Vanilla Hetshipping
This post annoys me.
I don't think it's fair to conflate vanilla and everything that is vanilla with masquerading kink. I agree with a lot of the individual points of the post (almost all of them), but the fact that they label everything they complain about as "vanilla" annoys the hell out of me, because... well, I just don't think that's what it means, and it's rather disparaging to represent everything and everyone who is "vanilla" as being too ignorant to know what they really want.
This post also annoys me.
While again I agree with the central point ("I want relationships defined by the participants rather than particular archetypes or ideal types of what a relationship should be like"), the meandering into het expectations and slash expectations and how het means belittling one gender de-facto so the obvioius choice is slash really grates on my nerves. Maybe that's the obvious choice for some people. The obvious choice for other people is to write het relationships as being between equals, which to me seems way more obvious than the alternative. The implication is again that that's somehow impossible, and so we must turn to slash (and not femmeslash, mind you). I see that implication a lot. Suffice to say, I call bullshit.
I mean, I don't want to go on some tangenital rant about how us poor vanilla hetshippers are ~so oppressed~ or whatever, but I still kind of want to ask these people if they've ever even spoken to someone whose preferences those were? Over the age of 15, preferably?
I don't know. I'd try to go correct them but I doubt anybody would listen to me and it probably isn't worth it anyway.
Would be interested in hearing your thoughts in the comments, though.
EDIT: Ohshit, one of the OPs has a Naoto icon on top of that.
I don't think it's fair to conflate vanilla and everything that is vanilla with masquerading kink. I agree with a lot of the individual points of the post (almost all of them), but the fact that they label everything they complain about as "vanilla" annoys the hell out of me, because... well, I just don't think that's what it means, and it's rather disparaging to represent everything and everyone who is "vanilla" as being too ignorant to know what they really want.
This post also annoys me.
While again I agree with the central point ("I want relationships defined by the participants rather than particular archetypes or ideal types of what a relationship should be like"), the meandering into het expectations and slash expectations and how het means belittling one gender de-facto so the obvioius choice is slash really grates on my nerves. Maybe that's the obvious choice for some people. The obvious choice for other people is to write het relationships as being between equals, which to me seems way more obvious than the alternative. The implication is again that that's somehow impossible, and so we must turn to slash (and not femmeslash, mind you). I see that implication a lot. Suffice to say, I call bullshit.
I mean, I don't want to go on some tangenital rant about how us poor vanilla hetshippers are ~so oppressed~ or whatever, but I still kind of want to ask these people if they've ever even spoken to someone whose preferences those were? Over the age of 15, preferably?
I don't know. I'd try to go correct them but I doubt anybody would listen to me and it probably isn't worth it anyway.
Would be interested in hearing your thoughts in the comments, though.
EDIT: Ohshit, one of the OPs has a Naoto icon on top of that.