Fandom and Viewer Issues: "Fan" Is Short for "Fanatic"

[Camera One]

So now they'll be discussing in the Writers' Room how to build an episode culminating in The Hug.  Grrrrrrrreat.

[Faemonic]

since there doesn't seem to be anything on the show itself that indicates any other orientation or any romantic interest between Emma and Regina I can't imagine that being the line-in-the-sand relationship that serves as a sign that the show isn't interested in representation at all.

 

Which brings me back to the point of wondering why the writers and others involved with the show even bother trying to placate this faction when there's no way they have any intent of going there.

In my opinion, they're waffling on it, and, yes, that results in queerbaiting. I don't get a sense of creative integrity from the OUaT showrunners, actually, I think they seem to just really need us to like them for some reason that has nothing to do with keeping the show's demand up to industry standards? Whether the ratings suffer or not doesn't seem to have much to do with the attitude they take towards the fandom, as creators, if it is the attitude that I'm reading correctly.

 

And, to keep on topic, that feeds into how the fandom and viewers react. I guess not all creators can have the lateral thinking brilliance of Whedon (*cough* Tara! Ends the Shipper Wars!) Or like Hideaki Anno who can just be the most gigantic douche to "fans" who try to take him to task for the way he executed his artistic vision already compromised by industry resources (some of those fans vandalized the studio and sent angry letters before Twitter made it easy. As in, snail mail, handwritten, home address, purely vitriolic content.)

 

OUaT is my only fandom right now, but I'm so glad that I learned from fandoms past and other not to expect coddling because frankly I wouldn't have learned that from creator-audience interactions here.

Edited December 8, 2014 by Faemonic

[Dani-Ellie]

From the "Shattered Sight" thread:

 

They are vaulting and doing flips like Olympians. Emma was just using Hook to make Regina jealous because she's really in love with her, so it's proof they're endgame. For serious. I kid not.

 

*sighs*

 

At this point, this isn't even bending canon. Ths is just straight-up, Adam Savage: "I reject your reality and substitute my own." Only they're not joking the way Adam was.

 

Because let's face canon-facts here: Regina hates Emma. Period, full-stop. There is no blaming that on the Shattered Sight spell, because Emma came up with the plan. Regina, as her normal, non-spell-whammied self, hates Emma enough that Emma, who was thinking clearly because she was immune to the spell, knew she would be the one person in Storybrooke whose spell-whammied, deep-down-feelings self would hate her so much it would overcome the magical love binding the ribbons.

 

And look, I have no problem with people shipping whatever their hearts desire. But when the two characters involved canonically hate each other, the cries about "endgame" seem a bit ... well, silly, to put it politely.

Edited December 8, 2014 by Dani-Ellie

[Shanna Marie]

They're definitely sending mixed signals if they're saying it's not gonna happen but still using the hashtag and teasing it in tweets.

 

Speaking from my experience in public relations and in my current work where I have to deal with fan reaction to creative work, the way to deal with this sort of thing is to say "that's an interesting idea, but that's not the direction we're planning to take the story," and then disengage entirely. No one officially involved with the show should be discussing things that aren't actually happening on the show or about to happen on the show. If they're asked directly in an interview, then give the "that's not the direction we have planned" answer and bring it back around to what they do have planned, like, "Oh, yes, we've heard that there are fans who want to see Emma and Regina get together, but right now, our focus is on developing Emma's relationship with Captain Hook, which we're having a lot of fun writing, and we're getting a lot of positive feedback from viewers about it." They don't have to mock the crackship or even give the very logical reasons why it will never happen. Let the fans play without people involved with the show getting at all involved in anything non-canon. Only use a ship hashtag when actually addressing that relationship that's actually happening, and stay out of it otherwise. An actress should never be put in a situation where she's expected to list hashtags for every relationship combination possible on the show in order to discuss what's happening with her character, and if there's an official policy that she's not supposed to, then she has that to back her up.

[Souris]

Absolutely, Shanna Marie. I'm not in PR, but I deal with it tangentially and hear enough stories from friends who are in PR, to know the right and wrong ways to engage with the public. The Once writers and ABC have not gone about dealing with SQ fans in an effective way. I recognize that social media is a fairly new animal for the PR world, but some things are just basic common sense. And the people who should know better have failed at even that. And their failure has ended up screwing over the actors, JMo particularly. I think they all need some social-media and social-issue training.

[Serena]

You know, I think it's because they're not trying to do social media and PR "right". The classic type PR tries to put forth the most positive, issue-free, drama-free view of their product. However, with things like TV shows, recently networks have adopted the "any talk is good talk" policy. 

And if we're talking about new writers like Scott whatshisname, honestly, who even KNEW of this guy before he got involved with SQers? He seems to have been involved with some relatively high profile projects like Hannibal and Pushing Daisies, but he never really "popped" like like some other writers like Jane Espenson did. Jane never created her own tv show (well, she did a web show) but she's a BIG DEAL in fan circles nonetheless. This guy was a complete nobody, so if even just 30 SQers check out his next project (whatever that may be, and hopefully he finds a different one next year) because of his pandering... well, it's 30 more people than before who are even aware he's alive, isn't it?

[Souris]

I am cynical enough to wonder if he's partially trying to make a name for himself by endearing himself to the very vocal SQ fans.

[sharky]

So is anyone else following this DRAMAZ in the CS fandom on tumblr right now? Apparently someone made a video about how Colin and Jen look like they could be more than friends in some BTS photos and BOOM! Listen, RPF is a little weird but like what you like. I just have a problem with people who support the idea of someone cheating on his wife and then get all huffy when people call them out for being shit stirers. If you make your bed, lie in it.

Of course, this is all boosting the views of the video in question, which I'm sure is exactly what it was intended to do. This weirdo fandom sometimes.

[Souris]

Yes, I've been sitting at my computer murmuring, "Oh, dear. Oh, no. Oh, dear." Rather interesting timing given our recent conversations in this forum about real-person shipping. I made it clear it skeeves me out. It seems so presumptuous (as if we know even a tiny fraction of the actors' real lives) and disrespectful to all involved. So just ... oh, dear.

 

And I can't help but thinking the rest of the fandom is going to have a field day -- "Oh, those silly, immature CS shippers, they can't tell fiction from reality!" At least, the ones who aren't SQ shippers who already think JMo is secretly in love with Lana, that is. Next thing you know, JMo will be lusting after the Pongo actor. (Well, OK, given how much she loves dogs, that last one might be true. ;)

Edited December 9, 2014 by Souris

[Minneapple]

That is so so cringeworthy. And that is primarily why real life shipping is so creepy. Why are you hoping that Colin is an adulterer? And that Jen is the other woman? Like how sick is that?

 

Also, that's when you just hope Colin or his wife or kid (if he has a kid) don't ever Google his name.

[pezgirl7]

Wow I was just on tumblr and didn't see a peep about any video. I guess that just shows that I only follow level-headed people. :) But seriously, I hope these rumors don't spread too far.

[Faemonic]

That is so so cringeworthy. And that is primarily why real life shipping is so creepy. Why are you hoping that Colin is an adulterer? And that Jen is the other woman? Like how sick is that?

As others have said above, it really is a problem with celebrity culture that it's like they can't have a personal life or personal perspective anymore, which makes a lot of actors "not real people"; the glamour of showbiz turns them more into living characters. Which, of course, if we're level-headed, we know is not only morally wrong but too frequently incorrect (and peripheral to our personal lives) to be worth standing by.

 

But as for cheering on adultery, well, if we make characters out of real people then we turn life into a story, "romantic adultery" is an old story that has somehow gained a lot of positive connotations: Lancelot and Guenivere, Tristan and Isolde, Jack and Rose on the Titanic, all the way up to, apparently now, Outlaw Queen. If Jen and Colin are dehumanized into characters, Helen isn't present on the stage or camera of the minds of most units of the fandom...which makes it all too easy for people to cast her as the unworthy rival in a love triangle (when she didn't even audition for that role, because life isn't a show! It's her life and her family that people are playing with, and unfortunately I think I get why it would be fun for people to play, but to stop and think would reveal how that's hella skeezy.)

 

So, here's just hoping that they all have fortitude enough not to suffer fools and spaces safe enough not to encounter any. Like, I have not seen that video.

 

And, hey, even if it does happen, I'm sure it would be more complicated than, "High school sweetheart realized dreams of stardom, dumped devoted wife and adorable child for shiny fellow famous person." But we wouldn't know the real details, and shouldn't know the real details. Unless any of them published a memoir about it or something for some reason. (I think I'd pass on that, too.)

Edited December 9, 2014 by Faemonic

[FurryFury]

But as for cheering on adultery, well, if we make characters out of real people then we turn life into a story, "romantic adultery" is an old story that has somehow gained a lot of positive connotations: Lancelot and Guenivere, Tristan and Isolde, Jack and Rose on the Titanic, all the way up to, apparently now, Outlaw Queen.

 

There is a good reason why "romantic adultery" trope existed in the olden days - you never got to choose whom you were married to. Love wasn't a factor in the marriage, unless you were extremely lucky. So it's no wonder some historical/quasi-historical/mythical relationships are typically seen in a romantic light (hell, I find Lancelot/Guinevere plenty compelling myself).

 

It's very different in this day and age, at least in Western culture, because by cheating, you are actively betraying the person who you, yourself, chose to marry and commit to. 

Edited December 9, 2014 by FurryFury

[InsertWordHere]

I think what really bothers me is that it seems people are once again devaluing friendship. Why can't JMo and C'OD be friends? How is that unfulfilling in any way? I'd feel the same way if both actors were single. I guess I'm just tired of the mindset that two people of compatible sexual orientations can't have a completely platonic relationship. It's like some weird result of the "friendzone" mentality. 

[YaddaYadda]

I never ever know what to think of stuff like that.  Some fans live on hope and fresh water.  I really, really hate that a man and a woman can't be friends unless one of them is gay.  And I hate the second two people have "chemistry", they must be doing it. 

 

People need a reality check and a life to go with that.

[RadioGirl27]

Ugh, really? I don't get this real-life shipping. Jennifer and Colin seem to be really good friends, I just hope this nonsense doesn't affect that friendship.

[Alex]

Ugh, really? I don't get this real-life shipping. Jennifer and Colin seem to be really good friends, I just hope this nonsense doesn't affect that friendship.

 

That was the first thing I though about when I saw the drama building up in Tumblr. I hope that people don't start writing nonsense to Jennifer and Colin's twitters.

[Rumsy4]

It's one thing to think two people might be great together (especially, as, in the entertainment industry, such things are sadly not uncommon), but it's another to ship them as though they are fictional characters. Even if, god forbid, Colin got divorced, and started a relationship with JMo, it would still be nobody's business but their own.

Some of them who were posting about shipping "Coliffer" were saying that they would never tweet the actors, but not everyone is going to be restrained, and what's to keep an anti-CSer from tweeting links to JMo or Colin? Apparently there are weirdos who ship Robert Carlyle and de Ravin as well. However, most actors are used to this kind of stuff, and know to ignore it.

[kili]

However, most actors are used to this kind of stuff, and know to ignore it.

 

I think it tends to come with the territory. Studios used to sometimes actually promote it. They had a lot of fun with that trope during "Singing in the Rain".  I don't get real-life shipping, but it does appear to be something the actors have to face, so ignoring it is probably the best strategy.

[Featherhat]

 

And I hate the second two people have "chemistry", they must be doing it.

 

Wasn't there an old thing where if they had chemistry it meant they *weren't* doing it? Because if they were then all that chemistry would be used up actually having sex. 

[Serena]

Well, I thought JMo and Sebastian had crazy chemistry, and they were doing it. But actually... maybe they only started doing it after they filmed the episode? It's ridiculous we did not have another Mad Swan scene after 117! We could have tested that theory.

[kili]

Wasn't there an old thing where if they had chemistry it meant they *weren't* doing it?

 

That was Joey's theory on "Friends". Chandler was dating an actress that used to date Joey and she was in a steamy play and Chandler was worried that she was cheating on him. Joey used as main evidence for his theoryh that he's never had any chemistry on stage with any of the women he acts with....

 

Snowing has plenty of chemistry and the actors are married, so Joey's theroy is probably wrong. It''s all a bit of a "Moo Point" because Joey's theory was proven wrong in show.

[YaddaYadda]

so Joey's theroy is probably wrong.

 

Joey was also a pretty bad actor hence the no chemistry with his co-stars.  His theory also cost Chandler his relationship with whatsherface.

 

#thingswelearnedfromfriends.

[maryle]

Actually that stupid  stuff is crossing the line really and could easyly make Colin and Jen to distance themselve from each other. That will be a lost for the fans who just like their friendship.

We,, as fans do not know anything about this people personnnal live, so we should assume anything at all about it.

[kili]

Actually that stupid  stuff is crossing the line really and could easyly make Colin and Jen to distance themselve from each other.

 

It is stupid and no actor needs to change how they act around the other actors. There are people out there that ship Lana and Jen too. There are probably people out that that ship whoever plays Dopey and Jen. Heck, I'm sure if we beat the bushes enough, we'd find somebody shipping Happy with Colin.  There are interesting people everywhere.

 

All fan bases have  a subset of crazies. All of them. You can't live you life based on crazy internet theories or you would have to become a hermit (and people would still see that as evidence of something).  Live your life. The people in your life know what is really going on and they are the ones that matter.

 

I think it's best if everybody just ignores the line crossers. They love the attention, so even criticizing them doesn't help.  If you are just doing your own thing...it can be kind of creepy...but...fill your boots. It's when people start harassing/harming others that I think interventions are required.

Edited December 9, 2014 by kili

[Stuffy]

Well, I thought JMo and Sebastian had crazy chemistry, and they were doing it. But actually... maybe they only started doing it after they filmed the episode? It's ridiculous we did not have another Mad Swan scene after 117! We could have tested that theory.

Yeah they didn't start seeing each other until a few months later after he and Dianna Agron broke up.  He was still dating Dianna when they filmed that Mad Hatter episode.  I always wanted at least one more Mad Swan scene after the curse broke.

Edited December 9, 2014 by Stuffy

[Rumsy4]

This reminds of people who "ship" Ryan Stiles and Colin Mochrie from Whose Line for years and years. They don't let it bother them, and play it up for all its worth in their improv. I wouldn't worry about this rumor affecting JMo and Colin's performance. Real people shipping has been around for ages (and as kili says, studios used to encourage it to promote their movies). Hopefully, JMo and Colin know how to deal with it and just "let it go". I just hope this doesn't devolve into another big fandom cat-fight. I also hope these shippers don't keep making post after post about it. 

Edited December 9, 2014 by Rumsy4

[Faemonic]

shipping "Coliffer"

That's the ship name?? It sounds like a vegetable.

 

I think it tends to come with the territory. Studios used to sometimes actually promote it. They had a lot of fun with that trope during "Singing in the Rain".  I don't get real-life shipping, but it does appear to be something the actors have to face, so ignoring it is probably the best strategy.

Oh, yeah. Sometimes studios take advantage of the real life shipping tendency. Don't fans not like it when they're lied to, though? (Even the ones that do enjoy deluding themselves?) I'd hoped that would be falling out of fashion what with cynical fans seeing paparazzi pictures of, like, Zac Efron and Vanessa Hudgens at the beach and going, "Ugh, they're just pretending to date to promote High School Musical 2..." And maybe even a few, "I can believe they're really dating but did they consent to having their pictures taken? Otherwise these aren't cool because it's prying into their private time together."

 

I can also imagine Robert Pattinson not being all that choked up about Kristine Stewart "cheating" on him with the director of Snow White and the Huntsman if their romance was more of a contractual obligation. Or maybe something entirely other and else is going on there. The thing is, we mere laypeople will never be told the real actual truthful details.

 

I don't even know how I caught these things. I don't seek out celebrity gossip to read, even--I swear!

 

This all also reminds me a little of that episode of The Simpsons where Homer was in a band and their manager-publicist person was like, "You're married? We can't tell people that! Women are going to want to have sex with you and we want them to think that they can." Cut to an upset Marge sobbing uncontrollably as Homer tries to placate her by saying it's only for the tour or something.

Edited December 9, 2014 by Faemonic

[Shanna Marie]

From a legal perspective, these people might want to be careful about demonizing the non-actor spouses of actors, either in their speculation or in fiction. Actors would be considered public figures, which makes it harder to prove libel or slander, but spouses wouldn't necessarily be, and broadcasting allegations via tumblr or Twitter could get people in trouble. Even with actors, if they're spreading this stuff in hopes that the actors will leave their spouses for their co-stars, that would meet the "actual malice" standard. I'm not sure that labeling something as "fiction" when it uses the person's name, description, profession, etc., would be much protection. I keep waiting to see if there's going to be a test case coming out of this, like with all the fanfic with serial numbers filed off that's now getting published. They're changing the characters' names in that One Direction RPF that sold to a publisher, and I think it was AU in the first place, so that these "characters" weren't actually members of a boy band, so it might be possible that someone who read this book without knowing the origins wouldn't be able to identify the real people from it, but still, it drew attention to the fact that this story had existed on the Internet. I guess celebrities don't necessarily want to go after their biggest fans in court, but if someone was demonizing their spouses in order to put them together with someone else, that might be what tipped someone over into the "I can't let this stand without a fight" column. (I'm not a lawyer, but I had to take media law in journalism school where we had to learn all this stuff, and then I worked as a media trainer to teach people how to be interviewed, so I had to learn it all again.)

[Faemonic]

It's great to have laws that would set those boundaries. It sucks that fandom can be such a morass of entitlement that we'd need laws to keep people in check like that when boundaries ought to have been obvious.

[Aliasscape]

What's sad about the real people shipping is there is absolutely no way to win with the crazies.

 

Real people ignore allegations.  Shipper: They're not denying it so it must be true.

Real people say say nothing but behavior changes. Shipper: See we were right, now they're pretending they're not together.

Real people say nothing but behavior doesn't change. Shipper: If it weren't true, they'd try harder to show that by not being close.

Real people protest the allegations. Shipper: They wouldn't be this upset if it weren't true.

Real people say they're dating. Anti-shipper: Well, it's surely just for show, the studio/management wants them to do this for publicity but we know they don't REALLY like each other.

Real People appear to have broken up: Shipper: The studio/management made them break up because it was messing with publicity.

Antishipper:  See, they were never really together. They don't seem upset enough about the breakup.

SuperShipper: They're not really broken up. They're just saying that so they can date in secret.

 

Having your real life shipped means nothing you say or do will ever be believed.

[kili]

Okay, this is from another show, but I think this can probably be said by the show-runners for a lot of shows, including Once.

 

Bones's show-runners have decided to write the actresses real-life pregnancy into the show (the female main character is married to the male main character):

 

“As with most new situations that have arisen in 10 years, we feel that this can only enhance the show. Although I’m sure there will be a vocal group of fans eager to attack me, I hope they will be pleasantly surprised by what we have in store.”

 

Hee.

[Featherhat]

Joey was also a pretty bad actor hence the no chemistry with his co-stars.  His theory also cost Chandler his relationship with whatsherface.

 

#thingswelearnedfromfriends.

 

Ah that was it, yeah I didn't forget Snowing but I wondered if it was a "thing" and not just #thingswelearnedfromfriends.

 

Aliasscape you have summed up internet (not just fandom) celebrity in one post. 

[pezgirl7]

I don't know where to put this, but does anyone else get kind of bummed when they hear someone say something bad (in a very non-constructive way) about their favorite character? There's not much Hook hate on this board, but when I do come across someone slagging him, it kind of brings me down. It's the reason I don't normally bash a character, because there has to be someone reading my post who likes them. I normally try to just focus on the things I enjoy about the show, or when I do complain, it's more about plot points and less about character traits. Constructive criticism and debate is fine, but when it's just plain name-calling and belly-aching, even when it's about a character I'm not that fond of, it just rubs me the wrong way.

[Faemonic]

I don't know where to put this, but does anyone else get kind of bummed when they hear someone say something bad (in a very non-constructive way) about their favorite character? There's not much Hook hate on this board, but when I do come across someone slagging him, it kind of brings me down. It's the reason I don't normally bash a character, because there has to be someone reading my post who likes them. I normally try to just focus on the things I enjoy about the show, or when I do complain, it's more about plot points and less about character traits. Constructive criticism and debate is fine, but when it's just plain name-calling and belly-aching, even when it's about a character I'm not that fond of, it just rubs me the wrong way.

 

My bummed threshold is pretty medial. I'm not easily bummed in the sense of stabbing people with salad tridents just for saying, "But he's not that hot..." (And I'm not saying you would, mind you, I'm just setting a gauge that I'm going to continue with:)

 

Back in the TWoP forums there was someone who responded to my squee at the Neverland arc (because I expected Swan Thief to be endgame and Captain Swan to never happen but I was so enjoying the little hints of Hook and Emma having that flirty dynamic) with "I cannot concuss myself hard enough to forget that he left her in an inescapable prison as she was begging for the sake of her son." That was good for me to hear, actually, I think it kept my perspective fresh. A balanced appreciation of the character, whether it's the viewer's projections, the writing, the casting/acting, doesn't only come from me as a wellspring--sometimes it comes from being open to what other people see that I can't.

 

That doesn't mean that I don't still have my own point of view, though. So, people who are pretty cemented in their view that Killian Jones promotes rape culture and everyone who likes the character is doing the same does bum me out because, in those spaces, I'm very discouraged from offering any viewpoint on it that doesn't meet that quota of vitriol. So, I stay away from those spaces. And it just really, really bums be out when those spaces set out for the conquest of how all spaces should be like that, and I'm pretty sure that I'm not speaking from a desire to preserve some privileged position as an oppressor here when I draw attention to the Hook-haters who go waaay over the line into the hypocrisy of trying to make Hook-lovers "know how it feels" to (trigger warning)

be..."raped"...like they are when...somebody likes...a...fictional...character...that...they...don't? ?? ?????

That's not cool, yo. That is so not cool.

 

To borrow terms from Jungian psychology, Captain Hook symbolizes my Animus (and probably yours, but only if you'd say so) but he also symbolizes somebody else's Shadow. (Still talking Jung, here, not Peter Pan.) So, we all work through that in our own ways. And it isn't healthy for some people to be silenced when they're working through their Shadow by ranting and spewing vitriol.

 

Besides, Hook's feelings aren't hurt by that. He isn't real. What is hurt (when it is hurt, and as I pointed out above it isn't always) is the validation and freedom that I have to explore my own emotions, working with this Animus--which is just as unhealthy as others being silenced as they're working with the Shadow.

 

So, there ought to be mutually-respected boundaries. Thank goodness for tagging and tag-screening technology on blogs.

Edited December 12, 2014 by Faemonic

[retrograde]

I'm not bothered personally by attacks on characters, no, because they're fictional. I am bothered -- maybe too much -- when I read unnecessarily unkind things about the people involved in the show, especially the writers. Yes, they're public figures to a point, but they're still human beings who should be afforded common decency. When people respond to things the writers or actors say in interviews, or the choices they make in in scripts or on screen, with nasty personal remarks it brings me down a bit and makes me uncomfortable.* I understand being annoyed or frustrated when they take the show in a direction people don't like -- or try to justify those things in an interview in a way that seems illogical to others -- but again, these are fictional characters. On a TV show. About fairytales. Characters they created on a TV show they created. About fairytales. In my opinion, it rarely warrants getting vicious and cruel about. Personally, I save my hate for rapists and bigots and people who litter. 

 

(This is not just a OuaT thing specifically, it just happens to be the show I am most engaged with online at the moment. And I rarely see it here so much as in the broader fandom. I have stopped reading/posting in several other show forums over the years because I just found the level of meanness about real-life cast and crew too much. For me, there's a big difference between snark -- which I'm all for -- and saying "that person is a useless sack of shit" in a public forum.)

 

* Usually; I admit I'm not so bothered when people get really annoyed at the showrunners on a personal level for, say, dismissing the whole Regina/Graham thing, because they're talking about a very real-life issue there.

[InsertWordHere]

Faemonic, as someone who has been subjected to an anti-Captain Swanner trying to teach me a lesson (or something) about rape and abuse by responding to a post I made on tumblr and writing out a 

brutal but "inevitable" scenario about my getting raped and tossed into a ditch dead by "someone like Hook" because I'll be too blinded by his good looks to see him for the abuser he is

, I most definitely agree that it is so not cool. The saddest thing is the post they were responding to didn't even contain any blind Hook-love or gushing over his looks, it was simply asking that people stop reducing Captain Swan shippers by saying they only like Hook because he's hot. This idea that Hook fans need to "know how it feels" and be educated (along with the assumption that all of us are ignorant about what a rape culture is simply because we don't agree with their interpretation of a couple on a tv show), is way, way out of line. 

 

There's a difference between blind hate of a character and actual constructive criticism. I have no problem with the latter but sometimes the former does grate, and this is for all characters, not just the ones I love. Stating genuine gripes about a character is perfectly fine, but people should remember to stick to attacking the ship not the shipper, and I've noticed that the people spewing blind hate seem to find that hard to do. 

[pezgirl7]

I think it could be as simple as the things I like are in a way a reflection of me. I get the same way when I hear someone knock a band I like, or my favorite sport. Like dude, don't harsh my mellow. :)

ETA oh my gosh InsertWordHere, that's horrible! I'm glad I haven't been subjected to such hate, but I mostly stay out of conversations on tumblr, and any heated debates elsewhere.

Edited December 12, 2014 by pezgirl7

[Faemonic]

The saddest thing is the post they were responding to didn't even contain any blind Hook-love or gushing over his looks, it was simply asking that people stop reducing Captain Swan shippers by saying they only like Hook because he's hot. This idea that Hook fans need to "know how it feels" and be educated (along with the assumption that all of us are ignorant about what a rape culture is simply because we don't agree with their interpretation of a couple on a tv show), is way, way out of line.

So, your plea to consider human beings as human beings got the reaction of dehumanizing you by someone ostensibly defending the oppressed and dehumanized because, to them, preserving their interpretation of a fiction was more important than considering a real person as a real person. Ugh! Some people!

I think it could be as simple as the things I like are in a way a reflection of me. I get the same way when I hear someone knock a band I like, or my favorite sport. Like dude, don't harsh my mellow. :)

That thing is, the things people don't like are a reflection of themselves as well. The thing is to keep it in reflection-world and not, basically, bum people out. Like I said, mutually respected boundaries has got to be the baseline for things we entertain ourselves with.

Edited December 12, 2014 by Faemonic

[Shanna Marie]

If it helps, just try to remember that a person's opinions and their expression of their opinions are a reflection of themselves, not of you. I don't necessarily mean that as an insult to the others (though in the case of making threats or drive-by trolling ...), just that their opinions are formed through their own worldviews and experiences, just as yours are, so their disagreement doesn't mean that you're being personally insulted. And if they're jerks about expressing their opinions, then that says something about them, too (and it may help to consider what that means about their opinions).

[Camera One]

How representative of fans is this "roundtable"?

http://www.tvfanatic.com/2014/12/once-upon-a-time-round-table-the-queens-of-darkness/

[KingOfHearts]

 

How representative of fans is this "roundtable"?

I'd say it is to a degree. Most of the people I've talked to in real life and heard from in social media pretty much have the same impression. I can't speak for the ironing-while-you-watch casual viewers, though.

 

I basically agree with them about what disappointed them the most, except for the Frozen epilogue scene in Arendelle. I thought that was necessary considering how little of 4A was actually tied up in this finale. I agree Emma and Hook should have gotten another scene. Its absence was most definitely felt.

Edited December 21, 2014 by KingOfHearts

[Souris]

Jane Espenson thinks SQ fans get it worst in the ship wars. 

 

I can't even.

[Serena]

Meh. Jane clearly made a career out of LGBT-friendliness (she has one web show about a gay couple - although on OUATIW, where she was an exec producer, there was a grand total of zero queer characters, so I guess she's LGBT-friendly as long as it doesn't interfere with her cushy Disney job) so I'm not surprised she's pandering to them. The victim complex of some of the people replying is eyeroll-worthy, though.

 

I still can't get over SQ shippers opposing OQ on moral grounds. I think OQ is awful, but on the grand scale of bad things Regina has done, banging a married man doesn't crack the top 50. 

Edited December 22, 2014 by Serena

[Crimson Belle]

Of the countries, Japan got it worst in WWII. There's a reason why.

[Souris]

Yeah, the AdulteryQueen thing is simply a convenient argument for some SQ shippers IMO. I know some people actually do have a problem with it, and rightly so IMO, but to me it's just something a lot of them have glommed onto to use as a cudgel -- much like their throwing around "homophobic!" for anybody who doesn't support SQ or "rape culture!" for CS fans. I'm just so tired of SQ getting pandered to above all others on social media, and now even a writer is presenting them as the biggest victims around. Seriously, WTF? Have I stumbled into some alternate reality?

 

There's a reason I stopped following all the writers. I should remember that.

Edited December 22, 2014 by Souris

[KingOfHearts]

 

I'm just so tired of SQ getting pandered to above all others on social media, and now even a writer is presenting them as the biggest victims around.

Well, we know where Woegina episodes like The Evil Queen got their victim complexes from now...

[Writing Wrongs]

I've been having a geeky fandom moment. Since I loved her portrayal of the Snow Queen so much. I have been reading up about Elizabeth Mitchell and found out that she attended Stephens College in my hometown and graduated in 1991 with a BFA in acting. She's a year younger than me and now I keep wondering if I could've seen her around town at some point. It's not a big town. I think I may have.

[Featherhat]

Yeah, the AdulteryQueen thing is simply a convenient argument for some SQ shippers IMO. I know some people actually do have a problem with it, and rightly so IMO, but to me it's just something a lot of them have glommed onto to use as a cudgel -- much like their throwing around "homophobic!" for anybody who doesn't support SQ or "rape culture!" for CS fans. I'm just so tired of SQ getting pandered to above all others on social media, and now even a writer is presenting them as the biggest victims around. Seriously, WTF? Have I stumbled into some alternate reality?

 

There's a reason I stopped following all the writers. I should remember that.

 

Some of the cast and crew might play it up on social media right now, it gets a lot of retweets and discussion going (both grumbling and squees) and its better than getting called "homophobic" because you don't bother to mention them. That said I don't believe they are planning to move it any further to canon than it is now so a) its throwing them a pointless bone b) can come across as if not exactly queerbaiting, definitely annoying on that score, for all that I think its a crackship personally. I don't think Michael Coleman was lying when he said they've make fun of the ship and its fan on set, but that's another fandom blow up.

[Souris]

I think they're definitely upping and pushing the Emma/Regina "friendship" in response to the SQ demands, so IMO it's affecting what the show is doing. Not in a good way, IMO, because I don't think there's any realistic way in hell that Emma and Regina would ever be more than cordial for Henry's sake and certainly not BFF drinking buddies -- especially after how nasty Regina was to Emma in Volde-ep (4x05). The fact they showed that drinking scene (a version of which could have easily been in the next ep if they were desperate to have it) instead of ANY emotional payoff with Emma for the Hook's heart storyline tells me they're more interested in appeasing SQ fans than story integrity. And I think that's a problem.