![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
cygnia posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
scans_dailyComic-Con kicks off amid period showing off fandom's ugly side
Comic-Con, we have a problem.
Once again, 130,000 pop-culture enthusiasts will descend on San Diego beginning July 18, immersing themselves in their favorite movies, TV and other pastimes for Comic-Con International, turning the sprawling convention into the center of the media universe.
Yet while the annual gathering is generally characterized by fans enthusiastically interacting with celebrities, a darker side of fandom has been in the headlines of late, reflecting the sort of distasteful minority that can give fans a bad name -- and might eventually prompt some talent to think twice about how much exposure they want to that culture.
no subject
Date: 2018-07-19 03:06 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-07-19 03:22 pm (UTC)Yes, you could argue that those things have always been there (and they have), but the minority responsible for this has been becoming louder as of late or, at the very least, their shitty behaviour has finally come fully into the spotlight. And that could have an impact with how creators interact with their fans moving forward.
I think what Kyle Kallgran said about "Ready Player One" sums it up pretty well.
in 2011, when the book was written, "Fandom" was seen as this innocent thing. the 2018 movie came in a post-gamergate world, in which we are now aware of how ugly fandoms can be and that online harassment IS an issue that needs addressing.
It's not about Comic-Con itself, but the context in which this comic-con is happening . the thing to do now is to watch carefully and see what happens.
no subject
Date: 2018-07-19 03:26 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-07-19 03:29 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-07-19 03:32 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-07-19 06:02 pm (UTC)This is borderline
Date: 2018-07-19 03:19 pm (UTC)However, we'll leave it here for now, in case it inspires more relevant discussion, or anyone has specific instances they'd care to share.
This is not a warning, on a disciplinary note, just a suggestion from your loveable Mod Team.
no subject
Date: 2018-07-19 04:00 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-07-19 06:06 pm (UTC)You know, if you got such a fucking problem with the fact the wedding was a cop out, go out and write a fucking fanfic where they do get married. Hell, write a fic where Bruce and Selina retire from super heroics, move to Minnesota, become fat and weird and open a shrimp farming business. I don't care, just don't fucking threaten people. This is the same reason I dumped an asshole on Tumblr because of their reaction to the big spoilers from Steven Universe a few months ago.
no subject
Date: 2018-07-19 08:09 pm (UTC)Seriously. People gripe and complain about every single pop-culture 'nerd' property under the sun, and it's like, guys, come on. Fanfic. That's what it's there for. *leaning in and whispering* That's what women and POC and LGBTQ+ folks have been doing forever.
no subject
Date: 2018-07-19 09:10 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-07-19 10:27 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-07-19 10:40 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-07-20 04:57 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-07-19 10:43 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-07-20 01:03 am (UTC)Essentially, the creator denied that the characters of Connor and Hank were Gay. This made shippers REALLY upset and began claiming that David Cage was homophobic and stuff.
This, in turn, upsets the people who were calling out Quantic Dream games (and Detroit most recently) for it's racist, sexist and homophobic undertones (as well as the plots being terribles), because these same shippers were quick to defend the game and are ONLY turning on it because their ship is non-canon. (and let's not get what many queer people have to say about M/M shippers in general...)
no subject
Date: 2018-07-20 08:11 am (UTC)I watched a lot of Lets Plays of David Cage recently
Date: 2018-07-20 08:48 am (UTC)Indigo Prophecy has a black character that has a jive soundtrack every time he walks into a room. Then there's the "wise old chinese" stereotype running a bookshop (they later say he does the act for the customers but hes still like got the mustache and robes and glasses.) And the main antag is an...Aztec? Mayan? priest...Lets just say Emperor's New Groove had more accurate depictions of central american culture than whatever the hell is going on there.
Heavy Rain - has the one female character get assaulted every time she turns around. Even her dream sequence has her in her underwear, taking a shower, and getting assaulted. Like the girl can't cross the street without getting tied up or almost raped.
Re: I watched a lot of Lets Plays of David Cage recently
Date: 2018-07-20 07:59 pm (UTC)The game actually has some weird undertones where it borrows the imagery of real-life minority oppression (segregation on the bus, armbands and triangles) but doesn't really examine real-life issues in the context of the setting or the fact that, for all intents and purposes, you can own a black person--Carl may treat and view Markus like a son, but Carlos Ortiz's android isn't nearly so lucky.
Re: I watched a lot of Lets Plays of David Cage recently
Date: 2018-07-21 05:24 am (UTC)Re: I watched a lot of Lets Plays of David Cage recently
Date: 2018-07-21 07:32 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-07-20 08:40 am (UTC)My best guess is some shippers were trying to one up the debate, asked Quantic and threw a fit cause it wasn't the answer they wanted. Not saying Quantic hasn't shit the bed in the past, but I think they have been improving.
no subject
Date: 2018-07-20 10:48 am (UTC)Welcome to the Batfamily fandom, circa... well, basically 1940, if one goes by Wertham..
no subject
Date: 2018-07-20 03:50 am (UTC)Please note the sarcasm
Date: 2018-07-20 08:35 am (UTC)Re: Please note the sarcasm
Date: 2018-07-20 07:45 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-07-20 04:00 pm (UTC)And there are two sides to every story. If there are toxic fans who take their feelings to the extreme, there are also creators who treat legitimate criticism with derision, such as J.J. Abrams claming Last Jedi critics were "threatened by women", or more recently, former ArenaNet writer Jessica Price accusing a user who wished to engage in actual polite discussion of telling her how to do her job (she was rightfully fired).
If creators should not be harassed by fans, creators should not shame the fans either (and no, one does not excuse the other). That's what mutual respect is about.
no subject
Date: 2018-07-20 07:44 pm (UTC)Using your analogy: there's a difference between "this dish is uncooked and could give me salmonella poisoning, please take it back to the kitchen" (a work that peddles racist/sexist/homophobic/otherwise harmful tripe) and "I don't like salad, take it off the menu. No, I don't care that some people are vegetarian. Why are you serving halal options? I'm not Muslim!" A work not fitting your personal tastes, opinions or viewpoints does not mean it is objectively bad and should not exist.
or more recently, former ArenaNet writer Jessica Price accusing a user who wished to engage in actual polite discussion of telling her how to do her job (she was rightfully fired).
Oh Jesus Mother of God, this shit.
a) The guy was not "engaging in discussion", okay? He wasn't asking a question, he wasn't looking for further insight or her opinion. He was telling her she was wrong. Flat out telling her, the expert in her field, she was wrong. The fact that he wrapped it up in a cheerful little ribbon and bow of "have a nice day!" doesn't make it less condescending.
b) The whole exchange should have merited, at the very most, a talking-to by her superiors. Seriously, in the annals of bad PR--if this even counts as that--that was barely even a blip on the radar.
c) Notice how another writer, a guy, stepped in to defend Price, but all the backlash and whinging is focusing on her? Wonder why that is.
Creators don't "owe" fans anything. They make works, you like them or you don't, you spend money on them or you don't, but acting like you're entitled to the art you like--and only the art you like--is frankly disturbing.
no subject
Date: 2018-07-20 09:20 pm (UTC)And Jessica Price.. Well thats Complicated.. I agree she shouldn't have been fired, that was way overboard.. Even if the guy was a Partner with ArenaNet it was still overkill, heck i dont care who it was it was still overkill.. On the Flip side, I also do think she was Toxic in that interaction, After the First Apology from Deroir it should have ended, Instead she continue to belittle and Insult him.
(frozen) no subject
Date: 2018-07-20 10:45 pm (UTC)The point of my analogy is that customers do not deserve to be mistreated for criticizing a product. "Make your own" is not an appropriate response to criticism, whether it's food, fashion or fiction. Whether the actual criticisms are justified or not is another discussion entirely and must be judged on a case-by-case basis. However, people are still entitled to their opinions. You don't need to be a chef to like/dislike food, and you don't need to be a director to like/dislike a movie.
As for the Jessica Price example, I read the user's original Tweets and I see nothing condescending about them. What I see is someone who appreciated the professional insight, but had a diverging point of view and expressed it in a courteous manner. Not only was Price's response uncalled for, but she doubled down on her attitude, shaming the user publicly and talking down on those who called her out. She handled the matter poorly, blowing it out of proportion and misrepresenting the company she worked for in the process.
Peter Fries, who supported Price's behavior, was also fired. Unlike Price, however, he didn't follow up by going to various sites to push the narrative of harassment and abuse. He also apparently deleted the Tweets he made in support of Price, which is telling to me.
Finally, I couldn't disagree more with creators not owing anything. What creators do about feedback is their call, of course, and tastes are subjective. But if a creator is asking for our money to read their comic or watch their movie, then yes, we are owed a quality product. There is a reason consumer rights exist. Even non-profit works are at least implicitly asking us to give them time and attention we could be spending on something else. So if we don't like the result, we're within rights to criticize it. It's called freedom of speech. And on the case of commercial products, we can also let our wallets speak for themselves.
I never denied there are bad apples who take it too far. But that still doesn't entitle creators to lump fans who make honest, thought-out criticism with the worst of the fandom. To think otherwise is to acknowledge we deserve to be treated like garbage for even daring to have a negative opinion on something we invested in. Which is far more disturbing than anything I said.
(frozen) no subject
Date: 2018-07-21 01:06 am (UTC)First off, tone policing is pretty crappy and makes a very poor argument.
However, people are still entitled to their opinions. You don't need to be a chef to like/dislike food, and you don't need to be a director to like/dislike a movie.
People can have all the opinions they want. They can like or dislike food, fashion and fiction at their leisure. I take issue with the idea that one set of opinions is gold-plated gospel, and that everything has to be according to those opinions. Again: people disliking something does not make it objectively bad.
As for the Jessica Price example, I read the user's original Tweets and I see nothing condescending about them. What I see is someone who appreciated the professional insight, but had a diverging point of view and expressed it in a courteous manner.
And again, there is a difference between "What about...?" or "Do you guys do...?" and "You're wrong, actually, the right answer is..." Price wasn't looking for advice or an argument. People--especially people who've been working a decade in their field--don't need to be told what to do, and women get this all the time because ha ha, those silly little female brains.
But if a creator is asking for our money to read their comic or watch their movie, then yes, we are owed a quality product.
Define 'quality product'. I refer you back to the analogy of "you shouldn't serve undercooked fish because it will give people food poisoning" versus "you shouldn't serve salad because I don't like salad".
So if we don't like the result, we're within rights to criticize it. It's called freedom of speech. And on the case of commercial products, we can also let our wallets speak for themselves.
This isn't about criticizing or not buying things, criticizing and not buying things is fine, this is about mobs who harass people and drive them off social media and send death threats and get them fired. That's the toxic element of entitlement.
(frozen) no subject
Date: 2018-07-21 02:56 am (UTC)That's not an argument; "treat others how you want to be treated" is basic manners. Asking for reciprocity is neither "tone policing" nor "crappy" and I don't appreciate your confrontational tone.
People can have all the opinions they want. They can like or dislike food, fashion and fiction at their leisure. I take issue with the idea that one set of opinions is gold-plated gospel, and that everything has to be according to those opinions. Again: you disliking something does not make it objectively bad.
Except I never brought up such an idea. I just made an effort to clarify my argument and you insist on distorting it. The previous post took me about one hour and a half to write and I won't repeat myself. If you want to argue my points, then address my points.
And again, there is a difference between "What about...?" or "Do you guys do...?" and "You're wrong, actually, the right answer is..." Price wasn't looking for advice or an argument. People--especially people who've been working a decade in their field--don't need to be told what to do, and women get this all the time because ha ha, those silly little female brains.
If that's how you choose to interpret it, that's your prerogative. The Tweets are still up at the time of this post, so anyone can follow my previous links and draw their own conclusions. Peter Fries made the same comment you just did and we know what came of it. As I see it, this is clearly inappropriate action from a creator and ArenaNet reached the same conclusion, as Mike O'Brien later explained.
Define 'quality product'. After that, once again, I refer to the analogy of "you shouldn't serve undercooked fish because it will give people food poisoning" versus "you shouldn't serve salad because I don't like salad".
For this discussion, I define "quality product" as something worth our time and money. But again, you're raising an entirely different issue. My argument is based on the right to criticize, not "good criticism" vs. "bad criticism".
This isn't about criticizing or not buying things, for Christ's sake, criticizing and not buying things is fine, this is about mobs who harass people and drive them off social media and send death threats and get them fired. That's the toxic element of entitlement.
I know what this topic is about. I read the original post and the CNN article. As I said initially, there are two sides to every story: there are toxic fans, and there are toxic creators who downplay feedback they're unhappy with, generalizing critical fans and treating them with contempt. Therefore, the act of criticizing is relevant to this discussion. I never condoned harassment, death threats and general hostility toward creators. But the opposite is also worth bringing attention to, since it doesn't help the issue.
(frozen) no subject
Date: 2018-07-21 08:26 am (UTC)If this is because I said "Jesus Mother of God, this shit", it's because "this shit" is frustrating. A man was mildly rude to a dev on her personal account, got a mild smackdown in response, and played the victim to the extent that two people got fired from their jobs. Because they didn't like her tone. Because she wasn't nice about someone being rude to her. Setting aside the misogyny, do you think any dev is going to be willing to talk openly or honestly to their fanbase now that they've seen that "if we don't like you, we can get you fired"? It's tiresome and infuriating.
Otherwise, I mean, we're in disagreement and I'm not apologizing for that. There hasn't been any name-calling or personal attacks, but if the mod team feels differently that's 100% fine.
Except I never brought up such an idea. I just made an effort to clarify my argument and you insist on distorting it. The previous post took me about one hour and a half to write and I won't repeat myself. If you want to argue my points, then address my points.
I feel like you keep missing my points, though. Your point seems to be that "I deserve to have my media the way I want it" and I'm suggesting there's a difference between "this is harmful to me and others" and "I don't personally like this". Because if it's the latter, maybe it's just not for you, and you can move on and find stuff that is for you and--going back to the original point--create fanworks. (I'm not a fan of the Call of Duty games, but I'm not going to stomp around going "oh my God, how dare they not be more like a Bioware RPG". I just... don't play the Call of Duty games.)
As I see it, this is clearly inappropriate action from a creator and ArenaNet reached the same conclusion, as Mike O'Brien later explained.
If we're at the point where getting that someone fired is an appropriate response to someone not being amused by rudeness, on a personal account, I'm pretty sure the dialogue's over. That's it. It's done. Every women in the gaming industry is going to feel a little unsafer, and every dev is going to default to the canned response for fear of touching off a shitstorm.
My argument is based on the right to criticize, not "good criticism" vs. "bad criticism". [...] As I said initially, there are two sides to every story: there are toxic fans, and there are toxic creators who downplay feedback they're unhappy with, generalizing critical fans and treating them with contempt.
Are there creators who dismiss any kind of criticism? Sure. Are all criticisms valid? No, not really. That's what I mean about opinions not being gold-plated gospel. Does 'toxic creators' mean "they're expressing horrible language and attitudes and making people feel unsafe or hurt", or "they're not doing it the way I want it"? Cf. food poisoning vs. salad.
(frozen) no subject
Date: 2018-07-21 10:42 pm (UTC)Otherwise, I mean, we're in disagreement and I'm not apologizing for that. There hasn't been any name-calling or personal attacks, but if the mod team feels differently that's 100% fine.
If the example I used is personally frustrating to you, I can't help it. And I'm neither asking nor expecting apologies for disagreeing with me. But I do ask to keep it level-headed (which you seem to have done this time, so thank you). I'm not out to push buttons and I'm not interested in heated arguments.
You have your perspective on the Jessica Price situation, you made that clear. I still have a different view of it, which I elaborated on and posted sources to back it up. From where I stand, she is no victim but a clear example of what creators should not do. There is nothing I can add without repeating what I've said previously, and I don't think going in circles will get us anywhere. So I'll move to the next point:
I feel like you keep missing my points, though. Your point seems to be that "I deserve to have my media the way I want it" and I'm suggesting there's a difference between "this is harmful to me and others" and "I don't personally like this". Because if it's the latter, maybe it's just not for you, and you can move on and find stuff that is for you and--going back to the original point--create fanworks. (I'm not a fan of the Call of Duty games, but I'm not going to stomp around going "oh my God, how dare they not be more like a Bioware RPG". I just... don't play the Call of Duty games.)
That's not what I meant at all, and I'm still unsure how you got that idea. I'm also not sure of how many other ways I can explain my stance. But since you keep pushing this train of thought, I'll tackle it head-on this time.
While I do understand what you're getting at, your logic seems pretty contradictory. On one hand, you say you take issue with the idea of holding "one set of opinions on a gold-plated gospel". That "disliking something doesn't make it objectively bad." And that's fair enough.
On the other, however, you also say: "Are all criticisms valid? No, not really," and you call back to your own food analogy to emphasize this statement. Isn't this exactly what you claim to have a problem with, setting a standard on "valid" criticism and dismissing any "set of opinions" that doesn't fit your definition?
Yes, there is a subjective element to criticism. But what constitutes as "valid" criticism is also subjective. What you deem valid in one instance may not be valid in another, and different people have different ideas of what's valid and what isn't. Again, it's up to each person to judge this on a case-by-case basis.
What isn't subjective, though, is that nobody likes disrespect. Do unhappy customers deserve to be treated differently based on their reasons? Should waiters boot customers out if they voice criticism not perceived as "valid"? No, that's not freedom of speech. If I think a character is poorly written in a story, I shouldn't be called a misogynist because the character happens to be female, especially by the author. And I shouldn't be told to make my own version as if my personal skills (or lack thereof) determine my right to my opinion. Am I stooping to insults and offensive comments to make my case? If yes, call me out, report me, do what's needed to stop it. If not, you may think what you will of my impressions, but at least respect my right to express them.
And that's why I consider types of criticism irrelevant to my argument. It's just not what I'm talking about. Whether creators agree, disagree or even care about criticism doesn't change the right to criticize in the first place, and doesn't entitle them to mistreat the audience investing in their work. If toxic portions of fandom are indeed gaining exposure, it doesn't help matters when creators go out of their way to patronize fans directly or through labels and generalizations. Toxicity fuels toxicity and it should be discouraged before it becomes widespread on both sides.
(frozen) no subject
Date: 2018-07-25 02:54 am (UTC)That's very convenient. Perhaps Deroir should have thought of that before he went shooting his mouth off to make himself look good in front of a crowd and got spanked for it.
(frozen) no subject
Date: 2018-07-25 03:55 am (UTC)(frozen) no subject
Date: 2018-07-25 04:05 am (UTC)(frozen) no subject
Date: 2018-07-25 04:10 am (UTC)(frozen) no subject
Date: 2018-07-25 04:15 am (UTC)The mass outrage, the calls for her firing, did you at any point notice how few of those people had anything to do with ArenaNet or Guild Wars before? How all of a sudden they were so mad about someone being called a toothless insult by a woman already known for being snide to people on the internet?
You're very helpful, loshk*.
*(You can have THAT for free!)
(frozen) Mod Note!
Date: 2018-07-25 08:09 am (UTC)(frozen) Mod Note!
Date: 2018-07-26 11:40 pm (UTC)What feels to you like the others attempting to belittle you, may be rather them express frustration with the ongoing narrative about Gamergate.
In general the sarcasm levels escalated more than was necessary on both sides, and that can be a tricky thing to pick up on in a text based discourse.
We won't take action against anyone in this case, but would remind all involved to keep discussions polite.
no subject
Date: 2018-07-20 03:19 am (UTC)