It's a bird.
There was a discussion about rape fantasies some time ago (I think it was in the Women's Issues thread?) that more or less covered these points already.
Personally, I basically view content warnings and "don't try this at home" disclaimers as being the writing-based equivalent of Safe, Sane, and Consensual.
Still a great "screw depression" song even after seven years.
Ace Pilot
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
x3 yeah I could see why that would certainly be problematic especially if they go out of their way to do it. The clear answer clears up my confusion on what you are saying.
That is the reason I asked more clarification on what you all considered to be glorification since that would certainly mean different things to different people. For me to understand what a person is saying it is generally best to have clear idea of their opinion on a matter. Especially as someone that does some writing which includes a wide variety of character types.
Imagine you see a person writing Sexist shit, with Content warnings and Disclaimers, how differently would you Approach this Problem (assuming that it bothers you), if
@) the writer is also clearly a reactonary person, maybe they post odious Things like "women are lesser beings" or something along those lines
b) the writer has not only Disclaimers, but if they get asked what their opinions are, they give either no answer or one that is more progressive. for example: "you think you can do to women what ever you want without their consent?" "no, i think my Story is very illogical, and it would be also shit if someone in real life could get away with this horrible behaviour."
c) the writer has some also one or more stories with a different Disclaimer: instead of stating that this Story has nothing to do with his real opinions, it just states that there it may be not for everyone because of sensitive material. and in that Story the author tries more to reflect on thoughts, maybe this Story is without the terrible Events that happen in the other stories, or maybe terrible Things do happen but they don`t get glorified, or maybe the abusive character gets some consequences etc.
d) the writer also has one or more stories without Disclaimer, and in the Disclaimer-less Story the writer does try to, for example, include minority, thinks About what message this Story has, respond to criticism etc.
Do you think an, i dont know, openly selfdescribed comicsgater who writes Sexist power fantasies should be approached the same way as b), c) and d)?
I think this discussion is important, because there will be other People who may not be conservative women haters,toxic nerds,trump supporters whatever but who still won`t refuse to post Sexist power fantasies.
Isn`t it good that I, instead of whining About Marvel not giving me Comics I enjoy, actually seek out a Substitute that makes me feel good?
Edited by sketchnaut on Sep 3rd 2018 at 10:30:22 AM
Ahr river
I'm an independent author and I agree with a lot of what was said here. Even if we ignore the "creepy" and just look at it banally, writers write things that should be deeply analyzed.
And what they write matters. It can contribute to toxic trends, it can play into bad stereotypes, etc.
That doesn't mean writing X makes you X, analysis is never that simple, but it does mean people are going to analyze how you write and come to conclusions about it.
Now, there are issues with sometimes projecting stuff onto the writer, but to be honest, most people aren't aware of the sort of dynamic that often takes on. It's not enough to write "twisted shit". There are many people who do who never get any hate. It's more complicated than just "write bad stuff get hate" and the mere act of analyzing and assumptions aren't the problem (although there are some problems with it because a lot of people have taken the idea and made it mainstream, leading to some mobbish problems)
So yeah, tl;dr you do have every right to analyze works and make assumptions, there are lines that can be crossed and that should be stopped, but the act of literary analysis that uses an author philosophy lens is not Evil.
Read my stories!
You shouldn't necessarily be judged by your work but your work WILL be judged by your work so you might as well make it count.
I got a lot of hate mail for incorporating gay people into my books and a generally progressive attitude. And you know what? I also got praise from some sources too. One letter really thanked me for including a Mexican superhero who wasn't a joke and another for a trans character.
But this one reviewer really was like...STUNNED one of my main characters was gay. It took up a huge chunk of the review.
No, you shouldn't. But that doesn't mean you get scot free, it just means you're not as bad as those other examples, but still problematic.
What I find strange about this is that you have framed the discussion as if it's a binary of "write terrible things and don't support them IRL" and "write terrible things and support them IRL". There's, naturally, the option of not writing terrible things.
Thing is, hypothetically speaking, when you publish your substitute you'll be giving this exact same crowd a platform.
Edited by Gaon on Sep 3rd 2018 at 11:00:11 AM
"All you Fascists bound to lose."
It's a bird.
Well, I guess we're just not gonna get along very well then.
Still a great "screw depression" song even after seven years.Perhaps. But there are varying degrees to it. Glorifying a murderer is one thing, but as long you don't support pedophiles (which, really, is the lowest form of human being on planet earth) or anything of the sort, I suppose "fucked up shit" can be argued to some extent.
"All you Fascists bound to lose."
Though, while I will never support those Clowns who think Kathleen Kennedy is a marxist and Marvel Comics anticapitalist, I will also not stop writing terrible things.
Though, i will never post or link that stuff on tv tropes , and guess i will stop writing here very soon. Though it is interesting how you think about this issue, glad to have this conversation.
I guess we just have a different opinion on how much media is contributing to culture.
For example, imagine a Girl has the opportunity to read miss Marvel and some powerful Feminist novels, some indie games from campo santo, Maybe overwatch, Comics like nimona and saga etc, (don`t know if thy are good examples, though I assume I picked good examples for female Empowerment in media),but the People she is surrounded by are Sexist assholes.
What would be stronger in influencing her? I can only guess. I simply don`t know in the end. I guess I am that stubborn, I would even continue writing problematic power fantasies if nazis cheered me on, but I guess I also couldn`t resist to constantly mock or diss them in my work because they are so shitty, if you get to know nazis, even if it is only online, you just have to expose them and mock them. It is like a Reflex.
I am not sure. They may have something to enjoy then, but that is not a Problem (or if it is, why?).
If someone would start a conversation with me online after reading my stuff and starts talking about how much he hates marxists and women invading media, I would tell him that I think that is stupid and why.
If I had a platform myself, idk, something like a subreddit (hopefully I never will), and some user would out himself as an idiot (maybe hating on trans Comics creators because they are trans etc.), I would tell them to shut up or leave. Or maybe directly tell them to leave, I am not sure. So I don`t know if this really would be the reactonary`s wet Dream, since it is only about enjoying stuff (even if it is cruel stuff), and every attempt at making it into the Symbol of hate against realpeople would be something I would distance myself from and oppose.
My stories don`t even take place in the real world most of the time.
This is something that hopefully no one will ever do to people who are this careful about this Topic like I am. Not that Right wingers are pro-free speech most of the time either, though (and I am talking about the principle of free speech, not the law).
Edited by sketchnaut on Sep 3rd 2018 at 12:19:19 PM
Let memes die. Kill them, if you have to.
I think writers sometimes get too defensive when people believe that they are, to an extent, defending unsavory things. Again, as has been mentioned many times before, this doesn't mean you support whatever that unsavory thing is.
What it does mean is that instead of analysing what is wrong, writers go through this song and dance where the engage in criticism deflection, and sometimes in effect engage in apologia. Just look at how many ardent apologists there are when it comes to the perpetrator of sexual assault, and how often media normalizes it, or worse, romanticize by being another tick box in "tragic past".
Don't catch you slippin' now.
It's a bird.
It would be interesting to see the opposite happen some time, for the reaction if nothing else.
"Your latest work contains problematic element X, Y and Z!"
"Yeah, I know. Thanks for noticing."
Still a great "screw depression" song even after seven years.
I hope this is not a dumb Question, but even with googling i couldn't find out what ardent is.
Edited by sketchnaut on Sep 3rd 2018 at 1:03:24 AM
It's a bird.
"Enthusiastic", "passionate", "dedicated" etc.
The problem is not her. It's, say, the young men reading all that terribly sexist work and being empowered by it that this poor hypothetical girl has to work with. Empowerment works both ways.
Giving them something to enjoy is empowering and strengthening their community. Assuming here, for example, we're talking about the people that loathe diversity in comics. For the more you mock and deride them, the non-sexists (for example) might be turned off from your work due its content, while sexists enjoy it. So you might end up solely with a fanbase of sexists. Not to mention the women who could enjoy your work for whatever other reason being turned off from yet another fanbase because the work treats women as subhuman and thus it attracted a fanbase of sexists.
You're also assuming your personal statements will affect the fans in any way or that you'll even know the fans are enjoying your toxic elements whilst firmly believing in these toxic elements in real life. Lots of people ignore the author's views and enjoy the work regardless.
That's what I've been trying to say: trigger warnings and "this work does not reflect my own views" only goes so far when the subject is "how culture impacts and changes people".
"All you Fascists bound to lose."
Ace Pilot
Would be great when we get to a point where people don't take fictional events as something they are allowed to do in the real world.
"When I offered to make Norea my third back-up girlfriend she just glared at me and started throwing things at me.." Renee Costa
My book series are often about Anti-hero characters.
Including one professional hitman.
Depiction is not condoning as is currently being debated in the Vampire: The Masuqerade forums.
Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
Ahr river
Depiction doesn't equal condoning, yes, but that doesn't mean it somehow makes you absolved.
How you depict things matter, what you choose to depict matters. And that doesn't mean you're "condoning" it but that still means you can look at it and analyze it and see what the effects are.
You can't portray a topic 100% neutrally. You will always pick certain symbols and angles when going about it. And looking at those is a valid form of literary analysis.
Read my stories!
That's a wrong attitude I think for fiction.
If you write a guy who is a serial killer as a book and he is portrayed as a guy who absolutely loves his work then gets away scott free at the end, you're not endorsing serial murder.
You're just telling a story.
You can love the Friday the Thirteenth movies for their over the top murders without having ANY responsibility in my mind because they're not political discourse, they're just entertainment.
Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
Ahr river
"You're just telling a story" is a shallow, dismissive interpretation of fiction.
You are implying that any sort of deep read or interpretation on a story doesn't actually matter. And that's simply not true. There is no such thing as "just" a story. These things carry deeper theme, deeper meaning.
I have friends who have waxed lyrical about what horror movies like Friday the thirteenth means, its commentary, and the tropes of a horror franchise.
Almost no literary analysis is "this has a dog in it, therefore it's a pro-dog agenda" and to assume is just creating a conversation no one can continue.
Yes, people can enjoy stuff on a shallow level, they can also enjoy it on a deeper level, and that deeper level can also include analyzing what a movie is trying to say, and how well it executed on its themes.
Edited by MrAHR on Sep 3rd 2018 at 4:38:20 AM
Read my stories!
But what is if the Boys consume a) very Sexist media and b) have parents who help them to reflect that stuff. What i wonder is, media can effect a Person negatively, but does it have to necessarily? What if the parents are good parents and they show the Kids how good or at least nonviolent relationships work?
Does the media have to have the stronger Impact? What if the Kids, i dont know, Play some Sexist steam mods or games, but also Play some less Sexist games as well?
Also, while i cannot prove this, I think for example gaters or trumpists are more unified by mocking something. Also, a lot of -gaters hate people if they call them far Right or mysoginists. I don`t think I would make them happy.
I think there is no completely innocent Pop culture. But still, enjoying something even if it could be interpreted in a bad way is totally fine if you ask me.
Also, I don`t think deleting a lot of bad fiction from the Internet (I mean, it is the Right of the Website owners to do so, don`t get me wrong) will help supporting minorities and women.
Edited by sketchnaut on Sep 3rd 2018 at 1:51:06 AM
It's a bird.
You'd think we'd have learnt that lesson several times over by now, but nope. It's almost as if most people go through some kind of collective memory wipe every time a new issue pops up.
I don't think critical analysis and "it's just entertainment" have to be mutually exclusive. To pick a random example, I think that the first Matrix movie has some questionable moral implications if taken at face value, but I also acknowledge that things like the lobby massacre were included primarily due to Rule of Cool, and that the Wachowskis probably don't think it's fine to indiscriminately murder cops and security guards.
In a similar vein, I'm both a W40K fan and a trekkie. Go figure.
Edited by Corvidae on Sep 3rd 2018 at 10:50:40 AM
Still a great "screw depression" song even after seven years.
Ahr river
They are not mutually exclusive at all. My point was that you shouldn't dismiss literary analysis as the wrong way to go about fiction. Especially since there are people who enjoy consuming media BECAUSE of what they can infer from the text.
Read my stories!
Let memes die. Kill them, if you have to.
I really hate when writers try to pull the "it is just a story" crap to dismiss criticism when they would happily accept compliments about how "deep" and "meaningful" a story is, or take glee in how their work had some sort of positive outcome. You can't have it both ways.
Don't catch you slippin' now.
Also, why should someone feel bad About something they don`t have much control over other than not Publishing the work? I think more Damage is done with selfcensoring. You think it would have been better if the death note write didn`t publish the work? There was at least one case of murder where someone stated that they were inspired by it.
Edited by sketchnaut on Sep 3rd 2018 at 2:02:25 AM
What constitutes as glorification or not is a whole different ballgame that's very hard to judge without addressing specific cases directly rather than speaking in general terms. You'll observe the debate here arose from Sketchanaut very clearly stating his work glorified in some way or another some odious behavior and the rest of us taking him up on that claim.
In highly broad terms, glorification tends to be when you take something and portray it with obvious sympathy and aggrandizement. You don't need to spend the entire story mocking a character with terrible beliefs, but if you constantly portray him as being awesome and being in the right, you're glorifying him in some sense.
"All you Fascists bound to lose."