Straw men in South Park fandom
There was some arguing on Tumblr and you know me, I love arguing. It's a long thread, or whatever, so start here and read back. A lot of people there have covered all the points I would make really well, but formerdinosaur mentioned that she is sick of seeing the conversation about bottoming and characters who are depicted as bottoming. She's right, it's an old discussion that keeps coming back, over and over again. So quickly, I jotted down a few points that came to mind on the topic, some of which are only loosely related:
It’s been done before. I got into this fandom on Christmas Eve 2007. That is six years ago. Six years. Part of me at all times is like, what the fuck, how did this go on for so long? Another part of me is just like, wow, it’s amazing that I’ve been in this fandom for six years and people are still arguing over the same stuff, namely the top-bottom dynamic between Stan and Kyle. I have heard this conversation so many times. It’s not in any sense the fault of people who keep starting this argument that they don’t realize it’s been had before, but it has. It’s good to acknowledge that this fandom has been around for a while and ask around to see what kinds of responses you get. Many of us have been here for a while, watching the same topics get rehashed over and over again. I would be happy to discuss almost anything, and I’m sure most people would be, too.
Just because something is mainstream doesn’t make it bad. It’s perfectly natural to want to make a trope your own by inverting it or to get sick of the mainstream way things seem to be done. But something being pervasive doesn’t make it wrong. Clichés are often cliché because they reflect some amount of truth. I think if Kyle is so frequently written as a bottom, you might ask why it’s so popular. People have before, but I don’t know that there’s any good answer, and that means the conversation remains relevant. Anyway, taste is personal, but something being cliché or well-tread or done-to-death doesn’t make it bad or wrong in and of itself.
Doing something just to be different isn’t worth much. We’re dealing with fan fiction. Moreover, we’re dealing with fiction. Novelty and rebellion can be qualities of excellent and revolutionary fiction, but there are so many other aspects of writing that are arguably more essential to the creation of a good piece of writing. It’s fine to pursue inversions and subversions of perceived tropes, but you’d better have something else going on in your story or it’s going to be pretty boring and unmemorable.
Characterization is subjective. Within reason, I mean, let me come up with something. … Okay, I think it’s pretty clear that Kyle’s parents aren’t crazy homophobes who’d kick him out of the house for being gay, yet I’ve read that a lot. If I see that, I consider it out-of-character. On the other hand, I’m willing to accept that Kyle’s parents have a range of possible reactions to his coming out, because even in real life people are unpredictable, and viewed somewhat differently by everyone they know. On this show we’re dealing with 17 years of sometimes inconsistent ‘canon.’ So maybe you and I see the same traits in Kyle and ascribe different readings to him based on these similar observations.
Gender roles can be restrictive and conforming to them can make us miserable, but that doesn’t mean they don’t exist. It’s admirable to think that gender roles are bad, but, listen, they’re not always bad. Not on their own. What’s bad is forcing people to conform to your gender expectations, individually or systemically. Gender roles are one tool people have for defining themselves, and so long as people use them as needed, and not as coerced by a patriarchal society, they’re not inherently harmful. Moreover, you can argue that gender roles are bad and forcing people to conform to them is bad, but that doesn’t mean gender roles don’t exist and a character on South Park won’t identify with some kind of gender expression in a fan fiction.
Some gay men are effeminate. You know what, some men conform to whatever harmful stereotypes we collectively have about gay men. Not all gay men! And a lot of the ones who do are not pervasively butch, or effeminate. Most people are an amalgamation of traits. In some senses, playing out extreme gender roles can be a response to or a subversion of restrictive stereotypes. From one standpoint, effeminacy calls into question what defines manliness. It can be viewed in that way as an act of rebellion, as an effeminate gay man can force those who do believe in conforming to strict gender dichotomies to reassess what is male. Quentin Crisp used his effeminacy as armor, as it forced people to confront his difference. (ETA: I had a line here about post-1980s butch aesthetics as a response to AIDS and it disappeared. Hello, where'd it go?) It’s not like the gay community isn’t accutely aware of and in many cases ready to embrace gender roles.
But, look, when you say you are not a fan of gay men in fan fiction conforming to gender roles, you probably mean you are not into reading about femmey men. Some might argue that condemning effeminacy and valuing it to be of lower status than butchness is a kind of sexism, for it sees traditionally female roles as lesser than male ones. This isn’t a new point. People have been making this point in SP fan fic for a long, long time, alongside the people who have been arguing that SP fan fic is sexist and Wendy is devalued by Stan/Kyle shippers who hate her. And that Bebe isn’t a slut. And that Cartman is fat so stop writing and drawing skinny!Cartman. If you are going to make these gripes, consider constructing them around actual evidence from the show and/or fandom so that alongside your passion there is some actual (meta)textual substance to digest. Remember when we called this shit “meta”? Me neither.
In conclusion, fiction tells truths. People write fiction because it’s escapist and amusing, but we also enjoy it for its truths. The fact is that there are some femmey gay men who like to bottom, and that doesn’t make them weak or girly. And even if it does, so what? Weakness isn’t always a fault. To call girliness an inferior quality is to be sexist. I genuinely believe that everyone in this fandom has their heart in the right place, and that we all love these characters and at least tolerate the show. The thing that makes anything in life interesting, but fandom especially, is a multiplicity of readings, ideas, and ways of expressing truths. Some of these truths are universal and some are personal. An author writing a story with bitchy Kyle wanting to bottom and having some femmey traits is what some of us want to read because it reflects some aspect of how we see Kyle and how we value ourselves in relation to gender roles. There are also a number of fics where Stan bottoms, and while I don’t really see him that way it doesn’t mean there’s no value in that presentation. It’s just something different.
In fandom, the best way to get what you want is to write it yourself. This advice is cliché, but it’s cliché because it’s true. If you write enough of it or you write it well enough or you just make friends who want you to be happy and stick around, others will follow. If you’re frustrated that no one’s writing enough of what you want to see, the best way to start a conversation about it is to openly ask why. None of this is new or groundbreaking, but that doesn’t make it any less legitimate.
It’s been done before. I got into this fandom on Christmas Eve 2007. That is six years ago. Six years. Part of me at all times is like, what the fuck, how did this go on for so long? Another part of me is just like, wow, it’s amazing that I’ve been in this fandom for six years and people are still arguing over the same stuff, namely the top-bottom dynamic between Stan and Kyle. I have heard this conversation so many times. It’s not in any sense the fault of people who keep starting this argument that they don’t realize it’s been had before, but it has. It’s good to acknowledge that this fandom has been around for a while and ask around to see what kinds of responses you get. Many of us have been here for a while, watching the same topics get rehashed over and over again. I would be happy to discuss almost anything, and I’m sure most people would be, too.
Just because something is mainstream doesn’t make it bad. It’s perfectly natural to want to make a trope your own by inverting it or to get sick of the mainstream way things seem to be done. But something being pervasive doesn’t make it wrong. Clichés are often cliché because they reflect some amount of truth. I think if Kyle is so frequently written as a bottom, you might ask why it’s so popular. People have before, but I don’t know that there’s any good answer, and that means the conversation remains relevant. Anyway, taste is personal, but something being cliché or well-tread or done-to-death doesn’t make it bad or wrong in and of itself.
Doing something just to be different isn’t worth much. We’re dealing with fan fiction. Moreover, we’re dealing with fiction. Novelty and rebellion can be qualities of excellent and revolutionary fiction, but there are so many other aspects of writing that are arguably more essential to the creation of a good piece of writing. It’s fine to pursue inversions and subversions of perceived tropes, but you’d better have something else going on in your story or it’s going to be pretty boring and unmemorable.
Characterization is subjective. Within reason, I mean, let me come up with something. … Okay, I think it’s pretty clear that Kyle’s parents aren’t crazy homophobes who’d kick him out of the house for being gay, yet I’ve read that a lot. If I see that, I consider it out-of-character. On the other hand, I’m willing to accept that Kyle’s parents have a range of possible reactions to his coming out, because even in real life people are unpredictable, and viewed somewhat differently by everyone they know. On this show we’re dealing with 17 years of sometimes inconsistent ‘canon.’ So maybe you and I see the same traits in Kyle and ascribe different readings to him based on these similar observations.
Gender roles can be restrictive and conforming to them can make us miserable, but that doesn’t mean they don’t exist. It’s admirable to think that gender roles are bad, but, listen, they’re not always bad. Not on their own. What’s bad is forcing people to conform to your gender expectations, individually or systemically. Gender roles are one tool people have for defining themselves, and so long as people use them as needed, and not as coerced by a patriarchal society, they’re not inherently harmful. Moreover, you can argue that gender roles are bad and forcing people to conform to them is bad, but that doesn’t mean gender roles don’t exist and a character on South Park won’t identify with some kind of gender expression in a fan fiction.
Some gay men are effeminate. You know what, some men conform to whatever harmful stereotypes we collectively have about gay men. Not all gay men! And a lot of the ones who do are not pervasively butch, or effeminate. Most people are an amalgamation of traits. In some senses, playing out extreme gender roles can be a response to or a subversion of restrictive stereotypes. From one standpoint, effeminacy calls into question what defines manliness. It can be viewed in that way as an act of rebellion, as an effeminate gay man can force those who do believe in conforming to strict gender dichotomies to reassess what is male. Quentin Crisp used his effeminacy as armor, as it forced people to confront his difference. (ETA: I had a line here about post-1980s butch aesthetics as a response to AIDS and it disappeared. Hello, where'd it go?) It’s not like the gay community isn’t accutely aware of and in many cases ready to embrace gender roles.
But, look, when you say you are not a fan of gay men in fan fiction conforming to gender roles, you probably mean you are not into reading about femmey men. Some might argue that condemning effeminacy and valuing it to be of lower status than butchness is a kind of sexism, for it sees traditionally female roles as lesser than male ones. This isn’t a new point. People have been making this point in SP fan fic for a long, long time, alongside the people who have been arguing that SP fan fic is sexist and Wendy is devalued by Stan/Kyle shippers who hate her. And that Bebe isn’t a slut. And that Cartman is fat so stop writing and drawing skinny!Cartman. If you are going to make these gripes, consider constructing them around actual evidence from the show and/or fandom so that alongside your passion there is some actual (meta)textual substance to digest. Remember when we called this shit “meta”? Me neither.
In conclusion, fiction tells truths. People write fiction because it’s escapist and amusing, but we also enjoy it for its truths. The fact is that there are some femmey gay men who like to bottom, and that doesn’t make them weak or girly. And even if it does, so what? Weakness isn’t always a fault. To call girliness an inferior quality is to be sexist. I genuinely believe that everyone in this fandom has their heart in the right place, and that we all love these characters and at least tolerate the show. The thing that makes anything in life interesting, but fandom especially, is a multiplicity of readings, ideas, and ways of expressing truths. Some of these truths are universal and some are personal. An author writing a story with bitchy Kyle wanting to bottom and having some femmey traits is what some of us want to read because it reflects some aspect of how we see Kyle and how we value ourselves in relation to gender roles. There are also a number of fics where Stan bottoms, and while I don’t really see him that way it doesn’t mean there’s no value in that presentation. It’s just something different.
In fandom, the best way to get what you want is to write it yourself. This advice is cliché, but it’s cliché because it’s true. If you write enough of it or you write it well enough or you just make friends who want you to be happy and stick around, others will follow. If you’re frustrated that no one’s writing enough of what you want to see, the best way to start a conversation about it is to openly ask why. None of this is new or groundbreaking, but that doesn’t make it any less legitimate.