Meta: Sometimes I feel like a tool of phallocentric hetero-male-supremacy, and sometimes I don't.

[lefaym]

Over the last week or so, I've been thinking a lot about the way that my slash-writing in Torchwood/Who fandom fits in with my feminism. I'm trying to be very self-critical (i.e. I'm not trying to hand-wave problematic issues where they do exist), but at the same time, I really want to highlight the positive feminist experiences that have come out

Comments

[lefaym]

I know that for me personally, around the time that "Wine Glasses" is set in the TW canon, I don't think their relationship was anywhere near one between equals. And though I think it's awesome when a fic can totally demonstrate Ianto having more agency, I wouldn't necessarily say that the writer is bringing shame on feminism by writing them as unequals.

Absolutely, I think you raise an excellent point here. Actually, I was just reading a blog that was arguing that being "feminist" does not necessarily mean portraying a feminist utopia.

But there are two problems that still persist -- the first is not so much the the relationship is unequal, but that I portrayed rough penetration as an act of asserting (albeit temporary) dominance, and that this way of thinking has caused much harm to women -- insofar as heterosexual is concerned, it's been used to erase distinctions between consensual sex and rape (because the act of sticking a penis into someone is seen as an act of possession regardless).

The second, broader, problem is why are so many of us who identify as feminists so drawn to valorising and upholding a relationship that has an inherent inequality attached to it? It's not just a matter of "feminist =/= feminist utopia", it's a matter of why are we choosing to celebrate them and immerse ourselves -- what is the attraction? To answer my own question, I suppose one could argue that such inequalities pervade our lives anyway, and that J/I fic is one way of negotiating that, but I'm sure the real answer is much more complex than that. (ETA: Just to be clear, I don't think it's wrong for us to explore an unequal relationship, but I am interested in critically examining why we are drawn to it, if that makes sense.)

And yeah, I don't really see much Gwen/Tosh subtext -- they didn't really seem to communicate much. But then again, one of the femmeslash ships that I'd like to explore one day is Tosh/Sarah Jane, and they never even met in canon! Of course, it has long been theorised that m/m slash is much more common simply because shows aimed at a general audience tend to privilege relationships (of any kind) between men over relationships between women.

[smirnoffmule]

Actually, I was just reading a blog that was arguing that being "feminist" does not necessarily mean portraying a feminist utopia.

This indeed, and I feel this quite strongly. I don't think a writer should necessarily be obliged to create character who upholds their own political and social ideals, I don't think it's artistically honest. When I write, be it fiction or original, I'm not provided a platform for myself, I'm providing one for my characters. What happens is driven by their personalities, beliefs, cultural backgrounds etc, not by mine. Obviously I can't help but shoehorn my own prejudices in there somehow or other, but I hope I have the grace to do it in a more unconscious way than by imposing my own set of values and experiences on a character who is not me. In broad strokes, possibly it's a necessity for a sympathetic character, since it would be hard for me to identify with a character who is actively misogynistic, homophobic, racist etc - but I do think characters should reflect roughly the conceptions and constraints placed on them by their own society, unless they are specifically given a reason to challenge them. I'm reminded of that horrendous feminist reading of Firefly that was floating around a while ago causing much comment and wank. I'm not about to argue Firefly is entirely unproblematic in that regard, but I did feel the author was rather missing the point that Whedon's characters are frontier men, they're cowboys essentially, they're not enlightened academics. They're not Joss Whedon, basically. A well-portrayed character should reflect their own situation, not the author's. So if a character is likely to equate penetration with power, well, real people do do that. The author needn't believe that they're correct, and actually if they're clever, can show us in subtle ways that they're not - for example by writing a fic where Ianto tops the fuck out of Jack for three pages, and then is still wrong-footed and confounded by him ultimately (or vice versa).

Though I will, just to provide my own complexity and contradiction here, say that I do love fic which flips or confounds expectations with regards to power in sex. At the end of the day, wanting to be fucked or not is nothing more than a preference for one physical sensation over the other (at any particular given point in time, since versatility does actually exist) and I don't see how that should necessarily equate directly to one's personality outside the bedroom. I also love fic which doesn't portray penetration at all.

Regarding writing women in fanfic - this is an area where I always feel inadequate, considering that in RL I'm strongly attracted to women and am basically functionally gay, for not writing/reading/seeking out more femslash or at least female-centred fic. I was auditioning for new icons recently and it struck me how heavily my icon collection is weighted in favour of male characters. So I went deliberately seeking some of my favourite female characters, but couldn't find any that I liked (I'm dead picky about which icons I decide to use). The reason finally occurred to me - it's because I use the icon to represent myself, and I dislike the idea of representing myself as feminine. Of the icons representing female characters I do have, none is actually what you'd call feminine. Similarly, I think for me fic writing is a matter of identification - - I identify strongly with male characters, less so with female characters. Whether this reflects a fault in me (and I know I do have gender issues) (not that that's a fault but it is my problem, not the source material's) or whether it's a fault with how female characters are generally portrayed, making it hard for fans to identify with them, I don't know. I do know most allegedly strong female characters in fiction make me want to eyeroll, though. What I want in my female characters is basically no more than what I want in my male characters - I want them to be people, with all the flaws, complexities, vulnerbilities and contradictions which comes with that state of being, and that's all. Having ninja skills and getting to go on top during sex is not a substitute.

[lefaym]

The author needn't believe that they're correct, and actually if they're clever, can show us in subtle ways that they're not - for example by writing a fic where Ianto tops the fuck out of Jack for three pages, and then is still wrong-footed and confounded by him ultimately (or vice versa).

This is something that I try to achieve in my writing (not that I necessarily succeed), and I do take your point that it's often a matter of keeping people in character. But then again, I must consider that I was writing porn, for women, which encourages readers not to simply read about an act of penetration used as power, but to identify with it and be sexually aroused by it. So I find myself wondering if I problematised the notion of power enough to counter that...

At the end of the day, wanting to be fucked or not is nothing more than a preference for one physical sensation over the other (at any particular given point in time, since versatility does actually exist)

Totally agreed about versatility, but I don't think that something like sex can be divorced from its cultural context to the extent that the physical sensation aspect of it can exist entirely independently.

I also love fic which doesn't portray penetration at all.

YES. That's one thing I really loved about your Death Note and Pavlov's Bell, actually. :) *fangirls you*

I identify strongly with male characters, less so with female characters. Whether this reflects a fault in me (and I know I do have gender issues) (not that that's a fault but it is my problem, not the source material's) or whether it's a fault with how female characters are generally portrayed, making it hard for fans to identify with them, I don't know.

Definitely NOT a fault in you, and I think you're quite right that it's often simply that men are represented as well-rounded people, whereas female characters (including "strong" ones) often are not (although I think that the Whoniverse provides an excellent exception to this rule). Nonetheless, because of this, we tend to be trained at a young age to identify with male characters as the "essential" humans, while female characters are represented as auxillary humans. Girls are taught to read and identify across subjective gender boundaries, and boys are encouraged not to do so (and it's the boys who usually end up having creative control over our television). So I think the question here is, does writing fic primarily about male characters simply reinforce that idea about men as essential humans? Or is there something else at play here?

And I know what you mean about not identifying with women who are represented solely as a stereotype of femininity, but I also think that broader cultural attitudes to this are worrying -- for instance, a feminist woman who finds herself interested in fashion or chicklit, etc, may feel under pressure not to represent women in a way that is superficial and flighty, yet a man who is into sports or cars, which are equally superficial hobbies, will not be judged for it regardless of his political philosophy. And I say this as a woman who is not into fashion or chicklit at all. :) (And this is not to say that things like fashion and chicklit aren't used to perpetuate misogyny -- but it's certainly no less so than the culture surrounding sports and cars. Nor is it to suggest in any way that these narrow stereotypes are in any way representative of the Real World -- it's just that they are pervasive in terms of how many people perceive the world.)

[andreth47]

I don't think it's wrong for us to explore an unequal relationship, but I am interested in critically examining why we are drawn to it, if that makes sense.) [...] Of course, it has long been theorised that m/m slash is much more common simply because shows aimed at a general audience tend to privilege relationships (of any kind) between men over relationships between women.

I think the question kind of answers itself. Why are we drawn to unequal power relationships in fiction and in slash? Because they are about power. Because power is attractive. Because power is sexually and intellectually and emotionally exciting. Because power is always, always, unequal: and if the power relationships are equal, the dynamic is boring. Not, as it were, dynamic! *g*

[lefaym]

Hmmm... but then what does that say about why we're drawn to m/m slash. I was theorising with smirnoffmule over on another post that perhaps it's because with a same sex relationship the power dynamics are perceived as being in play, rather than static (although of course there are a lot of people who would like to make them static).

[andreth47]

Ah, yeah, now that really gets to the crux. I think you've mentioned this upthread as well: we explore through m/m because male characters are perceived as having 'agency' in a way that female characters don't. (unless they're marked as somehow 'unfeminine') Male characters have the (implicit, invisible, phallic) power to subvert the power dynamic, even if they're the powerless partner.

Which brings us right back around to the equation of phallus and power, of course: even if you're not using it to penetrate your partner, you still possess phallic penetrative power in potential.

A female character first has to co-opt that phallic power; only then can she act to shift the power dynamic. It's already implicit in a male character, so it's simpler to write about the Possessors of The Penis.

In the end, though, what I really think it's about? Is penis envy. In the broadest possible sense. We write about men because that gives us their phallic power.

Which I will readily admit is a bit problematic, feminism-wise! ;)

[amonitrate]

ETA: Just to be clear, I don't think it's wrong for us to explore an unequal relationship, but I am interested in critically examining why we are drawn to it, if that makes sense.

Yes! That, and being *aware* of the unequal dyamics as unequal, and what makes them that way. Which much, much fic fails to do. It's not that it's wrong to write an unequal pairing, because god knows they exist in real life; but that the inequality be written about with awareness that it is unequal and why.

To me, a lot of slash (like a lot of het) is completely unaware of the inequality as such or why it's there, and so it just perpetuates the problem instead of exploring it or commenting on it. If that makes sense.

and now I'm noticing the dates on these things and hoping it's not too weird that I've jumped into your finished discussion:)

[used_songs]

To me, a lot of slash (like a lot of het) is completely unaware of the inequality as such or why it's there, and so it just perpetuates the problem instead of exploring it or commenting on it.

And that is such a wasted opportunity because that lack of balance can make for some really absorbing fiction. I love it when fic is complex and makes me think.

[lefaym]

It's not a problem to jump in now at all -- thank you for your comment!

And I think you make a good point about awareness -- and that is possibly one area in which I need to improve. I don't think I completely ignore it, but I think I gloss it over sometimes -- and indeed, one of the things I was wondering is if I use the penetration=power to achieve this gloss, as I usually make the least powerful person in my favourite pairing the "top" (oh how I wish we had some terms for that that weren't hierarchical!).

[amonitrate]

I'm sort of fascinated by how certain characters become fanonically Top or Bottom in fandom. Often there has to be a lot of forcing into the "feminine" gender role for some of the male characters, because that's what people seem to think it means to be a bottom. So the Penetrator, the one with power, gets to be the Man, and the penetratee, the one without power, gets to be the Woman. But in many canons, the choice of who is who isn't obvious, and to suss out how those decisions get made and concretized in a fandom is like being an anthropologist.

If one character is physically much larger than the other, top/bottom is determined by size. If one is more controlling than the other, it's determined by that. If one is emotional or tends towards depression, it can be decided by that. The mathematics of the top/bottom division in fandoms (because in many fandoms, the roles seem to become quite rigid -- every story has character X as Top and character y as Bottom) can become very complex if the OTP isn't obviously one or the other of the typical deciding factors.