female space and fannish femininity

[heyiya]

There's a very interesting conversation between Robin Anne Reid and Sean Griffin up at Henry Jenkins's blog here and here and mirrored on LJ at fandebate here, part of a summer project discussing gender hierarchies in fan studies. I commented in response to some discussions about essentialism, and ended up coming up with a mini-theory about fandom and

Comments

[cathexys]

Well, you already know I completely agree and am very much data point two here. Whether listening to boy bands for the first time, having actual female friends, or admitting to my TV star crush, before fandom that was all hidden away, b/c I was too smart, too grown up for any of that.

[heyiya]

:)

That was a great exciting conversation this morning, actually! Hmm, some people exchange fic to brighten each other's days... I talk theory at you. But it's affective theory!

[graycastle]

what a lovely point to make! I especially like the implication: that the charge of essentialism tends to ignore the manner in which female-fan space questions traditional femininity/female desire/gender identification. To allege that it is a space where women (and, I mean, c'mon, statistics) are exploring their sexuality and gender identifications - specifically the kind of squee that means we're overemotional, etc. - is not the same as saying that there is one kind of Woman's Expression or Female Space that is determined by "facts" of biology. In fact, it would seem to mean the opposite: when we say "romance or erotic fanfiction is a female space," what we mean is, "it's a space in which women discuss sexuality and gender roles in infinite variations

[heyiya]

Thank you for your lovely compliments! (Talking of squee; your Sedgwick icon makes me bounce up and down in joyous glee, every single time. :) )

the manner in which the charge of essentialism tends to get taken up by people who want to downplay gender inequalities or gender differences is a bit, y'know, suspect in itself

I think that in the post I linked to, what is going in is actually more complex than that (as the conversations that are taking place in comments now are showing), but in general, yes. I feel like I've heard that charge made against identity politics-based critiques, in one form or another, a million times; and while it may sometimes be warranted, so often it's made by people who want an excuse not to think about the material and political effects of the experience of difference (whether gender or race or whatever).

I think that, if we want to do interesting things with literary critical style and convention (which we should want to do) then one of the first steps we ought to take is admitting that we are all huge

[heyiya]

We're using the squee! to express something unexpressable in 'reasoned' language, and we feel a little bit guilty about it because we're expected to be rational (intellect! maturity!) and the squee-performance is this mask that protects us - I'm passionate, but I'm distanced from it! Perhaps Squee! marks the uneasy coexistence of rational and affective responses within (a) societ(y)(es) that implicitly value the former over the latter.Oh, yes! I still have a bit of cognitive disconnect when I hear people use fangirl langauge out loud because I associate it so much with the internet, it's funny. I totally agree that it's a community thing, and the performance of distancing while still being totally serious - that resonates so much, and I think it's really important! A way of owning the 'immaturity,' the emotional response, while also knowing that the rational/intellectual/highly artistic is there. But the difference between that self-consciousness ('we squee, but we also do so much more, and everyone is aware of this') and 'irony' is

[heyiya]

I guess what I'm suggesting is that there's a certain stereotype in the world regardless of whether we reinforce it: of an 'immature,' girly emotionalism that is frequently understood as feminine (the teenage girl into popstars, fainting for joy and wetting her knickers). It's a stereotype that as a teenager I was highly insistent on distancing myself from, but that the community and language of fandom gave me a space to reclaim. I never wanted to be that girl - but now I think that maybe after all there are useful ways in which that figure can be valued rather than dismissed. It's as much about valuing what's perceived to be immature as what's perceived to be feminine (I do feel that the two are linked, but you may disagree). Perhaps the image of immaturity, and disclaiming the idea of excessive excitement as immature, is a place we could meet

[heyiya]

Yay, agreement! :)

I can still refuse to be complicit

I can totally see your reasoning there. I think I'm influenced by queer and genderqueer writings and practices so that I see non-complicity as being something that can be practiced by performing gendered practices in ways that mess with the conventional construction of gender while acknowledging it (drag being the obvious eg) as well as by the kind of refusal you're carrying out; but it sounds like we want more or less the same thing in the end. Ie, not restricting how people can express themselves by the gender they (appear to) 'be'.

(sidebar: "is he gay or just British?"; In Britain, I have heard "Gay, or European?"meaning mainland Europe, of course.)

[heyiya]

a female identity in reference to sexualized medias that has nothing to do with the other male viewers is definitely of key importance in slash

I agree, I think - especially when you think about the shows that were the first to be slashed, that were aimed at a male audience. Interesting conversations over at the fandebate post, about the differences between soap opera fandom (aimed at women) and sf-oriented media fandom (at least historically, aimed at men and appropriated by women), and how fan responses differ between the two. Less fanfic for soap operas, apparently, and more contact with TPTB...

[peoriapeoria]

Sorta late here (just came from some meta on "Take Off Clothes As Directed" looking for the academic thinkings you intimated at).

I think it's less that the shows were aimed at "male audiences", but they were thinking shows that could imagine the future 'so far' and yet couldn't embrace women fully as subjects, as actors of verbs. They had other limits, and slash punched holes in those limits (notably, Spock and his emotionality, and Kirk only bonded to his ship). It's like how much fanfiction is written for shows that are flawed--the really excellent shows have too high a bar, and crappy shows don't inspire the effort.

Have you looked at any of the Man from U.N.C.L.E. academic writing?