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

[mjgchick]

Now the fandom is fighting over whose dolls are being sold more. These people are giving Disney money over stupidity. You can't make this shit up.

[Souris]

Lana did make a reference to going to get Hook and getting out of the UW as fast as they can, so NA must have gotten at least that quote fairly recently.

Edited December 30, 2015 by Souris

[legaleagle53]

Now the fandom is fighting over whose dolls are being sold more. These people are giving Disney money over stupidity. You can't make this shit up.

 

Bloody hell (to coin a phrase)!  These people are beyond insane.

[Minneapple]

I read a bit of the twitter kerfuffle over the friends and sisters interview. Actually the minute I read the article I knew it would cause a kerfuffle. I myself am annoyed that someone who tried to kill Emma's mom and her almost-boyfriend could be called her friend and sister, but whatever. I'm just trying to figure out what the people raising a firestorm want. Like...seriously. WHAT DO YOU WANT?

[Rumsy4]

They want SQ to be canon. Or rather, they believe SQ is already canon textually and subtextually, and some of them (loudly and obnoxiously) seek validation from everyone that their interpretation is correct. Anyone who refuses to cater to their viewpoint is considered wrong and horrible, and they immediately demand reparation for the perceived wrong done to them. It's sad that all cast and crew feel like they need to walk on eggshells to avoid upsetting their delicate sensibilities. 

Edited December 31, 2015 by Rumsy4

[PixiePaws1]

They want SQ to be canon. Or rather, they believe SQ is already canon textually and subtextually, and some of them (loudly and obnoxiously) seek validation from everyone that their interpretation is correct. Anyone who refuses to cater to their viewpoint is considered wrong and horrible, and they immediately demand reparation for the perceived wrong done to them. It's sad that all cast and crew feel like they need to walk on eggshells to avoid upsetting their delicate sensibilities.

Excellent summation.....

[ABitOFluff]

Now the fandom is fighting over whose dolls are being sold more. These people are giving Disney money over stupidity. You can't make this shit up.

I followed one of the notes on Souris' post about the Funko sales to a SQ Tumblr, and wow. Basically, they reject actual data in favor of "a few people online said they went to a store, and Regina was sold out, and the clerk said they coudln't give Hook away.

 

I work on an e-commerce site. I can tell you what the best sellers are, but I'd have trouble telling you the worst sellers, but here's a hint. IT'S NOT BASED ON ATP STOCK!!

[sharky]

It's sad that all cast and crew feel like they need to walk on eggshells to avoid upsetting their delicate sensibilities. 

That's why I think these most recent statements are interesting. These are the actual actresses -- one of which is perceived to be a big SQ supporter -- saying that's not the right interpretation. For some of the actors, they decided to walk away from social media (Ginny). Others don't really engage fans all that much to avoid the dramaz (Colin) and now we're seeing Lana and JMo actually seeming to not give a crap what kind of shitstorm they stir up anymore. Things are going to get really interesting come March. I wonder if these things are the last straws for SQ fans and if they really decide to stop watching the show when we go to the Underworld and it becomes Once Upon a Hook. :) And I bet that the ratings prove that no one will miss them.

 

ETA: It looks like Lana actually responded to the naysayers on Twitter with a statement that seems pretty pointed. She starts out saying she still supports the SQers but then says, "With that said, aren't I entitled to view Regina and Emma's relationship through my personal lens? Don't I have the same right as everyone else?" Yes! Yes, you do! I just wish she would've said something ages ago when her co-stars were getting beat up for saying the same things she's saying now.

Edited December 31, 2015 by sharky

[FierceAfroChick]

If JMo posts anything other than SQ or a selfie with Lana for her final 101 Smiles thing tomorrow, shit will be worse than today. Especially if she posts something with Colin. She posted 4 pics referencing him and Hook last year and ooh wee did she catch hell.

[legaleagle53]

They want SQ to be canon. Or rather, they believe SQ is already canon textually and subtextually, and some of them (loudly and obnoxiously) seek validation from everyone that their interpretation is correct. Anyone who refuses to cater to their viewpoint is considered wrong and horrible, and they immediately demand reparation for the perceived wrong done to them. It's sad that all cast and crew feel like they need to walk on eggshells to avoid upsetting their delicate sensibilities. 

 

It's not a term that I like to toss around lightly, but these people are seriously mentally unbalanced.  While yes, it would be nice to see some gay/lesbian representation on the show (and who says it has to be female/female?  What about something for the gay MALE fans?), the cast and crew have made it clear over and over again that SQ as these "fans" define it is not going to happen, never was going to happen, and never will happen even if the show runs for 25 years or more.  What's that definition of insanity again, SQ radicals?  Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result each time -- and you're Exhibit A.

[maryle]

Actually I felt more sympathique toward Lana if she had supporter more Sean,JEN and Colin and not only when she is underground the fire but I admit she spore as clearly as one can. And Anybody Who still believe that SQ can happen in canon do not wish know the thruth. queerbait anymore! The timing of all that is intetesting indeed!

Anyways ,I am almost ashame to be a part of this fandom! The actors(ess) and writers most be sure we are crazy by now

[mjgchick]

This is giving me second hand embarrassment. I'm just thinking of the cast discussing how the fandom lost their collective minds. What Lana said was not controversial at all. No one but those fans think they are more than friends.

[InsertWordHere]

I have to admit I got a little giggle over Lana Parrilla saying "for as long as I can remember" because that's such a season one cursed-Storybrooke thing to say. Maybe she's trying to secretly tell us that she's been cursed! 

 

Seriously though, I am glad she posted her message. 

[Stuffy]

Some may be mad at Lana but there are people on Twitter actually blaming Jmo for what Lana said. It's their belief that Lana posted what she did as a pr move to cover for Jennifer after yesterday. Which btw was someone posting a meeting Jmo story that happened several months ago where Jennifer denied swan queen again.

Edited December 31, 2015 by Stuffy

[october]

I've wondered in the past whether OUAT should employ some kind of social media consultant. Basically a neutral person with experience in fandom garbage to give the cast and writers some pointers on handling online abuse, on seeking help, and on how to give a gracious but firm and united response to this SQ drama when it, inevitably, flares up. Because it's like there's something new every week and the show's writers and actors are fighting fires individually as they pop up and posting bland and ineffective 'please be nice, you guys!' messages or posting next to nothing at all because they're so tired of it. This is an overwhelming problem, but their response to it AFAIK has been very passive, reactionary, and uncoordinated while the SQers themselves are aggressive and organised.

[YaddaYadda]

Natalie Abrams is such a shit stirrer though. Does she do this with just Once, or all the shows she covers? Girlfriend really sucks. She has throw JMo under the bus so often. I'd have stopped doing interviews with her.

This is what happens when you feed the trolls. This has zilch to do with representation, and I'm not sure I get where this sense of entitlement comes from.

[Rumsy4]

This is what happens when you feed the trolls. This has zilch to do with representation, and I'm not sure I get where this sense of entitlement comes from.

 

Adam. I know I am being rather hard on him, but he has been feeding the trolls for a long long time. Part of the blame lies at his feet. 

[Souris]

Natalie Abrams is such a shit stirrer though. Does she do this with just Once, or all the shows she covers? Girlfriend really sucks. She has throw JMo under the bus so often. I'd have stopped doing interviews with her.

 

I don't have personal knowledge of her with other shows, but I had somebody tell me that in another fandom, they hate her so much that they have one person who will go copy anything she writes about that show to disseminate to the fans so that they don't give her the web hits. If true, that tells you something!

[sharky]

I wouldn't be surprised. I did that in another fandom with Kristin Dos Santos from E. What is with the awful television writers? There are some amazing tv writers out there -- Matt Mitovich, Michael Ausiello, Alan Sepinwall and Daniel Fienberg come to mind. And then there are some real duds.

Edited December 31, 2015 by sharky

[mjgchick]

Kristin was so god awful during the Gilmore Girls days. I remember Michael Aussiello use to be so rude to a lot of the earlier CW shows especially to the One Tree Hill cast which is why they just decided to let Matt do interviews for the shows.

The Natalie tag on tumblr is mostly people ranting about her. I think Greys is the other fandom that currently hates her so its not just OUAT.

[Faemonic]

Some may be mad at Lana but there are people on Twitter actually blaming Jmo for what Lana said. It's their belief that Lana posted what she did as a pr move to cover for Jennifer after yesterday. Which btw was someone posting a meeting Jmo story that happened several months ago where Jennifer denied swan queen again.

There's also a Swen Again Jen hate blog out there on Tumblr. Catchy tag. From what I've seen, though, a good number of Tumblr SQers are not happy about that and don't want the ship associated with criticizing the actress.

 

Does no one still remember this? If the guy who plays Happy encountered the bad apples a lot of the time, he put it badly. But back then, JMo was including SQ in the roll call of ships around Emma that she loved. Maybe because it could still have happened, and she didn't know (because, please, the way the captain swan thief love triangle was handled I think shows it was totally writing by fan demand), and evidently wasn't personally uncomfortable with the show taking that turn because she made that mention of it. I wonder what could have changed her disposition towards SQ into one so much more cautious. Maybe it was the bad apples.

 

I've wondered in the past whether OUAT should employ some kind of social media consultant. Basically a neutral person with experience in fandom garbage to give the cast and writers some pointers on handling online abuse, on seeking help, and on how to give a gracious but firm and united response to this SQ drama when it, inevitably, flares up. Because it's like there's something new every week and the show's writers and actors are fighting fires individually as they pop up and posting bland and ineffective 'please be nice, you guys!' messages or posting next to nothing at all because they're so tired of it. This is an overwhelming problem, but their response to it AFAIK has been very passive, reactionary, and uncoordinated while the SQers themselves are aggressive and organised.

SQers are aggressive, or at least the aggressive ones are (duh-doi, apparently there are aggressive OQers out there which surprises me because it means there are OQers), but organized? I think it's just par for the course in fandom.

 

Social media consultant would be a very good idea, but I think they're all just testing the waters, and nobody really knows how to handle it well or properly.

 

I mean, I think the first direct addressing of it was that question posed in some convention panel, who I still remember how elated she sounded, when she said, "It's in the writing, it's in the acting, it's in the editing: Are you giving us Swan Queen on purpose?" The answer was No then from A&E, and it's a No now, and it was a "No, but ehh it could help the ratings if we let them hope, and besides they can get scary when we don't give them that" all the way through but bad apple SQers only thought that caution only came from heteronormative bigotry and not a real caring warning. So, I can't sympathize with all the woe about wasting four years with baited breath for something that is now "sure to never happen" just because Lana and JMo sisterzoned and friendzoned their characters.

 

Especially when the showrunners are gearing up to represent some token quota-meeting lesbian couple, which passes for radical representation. (cough *Carmilla vlog version* cough cough *XenaBuffy* cough *Seriously Milah's actress was on The L Word how are standards for lesbianism not higher it's almost 2016*)

 

Hrmm...maybe that those coincide is a PR move. Badly played. So very, very, very badly played.

 

From here: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/once-a-time-creators-question-839776

With the gay storyline that you're working on, was there any difficulty getting Disney to come on board for it, and did you know which characters it would involve?

HOROWITZ: The storyline that we're planning to tell, everyone has been super supportive of. What we're endeavoring to do is to not make a big deal of it because that's how we see this world — it's not a big deal. It should just be a love story that is as exciting, emotional and heartfelt as any other love story.

KITSIS: For us, we wanted to tell it no differently than we would with Robin and Regina or Snow and Charming. We just wanted to tell a love story. For us, it's a love story like any other and it's something we're excited about. Everyone's been supportive, and we're going to tell it in the second half of the season.

 

Short version of my fan issue reaction: No, don't!

Edited December 31, 2015 by Faemonic

[Rumsy4]

But back then, JMo was including SQ in the roll call of ships around Emma that she loved. Maybe because it could still have happened, and she didn't know (because, please, the way the captain swan thief love triangle was handled I think shows it was totally writing by fan demand), and evidently wasn't personally uncomfortable with the show taking that turn because she made that mention of it. I wonder what could have changed her disposition towards SQ into one so much more cautious. 

 

As an actor, JMo would support all ships and shippers, because the shippers are supposedly fans of the show and fans of her character (hah!). It's got nothing to do with the canon or fanon nature of a ship. However, over time, a subset of SQ fans, the infamous bad apples, have harassed her to the point where she is no longer interested in palliating rude and bullying behavior, or in acceding to their increasingly unreasonable demands. 

 

From Lana's PoV, most of her fans have been SQ shippers. So why wouldn't she support them? It doesn't necessarily mean she was also actively shipping SQ, though I don't think she would have minded if the Show had taken that direction. It's only recently that Regina got a current canon pairing of her own in the Show. Since then, Lana has received backlash from some SQers over remarks she has made about OQ in conventions. In fact, I remember Lana making the "sister" comment wrt the Emma & Regina friendship in Season 4. JMo tends to get more hate and backlash because her character Emma has had many love interests in the course of the show, and so there have been many ship factions clamoring for validation. I guess that's why the SQ ship seems so skewed in favor of Regina, and by association, Lana. The BA SQ fans have been hateful to Sean as well. He has spoken about this several times.

Edited December 31, 2015 by Rumsy4

[Free]

Adam. I know I am being rather hard on him, but he has been feeding the trolls for a long long time. Part of the blame lies at his feet. 

 

I know Adam is one of those showrunners/writers who engages in twitter drama, which usually ends up making things worse in these situations.

[Camera One]

Adam says inflammatory things on Twitter, while Eddy says them in interviews.  It's a partnership.

[Free]

Adam says inflammatory things on Twitter, while Eddy says them in interviews.  It's a partnership.

 

Oh definitely, they have the foot in the mouth disease.  It would've been better to not say anything at all.

[Jul 68]

Nah. This gives them lots of free publicity.

[mjgchick]

The Jennifer Morrison tag is scary right now. People need to get a grip and learn to what homophobic actually means.

[Selina K]

I feel so badly for JMo. She seems like a person who is really about being positive and accepting and she is being bullied by people with a completely warped view of reality. Jennifer has a job and she owns that job and her interpretation of the character. Refusing to adopt someone else's interpretation of that character does not mean she is a homophobe. It means she is reading what's on the page she is handed by the writers and accepting that what is on the page is what the writers mean for the character. I think people have made this too personal and assumed that actions the writers and actors take are directed at them personally. The writers and actors are not making personal attacks just because you have Twitter account and a voice. It's like assuming every guy who cuts you off on the highway is personally doing so to piss you off, and not realizing that maybe his wife is in labor in the seat next to you and he isn't thinking about you at all. Having a Twitter account doesn't mean you speak for most or all or a majority of fans nor does it mean anyone is trying to upset you. Relax and watch the show. If you don't like it, turn it off. Stop sending actual hate into the universe as a response to made up perceived hate.

[OnceUponAJen]

I don't understand the need for actor validation of their viewpoint. Ship what you ship and enjoy it. Fanfiction is your friend of the show isn't pleasing you.

[Faemonic]

I don't understand the need for actor validation of their viewpoint. Ship what you ship and enjoy it. Fanfiction is your friend of the show isn't pleasing you.

I guess there's the sense that fanfiction isn't the "real" story. And that might be very strange considering that this show's premise is basically Disney fanfiction that everybody in the show took to even more fanficcy levels.

 

But I think most people who do need actor validation don't know the nuances of industry politics (even as basic a "nuance" as the actor is not the character; then that the actor is contractually obliged to say the writers' lines in the way that the director tells them to) and definitely don't know multimedia literary analysis theory...and I can't blame them for that. The actor has the most familiar face in spite of really having the least power over the story. Fanfiction, even when it's good, takes searching and scrolling and imagination, and nobody's read all the same ones; so, the actual show remains the far more accessible medium.

 

Throughout all this, the idea of Canon is still a thing, and actor interviews are still collectively regarded as closer to that Canon than fanfic. If fanfiction is a friend, the Canon is the the parent you still live with.

 

*

 

I swear I'm not picking on Ginny, I've been quoting her so often because I think she's actually been the Voice of Reason, but I came across a blog post that brought up her years-old reply to the question of if she ships Swan Queen. Her reply went something like, "This is not Once Upon A Time In My Pants, I support LGBT relationships just not with my fictional daughter and her step-grandmother." And she's been consistent about that, bringing up during group interviews that it's weird that Hook is making a move on his stepson's babymomma. I take it that anything in the same room as incest is her Squick, and I shouldn't be more inclined to want her to chillax just because this time she expresses that Squick for a pairing that I like. That would be really hypocritical of me.

 

(For those not hip to the jive, Squick means "a personal aversion to something" or "a moderate to extreme annoyance upon mild exposure". I think it's onamatopoetic, but it's fanspeak that's gotta be about a decade old by now, so kids these days are probably calling it something else.)

 

But, I imagine what if it weren't Ginnifer Goodwin squicking to that, but a casual viewer. Maybe not so casual, a fan goes to the fanfics and finds Swan Queen and Captain Swan being so popular, and thinks that they're both squicky because of the incest-by-association. They watch the main show and Captain Swan is actually happening, and wonders...Doesn't anybody else think that's a little weird?? Given the circumstances???

 

Take the natural reaction to some other blogger or forum-frequenter going, "Yeah, I think it's weird too" blah blah other fans say it's not as though Killian and Emma are blood-related or grew up together, or Hook's not that much more mature in spite of his centuries because he's been in Neverland. Agree to disagree.

 

And then compare that reaction to someone in the show saying the thing. It won't change the show, but it's just natural what with having taking in all the cultural constructs and subliminal messages and unspoken guidelines for how things are...that someone would hear that and feel disproportionately more validated. On the flip side, people who want so-and-so ship to keep sailing would hear that and feel disproportionately annoyed that Ginny is saying it as opposed to some random fellow internet denizen saying it.

[Rumsy4]

(For those not hip to the jive, Squick means "a personal aversion to something" or "a moderate to extreme annoyance upon mild exposure". I think it's onamatopoetic, but it's fanspeak that's gotta be about a decade old by now, so kids these days are probably calling it something else.)

Kids these days broadly label anything they find "problematic" as triggering. :-p

[Free]

Nah. This gives them lots of free publicity.

 

I'm not sure it's the good kind.  It only makes the OuaT fandom as a whole look worse.

[maryle]

Its crazier by the hours!

Now it seem some tumblr is claim in Jen stalk her and has à personnalité beef with SQ Blogger.

And it is Just jour 1 I Wonder where it could go any deeper!

I am beginning to fera for Jen somes of them seem crazy enought to really both et her.

[sharky]

On tumblr? Do you have a link? I tried looking for it and it seems that Once tags have been invaded by spam. Lovely. I doubt it's a big deal. There were also SQ fans saying that Captain Swan fans hacked and deleted the tumblr for a well known SQ blogger and we know how that turned out.

[Rumsy4]

I got my first ever anon hate ever. On the first day of the year. It was some vile anti-CS crap. I am not upset, though. I just blocked the anon. I'm not going to publish the ask and give them what they want--drama

I just reblog stuff on tumblr, and never participate in the drama. I haven't even posted original stuff in the CS tag in ages! How did they even find me? What a sad miserable person to do that to ring in the new year?!!

[maryle]

I am not good with links but it is ease to find when writing anti jmo and the Blogger is ash something.

[mjgchick]

All I saw was someone saying Jen ignored them during some Twitter Stuff on the pro Jen tag no less. Her tag is still scary to go into.

[Rumsy4]

I'm seeing a bunch of posts in the JMo tag badmouthing and practically swearing at Jen based on the EW article and on some unsubstantiated rumors about something Jen said that someone overheard somewhere. Some of these people seem delusional, tbh. 

[Souris]

It's truly toxic. The amount of hate they're spewing at JMo over unsubstantiated anonymous rumors is disgusting.

[maryle]

OK I looked at the Blogger and her is one of her post full Blogger is angstbotfic her the post I fond about her croisade.

" Dean, Jennifer Morrisson , I would think that you have better thing to do that keep tabs on a fandom you evidently hate, but it has come to my attention that appenrently you spend enough time on tumblr that you mentioned me by name, in Paris as a fans you hate."...but the fact you hate me because I am too political...If I had not already lost all respect for you..."

And it goes on. It is Just gossip from event months ago, so for me it is....

[sharky]

Geez, talk about delusions of grandeur.

[Rumsy4]

Yeah--like Jen has nothing better to do. lol

[Faemonic]

That sort of unabashed vitriol is awful enough from one person, no matter how well their target might be at ignoring or dismissing it, but how do so many people stir up that much negative energy over...a game of whispers? That's not citation.

Who is it on these forums who went to journalism school and told us the motto: "If your mother tells you she loves you, check that it's in fact a fact"?

Isn't that commonsense in media...yet? And this is totally a value judgment that I'm making. People have the right to think and feel as much vitriol as they do, and maybe blogging it out is part of getting over it, maybe this provides a great distraction for something worse going on in their offline lives, and certainly the medium and community lets everybody get away with intellectual dishonesty/laziness if not actually encourages it so it becomes some hive mind mob on the information superhighway. But I'm just appalled at the toxicity out there that thrives on proudly being factually wrong and morally wrong and cruel. And noisy.

But I suspect this is (and has been) all par for the course with celebrity culture. I'm just always sad to find current examples of how this world still has room for that.

[october]

Here's another link about this bullshit: http://scarimor.tumblr.com/post/136407669400/psa-for-the-anons

 

 

Fools are sending folk anons questioning the veracity of reports that Jennifer Morrison badmouthed several Once Upon a Time fans backstage at the Xivents convention.

She did it. She named at least one CaptainSwan shipper (for meta she doesn’t like) and at least one SwanQueen shipper (for being too “political”) as examples of fans she doesn’t like. Yes she did. It was unprofessional of her and very ill-advised, but she did it. Plenty of people have known about it for months, but fandom has more respect than she showed and kept it quiet to protect her reputation (and kept the names of the fans she personally attacked an even closer secret to protect them from harrassment).

It happened. People heard her do it. Get over yourselves and cut it out.

 

Oh God.

 

• No proof, obviously.
• Since when does Jennifer Morrison read meta commentary online and enough so that she'd remember screen names of the shippers who wrote it?
• And when has she ever disagreed with someone and let it actually get personal? Saying you don't share someone's opinion isn't the same as a personal attack and I really doubt her accusers know the difference.
• 'They don't like me because I'm too political!!' sounds exactly like the kind of thing swen like to think everyone says about them behind their backs as if their fanon is just too radical that the rest of us can't handle it.
• The Xivent con was in June. No way in hell those fans would've kept this quiet for six months to 'protect Jennifer's reputation'.

[Rumsy4]

For sh*ts and giggles I checked out that tumblr account. Oh my god, people seem to twist themselves into pretzels to bash Jen. 

 

the medium and community lets everybody get away with intellectual dishonesty/laziness if not actually encourages it so it becomes some hive mind mob on the information superhighway. 

 

Well said! 

Edited January 2, 2016 by Rumsy4

[Shanna Marie]

Even if it did happen (unlikely, but still ...), it was backstage, which means it was private conversation, not at a public event, and therefore has nothing to do with professionalism. Who in the entire world hasn't ever said something about someone who annoyed them in private conversation?

 

Though I do sincerely doubt that she remembers and names specific screen names. I can't even remember the Twitter handles of my closest friends. I might recognize screen names of individuals I see a lot if I see them in context, but I wouldn't remember them enough to talk about individual posters (sorry, gang -- if I ever refer to anything said here in some other setting, you won't be getting named other than as "someone on PTV" because I won't remember your screen names and who said what away from the board).

[Camera One]

You can call us Mary Margaret.

[sharky]

I particularly liked this response to the initial post:

An actress sat down & started to badmouth a fan that she’s aware of online, a fan that didn’t direct tweets at her or something, just made public posts on tumblr that were what was it? “Too political”? Is she for real? Where does she find the time? Isn’t she supposed to be “researching” & “working hard” for her role that silly editing ~ruins~ all her good work & that’s why s5A sucked, through no fault of her own or the effed up C$? ;p

Is that why she failed at her arc? She was sitting down to “research” & ending up just browsing through your blog? xD

I think this person is trying to argue that JMo surfed the web instead of doing research, which is why she was badmouthing a fan. But instead, they essentially are inadvertently defending JMo. Because really, what actress would go trolling tumblr instead of researching her role? Geez, the delusions of grandeur are strong with these people.

[Serena]

I'm so sure this coincidentally only came out just now, and has nothing to do with Lana's "sisters" comments and telling SQers she sees it differently. Nope, nothing convenient about that.

[Rumsy4]

I got another hate anon. :-/