UR DOING IT WRONG
This is a response to a Swedish newspaper article about Star Trek slash. I have some problems with it and my reply was a bit too large for the comment box.
It's interesting that a newspaper is talking about slash, but, wow, this article has a lot of inaccuracies. (Sorry if you're reading this, Linda Leopold, but it needs to be said!)
Okay: firstly, slash does not equal porn. This article, however, implies that it does. Though she says the Star Trek slashfics contain "romantic or erotic meetings between mainly Kirk and Spock," she then focuses mainly on the erotic, as evidenced with her statements and phrasing in these sections:
*"The new young versions of Kirk (CP) and Spock (ZQ) trigger the fans into more and more deviant stories"
*"Most stories that fans write about their favourite films, novels and TV series are not about male characters getting it on"
*"Why in the world makes female fans want to read and write smutty stories about the Star Trek-heroes"
Don't get me wrong, I love porny slash, but it's misleading to imply that all slash is porn.
Secondly, I sincerely doubt that slash is as small and secret as the writer implies with the following statement:
"But slash is still a small infamous subgenre in the big world of fan fiction which exists (now mostly on the internet). Most stories that fans write about their favourite films, novels and TV series are not about male characters getting it on. Some fans are even unknowing about the fact that slash exists."
I'm interested to know where she got the numbers that show slash is "small" in relation to the other genres of fanfiction. This statement seems to be an unqualified speculation-a personal opinion, not fact. Granted, I don't have the statistics on this either, but in my 9 years of fandom experience (I started off shipping het, BTW) I feel pretty confident in saying that if you're in fandom for any length of time you'd pretty much have to be living under a rock not to know the three main fandom categories: het, gen, and slash. This is especially true in fandoms with dominate slash ships, such as Star Trek (Kirk/Spock), Supernatural (Sam/Dean), Harry Potter (Draco/Harry), etc. I'm sort of interested in polling het communities now to see what percentage of their members know what het, gen, and slash is. I'm willing to bet that most of them know what all of those are.
Also, there's a second level of fuckery in that quote that's directly related to my first point:
"Most stories that fans write about their favourite films, novels and TV series are not about male characters getting it on."
This statement implies that most fanfic is not slash while simultaneously defining slash as "[stories] about male characters getting it on." This is problematic not only because it further marginalizes and misrepresents slash (it makes slash look like some kind of deviant anomaly), but because it also implies that het and gen stories are somehow cleaner or better than slash (as if slash is the only genre that contains sex or adult themes).
Let's flip the statement around: "Most stories that fans write about their favourite films, novels and TV series are not hetfics (stories about male and female characters getting it on)." Technically this is just as accurate as the slash statement was (het is no more the majority than slash or gen is), but it sure does sound insulting, doesn't it?
Lastly, I find fault with the following statement:
"Today - when TV is chock-a-bock full of velour-men and every otehr TV-show contains homosexual characters - is there still a need for slash? Apparently."
This statement creates a double-standard between slashfic and het/genfic; it accepts the existence of het/genfic without question, but requires that there be a "need" for homosexual interaction (that is, a lack of homosexual characters in media) in order to validate or necessitate slashfic.
The majority of romantic relationships and deliberate romantic subtext between characters in any media is heterosexual. By this writer's reasoning, we could then say there is no "need" for hetfic at all, just like since now that there are a few more homosexuals in media there is no "need" for slashfic.
Also, the statement is just plain wrong on a fact-based level as well-most mainstream books, movies, and t.v. shows aren't primarily about homosexual characters or homosexual relationships. And even if they were, why does that mean I can't write fic about them?
Listen, I know Linda Leopold is trying to show slash in a positive and truthful way, but she's doing it wrong. This article is grossly inaccurate and is a bad way to introduce people to the idea of slash.
Another note: the writer should have asked for people's permission before she started quoting/reccing them by (user)name.
It's interesting that a newspaper is talking about slash, but, wow, this article has a lot of inaccuracies. (Sorry if you're reading this, Linda Leopold, but it needs to be said!)
Okay: firstly, slash does not equal porn. This article, however, implies that it does. Though she says the Star Trek slashfics contain "romantic or erotic meetings between mainly Kirk and Spock," she then focuses mainly on the erotic, as evidenced with her statements and phrasing in these sections:
*"The new young versions of Kirk (CP) and Spock (ZQ) trigger the fans into more and more deviant stories"
*"Most stories that fans write about their favourite films, novels and TV series are not about male characters getting it on"
*"Why in the world makes female fans want to read and write smutty stories about the Star Trek-heroes"
Don't get me wrong, I love porny slash, but it's misleading to imply that all slash is porn.
Secondly, I sincerely doubt that slash is as small and secret as the writer implies with the following statement:
"But slash is still a small infamous subgenre in the big world of fan fiction which exists (now mostly on the internet). Most stories that fans write about their favourite films, novels and TV series are not about male characters getting it on. Some fans are even unknowing about the fact that slash exists."
I'm interested to know where she got the numbers that show slash is "small" in relation to the other genres of fanfiction. This statement seems to be an unqualified speculation-a personal opinion, not fact. Granted, I don't have the statistics on this either, but in my 9 years of fandom experience (I started off shipping het, BTW) I feel pretty confident in saying that if you're in fandom for any length of time you'd pretty much have to be living under a rock not to know the three main fandom categories: het, gen, and slash. This is especially true in fandoms with dominate slash ships, such as Star Trek (Kirk/Spock), Supernatural (Sam/Dean), Harry Potter (Draco/Harry), etc. I'm sort of interested in polling het communities now to see what percentage of their members know what het, gen, and slash is. I'm willing to bet that most of them know what all of those are.
Also, there's a second level of fuckery in that quote that's directly related to my first point:
"Most stories that fans write about their favourite films, novels and TV series are not about male characters getting it on."
This statement implies that most fanfic is not slash while simultaneously defining slash as "[stories] about male characters getting it on." This is problematic not only because it further marginalizes and misrepresents slash (it makes slash look like some kind of deviant anomaly), but because it also implies that het and gen stories are somehow cleaner or better than slash (as if slash is the only genre that contains sex or adult themes).
Let's flip the statement around: "Most stories that fans write about their favourite films, novels and TV series are not hetfics (stories about male and female characters getting it on)." Technically this is just as accurate as the slash statement was (het is no more the majority than slash or gen is), but it sure does sound insulting, doesn't it?
Lastly, I find fault with the following statement:
"Today - when TV is chock-a-bock full of velour-men and every otehr TV-show contains homosexual characters - is there still a need for slash? Apparently."
This statement creates a double-standard between slashfic and het/genfic; it accepts the existence of het/genfic without question, but requires that there be a "need" for homosexual interaction (that is, a lack of homosexual characters in media) in order to validate or necessitate slashfic.
The majority of romantic relationships and deliberate romantic subtext between characters in any media is heterosexual. By this writer's reasoning, we could then say there is no "need" for hetfic at all, just like since now that there are a few more homosexuals in media there is no "need" for slashfic.
Also, the statement is just plain wrong on a fact-based level as well-most mainstream books, movies, and t.v. shows aren't primarily about homosexual characters or homosexual relationships. And even if they were, why does that mean I can't write fic about them?
Listen, I know Linda Leopold is trying to show slash in a positive and truthful way, but she's doing it wrong. This article is grossly inaccurate and is a bad way to introduce people to the idea of slash.
Another note: the writer should have asked for people's permission before she started quoting/reccing them by (user)name.