts are more negative these days; they're simply reflecting my opinion of the canon that came out after we started. You're surely aware there are a number of fans who similarly think Rowling failed with the last two books? I simply acknowledge the bad stuff that was written by Rowling (and then criticise it); you don't want to hear of it (at least not through me). I'll grant you that rose-coloured glasses would certainly make it easier to stick with your 'ship'!
(I probably don't ship H/Hr these days; not the 'canon' parties, at any rate. Or much less strongly than I used to. Because Harry and Hermione were treated badly by Rowling as well, IMO. Contemporary H/Hr stories have lots more to 'fix' than they did in simpler, pre-HBP times.)
If you aren't capable of participating here without running Ginny down, so be it.
Like I said, I'd find it hard to discuss Ginny if whole blocks of canon are out of bounds. We'll both survive. :-)
But hey, who knows, you might put up an entry that's outside your Ginny proscription. Now, about Ron ... :-)
Reply
http://www.journalfen.net/community/fandom_wank/1206985.html
There are 1500 comments. I don't feel like wading through them again to find the one that specifically referenced you, though the link to the Leaky Cauldron appears in the body of the wank. I may be remembering wrong - that particular post may not have led me back to LJ, I think instead it took me to HMS STFU on Journalfen. And I'll admit to going looking yesterday for incidents of a similar nature to the one that occurred in Tartanboxer's journal, after you resorted to calling Ginny names. And yes, I found some.
you don't want *any* negative things about Ginny, 'name calling' or otherwise
I've defined for you what construes bashing in my journal. You're the one guilty of madly exaggerating, now, and it's rapidly becoming tiresome.
I've got to be be careful to honour your wises not to 'bash' Ginny from now on, so I can only discuss the other stuff, like aspects of this discussion itself, fandom, or me.
Still exaggerating. Is your perspective really that narrow? Is Ginny the only aspect of the HP novels you're interested in discussing anymore? Do you have nothing to contribute to fandom that's positive?
There's absolutely nothing wrong with name-calling as far as I can see. If the shoe fits, and all that. If my saying this startles you then perhaps we have a cultural misalignment here.
Then why did you take offense at my calling you a troll? It's just a name - nothing to get offended about, if the shoe fits and all that. And it fits, Brad. Maybe not previously here, but with this exchange, yes, it fits. You aren't truly interested in giving Ginny's character a fair analysis. You're only interested in bashing her, or you wouldn't have equated my disallowing Ginny-bashing to disallowing any discussion of Ginny or the HP books whatsoever.
Why, out of the other characters I listed in my original post, did you only mention Ginny? You could have splooged about Molly Weasley. Heck, you could have waxed eloquent about how deserving Hermione was of the title, and that would have been acceptable. But instead, you chose to slam Ginny - whom you know good and well is one of my favorite characters. Why would you do that, if not to provoke a reaction from me?
Words can be just as hurtful as a slap to the face. Here in LJ-land, words are the only weapons we've got - and hurtful words are the reason the 'shipper wars exist. No, Ginny Weasley, fictional character that she is, can never be hurt by your words. However, in this case, I've found your words offensive and demonstrative of a complete lack of respect for me. Why would I want to continue any kind of discourse with someone who so obviously does not respect me, and in reality is likely sneering at me behind the innocuous smiley faces that you use to punctuate anything that could be construed as insulting or snide?
New rule: no smiley faces. If you're going to be snide, at least own it.
It has been nearly 2 years since DH came out. And yet, you're still writing TLDR's about it. I fail to understand why anyone would want to expend that kind of energy on something they hate. I've read your comments and others' comments on what horrible books HBP and DH were - and they do not interest me. I am not interested in rehashing them over and over.
Posting a final summation of your literary critique of DH's shortcomings is a great idea. Maybe it will prove to be cathartic for you and you can finally move on.
There's a new Star Trek movie out. If you haven't already seen it, maybe you should give it a shot. You might find a whole new fandom to rant in.
Reply
I'll admit to going looking yesterday for incidents of a similar nature to the one that occurred in Tartanboxer's journal, after you resorted to calling Ginny names. And yes, I found some.
And yes, that 'some' would have been very small in number, too. However, as I've said, I'm more interested in the Brad/Delylah history setting up the Brad/Delylah context for this current Brad/Delylah exchange.
Is your perspective really that narrow? Is Ginny the only aspect of the HP novels you're interested in discussing anymore?
Oh, you misread; I meant that I was curtailed to commenting on the 'discussion, fandom or me' in this current exchange. Heh. Yes, words *are* powerful. So your follow-up questions about a 'narrow perspective' and such are embarrassingly overreaching and moot.
Then why did you take offense at my calling you a troll? It's just a name - nothing to get offended about, if the shoe fits and all that. And it fits, Brad.
Uhm, no, the shoe doesn't fit. But why are we back here again, why are you looping to old and abandoned material? We've been through this; you asked your question; I answered it; we'd moved on.
Why ask the question, and accept it ... only to come back to it again? There's no logic - or honour - in posing a question if you're not going to accept the reply, Delylah.
Why, out of the other characters I listed in my original post, did you only mention Ginny?
I think I've answered something close to this question, but okay, I'll do it again - I think Rowling *tried* to make Ginny something approximating this 'HBIC'; I've always thought of it as 'head cheerleader type'. But other than suddenly being awesome in the beauty department - "a lot of the boys [think she's good looking]" - Rowling succeeded only on a small and petty scale, making the character much less appealing to some in the process. But I think the authorial intent there with that character was the closest to this 'HBIC' thing.
Words can be just as hurtful as a slap to the face. ... so obviously does not respect me ...
All I can say to that is you seem to be getting more and more angry at all this. At the beginning of this exchange you said you "weren't interested" in my talking about Ginny ... but were willing to 'play along'. So - at your invitation - I continued our conversation. So please don't go into a positive feedback loop (as I've said, you seem to be revisiting old accusations) amplifying things into inflammatory charges such as the above.
I'd answer the meandering questions about DH but since my reply would likely "not interest you" I don't think it would be worth my time. And I doubt you'd be receptive anyway.
You might find a whole new fandom to rant in.
Oh, Delylah. From a discussion about Ginny in your blog - condoned and 'played along' by you - to this.
Most of this latest post from you is either cycling back over old material (which does you no credit) to madly oscillating over the fandom multiverse and more overt derision. Your demeanour seems to be disintegrating in writing these final sad cheap shots; you'll see what I mean if you re-read them after you've cooled down. I won't similarly descend to such behaviour; I'll simply bring this exchange to a close (from my side, anyway), thanks. Enjoy your censored and sanitised Ginny!
Reply
Leave a comment