![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Slash & Het & Femmeslash
I had a whole bunch of friends come over for my belated birthday party, which was a blast. I'm really lucky in that my friends are friendly with each other, so if I step out for a minute I don't have to worry about anyone being left out of the conversation.
Only downside is that I'm super behind on comments, but that's a small price to pay. ^_^
And now, meta.
When people get to discussing slash and het (note: femmeslash is almost never mentioned in these discussions) there will be, at some point, at statement to the effect that 'slash and het are equally problematic' meaning that arguing that one is inherently better is pointless. The fact that neither genre is more feminist or subversive by default is true but what doesn't get mentioned is that het and slash and femmeslash are troublesome and empowering in different ways.
Before I begin, a few notes:
-no genre is quantitatively better or worse than any other. Romance novels are not less worth-while than lit novels, nor are they automatically written with less skill.
-every genre (especially in fanfic) is largely composed of horrible stories.
-not every story or fanfic says or is trying to say something subversive or culturally relevant. This is okay. Stories can be neutral. They can just be there to be PWP, they can just be there to watch the characters have adventures.
That said-
At its best, slash is both subversive and feminist, a genre written by women for women and comprised of narratives removed from the heteronormative culture standards.
At its worst, slash is misogynistic and forces blatantly sexist roles on the characters involved, while erasing and vilifying women and femininity. Additionally, it can be portray men in unrealistic and objectifying ways.
At its best, het is a way to celebrate relationships between equals as well as deconstruct and explore traditional and nontraditional gender roles. Also, it can be used to forfront forefront female characters who are often not given the same screentime as their male counterparts.
At it's worst, het supports sexist dynamics and glorifies the male point of view, as well as reinforcing the idea that all women must be in a relationship to be happy, that that The Man You Love > Everything Else In Your Life.
At it's best, femmeslash gives even more screen time and attention to the ladies and allows authors to explore issues that might feel unnatural or out of character for a male character to be party to. Additionally, because femmeslash is less popular within the fandom, I have noticed a trend for there to be more well-written fics when looked at proportionally.
At its worst, it objectifies women and supports the idea that lesbians do not get happily ever afters.
supports the idea that lesbian leads to death.
Your thoughts?
[ETA: I'VE EDITED THIS A BIT TO REFLECT POINTS THAT COMMENTATORS MENTIONED, TO CLARIFY SOME OF MY THOUGHTS, AND ADD THINGS I FORGOT.]
Only downside is that I'm super behind on comments, but that's a small price to pay. ^_^
And now, meta.
When people get to discussing slash and het (note: femmeslash is almost never mentioned in these discussions) there will be, at some point, at statement to the effect that 'slash and het are equally problematic' meaning that arguing that one is inherently better is pointless. The fact that neither genre is more feminist or subversive by default is true but what doesn't get mentioned is that het and slash and femmeslash are troublesome and empowering in different ways.
Before I begin, a few notes:
-no genre is quantitatively better or worse than any other. Romance novels are not less worth-while than lit novels, nor are they automatically written with less skill.
-every genre (especially in fanfic) is largely composed of horrible stories.
-not every story or fanfic says or is trying to say something subversive or culturally relevant. This is okay. Stories can be neutral. They can just be there to be PWP, they can just be there to watch the characters have adventures.
That said-
At its best, slash is both subversive and feminist, a genre written by women for women and comprised of narratives removed from the heteronormative culture standards.
At its worst, slash is misogynistic and forces blatantly sexist roles on the characters involved, while erasing and vilifying women and femininity. Additionally, it can be portray men in unrealistic and objectifying ways.
At its best, het is a way to celebrate relationships between equals as well as deconstruct and explore traditional and nontraditional gender roles. Also, it can be used to forfront forefront female characters who are often not given the same screentime as their male counterparts.
At it's worst, het supports sexist dynamics and glorifies the male point of view, as well as reinforcing the idea that all women must be in a relationship to be happy, that that The Man You Love > Everything Else In Your Life.
At it's best, femmeslash gives even more screen time and attention to the ladies and allows authors to explore issues that might feel unnatural or out of character for a male character to be party to. Additionally, because femmeslash is less popular within the fandom, I have noticed a trend for there to be more well-written fics when looked at proportionally.
At its worst, it objectifies women and supports the idea that lesbians do not get happily ever afters.
supports the idea that lesbian leads to death.
Your thoughts?
[ETA: I'VE EDITED THIS A BIT TO REFLECT POINTS THAT COMMENTATORS MENTIONED, TO CLARIFY SOME OF MY THOUGHTS, AND ADD THINGS I FORGOT.]
no subject
Ahhh, THAT trope! The evil lesbian one. Yes, I've seen that a few times and it really does bother me. Actually, it's not just the evil lesbian thing that pisses me off about female villains. Why is it that in order to demonstrate how "evil" these women are they have to make them overly sexualized? I mean, don't get me wrong. I love it when a female character is comfortable with her sexuality. But there are SO MANY female antagonists out there who are portrayed as dominatric nymphomaniacs. It's like the writers are trying to say that, for females at least, diabolical intent = extreme sexualization.
no subject
It's okay. I actually took it as a compliment, seeing as qualapec's a friend and she's wonderfully bright. So, thanks!
Ooo... what was the DVD called, out of curiosity? Because a friend of mine was talking about something he saw just the other night in reference to media and the portrayal of LGBT community. I'm wondering if it was the same one he saw or not, because he said he'd never been more disappointed with the human race as he was at that moment.
no subject
Ah, that wasn't the one he'd mentioned. The documentary he saw was something called "Being Accepted", or something like that. I haven't seen it myself, but it did affect him.
no subject
Overly sexualized female villains...For me, it seems that villains like that are often vampire/fae/old goddess, which to me is more a reference to the way sexuality was looked at more openly in cultures prior to the Jeudeo-Christian domination. The fact that they are often more overly sexual AND ANTAGONISTS seems more problematic from a religious/cultural biased standpoint. And I think it's seen in male antagonists too. Madrigal Wraith (Dresden Files) and Jean-Claude (Anita Blake), I can't think of any that aren't vampires from the top of my head. But I really think it depends on whether or not the hero is a man or woman so the temptation to the dark side is maximized.
no subject
I wasn't referring to the villains that come from a culture or era where sexuality is okay per se, though I do feel like that's been done to death and back again. And even IF the villain happens to come from one of those backgrounds... it's still portraying sexuality as something that only the bad guys do.
What I'm actually talking about are more modern set stories with female antagonists. Male antagonists are FAR less sexualized than female. How many times have you seen a female villain smack the male hero around and act threatening in a physical sense WITHOUT wearing latex, leather or some other form of impractically tight clothing. Using Jay and Silent Bob as a case in point, seeing as Kevin Smith made a total mockery of this particular trope, the three female thieves are incredibly sexual whereas their more moral teammate is scene as a bit more wholesome... unless you count Jay's fantasies about her. *grins*
Anyway, the point is that sex is being equated with deviance and as something that's "bad", which actually DOES play into the religious extremist view quite heavily. The good girls only act sexual when it's with their leading man, the bad girls act sexual all the time. Even the female leads that ARE sexualized are done so in a way that makes them look like a bad girl with a heart of gold, so to speak.
I'm not saying remove the sexiness, not by any means. But damn it all... do it RIGHT. You can be sexy and fuck like mad and be on the good side.