Slash vs Same-sex pairings

[aadler]

 
Last week, frogfarm and I did a brief exchange of e-mails, discussing various aspects of our attitudes toward fandom in general and fanfiction in particular. With that individual’s permission, I’m posting my last note, as illustrative of part of my outlook.

---

I offered to explain why your preferred pairing [frogfarm is an inveterate Faith/Willow ’shipper] didn’t fall within the category of things I dislike. You expressed interest in my opinion. That follows.

There is a tendency to interpret opposition to slash — not just “not to my taste”, but actual opposition and rejection — as indicative of or synonymous with that dread thing, “homophobia”. (A term I despise and the foundations of which I utterly reject. The word is just a way of saying, “Anybody who disagrees with me on this issue is stupid and wrong and repressed and hateful and bigoted and evil, and I don’t even have to prove those things because just applying the label automatically invalidates everything they say and everything they stand for and HA HA I WIN.”)

No, when I speak of disliking slash (and I truly do), I’m not talking about same-sex pairings per se, but using shorthand for something a bit more specific and limited. What I actually dislike and oppose, and for which I see no justification whatsoever, is the habitual, systematic, gratuitous, and artificial homosexualization of canonically heterosexual characters, for no good purpose. (Maybe the first time it was done, it was “breaking new ground”. Now it all seems to fall under self-titillation, pandering, jumping on the ho-yay bandwagon, or even deliberately designed to offend those benighted knuckle-draggers who dislike slash.)

Because of this, I don’t apply the same objections to Willow/Tara. Or Willow/Kennedy. Or even Willow/Faith. This is because those pairings are neither gratuitous nor artificial. Tara apparently was genuinely same-sex oriented. Willow (whether fundamentally lesbian, or a bisexual who thought it necessary to expunge any twinge of opposite-sex-attraction from her personality) was nonetheless canonically shown as part of two separate same-sex relationships. Faith, for all the fact that every bit of her demonstrated sexual activity was aggressively heterosexual, put out some deliberate and explicit overtures toward Buffy in Season 3. (Even if it could be argued that she didn’t mean it, and was just doing it as a kind of personal power-play, the fact remains that she did those things.)

As far as same-sex pairings are concerned, Willow is canonical. Tara is canonical. Kennedy is canonical. Faith is canonically plausible. I’m still not crazy about the whole business — for that matter, specific focus on ANY ’ship is boring to me — but those, and perhaps others, don’t require that familiar characters be twisted into knots to accommodate someone’s agenda.

So, no, I don’t have a lot of patience with femslash or any slash. For that matter, I have no interest in any story, same-sex or opposite-sex, that centers the story around sexuality; I have better things to do with my time. The [Willow/Faith] pairing you favor, however, while it doesn’t intrinsically appeal to me, doesn’t automatically trigger “don’t read” status.

And that’s where I come from.

Comments

[baudown.livejournal.com]

I'm confused about a number of things in this post.

First, I am curious about the comment re: rejecting the "foundations" of the term homophobia. Do you mean that you don't believe that aversion, negativity and hostility (possibly fear-based) to homosexuality exists? Or are you simply objecting to the manner in which the term can be over-used or misused? It would be difficult to agree with the former. As for the latter, I agree that the throwing around of loaded terms to preclude argument is unproductive. Everyone should be careful about this.

While I can certainly understand that slash is not everyone's cup of tea, I don't understand "opposition" to it. Why is it something that even registers if you're not into it? No one is being forced to read it. No one is pushing slash on non-slash readers. It's posted at sites aimed at slash writers and readers; avoid them if you don't want to read it! If you've friended someone who's writing slash, you can de-friend. It's not a phenomenon with the social or cultural or political power to threaten the fabric of our culture, or even of fandom, in any way.

I don't understand the meaning of "systemic" homosexualization of characters. What system are you referring to? And what is meant by homosexualization "for no good purpose?" Isn't the purpose of all fan fiction entertainment for the writers and readers? Isn't it all based in a kind of wish-fulfillment, i.e. wanting to see something that was not specifically portrayed in canon? Further, I can't imagine that anyone is writing slash for the purpose of offending those who dislike slash. They are writing for themselves and for like-minded fans.

I don't believe slashers are twisting characters into knots to suit any particular agenda (and I'm not sure what that agenda would be). Slash writers and readers may interpret text or subtext differently than non-slashers. This is a matter of experience and perspective and imagination. Fan fiction isn't merely an exercise in re-hashing canon, which would be pretty dull. To say that a homosexual relationship shouldn't exist in fan fiction because we haven't seen those characters engage in same-sex relationships in canon ignores that these characters have a imagined pasts, presents and futures that also have not been portrayed on screen. It ignore the fluidity of sexuality and sexual behavior. It would preclude so much wonderful writing, both in het and slash fic, if all a writer could do is re-write what has already been done.

You're post lists homosexual couples that you deem "acceptable" based on canonical plausibility. I don't know if you were limiting yourself to female couples. But certainly, it would be hard to ignore the canon-based legitimacy of a past relationship between Angel(us) and Spike. It pretty much goes beyond subtext and directly into text in AtS. And while there is certainly a lot to debate on the subject of writers' intentions versus viewers' interpretations, it's hard to ignore Joss Whedon saying that A/S had sex.

I generally don't read a lot of PWP, although it can be very enjoyable, especially if well-written. But I do love fan fic focusing on relationships. Love and sex are two of the most powerful human drives, so stories about sexuality and romance are very interesting to me. This is true both for same-sex and hetero relationships. I like Spuffy, as well Spangel and Spander, as long as the work is good, although I've come to prefer slash overall.

There's room in the world, including fandom, for a host of preferences and opinions. Enjoy yours! Try not to worry about the rest!

[aadler]

So, essentially, you disagree with everything I said.

Okay.