Current mood:	cranky
Entry tags:	fandom, meta

Don't tell me who I am.
I found this essay by kalpurna (which I think a lot of you will love) bizarrely alienating.

She says:

"It can be pretty damn hard to be a straight woman in fandom, according to my friends who are."

Which may or may not be true for you, I wouldn't know. I personally don't find it remotely difficult and never have, although I've seen this phenomena spoken of by a few people, who claim that a lot of girls in fandom are afraid to admit that they're straight; some even fake being bi in order to fit in.

But when I polled my flist a year ago, more than 50% of those who answered openly identify as straight. So is my flist somehow unusual or are you all just more comfortable admitting it to me and mine because *I'm* comfortably "out" as straight?

kalpurna goes on to say:

"Nobody who reads or writes slash isn't a little bit queer."

I'm not quite sure how a statement like that helps straight fen feel more comfortable in fandom. Essentially she's telling us that we don't know ourselves; that she knows us better; that there's no such thing as a heterosexual fangirl and if you think you are one, you're wrong.

I don't like being told what and who I am by other people. Especially other people who appear to only be able to see things from their own perspective. What about my perspective?

I'm straight. I write porn for women and read porn written by women and I enjoy it immensely. I have close female friends, both on and offline. We often talk about sex and porn. I've had sex with a woman. I didn't like it. I love women but they don't turn me on. I love porn. I love that my porn turns on women. I love that some of my straight male friends have read my (gay) porn and found it arousing. I'm open minded. I can't and won't claim to be queer because that would be a lie. I'm not you and you're not me.

Who are you?

(186 comments) - (Post a new comment)

hils 2007-10-15 12:53 pm UTC (link)

I have to say that as a straight woman I have never felt especially alienated in fandom. I have never done a poll but I would estimate that at least 75% of my flist are straight females. "Nobody who reads or writes slash isn't a little bit queer." Try pointing that out to straight men who watch lesbian porn. To me that's exactly the same as reading or writing slash and there's nothing queer about it. Well, apart from the characters involved ;) (Reply to this) (Thread)

mskatej 2007-10-15 01:00 pm UTC (link)

I have a number of male friends who have told me stories about how when they were younger they would get together in groups and watch porn. It seems an odd thing to do right? But not really. I think sharing porn with people of the same sex takes away the seedy element of it, in a way, and it's something that friends can bond over. And yes, they can bond over it in a platonic way. Sharing an interest in sex and porn with other people says very little about a person's sexual orientation, unless the reason your friend wants to watch porn with you is so they can get you all turned on and jump you. But that never happened to any of my male friends, and it's never happened to me. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	allzugern 2007-10-15 01:01 pm UTC (link)
	How...constricting. What facts is she basing her opinion on (I would go read the post, but have a feeling it will only piss me off - and after the deb wank, I'm just not in the mood). I've been around since 2002 and this is the first time I've ever heard such a thing. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	mskatej 2007-10-15 01:04 pm UTC (link)
	The post pissed me off a lot. , but it has a lot of comments, none negative. She may have said some good things, but I couldn't get past her tunnel visioned view of how sexuality works in fandom so I didn't enjoy any of it. (Reply to this) (Parent)

sadface 2007-10-15 01:02 pm UTC (link)

Oh hey, I hated that post but the meme had already stopped talking about it by the time I read it. :( I...think it's bizarrely worded possibly because I sexualise the concept of sexuality so for her to say that that writing porn means I'm a little bit gay because I'm doing it to get women off doesn't really work because I'm not getting off on the women getting off. Idk, I feel like it kind of trivialises for me what fandom is about and it's not a place where we can all be gay but a place where there is a kind of equality for everyone, a place that isn't really about sex and I don't think people only write porn for it's sexual value, I think it's about friendship and bonds and it's a place where it *doesn't* have to be about orentation. A place where 'normal' not doesn't exist as it were, but like...we don't need a standard? we don't all need to be one thing, we're not all a little bit this or a little bit that. We're all whatever *we* want to be. Frankly I found the whole thing to be kind of a piss take of everything I feel about fandom. And I know she says that it won't apply to everyone but really, stop making vague sweeeping statements about the 'standard' for fandom. >:( This might not really make sense because the whole thing made me kind of incoherantly angry. (Reply to this) (Thread)

mskatej 2007-10-15 01:18 pm UTC (link)

Oh, I'm so glad I'm not the only one who got angry reading it. I got to the statment about eveybody being a little bit queer and felt genuinely perturbed. Idk, I feel like it kind of trivialises for me what fandom is about and it's not a place where we can all be gay but a place where there is a kind of equality for everyone, a place that isn't really about sex and I don't think people only write porn for it's sexual value, I think it's about friendship and bonds and it's a place where it *doesn't* have to be about orentation. A place where 'normal' not doesn't exist as it were, but like...we don't need a standard? we don't all need to be one thing, we're not all a little bit this or a little bit that. We're all whatever *we* want to be. THANK YOU. That's it exactly. I was actually discussing this very subject with Dréa recently and trying to explain that my sexual orientation has nothing to do with anything I do in fandom. I wouldn't presume to know anyone's sexual orientation, just because of their hobby or because of the company they keep. It's too personal! A person's sexuality is a blank slate until they inform me otherwise. (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)

(no subject) - sadface, 2007-10-15 01:31 pm UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - mskatej, 2007-10-15 02:47 pm UTC (Expand)

maleyka 2007-10-15 01:10 pm UTC (link)

Like I said in my comment over there, I've never exactly found it hard to be straight (I think. I mean, I'm a virgin. IT MIGHT CHANGE, is what I'm saying, but right now I believe myself to be pretty damn heterosexual *g*) in fandom. I do, however, do a double-take whenever I hear something to the effect of "slash fandom is a place of straight women", because that's not been my experience at ALL. I've never done a poll or anything, but at least of the people I interact with on a regular basis, some are lesbians, most are bi, and, like, two are straight. I actually enjoy that; it's given little me exposure to issues and lifestyles I just don't encounter in my offline life, and I've never felt alienated or discriminated against or anything. What I do find off-putting is the het-hate that crops up in many a slash fandom (I'm not talking about "I prefer slash" or "It's just not my cup of tea" but actual, SERIOUS comments of the "EW, HET" variety) but those are easy enough to avoid when I stick to my own flist, and, you know, there are some asshats at every party. *g* (Reply to this) (Thread)

mskatej 2007-10-15 01:28 pm UTC (link)

I do, however, do a double-take whenever I hear something to the effect of "slash fandom is a place of straight women" That is a misnomer yes, but it's something that is said by outsiders, not by people who are actually part of slash fandom. Because there's no way you can miss how queer-friendly/queer-heavy fandom is once you're actively participating. When I first found out (in my initial discovery of fandom) that my favourite writer was a lesbian I was surprised: why would lesbians be writing about boys fucking? But after that *nothing* has surprised me. There are so many different sorts of women here and we're all welcome (as far as I'm concerned). (Reply to this) (Parent)

suzycat 2007-10-15 01:13 pm UTC (link)

Yeah, you know, I dunno. I think the "ooh we're all queer!!!" argument, while sound to a point (what *is* going on when girls write hot sex with other girls while pretending to be gay boys?), does rather dangerously push over the Actual Queers, whose lives may not be quite so full of squee and giggling on a day to day basis due to being, you know, queer. I say this because I've hovered round that argument myself. On the other hand, the queery nature of fandom actually reassured me that my periodic queer notions were nothing to be worried about. Once I'd realised that some of the girls gushing over girlcrushes were happily married-to-men women, and some of the women panting over hot boys were comfortably identified as lesbian, I started to recognise that sexuality really *is* quite fluid and that ultimately, the identification that feels most right is your real sexual identification. So, yeah. Fandom is a girly squee place, for certain, with much canoodling, much like adolescence. I think it's very queer friendly, possibly even queer-dominant; but not every fangirl could claim to be queer, really, even though she may sometimes desire in a queer sort of way. (Reply to this) (Thread)(Expand)

	mskatej 2007-10-15 01:59 pm UTC (link)
	I think the "ooh we're all queer!!!" argument, while sound to a point (what *is* going on when girls write hot sex with other girls while pretending to be gay boys?), does rather dangerously push over the Actual Queers *nods* No doubt the statement that we're "all queer" in slash fandom is going to get up the nose of the occasional militant lesbian as well. :D (Reply to this) (Parent)

(no subject) - alixtii, 2007-10-17 02:11 am UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - suzycat, 2007-10-17 02:27 am UTC (Expand)

swanswan 2007-10-15 01:17 pm UTC (link)

I really liked that post, but sent it on to a friend who had the same reaction as you (and has since, delightedly, decided to nickname me 'queerbait' - bestfriends are special) ANYWAY I think - and seriously, this is a matter of interpretation - that 'queer' is being used in a particular way there. Not to mean 'gay', not to indicate attraction to the same sex, but to talk about.. hm... a space in which the actions/intentions/feelings being expressed are outside the norms of conventional (thereby heterosexual) society. Fandom is a queer space, in lots of ways. We are chicks who write stories to get each other off and there's an element of queerness to that. So I really think it's just a differing interpretation of the word 'queer' that's causing confusion. When you say "I love porn. I love that my porn turns on women." that's what kalpurna is talking about, I think. Not who you want to sleep with. I am not being very articulate! I just know that there's a world of queer studies out there, and very little of it actually has to do with who you fuck. (Reply to this) (Thread)(Expand)

mecurtin 2007-10-15 01:34 pm UTC (link)

a space in which the actions/intentions/feelings being expressed are outside the norms of conventional (thereby heterosexual) society Bingo, exactly. "Queer Studies" isn't about who's gay, but who's over the line. "We're all queer here" doesn't mean "you're gay even if you don't think you are," it means "we're all outside the lines, we're all doing what's not sanctioned, we're all *weird*." This is why slashers often talk about being in or out of the closet about slash. That feeling you have when you go to a party with non-fans, and they ask what you're interested in these days, and you can't say -- *that*'s the closet feeling. And when you actually go ahead and say it, *that*'s the coming-out feeling, a little bit. Kate, does this make sense to you? Is this something you didn't get from kalpurna's post? (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)

(no subject) - sadface, 2007-10-15 01:38 pm UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - alixtii, 2007-10-17 02:03 am UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - mskatej, 2007-10-15 02:12 pm UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - carmarthen, 2007-10-18 12:37 am UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - mskatej, 2007-10-15 01:42 pm UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - swanswan, 2007-10-15 01:55 pm UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - mskatej, 2007-10-15 02:06 pm UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - glossing, 2007-10-15 02:16 pm UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - mskatej, 2007-10-15 02:25 pm UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - swanswan, 2007-10-15 03:11 pm UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - mskatej, 2007-10-15 03:28 pm UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - kalpurna, 2007-10-17 09:22 pm UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - mskatej, 2007-10-18 08:28 am UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - alixtii, 2007-10-17 02:07 am UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - kalpurna, 2007-10-17 09:18 pm UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - swanswan, 2007-10-17 09:26 pm UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - chicafrom3, 2007-10-17 02:16 pm UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - mskatej, 2007-10-17 02:20 pm UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - miriam_heddy, 2007-10-17 06:18 pm UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - mskatej, 2007-10-17 09:02 pm UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - miriam_heddy, 2007-10-18 02:11 am UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - glossing, 2007-10-15 02:15 pm UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - swanswan, 2007-10-15 03:02 pm UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - alixtii, 2007-10-17 02:09 am UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - heyiya, 2007-10-17 06:40 am UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - mawaridi, 2007-10-17 06:07 am UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - mskatej, 2007-10-17 09:21 am UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - mawaridi, 2007-10-17 09:38 am UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - mskatej, 2007-10-17 10:05 am UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - cryptoxin, 2007-10-17 04:00 pm UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - mskatej, 2007-10-17 04:03 pm UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - skuf, 2007-10-15 05:06 pm UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - mawaridi, 2007-10-17 05:56 am UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - mskatej, 2007-10-17 09:27 am UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - mawaridi, 2007-10-17 09:50 am UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - mskatej, 2007-10-17 09:59 am UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - mawaridi, 2007-10-17 10:03 am UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - mskatej, 2007-10-17 10:17 am UTC (Expand)

morganichele 2007-10-15 01:53 pm UTC (link)

Hmm. I think it's kind of ridiculous to say that "Nobody who reads or writes slash isn't a little bit queer." What? So...I guess Stephen King is a 'little bit of a mass murderer'? I suppose someone better inform the authorities. I've been attracted to men and women for as long as I can remember. I've had relationships with both, and ended up married to a man. *shrugs* Who cares? I don't think writing has anything to do with who you like to have sex with. I think it has to do with someone's imagination and abilitiy to empathize with humanity in general. I love to read slash, and personally, I'll continue to read it whether it's written by gay women, straight women, gay men, straight men, or a one-legged pirate cat named 'Slappy' (Slappy's probably bi, btw). The last time I checked, when people put up their description for their stories, there is a space for the title, the author's name, maybe a summary and a word count...there is NO space for sexual orientation of author. Why? Because it's irrelevant. It has jack to do with the story. Oy. (Reply to this) (Thread)(Expand)

mskatej 2007-10-15 02:23 pm UTC (link)

I suspect Kalpurna is projecting just a little bit: if it's true for her it must be true for us all. But yes, I agree that the sexual orientation of an author and her readers is not relevant and has nothing to do with how much I'm going to enjoy (reading or writing) a story. Why she assumes that there is a sexual relationship between writers and their readers simply because the story is erotic, is beyond me. (Reply to this) (Parent)

(no subject) - alixtii, 2007-10-17 02:00 am UTC (Expand)

duskwillow 2007-10-15 02:04 pm UTC (link)

That's silly, I have both straight gals and straight guys on my f-list who enjoy slash. It doesn't even have to be written, they also ship slash pairings on tv shows/movies. It's about chemistry, and well written characters (tv/fic). They are just open minded and don't give a damn about what someone has, or doesn't have, in their pants when it comes to characters. *shrug* And just because I'm bi doesn't mean I enjoy slash any more than any of them. Our reactions/comments are usually pretty much the same most of the time. I don't get the labelling there. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	mskatej 2007-10-15 02:27 pm UTC (link)
	I'm quite happy to label *myself*, but I don't want other people (particularly not strangers) to do it for me. How can they possibly know what's going on in my head and body, unless I tell them? (Reply to this) (Parent)

	glossing 2007-10-15 02:07 pm UTC (link)
	Why is so much fannish meta so damn self-congratulatory? Which is to say: thanks for this post, which is thoughtful instead. *g* (Reply to this) (Thread)

	mskatej 2007-10-15 02:24 pm UTC (link)
	*bows gracefully* :D (Reply to this) (Parent)

	tommy_chivs 2007-10-15 02:14 pm UTC (link)
	I'm an extreme heterosexual. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	mskatej 2007-10-15 02:25 pm UTC (link)
	You just made me choke on my laughter. (Reply to this) (Parent)

annalazarus 2007-10-15 02:21 pm UTC (link)

You know, this is going to sound like Steven Colbert saying he can't tell if people are black because he doesn't see color, but I honestly don't keep track of who on my flist is gay/straight/bi. I figure what we have in common is that we all like *fictional* smut, and I don't particularly care about who they're going off and creating *real* smut with. I'm such a hippie. I don't like labels, man... (Reply to this) (Thread)

mskatej 2007-10-15 02:36 pm UTC (link)

I honestly don't keep track of who on my flist is gay/straight/bi. Me either. Unless they go on about it a lot it's not the kind of thing I'm going to remember or give a shit about. My flist's sex lives are of very little interest to me quite frankly. Which is another reason I find her assertion that we all have these close homosocial relationships with tons of women in fandom a bit preposterous. *She* might, but I certainly don't. The friendships I have in fandom are pretty much the same as the friendships I have in RL, except that I don't get to see them in person very often and we talk about television a lot more than is normal. (Reply to this) (Parent)

butterfly 2007-10-15 03:07 pm UTC (link)

"Nobody who reads or writes slash isn't a little bit queer." *blinks* That statement does seem a bit presumptuous. Considering the many, many reasons that people have for writing slash, it's a bit of an odd one (one of the reasons I've seen people give is because they're straight and not interested in reading or writing about women in sex scenes -- they like reading about two men in part because then they can be attracted to both partners). (Reply to this) (Thread)

	mskatej 2007-10-15 03:31 pm UTC (link)
	Indeed. There's an implicit lack of acknowledgement that there are myriad reasons for doing what we do. I'm quite sure the OP doesn't mean it in quite so narrow a way, but her wording is seriously problematic. (Reply to this) (Parent)

mayatawi 2007-10-15 03:16 pm UTC (link)

I haven't read the post and I'm totally not in a headspace to do so right now, so take that as a caveat. But at a glance, in a devil's-advocate sort of way: "Nobody who reads or writes slash isn't a little bit queer." I don't know what kalpurna meant by this, but I think it depends a lot on your definition of queer. There's the traditional in-a-box definition of gay; there's the idea of just being a little bit gay; and then there's the definition I like, because then I can call myself queer without having to give firm answers about my sexuality that I'm not sure of myself yet, which means "outside of mainstream sexual behavior." So writing slash is "queer" because it's not generally acceptable/acknowledged behavior for women. In a sense, also, you're providing other women sexual pleasure, but that might be stretching cause/effect a bit. As I said, just an idea. (And I say I'm queer because I don't think I'm entirely straight, but I haven't had, let's say, a large enough sample group to properly test that theory. So I'm "queer" because I'm open to the idea, and I'm not comfortable calling myself gay or straight or bi, because I just don't know. It's kind of a catch-all in my mind.) p.s. Icon because I like it, not because the keywords are in any way directed at you personally. :) (Reply to this) (Thread)

mskatej 2007-10-15 03:44 pm UTC (link)

ILU. I think it depends a lot on your definition of queer. Right. I'm assuming she means it in a queer=gay way, because of other things she says in the essay, but it's possible I'm wrong. And I say I'm queer because I don't think I'm entirely straight, but I haven't had, let's say, a large enough sample group to properly test that theory. So I'm "queer" because I'm open to the idea, and I'm not comfortable calling myself gay or straight or bi, because I just don't know. It's kind of a catch-all in my mind. I think one of my issues with her labelling all of us (and therefore me) is that I've been through a lot in my life, I've learned a lot about myself, and I've given my sexuality a lot of thought. I've reached conclusions about myself and they *mean* something to me. When I say "I'm straight" it's not something I say thoughtlessly or without knowledge of what the label means or without a long history of experimentation behind me. It's a part of who I am. (Which is something you'll often hear gay or bi people say, so why should it not also be true for straight people?) (Reply to this) (Parent)

tl;dr pt 1 svilleficrecs 2007-10-15 03:57 pm UTC (link)

I think that the experience of writing is different for different people, regardless of orientation, and for me, at least, when I'm writing... I'm not really writing *for* other people. I mean, people (and in this case women) are the end users, but when I'm creating the story, it's pretty much exclusively a relationship between me and the text. The act of creating a story (smutty or not) is (for me) a masturbatory experience rather than a .... between two people experience. I may have betas, may post drafts to get a feel, but when I'm writing, it's me and the story. When I release it into the wild, the story then has a relationship with the readers (most of whom are women, straight or queer) but at that point, I've cut the apron strings and it has its own independent relationship with the readers. The story is what turns them on, not me. And this isn't (as I've seen theorized on other posts about why TMI feedback (like, oh, I came so hard to this story, I broke my vibrator) bothers some people) that I've got queerophobia or issues with women expressing their sexuality. Most of what I write is very explicit, intended to be arousing and it only makes sense (if I do it right, and I spend a lot of hours and effort trying to do it right) that it turns someone on to the point of wanting to masturbate. I'm fine that my baby does that. I'm fine that my baby is a whore like that. And I made her the best whore possible. But. From the creator end, FOR ME, writing hawt, hawt smut, the process of it, the headspace I have to get into to really do it well (and sometimes, I think I really do) has fuck all to do with the reader *as a specific person with an orientation*. When I'm editing and polishing and taking a story from raw material to sharpened sword of smut, it's me and the story. Of course I'm trying to create a story that evokes feelings in the reader, but ideally, for me, you shouldn't think of me-the-writer when you're experiencing the story. Ideally, for me, I don't matter in this equation. You (the reader) should have an intimate relationship with the story the same way I did while creating it, but you and I? Reader and Author? Our relationship shouldn't matter. I want you to enjoy and get off to my story (if that's your thing, or you can just have a tingly feeling in your tummy) and I get pleasure from knowing my story did that to you, but it's not because I have any desire to do that to you, personally. (Male or female, and I do have some male fans on my list, and I (who in my personal, sexual life, identify as firmly heterosexual) have no more desire be told I made their dick hard than I want to hear that I made aomeone's pussy wet. I mean, I'll take it as a compliment, but for me (in my experience everyone varies bla bla bla) the fact that I am a woman and my stories turn women on doesn't necessarily make me queer (and isn't necessarily a queer interaction) any more than, say, if my child (who I raised to be a smart, loving individual) goes out and picks up chicks and gets them off. Yes, there are a lot of places where the story-as-child analogy breaks down, but in this context, for me, it works. And I also get that the end-user experience is different (having been a long time end-user of female written smut.) I get that when reading a story, it can be easy to feel like the author is speaking directly to me, the reader. The author turned me on. And when the author does their job right, they create that illusion that they (through the characters) are speaking directly to me. (continued) (Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: tl;dr pt 2 svilleficrecs 2007-10-15 03:57 pm UTC (link)

But having been on the author side many, many times over the last 10 years, and having thought about this long before I stumbled across the meta, I can tell you that when I write smut, *I* am not trying to arouse *you*. If I were writing you in particular a personal letter, if I were creating porn intended to turn your specific crank, then yes, I think there's a potentially queer interaction in play there. But when I write smut, when I get that initial idea that turns me on (sexually, narratively, or otherwise) and I spend the days, weeks or months letting the story flow through me over and over until I've made it the best story it can be, the truth is, I don't really think about the reader much. I think about "reader response". I think about how can I make this or that clear or more tense, or a better payoff for the amorphous, genderless, faceless aggregate of readerdom. But I don't think about *you* or your pussy. I am not afraid of pussies or turned off by them. I like mine. I have, in fact, sampled the pussies of others and my reaction was a resounding "meh". I'm a fan of dick *when we are talking about my own personal sexual interaction.* But for me, writing sexually explicit stories aren't sexual interaction with anybody but myself and my own imagination. Maybe I'm not the norm, and maybe if I were more involved in "the fannish community" my experience would be different. But in the end, when I, a girl, write smut for other girls, it's not a performative act. It's not an interactive act. It's a creative act. And for my creation to fulfill its purpose it needs to find an audience and interact with that audience. But I don't get off on getting you off. I get off on making a thing that, hopefully, even if my name was stripped off of it, would be capable of getting you off. Which is a subtle distinction, I know. And I'm sure some people would argue that I'm kidding myself, but this is my experience. Call it a cop out if you want, but it's not me getting you off, it's my story. And while you and I have genders, my story doesn't. Therefore, for me, writing a story that goes on to get other women off isn't a queer experience. (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)

Re: tl;dr pt 2 - svilleficrecs, 2007-10-15 04:09 pm UTC (Expand)

Re: tl;dr pt 2 - mskatej, 2007-10-15 05:36 pm UTC (Expand)

Re: tl;dr pt 2 - mskatej, 2007-10-15 04:10 pm UTC (Expand)

Re: tl;dr pt 2 - svilleficrecs, 2007-10-15 04:11 pm UTC (Expand)

skuf 2007-10-15 04:15 pm UTC (link)

It can be pretty damn hard to be a straight woman in fandom, according to my friends who are." It's not my impression the straight females on my f-list are having troubles being straight in fandom, but otherwise, yes, the essay rang very true to me. (When I polled my f-list, about 1/3 identified as straight females, btw.) Nobody who reads or writes slash isn't a little bit queer. Maybe I misunderstood her, or maybe you did - I did not take that to mean sexually queer, but more about a mindset what is different from "normal". (Reply to this) (Thread)

	mskatej 2007-10-15 05:10 pm UTC (link)
	It's possible I misunderstood her yes, but I explain why I came to the conclusions I did in answer to a number of comments up-thread. (Reply to this) (Parent)

juno 2007-10-15 04:36 pm UTC (link)

What's funny to me is that she says that it's hard to be a straight woman in fandom and then points out all the things that she loves about it. Maybe that makes her uncomfortable because she is creating fic to get other women off or talking about TMI stuff and feels that makes her queer and therefore not straight (?) She does not seem to be pulling out the oppression card which would be untrue and unfair. I do think it she is worried too much about labels. (Reply to this) (Thread)(Expand)

	mskatej 2007-10-15 05:13 pm UTC (link)
	There's an element of 'Don't worry if you're straight and feeling left out because you're not REALLY straight. We're ALL queer in fandom!' about the essay. I do think she is trying to make hetero fangirls feels less like outsiders (because she seems to assume that most of us do), but it actually had the opposite effect on me. (Reply to this) (Parent)

(no subject) - kalpurna, 2007-10-17 09:25 pm UTC (Expand)

	sori1773 2007-10-15 05:13 pm UTC (link)
	GAH. That post irritated me beyond belief. I found it to be presumptuous and judgmental. But, yeah. Whatever works in her world. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	mskatej 2007-10-15 05:14 pm UTC (link)
	I feel very comforted that others reacted the same way I did. *pleased* (Reply to this) (Parent)

	azewewish 2007-10-15 06:30 pm UTC (link)
	*blinks* Huh, nice to know that I'm queer because I like to write about hot boys making out & having sex with each other. I had no idea that was a requirement. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	mskatej 2007-10-15 07:00 pm UTC (link)
	And apparently a lot of people seem to think so! *hands* (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)

(no subject) - azewewish, 2007-10-15 07:32 pm UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - mskatej, 2007-10-15 09:27 pm UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - lavendertook, 2007-10-17 05:50 pm UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - azewewish, 2007-10-17 05:59 pm UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - lavendertook, 2007-10-17 06:04 pm UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - azewewish, 2007-10-17 06:11 pm UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - lavendertook, 2007-10-17 06:36 pm UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - idiosyncratic, 2007-10-17 06:44 pm UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - azewewish, 2007-10-17 06:52 pm UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - mskatej, 2007-10-17 08:41 pm UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - azewewish, 2007-10-17 08:55 pm UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - mskatej, 2007-10-17 09:05 pm UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - azewewish, 2007-10-18 12:03 am UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - glendaglamazon, 2007-10-17 06:37 pm UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - lavendertook, 2007-10-17 06:43 pm UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - sweill, 2007-10-17 07:20 pm UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - sparkymonster, 2007-10-18 01:36 am UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - lavendertook, 2007-10-18 03:06 am UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - sparkymonster, 2007-10-18 03:26 am UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - mskatej, 2007-10-18 08:30 am UTC (Expand)

frelling_tralk 2007-10-15 07:28 pm UTC (link)

A lot of men enjoy watching porn with lesbians, so it doesn't surprise me that a lot of women might enjoy reading erotic fic with men, and I don't think it makes the women in question automtically a little bit queer, however people want to use the term. That's assuming that only a select group of women might find men being together a turn-on, even though plenty of men openly talk of being turned on to watch lesbians together, so the reverse shouldn't be seen as being any more queer. Slash has become a lot more accepted by the mainstream now, I mean in the Buffy finale Buffy was commenting on liking the idea of getting Spike and Angel all oiled up for her. A lot of women probably secretly enjoy the thought of two hot naked men getting all sweaty together, even if some of us don't like to talk about it openly. (Reply to this) (Thread)(Expand)

	mskatej 2007-10-16 08:23 am UTC (link)
	so the reverse shouldn't be seen as being any more queer. True. Although the fact that we're writing erotica for other women is something that a number of fen seem to interpret as being a bit queer. As in, the authors (who are women) are getting their readers (who are also women) off. svilleficrecs explains what I think about THAT above. *g* (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)

(no subject) - frelling_tralk, 2007-10-16 10:42 am UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - mskatej, 2007-10-16 10:50 am UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - mawaridi, 2007-10-17 09:43 am UTC (Expand)

	tasabian 2007-10-15 11:03 pm UTC (link)
	Hmmmm, I would guess that the slash loving straight girls are very queer-friendly but that's not at all the same thing as being queer. I certainly don't feel uncomfortable as a straight chick in fandom, nor have I ever felt pressured to cough up any bi-experiences. In other news, so glad you're submitting a story to PL Nunn's contest! Can't wait to read. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	mskatej 2007-10-16 08:24 am UTC (link)
	I would guess that the slash loving straight girls are very queer-friendly but that's not at all the same thing as being queer. *nodding* Absolutely. In other news, so glad you're submitting a story to PL Nunn's contest! Yes! Tis very exciting. (Reply to this) (Parent)

alixtii 2007-10-17 01:49 am UTC (link)

Well, I'd probably also argue that nobody who reads or write "slash" (femslash in my case, and I think the claim holds true for het and some gen as well) isn't a little bit female. And I'm male. But the discoursely is female, the community is of, by, and for women, and that affects one's subject-position within it, IMHO. Queerness isn't constructed in the same way, but I don't think being straight (which I am, too), even 100% straight by a Kinsey perspective (which I'd argue would be overly reductive exactly because it couldn't capture the type of queerness kalpurna is talking about) necessarily invalidates what kalpurna is claiming. (Reply to this) (Thread)

mskatej 2007-10-17 08:47 am UTC (link)

I think Kalpurna's post rings true for a significant number of female fans, particularly female fans who are bicurious or who identify as bisexual or gay. Particuarly fans who have formed close friendships with other women in fandom that are markedly different (i.e. more sexual) from the female friendships they have offline. My issue with the post (other than her irritating claim that fangirls are somehow more special and awesome than everyone else. We're dorks who love porn. Big fucking deal.) is that it's not relatable for everyone in fandom like she seems to think, and she rejects the notion that fangirls like me even exist. I don't have a sexual relationship with any of my fandom friends, and I'm not any closer to them than I am with my offline friends. If that's true for me then it's likely true for other fangirls. It's her incorrect assumption that we're all the same that bothers me most. (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)

(no subject) - alixtii, 2007-10-17 10:14 am UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - mskatej, 2007-10-17 10:30 am UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - alchemia, 2007-10-17 03:46 pm UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - mskatej, 2007-10-17 03:54 pm UTC (Expand)

	severuslovesme 2007-10-17 06:05 am UTC (link)
	(here via metafandom) I found her post incredibly alienating, and you've concisely and eloquently described why. Thank you for posting this! (Reply to this) (Thread)

	mskatej 2007-10-17 08:49 am UTC (link)
	My pleasure! The post made me feel suddenly like I wasn't a Real Fangirl simply because I don't consider myself "a little bit queer". I'm glad others felt similarly about it. :) (Reply to this) (Parent)

heyiya 2007-10-17 06:50 am UTC (link)

Here from metafandom; I didn't comment on kalpurna's essay, but the queerness (or not) of slash is something I think about a lot. I do identify as queer, in several senses, but I don't see my enjoyment of slash as something that defines my sexuality (though it certainly has something to do with my sexuality, I would say). I found that remark a little... problematic, too. Generally in my experience of queer culture, it's extremely offensive to define someone else's identity or sexuality for them. Slash fandom is either the straightest queer space or the queerest straight space I occupy on a regular basis; and yet there is *something* queer about it to my eyes. I wonder what difference would it make if the remark were "nobody who reads or writes slash isn't doing something a little bit queer"? I find that statement to be intuitively true, based on a broader definition of queer than 'same-sex attracted'; I wonder if anyone offended by the original would find that more amenable. (Reply to this) (Thread)(Expand)

mskatej 2007-10-17 08:54 am UTC (link)

Generally in my experience of queer culture, it's extremely offensive to define someone else's identity or sexuality for them. Yes. I think that's because it *is* an offensive thing to do. I wonder what difference would it make if the remark were "nobody who reads or writes slash isn't doing something a little bit queer"? See, now *that* works. And *that* I agree with. It's funny how those couple of extra words completely change the meaning of the sentence. (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)

(no subject) - heyiya, 2007-10-17 03:09 pm UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - mskatej, 2007-10-17 03:11 pm UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - glossing, 2007-10-17 01:21 pm UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - trobadora, 2007-10-17 03:23 pm UTC (Expand)

This is the one that got me (edited to correct a line) dunmurderin 2007-10-17 06:56 am UTC (link)

Here from metafandom: Having read kalpurna's essay, this was the bit that got me: Few things drive me as crazy as the assertion that "girls are vicious to each other." Girls are backstabbing, right? Especially in middle school, it's the fundamental nature of girls to form cliques, to fight and compete over boys, to be jealous and catty. That's the way it is. Bullshit. On the one hand, I'm glad kaluprna's experiences with other women have been so positive; on the other hand, I feel like I need to call bullshit on her calling bullshit. Because to be blunt, I have no trouble believing the assertion that girls are vicious to each other and I don't think I'd have to search far among other women -- inside and outside of fandom -- who would also agree with the idea that women are oftentimes our own worst enemies. Yeah, when I was a kid there were boys who picked on me, but by and large it's the other girls I remember the most as being meaner and more hurtful. Up until fairly recently, I had more male friends because I had an easier time getting along with boys/men than I did other women. And I learned early that in a lot of situations, if you're not like other girls, you will find yourself on the outside looking in with a quickness. It's no different in fandom. Girls (and women) are vicious to each other -- GAFF, Fandom_wank and fanficrants, though to be honest I think all of those communities provide valuable sounding off spaces for fandom as a whole. Girls are backstabbing? The MsScribe fiasco, anyone? Or Victoria Bitters? It's pretty backstabbing to cheat people out of several thousand dollars, IMO. Girls form cliques? Shipper wars. Slash vs. het vs. gen. Girls fight and compete over boys? Hell, in fandom they fight and compete over imaginary boys! How many wives does Snape have now? What's worse in fandom is that a lot of times the "girls" are adult women in their 20s and 30s, who should probably know better. (Reply to this) (Thread)(Expand)

	Re: This is the one that got me (edited to correct a line) wemblee 2007-10-17 09:00 am UTC (link)
	There are things I agree with in kalpurna's essay, but I've gotta give a big ol' WORD to your last paragraph, there. (Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: This is the one that got me (edited to correct a line) - mskatej, 2007-10-17 09:04 am UTC (Expand)

Re: This is the one that got me (edited to correct a line) - zaneetas, 2007-10-17 05:13 pm UTC (Expand)

Re: This is the one that got me (edited to correct a line) - mskatej, 2007-10-18 08:39 am UTC (Expand)

airinshaw 2007-10-17 09:33 am UTC (link)

I can see that there's a lof of discussion here about what kalpurna meant when she said "queer" but has anyone actually asked her? I personally took it as queer meaning "Originally a synonym for "odd" or "unusual," but I can see where confusion might have arrisen due to being co-opted as synonym for gay. I assumed that was how it read but that could be because in and around my flist lately there has been a lot of talk about "queer" sexuality vs "gay/bi/trans" sexuality (and the difference between the two meanings). As Kalpurna and I have a certain amount of flist in common, she probably read the same posts and therefore it's possible that she just used "queer" in that sense without defining it. And from looking through the comments here I can see that a number of people here (and therefore probably more who didn't comment) who read it as a blanket statement defining all slash readers/writers as gay. Meaning of course that again the definition of the terminology can vary hugely across fandom. (Something we talked about at connotations just this weekend.) Just wondering if it might not have been worth mentioning issues with the discussion in the comments to the post and therefore allowing kalpurna to address them directly? I think that this is maybe just a case of poorly defining intent in a statement rather than painting all of slash fen with the same "queer" brush. But hopefully kalpurna will see this on metafandom too and let you know herself. :D (Reply to this) (Thread)

mskatej 2007-10-17 09:47 am UTC (link)

I truly don't know how anyone could read that essay and think she meant queer=odd, because she talks at length about it in terms of sexuality and sexual orientation: It has always confused me that the standard goggle-eyed magazine description of slashers is "straight women writing about gay men," for two reasons - first of all, isn't it a lot weirder to write about gay men if you're a lesbian? And secondly, it's just not true. There are some straight women on my friendslist, some lesbians, one gay man, and quite a lot of bisexuals or otherwise queer individuals. It can be pretty damn hard to be a straight woman in fandom, according to my friends who are. I even think it's fair to make the argument that no matter how straight you may be – no matter how little interest you have in having sex with or dating a woman – if you are participating in slash fandom, you are, on some level, queer. You are participating in an erotic activity with other women. You are interested in, almost obsessed with, queerness and queer themes. Nobody who reads or writes slash isn't a little bit queer. How can you read that section, for instance, and claim that she's talking about queerness simply in terms of "thinking outside the box" or "being a bit unusual"? Honestly, if Kalpurna commented on my post and claimed that I misunderstood her use of the term, I would be deeply unimpressed with her. *g* (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)

(no subject) - airinshaw, 2007-10-17 10:50 am UTC (Expand)

(no subject) - mskatej, 2007-10-17 11:05 am UTC (Expand)

---

(186 comments) - (Post a new comment)