![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
One other thing I noticed at the booksale was that you could have a drinking game with cover copies that begin or end with the following sentence:
“The (adjective) (synonym for story) of (number) men and their (adjective) (relationship/lives) that (influenced/created/changed) (event/setting).”
Add in paragraphs that could be summarized as such, and the drinking game would end up rather lethal.
For perspective, I probably spent 7 total hours going through books and went through every section of fiction including classics and excluding thrillers (though I did glance through to see if anything I’d be interested in was miscategorized) and then history, politics, and biography/autobiography for nonfiction*.
And it’s not like “The (adjective) (synonym for story) of (number) men and their (adjective) (relationship/lives) that (influenced/created/changed) (event/setting).” isn’t good or is automatically less interesting or generic or whatever, but it takes up so much of what’s out there that it really makes it hard to get me interested. And you know, I used to have opinions about slash, but now that…kind of is my opinion. Which is why I always get confused when I see people talk about slash from the perspective of accepting or not accepting homosexuality, because most people I know who aren’t fans either are less interested in fiction the less it involves women (which is not to say that slash excludes women, but by putting something forth as m/m slash, the natural interpretation is that the main focus will be the relationship between two men, with women a secondary focus) or they aren’t interested in another thing focusing on relationships between men. (Mind you, I believe that there are people who object to slash from the perspective of homosexuality both in fiction and in real life, it’s just that most of my experience is with people who support both, but take female presence and representation into account when even considering checking something out.)
And since I’m already tangenting and rambling all over the place, is anyone else (who hangs around places like![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
metafandomand fandomsecretsreally bugged by the thing that seems to be going around lately that boils down to “part of the appeal of slash is that it’s a relationship between equals”? In one metafandom’d post, the OP said that she (I assume) thought people approached shipping from het or slash, and that if you wanted a relationship between equals, then you had to turn to slash.
I disagree with that on a lot of levels, but especially since it’s approaching relationships from an apparently subconscious assumption that (1) men and women are not equal, and can never be equal, and (2) relationships between men and women are not equal, and can never be equal. Based on the occasions I’ve seen it, I think the people explaining the appeal of slash that way would object to the idea of a natural inequality between men and women, but it seems that to include the subject or equality in shipping in the first place, there has to be a subconscious assumption of inequality. And yes, fiction often (regularly) portrays relationships-romantic and platonic-between men and women as being unequal, but most people I know who are into fanfic seem to look at fanfic as a way to explore, expand on, or “fix” canon. So while you have a reaction to canon that can boil down to “I prefer the relationship between A/B to A/C because A/B are more equal to A/C” inequalities between the genders in your own writing, or perceptions in approaching canon (in my admittedly limited reading of fanfic, power imbalances between characters usually seemed to be far greater than they were in the canon) would seem to be based on internalized bias, not nature or anything about the way things “have” to be.
(No, I don’t think I really had a central point to all that, just shooting things off the top of my head.)
*Of course, then there are the romance novels where you sometimes get blurbs like:
To escape an arranged marriage, spirited Lily Bainbridge has staged her own death, and, disguised as a boy, she fled to London and a life of freedom. Yet her plans to live masquerade as an independent widow are thwarted by an encounter with a powerful and dangerously attractive marquis who wants to make her his mistress. Lily is afraid that if she gives him her innocence, he’ll steal her heart.
Having agreed to a marriage of convenience to honor his family duty, Ethan Andarton, the Marquis of Vessey, has no intention of abandoning his rakish ways. Then fate intervenes in the guise of an impetuous young lady–a woman bold enough to scheme her way to London, who tempts him with her mystery and her sensuality. Kiss after kiss, caress after tender caress, Ethan vows to discover all of Lily’s hidden secrets. For beneath the layers of her clever ruse lies a burning passion that will ignite a tempestuous love neither of them can deny.
Sadly, that book was gone by the time it was “as many books as you can fit in a box for $10” so I cannot tell you if the actual book lives up to that! (Mind you, I’m not sure if it would be awesomely bad enough to read the whole thing. But I’ve also seen enough authors-especially romance authors-lament cover copy and cover images enough to know that the inside may actually be good.)
ETA: Since this apparently isn’t clear and is what everyone wants to talk about: I am not talking about m/m slash. I am not talking about het. I am not talking about m/m slash vs het. I am not talking about power dynamics in m/m slash. I am not talking about power dynamics in het. I am not talking about western vs eastern m/m (or m/f) relationships or slash fandoms. I am talking about the perception that a relationship between two men is automatically equal, and that a relationship between a man and a woman is automatically unequal, and the assumption that, not only is this unavoidable, but that the best reaction to this perceived inherent inequality is to agree and then avoid.
Note: If comments continueat the rate they have been, I likely won’t be able to respond to a lot of them. I will read them, though, and feel free to talk amongst yourselves, as long as you keep it clean and don’t flame or bash.
“The (adjective) (synonym for story) of (number) men and their (adjective) (relationship/lives) that (influenced/created/changed) (event/setting).”
Add in paragraphs that could be summarized as such, and the drinking game would end up rather lethal.
For perspective, I probably spent 7 total hours going through books and went through every section of fiction including classics and excluding thrillers (though I did glance through to see if anything I’d be interested in was miscategorized) and then history, politics, and biography/autobiography for nonfiction*.
And it’s not like “The (adjective) (synonym for story) of (number) men and their (adjective) (relationship/lives) that (influenced/created/changed) (event/setting).” isn’t good or is automatically less interesting or generic or whatever, but it takes up so much of what’s out there that it really makes it hard to get me interested. And you know, I used to have opinions about slash, but now that…kind of is my opinion. Which is why I always get confused when I see people talk about slash from the perspective of accepting or not accepting homosexuality, because most people I know who aren’t fans either are less interested in fiction the less it involves women (which is not to say that slash excludes women, but by putting something forth as m/m slash, the natural interpretation is that the main focus will be the relationship between two men, with women a secondary focus) or they aren’t interested in another thing focusing on relationships between men. (Mind you, I believe that there are people who object to slash from the perspective of homosexuality both in fiction and in real life, it’s just that most of my experience is with people who support both, but take female presence and representation into account when even considering checking something out.)
And since I’m already tangenting and rambling all over the place, is anyone else (who hangs around places like
metafandomand fandomsecretsreally bugged by the thing that seems to be going around lately that boils down to “part of the appeal of slash is that it’s a relationship between equals”? In one metafandom’d post, the OP said that she (I assume) thought people approached shipping from het or slash, and that if you wanted a relationship between equals, then you had to turn to slash. I disagree with that on a lot of levels, but especially since it’s approaching relationships from an apparently subconscious assumption that (1) men and women are not equal, and can never be equal, and (2) relationships between men and women are not equal, and can never be equal. Based on the occasions I’ve seen it, I think the people explaining the appeal of slash that way would object to the idea of a natural inequality between men and women, but it seems that to include the subject or equality in shipping in the first place, there has to be a subconscious assumption of inequality. And yes, fiction often (regularly) portrays relationships-romantic and platonic-between men and women as being unequal, but most people I know who are into fanfic seem to look at fanfic as a way to explore, expand on, or “fix” canon. So while you have a reaction to canon that can boil down to “I prefer the relationship between A/B to A/C because A/B are more equal to A/C” inequalities between the genders in your own writing, or perceptions in approaching canon (in my admittedly limited reading of fanfic, power imbalances between characters usually seemed to be far greater than they were in the canon) would seem to be based on internalized bias, not nature or anything about the way things “have” to be.
(No, I don’t think I really had a central point to all that, just shooting things off the top of my head.)
*Of course, then there are the romance novels where you sometimes get blurbs like:
To escape an arranged marriage, spirited Lily Bainbridge has staged her own death, and, disguised as a boy, she fled to London and a life of freedom. Yet her plans to live masquerade as an independent widow are thwarted by an encounter with a powerful and dangerously attractive marquis who wants to make her his mistress. Lily is afraid that if she gives him her innocence, he’ll steal her heart.
Having agreed to a marriage of convenience to honor his family duty, Ethan Andarton, the Marquis of Vessey, has no intention of abandoning his rakish ways. Then fate intervenes in the guise of an impetuous young lady–a woman bold enough to scheme her way to London, who tempts him with her mystery and her sensuality. Kiss after kiss, caress after tender caress, Ethan vows to discover all of Lily’s hidden secrets. For beneath the layers of her clever ruse lies a burning passion that will ignite a tempestuous love neither of them can deny.
Sadly, that book was gone by the time it was “as many books as you can fit in a box for $10” so I cannot tell you if the actual book lives up to that! (Mind you, I’m not sure if it would be awesomely bad enough to read the whole thing. But I’ve also seen enough authors-especially romance authors-lament cover copy and cover images enough to know that the inside may actually be good.)
ETA: Since this apparently isn’t clear and is what everyone wants to talk about: I am not talking about m/m slash. I am not talking about het. I am not talking about m/m slash vs het. I am not talking about power dynamics in m/m slash. I am not talking about power dynamics in het. I am not talking about western vs eastern m/m (or m/f) relationships or slash fandoms. I am talking about the perception that a relationship between two men is automatically equal, and that a relationship between a man and a woman is automatically unequal, and the assumption that, not only is this unavoidable, but that the best reaction to this perceived inherent inequality is to agree and then avoid.
Note: If comments continueat the rate they have been, I likely won’t be able to respond to a lot of them. I will read them, though, and feel free to talk amongst yourselves, as long as you keep it clean and don’t flame or bash.