Fandoms

Is it just me, or... (and this is not a rhetorical question, I am honestly not sure whether it's just me)

Is it just me, or in the past years, most nerdy communities' attitude regarding fandoms took a 180° turn to the other extreme?

Where there used to be a progress of reclaiming any insult about obsessiveness and turning it into a celebration of enthusiasm, like "fanatic" became "fan", or "geek" and "nerd" became something that we identify with, instead of something that they say to us, nowadays, even among ourselves, almost every new community comes with a -tard or -fag suffix attached to them by us, and there is a constant pressure for fans to distance themselves from the labels that would imply that they are too obsessed with the subject.

I'm talking about labels like "hardcore gamer", "[gaming platform] fanboy", "weeaboo", "otaku", "brony".

Yes, people always argued about labels, like there was the "trekkies vs. trekkers " debate, but that one was always seen by everyone else as the pointless bickering of the two equally silly halves of a fandom, while the attitudes of the past few years all seem to lead to the idea that fandoms in general are bad, they ruin goods shows with their obsessiveness and elitism, and that you shouldn't identify with them at all if you want to be accepted as a normal person.

On a side note, there is also an interestingly consistent trend of portraying a fandom as something "dirty". While usually it's exactly the most devoted fans who would want to see their thing to be deeper and more full of content, there is this idea that the fans are mainly defined by their basest urges. For example :

The term "fanservice", meaning "giving the fans what they want", has been identified with sexuality, assuming that what the fandom wants is sex. In anime fandom, "otaku pandering" is almost exclusively brought up as a synonym of that phrase, in relation to ecchi or moe.

"Fanfiction" is always automatically assumed to be smut.

The debate of whether or not bronies (and even more so, furries), are acceptable, has mostly been led by the issue of whether or not they are sexually motivated.

edited 20th Aug '12 4:52:42 AM by Ever9

Nah, I've noticed it too.

I guess the term "fan appeal" can be used instead of fanservice. This describes what it's supposed to be.

Yep.

I think it also has to do with the internet, maybe? Like back in the day, you had to really look to find a hardcore Trekkie or something like that. You'd have to go out of your way, like conventions or something. Nowadays it's pretty easy to see extreme fans. So maybe fans want to distance themselves from that.

edited 20th Aug '12 4:48:21 PM by wuggles

Here's something relevant

Urban Dictionary describes Furries/Furry as:

There is no one single definition of what a furry is. Even within the furry fandom, people cannot always agree on just what makes a person a furry or not.

"Some would argue that to be a furry, you must think and talk like one (i.e. use furry specific words and phrases). Even if you go to conventions, wear a fursuit, draw the art, writes the stories etc but don't talk using furry lingo, you're not a furry. Basically, someone that may walk the walk but doesn’t talk the talk."

"Others would argue that even liking anthropomorphic creatures makes you a furry. You may have no idea the furry fandom exists or have ever heard of a furry convention, let alone any of the websites; simply liking 'anthro' critters makes you a furry."

The way I see it, if or if you don’t consider yourself a furry is a matter of personal opinion.

As with any hobby, most furries are normal people just like anyone you'll meet at work/school or going to/from work/school or anywhere. Then there is the small percent that are hard core fans and have taken what for most is a hobby and perverted it (sometimes in an all to literal sense).

As is with so many other things in life, the few that take it too far tend to be the loudest. The silent majority are often forced into silence by the loud majority for fear that people will label them as being in the same class as the minority that have perverted it.

One unfortunate side effect of the internet and the relative anonymity that some sites grant their users is people are able to engage in activities (even if only on a virtual level) that they would never even consider doing in real life. An example of this is trolls of message boards that say things to people they’d never say to them in person. I think a lot of the stereotypes associated with furries are because of this.

In conclusion, as with any hobby, there are some furries that have taken it too far and/or perverted what for many is a fun harmless hobby.

If only the silent majority were not so silent, people would realise there is more to furries then perversion.

Let's have a look at some of these.

You've got two points here that I think are worth further discussion. First is the labelling of new communities with -tard and -fag suffixes. It is important to remember that the term 'fag' is used ironically as much as not (i.e. a newcomer to a forum might self-deprecatingly identify themselves as a newfag) so it is not always an insult, whereas -tard is generally not used ironically. I disagree with your assertion that all every community attracts these epithets or that we label them as such. As far as I can tell, this treatment is reserved for communities that are (a) highly popular and (b) are perceived to not be worthy of their popularity by a vocal section of the internet. This is why you see Twitards and Narutards but no Tokientards or other such things.

I'm not aware that so-called fan culture ever celebrated the execessively devoted. Or if it did, this was back when they formed the majority of the fandom. Let's call it the democratization of fan culture, with apologies to George Orwell for offenses against the English language. As a work becomes more and more popular, different kinds of people move in who enjoy the work but do not necessarily have that same level of "commitment". These so-called normal people worry about being associated with certain stereotypes by their own friends who may not share their interests. To give a non-fandom-related example, what do you think of when I say that I'm buying up gold as a hedge against inflation? I don't mean "you" specifically. You might decide, and rightfully so, that I might have a toe dipped in the survivalist, libertarian, or low income communities for whom gold appears to have a strange attraction.

Even among fellow geeks (especially among fellow geeks), I am reluctant to talk about Visual Novels as these are still associated strongly in the West with hentai and rightfully so. Stereotypes exist for a reason. Yes, in theory, the fact that I read these games makes me no different from someone who spends their time reading erotic romance novels but the reality is more complex and draws upon stereotypes from anime, Japanese culture in general, and a thousand and one other things that readers of erotic fiction don't have to deal with. Vice versa as well.

Actually, I see it as more of coin with two sides. On one side you have the people who have been in the fandom for a long time and their opinions on matters relating to the fandom are well-respected. On the flipside you have exactly what you described — the obsessiveness and elitism of the so-called True Fans summed up best, in my opinion, by Professor Frink when he claims that others won't enjoy whatever-it-was on the same level that he does.

With terms like weeaboo, I think it's about subtleties. Weeaboo carries a suggestion of immaturity that the synonym Japanophile does not carry. The unspoken implication is that a weeaboo is in love with a superficial, Hollywood interpretation of Japanese culture, possibly derived from anime and other products deemed fit for Western consumption.

This appears to be more of an anime-related problem than anywhere else. Again, stereotypes exist for a reason. Very few animes go on for more than a season and those that do have generally made use of sexualized characters as one of the draws. A vicious cycle ensues where fanservice-heavy animes become popular, resulting in a market that capitalizes on their popularity, which creates ever-increasing amounts of slice of life, moe, and romantic comedy. Think of that what you like.

As for fanfiction, I've never heard of any such assumption aside from certain fandoms where the fic writers are assumed to be mostly girls and these girls are assumed to write mostly yaoi. In the big picture, fanfiction tends to be associated more with Mary Sues, at least in my experience.

Wouldn't that just create an euphemism treadmill? We might as well rename fans to "enthusiasts", and call it Enthusiast Appeal, but if the rest of my theory is right, and the formation of this phrase was due to a universal press towards portraying fandoms as a negatively obsessive thing, then the new phrase would eventually just take it's place.

For example, on TV Tropes itself, we already have another page for the more neutral concept, titled Pandering to the Base, and that already has it's own negative associations; like I said in the OP, in the anime fandom that phrase "pandering" eventually even reached the exact same definition as "fanservice", mostly referring to panty shots and bathing scenes.

edited 21st Aug '12 9:05:03 AM by Ever9

"For example, on TV Tropes itself, we already have another page for the more neutral concept, titled Pandering to the Base, and that already has it's own negative associations;"

Its probably because "PANDERING" is in the title, since the word "pandering" has negative connotation.

I guess, but these negative connotations themselves are arbitary, they are there because the idea behind pandering itself is looked upon critically. If we would use yet another word to describe it, than that word would become negative.

The thing about anime fan service is that they mostly put it in there for no reason at all. It's like put the most popular character in the episode even when it has nothing to do with them.

For me, I started having a highly negative view of fandoms not because of their odd quirks or tastes - in fact I couldn't care less about Twilight, Furries, Bronies, Touhou, or any of the others. Just live and let be. Instead, the ones that soured me are the types that treat their own approach as the only "correct" way to enjoy something, act hostile towards newcomers, or treat changes to the canon or setting as a personal offense. I'd dare say those type of fans do far more damage and chase away more potential newcomers than any of the other issues do.

Fandoms are as old as humankind.

Minutes after Ug the Caveman created his first work, people started discussing it and drawing graphic Big Hunter/Big Mammoth slashfiction on the other walls of the cave.

x100

I should point out that adding "fag" to the end of something isn't limited to just fandoms. Indeed, it's pretty much universal. For instance, in Japan, someone that is happy with their offline life is a riiarujuu, which can to some extent be roughly translated as "realfag." There's a certain derisive element to adding -fag to the end of something, but it's almost like it's more a simple matter of identification than it's really condemning. I think at a certain level it's just generally misanthropy and cynicism, in the way that some people make racist comments claiming to be protected by Poe's Law-they're not being racist, they're being caricatures of racism. But if everyone's doing that ... well, anyway, the point is that it's hard to tell how much of the derision is actually "genuine." But because no one can tell, the people who can't tell think it's genuine, and thus they, wanting to be part of the crowd, adopt it for real.

Thanks!

I thought that that was simply yet another not-actually-funny 4chan meme or something like that.

It's popular enough to show up in Steins;Gate so that must mean it has penetration.

Yeah, but that's still the kind of thing, that is in reality, often criticised by the actual fandoms, rather than applauded.

Generally, fandoms don't want the subject of their interest to be shallow. There are some kinds of continuity nods, meta jokes, or similar moments, that are aimed more at the core fandom than at the general audience, but the fandom usually still expects these to be at least clever and well-done, and only starts calling them "fanservice" when they are not.

Also, there are also the "things that the fandom has ruined for you" complaint threads common on some forums. Again, the implication is that the "fandom" are bad people and the speaker is trying to distance themselves from it, even while being on a fansite, discussing "the fandom" as a group of other people who are too obsessive.

I tendd to find that fandoms are okay with fanservice that makes no sense if and only if the work is self-aware about it, such as by making a joke that either leans on or breaks the forth wall.

Some fandoms are too precious about their special little thing. Or some parts of them. I am forever amused about how some fans of the Fallout series absolutely detest anything that links My Little Pony:Friendship is Magic to their thing. Even though Fallout: Equestria rocks. And has attracted some of the best fricking fan art out there in the wilds.

Some of the fans of the Ponies aren't too fond of their thing being linked with Fallout and are disgusted by Fallout: Equestria but they don't seem to be as vile about it as the Fallout crowd are.

Y'know how the development of the Printing Press was a communications advancement on par with the development of the Internet for Renaissance Europe? Fandom psychodynamics explains a lot about the academic debates and political conflicts of that era.

There is a lot of that stuff in the chatter amongst the folks in the 1632-verse. About how much the population love access to information and gossip^ as well as straight news, and how much that process gets affected by the introduction of the new science of radio and continuous wave transmission/receiving equipment.

^that the printing press and subsequent wide-spread use of propaganda pamphlets, religious tracts, the first real newspapers and scandal sheets and most importantly for that time, versions of the Bible that were not in Latin, as well as other famous books like Don Quixote and the like.

edited for completeness

edited 22nd Sep '12 8:42:22 AM by TamH70

...and of course, if you read the biographies of the Classical Musicians of the era — Sex, Drugs And Baroque And Roll, European Tours and Disastrous Gigs: sounds famillar, doesn't it?

Oh, but I have a story to tell. At first, I found "nerd" an already-reclaimed, friendly term, one I even could identify with. Then this forum had its period of silly yet obsessive infatuation with a certain bloggie's own special brand of rationalism. And then I started to think of this term back as an insult.

Oh yes, Yudkowski.