Continuation: Why the Queer as Folk fandom is so Wanktastic
This essay was a hard one for me to write just because I needed to do some exposition up front before I could broach my actual point. I didn't do this in the first part but now it's become necessary. I hope you'll stay with me here...
Oh, and you might want to read Part 1 if you haven't already ( Read more... )
Oh, and you might want to read Part 1 if you haven't already ( Read more... )
It's more the idea that even though you knew that Brian and Justin would eventually get back together, could you really enjoy Justin/Ethan being together? When they were having sex were you thinking, "Whatever, Justin and Brian will be back together in no time!"? Or was it more, "Wow, if Justin and Ethan do it one more time while poor Brian pines away I'm going to scream!"?
A lot of people would go for option number 2. They are the anti-shippers. Maybe you aren't one. Or maybe you aren't one for J/E but you would be anti-shipper if another pairing broke up B/J. I don't know.
But the animosity comes from the idea that you just can't stand to see a certain pairing acted out on screen. And certainly, some fans are going to feel and respond to their hatred more than others would.
And I see you point about remembering that your pairing still happened. But the anti-shipper is a bitter, bitter person. (Or I am at least.) And sometimes memories aren't good enough. Especially when your favorite pairing has been replaced by a couple that you are inescapably disgusted by. What if Justin had stayed with Ethan? How would you feel about J/E then?
So there's my clarification of my essay. Thank you for commenting!
Reply
When they were having sex were you thinking, "Whatever, Justin and Brian will be back together in no time!"? Or was it more, "Wow, if Justin and Ethan do it one more time while poor Brian pines away I'm going to scream!"?
It was mostly, "Ethan needs to shave his chin", to be honest. Except for the episode where they're in the bathtub and he answers the phone, then it was "I hope he doesn't drop the receiver -- at least, not with Justin in there with him."
And regarding not being able to "stand see[ing] certain pairing[s] acted out on screen", I get that feeling a lot more from Brian/Michael shippers, purely because they don't like Brian/Justin, and Justin, in particular, at all. But a lot of B/J-ers don't despise Mikey, nor do they feel that what's canonically SHOWN (read: not possible romantic subtext that doesn't actually happen) on screen between Brian and Michael is "bad" or "icky". I think B/Jers are more likely to enjoy the natural progression of the characters (Michael's getting together with Ben and their raising Hunter, Brian and Justin being "partners" as of season four), simply because their pairing is definitively supported. And as such, they take a lot of flack from (mostly) bitter B/Mers (and to be fair, tend to get embroiled pretty passionately in the dissention, as well) who wish the show would have gone differently.
What if Justin had stayed with Ethan? How would you feel about J/E then?
You know, I read Justin/Ethan stories on occasion; almost always, they include Brian AND Justin realizing that there's something between them that, even if they aren't together, will always exist. It's different than reading a 'fic where Brian inexplicably breaks it up with Justin and then hooks up with Michael after a 20-year latency period where he wasn't romantically attracted to him at all. Michael just isn't an Ethan-esque character waiting in the wings, so for me, there is a lot of differentiation between shipping Justin/Ethan and Brian/Michael.
Reply
Mmm, true. Poor Fab. He looked much better on Buffy.
I get that feeling a lot more from Brian/Michael shippers
That might be true. But for me anti-shipping (for the most part) has nothing to do with the pairings that I do ship. For instance, I hated Justin/Ethan together. Mostly because it was phony and overdone. Obviously it was Justin lashing out against Brian's motto of "love is for straights". But hating Justin/Ethan does nothing for me as a B/Mer if you get my meaning. I just hated them for the fun of it.
On the otherhand, yeah, I think anti-shipping can be found more in fans who aren't getting what they want canonically. (Although I've definitely heard it from B/Jers and Be/Mers as well.) But the point of this section of the essay (and all the other sections) was to discuss the various reasons why people in the QaF fandom wank. Maybe all of these ideas won't apply to every person. But in general, I think my point stands. Sometimes hatred of a pairing can lead to wank.
Reply
I think Justin/Ethan is one of those pairings that can be bothersome to some viewers because it's so obviously meant to represent one particular thing. It's like how most of the munchers' storylines revolve around their popping out kids -- it's not nearly as exciting as Brian living it up at Babylon. But still, neither of them attract a whole lot of volatility, at least not the way Brian/Justin and Brian/Michael (and to a smaller degree, Ben/Michael) seem to.
I agree, though, that people whose pairings are mostly fanon are prone to being more bitter/defensive. It was like that with Harry Potter fandom, where many people saw slash where there was, canonically, merely het. But again, there is some component of QaF fandom, some weird x-factor, that's keeping the shipping flame wars well-fanned, despite the fact that it's all been hashed out 646437373 times. It's wankier than your average wank, I guess.
Reply
I read that, and let me say that I'm more than a little surprised. Who are all those so rational B/Jers you're talking about ? Where are they exactly ? I know they exist (some of them are on QAF talk), but they are for the most part silent, they are not the majority.
Let me tell you my sad experience. I'm French. I caught the second season of QAF US almost two years ago on French TV. And I only watched it because I had seen QAF UK two months before, since even if the audience of those two shows is very limited, only QAF UK and Russel T. Davies have a good reputation. When I began watching QAF US, I discovered B/J, and I was shocked by the complete implausibility of this relationship (frankly, why would an adult, successful and erotomaniac man like Brian be interested by this little boy, well, outside childish fantasies ?), and by its stench of pedophilia. At the same time, I saw Michael, and I immediately fell in love, like I was in love with Vince. Then I saw the relationship between Brian and Michael, and I saw the only really interesting and deep story in QAF US, the only real thing, the only... human thing. Oh, that's not surprising : this relationship IS RTD's story, the story of two best friends who love each other, but whose fears paralyze ; the story of an unrequited love... but in reality and strangely, of two unrequited loves, as we learn it in the end ; in brief, the story of two best friends in love with each other, but who didn't say anything FOR 15 YEARS !
Then I was interested in finding sites about QAF and the two best friends... and I mostly found sites made by B/J fans. Note that here, in France, we - or at least people who don't go on sites in English and who don't speak English - don't "ship" ; the notions of "fandom", "shippers", "slash", "OTP" are unknown. Oh, we can prefer Angel, or Riley, or Spike... but all in all, Buffy could be with any of them, or none of them, or the three of them together... we don't care. On all those sites made by B/J fans, I only saw deformed views on the show due to shipping (Brian and Justin as the two main characters !), and, much worse, hatred. Hatred against characters supposed to be especially kind. Hatred against Michael (the famous whiny and stupid manipulator whose only purpose is to break the B/J relationship), and yes... against Ethan. Ah, the childish way of diminishing him by constantly attacking him for his physique ! Oh, and by attacking the actor, of course. Because in parallel with this hatred against characters, there was the same hatred - and I was totally shocked and taken aback by it - against the actors, Hal Sparks, and Fabrizio Phillipo. Well, especially Hal Sparks, as you are well aware of it yourself. But, like you said somewhere else, the hatred against Hal Sparks has nothing to do with the hatred against Michael ! NO-THING ! I'm sure you can find tons of B/Mers who depise him and who can't stand the way he says he's straight and who will accuse him of Homophobia. Yeah. And I'm sure that B/Jers like you absolutely don't hate Michael - oh, excuse me, Mikey. (TBC... !)
Reply
Haha, most of them DO keep to friends-locked journals and/or don't feel that they have to "defend" their ship at all, because it's canon. I mean, why go through the trouble when it's already happening, you know? But for the record, they DO get defensive (myself included!) when they're being attacked (like pretty much anyone), so maybe that's where you assume irrationality.
Re: The "stench of pedophilia": in Pittsburgh, with Justin being 17, his and Brian's sexual relationship is perfectly legal. As for their emotional connection, I'm sure Brian's asking himself how he became so enamoured with a teenage kid, too. I think the whole POINT of their continuing storyline is to explore why/how this works, despite all odds. Brian/Justin isn't the tale of you and your best friend realizing that you can have sex and still maintain a solid friendship. It's something else entirely, and it makes as many people uncomfortable as it does intrigue others. It's rare and it's messy and, I imagine, that's what Cowlip appreciates about it. I know I do.
Also, this may well be generalizing, but people who are diehard QaF: UK loyalists tend to have a very difficult time accepting B/J, as well as seem to be waiting for Brian and Michael to run off together. Many of them don't bother watching past season 1-2 because they're "disgusted by how much Cowlip veered off course", completely missing the point that this is Cowlip's story and their set of characters, not Roger Davies'. They may have similar characteristics, but Brian is not Stuart as much as Michael is not Vince and Justin is not Nathan. Stuart/Vince's chemistry is different than Brian/Michael's -- and you could not find two more different actors to play pretty party boys in their late-twenties trying to recapture their lost youths than Gale Harold and Aidan Gillen.
The more you watch of the US series, the more it really stands on its own feet -- but I guess there's always a subset of the viewership that's always going to go, "the UK version was better and B/M makes more sense than B/J because it's more true to how Stuart/Vince ended up", and no amount of arguing is going to change their minds, so why bother.
the story of two best friends in love with each other, but who didn't say anything FOR 15 YEARS !
Michael says as much all the time, and Brian makes it clear that he's not interested in Michael sexually. They love each other, in the deepest, friendship-y way that they can, but they realize they have different ideologies about love and relationships, and eventually, even Michael comes to realize that he's better off being Brian's best friend than his lover. Like Hal Sparks has said, "Brian and Michael are together, just not in a way that some people understand."
Oh, we can prefer Angel, or Riley, or Spike... but all in all, Buffy could be with any of them, or none of them, or the three of them together... we don't care.
I think the big difference between preferring Angel/Buffy to Spike/Buffy is that both of them actually happen. We see them both kissing (romantically) and having sex, and Buffy considers them both her lovers at some point in the series. Brian/Michael shippers don't/will never have that -- hence the bitterness.
Ah, the childish way of diminishing him by constantly attacking him for his physique !
I know, it's sad. I just don't like his facial hair. I can't apologize enough for that. I do hope your opinion of me isn't marred forever!
the hatred against Hal Sparks has nothing to do with the hatred against Michael!
Some people dislike Michael because he's whiny and his actions can be construed as manipulative and stupid. Some people don't like Hal Sparks because in interviews, he comes across as always trying to cover his ass and essentially sticking his foot in his mouth again and again. Some people dislike them both fervently, some love them equally, and some don't really give a crap one way or the other. But you're right, Hal does not equal Michael.
Reply
Re: The "stench of pedophilia": in Pittsburgh, with Justin being 17, his and Brian's sexual relationship is perfectly legal. As for their emotional connection, I'm sure Brian's asking himself how he became so enamoured with a teenage kid, too. I think the whole POINT of their continuing storyline is to explore why/how this works, despite all odds. Brian/Justin isn't the tale of you and your best friend realizing that you can have sex and still maintain a solid friendship. It's something else entirely, and it makes as many people uncomfortable as it does intrigue others. It's rare and it's messy and, I imagine, that's what Cowlip appreciates about it. I know I do.
It's legal in Pittsburgh. And ? I'm sure you could find a lot of countries where you can marry at 13. And I'm sure you know who has the power in these relationships. And I'm sure you have an idea of what were the marriages in the 50's in your country or mine, and of what some still are. There are three ages in life : childhood, adolescence and adulthood. And there are reasons for these distinctions. By definition, a minor is not responsible. He's not a citizen yet, he doesn't take care of himself, and isn't autonomous. He depends on his parents (or guardians). An adult, who by definition is responsible, shouldn't allow himself to overstep these limits.
Justin lives with his parents, then with Brian, who plays the part of the two parents. I'm sorry, but a lover mustn't be a daddy. You say it's rare ? Oh yes, since Justin is a boy, it's rare. But young women in an inequal relationship, you'll find plenty of them. Yes, the B/J relationship is totally inequal : when someone who's not your parent pays for your studies and your needs, when you have to suit your wishes to those of someone else, then you have no dignity.
Finally, even if he was younger, Nathan looked older than Justin, he was rather manly. Justin hasn't the body of a man, he looks like a little boy : he clearly plays the role of the Harlequin young girl in this relationship, and I'm not surprised that so much women identify themselves with him.
As for their emotionnal connection, I must laugh at that. B/J is only the sexual relationship in the show. No depth. We never know why they love each other, since they don't know each other, and don't even seem interested in each other. And we're lucky that they don't communicate, because when they do, they say the most ridiculous lines I've ever heard.
I HOPE Brian asks himself why he is in love with this kid, a love which is SO rare... Poor Brian, the answer is rather easy. It's called Harlequin romances for women, it's called fary tales for kept women, and it's called bad litterature. Pathetic between two men, if I can give my opinion.
Plausibility is imperative to make a story good. Let's be realistic. Take a man whom everyone wants : rich, beautiful, sexy... and of course, bad boy : fantasy for women. The bad boy doesn't believe in love. Well, in reality, there will not be a totally ordinary woman who will "tame" him thanks to her great love, and make him believe in love. Justin is not handsome, not bright, not kind... He's ordinary, and we have no reason to believe that Brian would fall in love with him. We can just understand that any stalker could have caught Brian. It doesn't make me unconfortable. I weep at the banality and the childishness. And I feel sorry for our mothers wou have fought for her and our rights and independence.
Reply
Reply
I'm not waiting for B/M to run together. I don't accept B/J because it's dumb, bad television, and it represents all what I hate in real life. It's rather clear that those two characters reveal their worst faults when they are together. But I guess it's so great to treat others like shit. No apologies, no regrets ! And sorry, the B/J sex bores me to death. Brian in Babylon bores me to death. They should send the vampires of the Bronze in Babylon, so we would see something happening at last. You see, I rather see Mel and Linds with their babies.
Stuart/Vince's chemistry is different than Brian/Michael's
Chemistry. Again. Not an argument in my country. You can tell me over and over that B/J have great chemistry, and B/M have no chemistry, it's not something objective. It's not pertinent. But I'd like to know what the difference exactly is between S/V's and B/M's chemistry.
and you could not find two more different actors to play pretty party boys in their late-twenties trying to recapture their lost youths than Gale Harold and Aidan Gillen.
And your point is ?
The more you watch of the US series, the more it really stands on its own feet -- but I guess there's always a subset of the viewership that's always going to go, "the UK version was better and B/M makes more sense than B/J because it's more true to how Stuart/Vince ended up", and no amount of arguing is going to change their minds, so why bother.
But I agree : it's not the same story NOW. But the problem is that it was when they literally took all the UK material, which told the story of S/V - B/M. If their story had to be different, the BEGINNINGS had to be, too. And they didn't need to constantly throw Michael between B/J and keep the triangle alive (if you don't see it, Cowlip does it for you and say it) in order to keep some of the audience. I already only watch Michael scenes, I'd do it even if there was "only" friendship between B/M. Frankly, the USA should stop doing remakes and directly show foreign works. Yes, the original versions are almost way better, certainly because the original author has something to say.
I love B/M because unlike B/J, I find them interesting and, like I said, I find their bond deep, their love true : I don't care if we call that "friendship". I enjoy their relationship, that's all.
and Brian makes it clear that he's not interested in Michael sexually.
If you say so.
They love each other, in the deepest, friendship-y way that they can, but they realize they have different ideologies about love and relationships
And I hope you realize that you could say the same about Brian and Justin... Well, "thanks" to that, we have the one and unique plot in the B/J relationship : they break up, make up, break up, make up...
Brian/Michael shippers don't/will never have that -- hence the bitterness.
If you say so.
Some people dislike Michael because he's whiny and his actions can be construed as manipulative and stupid.
That's called nonsense. I'd love to see a semblance of pertinent argumentation here. In my dreams.
he comes across as always trying to cover his ass and essentially sticking his foot in his mouth again and again.
Sorry, that makes no sense to me. Facts and explanations ? But I've read a lot of what the Hal Sparks' detractors have to say, and it's always utterly ridiculous. My favorite is when they blame him for saying he's straight. Who cares ? Grow up.
Reply
in addition, check out the community info:
Posts and comments should comply to general etiquette. Disagreement is good, because it encourages discussion on the essays. But no personal attacks. No name calling and so on...
Reply
What can I say ? You must certainly represent the silent voice of the crowd, so, ll try to get over it, and to grow up in my next life : it's too late now.
in addition, check out the community info:
Posts and comments should comply to general etiquette. Disagreement is good, because it encourages discussion on the essays. But no personal attacks. No name calling and so on...
No personal attacks ? No name calling ? You must have read one of my posts somewhere where I called my minister Raffarin a moron, and I'm really sorry about that : remember that he's not very well liked. But "grow up" has nothing to do with name calling, and was not intended to Zoisite - i.e. the person I'm talking to, whom I must not personally attack and whom I don't personally attack - since I' m not responding to a post where she'd make the ridiculous moaning against Hal Sparks that I'm criticizing... in general. I'm not used to throw insults at my interlocutors. But since you told me to grow up, must I assume you're making personnal attacks and name calling... against me ? I wouldn't dare to think that.
But I'm sure you personally have some great and interesting insight on the subject itself, so I will gladly leave you my place in this discussion. I guess there's not much courage left in me for English practice and hours spent in my dictionary. After you...
Reply
Funny, I always see Justin as these things and not Michael.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
But yeah. Mostly he's just stupid. Or naive. Whatever we want to call it. :)
Reply
Leave a comment