Thoughts

[alixtii]

This post from metafandom is making me feel very, very young.

*

The problem with lumping both femslash and m/m slash under the same "slash" label isn't only that somehow femslash always seems to end up dropping out of the discussion altogether (no matter how much some might protest that they really do mean both brands of slash), but that the grouping just plain doesn't make much sense. In addition to the gender of the objects of desire (a not insignificant difference, obviously!), the tropes, the communities, the ethoses (ethoi?), and the dynamics of the fic are all so incredibly different that one can't help but ignore one or the other when using the term "slash"--the two types of fic are just too disparate to fit comfortably under one label. A generalization about "slash" is hardly ever going to speak in any meaningful way to the situation in femslash. The differences between the two genres are legion. (This may vary from fandom to fandom, but in my experience femslash has never been as OTP-oriented, for example, as either m/m slash or het.)

The only thing we're left with is that both types of slash involve same-sex encounters. And while at one point in fandom, the "ooh!" of same-sex sex might have been important enough to link these two within a same genre, I don't think that's the case anymore. We categorize fics now based on the genders of the objects of our desire more than on the dynamics of the relationships involved, I think, and so femslash and m/m slash end up becoming more diametric opposites than anything else.

Of course, there's also still the "saying 'femslash' is like saying 'female doctor'" problem, which is why I try to make a habit of never using the term "slash" unmodified at all.

Comments

[thelastgoodname.livejournal.com]

[I think the plural of ethos is ethos.]

This is also a problem with the lesbian and gay community--or rather, the lesbian and gay communities, because most lesbians and gay men have nothing in common except that homophobes hate both of us, and funding groups won't fund us separately.

I prefer to reclaim the word gay in general usage (when coming out to complete strangers, for example), so I would probably be wont to use the "generic" slash when talking to people who've never heard of fanfic. On the other hand, I've recently taken to using f/f, m/m, and f/m when indulging in meta (unless I'm ranting about slash or het fans).

[alixtii.livejournal.com]

I hadn't thought of the lesbian/gay parallel, but now that you mention it it makes a whole lot of sense.

[katieliz.livejournal.com]

Re: the female doctor problem.

In my gender studies class we read a article (written in the 80s) that's main point seemed to be the female doctor problem. Only I have never in my life heard someone call a woman doctor that. Maybe its because I'm a female so people would be nervous about saying that in front of me?

Is it still a big issue?

The point I made was that I hear male nurse all the time, but I don't think I've ever heard "female" in front of a profession, so sexism in that way still exists, its just different than we expect.

[alixtii.livejournal.com]

Well, I concede the point that the "female doctor problem" isn't so much of a problem as regards actual female doctors, but you instantly knew what I meant when I mentioned it and was able to connect it to a body of academic literature, so that's probably the best name to call the issue by.

As more women move into male-dominated fields (thank god! now only if we could get rid of the glass elevator and glass ceiling....) the female doctor problem probably is and will be lessened in terms of the need to have special terms for females in those professions. As you point out, the flux of men into traditionally female professions has gone off quite so well, though.

I think it's still an issue in that people outside blue state NJ (and Philly) might not be so careful to be PC. I'd very easily believe that in the 80's things would have been different even here. And of course one has to go even farther back to find sincere uses of, say, "poetess." So things are definitely getting better.

Also in the plethora of things, like slash, which by default would be assumed to be associated with one gender unless explicitly modified otherwise, with the assumption that the default is more natural or otherwisely superior. And thelastgoodname brings up the parallel with lesbian/gay above, which I think is a good point.

And I feel like there are professions today for which the default would still be considered "male," but the only one I can think up off the top of my head would be priest.

So: no, I don't think there's still all that much problem with female doctors per se, but the phenomenon itself is still very much alive and an active part of the way systemic inequities are built into our language.

[thelastgoodname.livejournal.com]

A friend of mine calls female restaurant managers manageresses, and while I'd never heard it before, no one else seems to notice when he does it. He does not call female doctors doctresses.

And an extension of the female doctor problem that no one ever seems to notice is the distinction between actors and actresses.

[alixtii.livejournal.com]

Oh, I totally notice when someone uses "actress" outside the context of the Academy Awards. Although I suppose I only find the usage surprising in cases when the gender truly is irrelevant--if an actress were to call herself an actress rather than an actor I'd be surprised, but not so much if she or someone else were stresssing the femaleness--because no one says "female actor." When I talk about female actors I find hot, I'd say "the hottest actress" even if I were complimenting say Summer Glau's acting skills I'd say she was a good actor.

In both cases, the problem isn't so much with the forms "female doctor" or even "actress"--there are plenty of reasons why the gender of a performer or medical professional might be relevant--but that the "default" forms are understood to denote males.

[gloss]

In addition to the gender of the objects of desire (a not insignificant difference, obviously!), the tropes, the communities, the ethoses (ethoi?), and the dynamics of the fic are all so incredibly different that one can't help but ignore one or the other when using the term "slash"--the two types of fic are just too disparate to fit comfortably under one label.
See, I really kind of disagree with all of this. I don't dispute your experience, of course, but I also don't think things are (or need to be) quite so disparate/polarized as you're portraying them here. So please take the following comment as an attempt to sort out my own experience and expectations.

I mean, I'm coming from a fandom context where most people write boyslash, het, girlslash, and threesomes; there's not the divide there that one might find elsewhere, and its absence is probably one of the things I like most.

My disagreement falls into a couple of slots:
- gender of the objects of desire (a not insignificant difference, obviously!): It's not a big difference for me, nor for a lot of writers I like. I kind of wish you'd qualified this statement more.

- the tropes, the communities, the ethoses (ethoi?), and the dynamics of the fic - I'm not quite sure what you're describing here, and probably need some textual evidence in order to understand; I'm particularly interested in what you mean by the tropes differing. I had something of a personal breakthrough, writing-wise, a couple years ago when I realized that essentializing the differences in gender dynamics was silly, and started trying to write girlslash as I would boyslash and het. I think my fic improved, but that's a personal opinion, of course. (Ethoi is the plural that ethos would take if it were masculine; there's also ethe as a possibility.)

- This may vary from fandom to fandom, but in my experience femslash has never been as OTP-oriented, for example, as either m/m slash or het.
This surprises me, if only because Buffy/Faith, Cass/Steph, and Inara/Kaylee are *so* popular in their respective fandoms.

[alixtii.livejournal.com]

It's not a big difference for me, nor for a lot of writers I like. I kind of wish you'd qualified this statement more.

I'm not claiming that people don't base their reading and writing on enjoying a specific type of relationship (i.e. queer), because I know that plenty of people in fandom do, but I think basing it on the presence of the gender(s) to which one is attracted is more common. Furthermore, I'm making the argument that since so much f/f and m/m isn't about "gayness" as we know it in RL, and because same-sex relationships are generally less subversive both in terms of society and specific fannish texts, there's less of an impetus for a fanwriter/reader to say "I like reading/writing about same-sex relationships" rather than "I like reading/writing about men/women/both/neither/&c." If you ask the average m/m writer why she slashes, I'd expect she'd put forth men as the objects of her desire first, before any other explanations. (IOW, the "one man good, two men better" argument never falls out of favor.)

I'm not quite sure what you're describing here, and probably need some textual evidence in order to understand; I'm particularly interested in what you mean by the tropes differing.

I've never seen a femslash "We're Not Gay, We Just Love Each Other" fic. I don't think I've even seen a femslash genderswap fic. I know fpreg exists, but it's not exactly as common as mpreg, even proportionally to the amount of femslash written. Wingfic? So many of the tropes and formats and other elements that someone like cathexys might put forward as typical of m/m slash are commonly absent in f/f, or at least the f/f I've read. F/F writers don't need to work out body issues stemming from projecting themselves onto a body of the opposite sex (unless they're me, or another het f/f writer, who are in the vast minority). There's no exploration of masculinity, and less of a need to explore feminity because most of the writers are already female. There's less fear and hatred of Mary Sues, I think. Certainly there's less negative knee-jerk reactions against female characters in general. And also there's less discomfort with the notion of homosexuality. The list really goes on, I think, but I'd really need to compare it with someone entrenched in m/m slash fandom.

[alixtii.livejournal.com]

I had something of a personal breakthrough, writing-wise, a couple years ago when I realized that essentializing the differences in gender dynamics was silly, and started trying to write girlslash as I would boyslash and het. I think my fic improved, but that's a personal opinion, of course.

First off, I agree that essentializing gender differences is silly, and I don't know if your writing improved, but I've loved most of the femslash of yours I've read, so I think you're definitely doing something right. But I have to wonder how much of your boyslash was, to begin with, necessarily representative of the genre as it was (rather than how, perhaps, how it should be). I'm trying to describe my experience in fandom, doing my flawed best to look beyond my flist; if I were trying to prescribe what type of fic should be written (which of course I would never do) my exemplars would be much different--albeit much closer at hand. I don't recommend anyone try and write the "quintessential" m/m or f/f fic if they are striving for literary quality; but from a fanthropological standpoint I think it is useful to extract what those qualities would be in this sociohistorical location.

When I write a fic, I too try to write the fic as my muse demands, but I do recognize that my situatedness will inevitably reveal itself. And as a fanthropologist I look to how the situatedness of others reveals itself in their fannish endeavors, as a purely descriptive project always. (As a het male guest in a female space, I'd tread very lightly to do anything more.)

This surprises me, if only because Buffy/Faith, Cass/Steph, and Inara/Kaylee are *so* popular in their respective fandoms.

It never seemed to me that Inara/Kaylee was all that much bigger than, say, Kaylee/River. Obviously there's some selection bias going on (I like Kaylee/River better than Inara/Kaylee), but it's not like there wasn't over a year in which I read the_cortex regularly. (Lately I've had it filtered out.)
And there will always be a steady stream of Buffy/Faith, but it never seemed to me that it had even close to the market share occupied by a McShep, Blake/Avon, or even Kirk/Spock, and that even XF m/m was much more dominated by a single pairing (M/K) than Buffy femslash is. Xena/Gabrielle is an outlier, but then my understanding is that fandom is unique in more ways than one. (I'm going by hearsay on a lot of this, so I wouldn't necessarily be surprised to be proven wrong about the rôle of OTPs in m/m slash, but again I followed the su_herald for long enough to feel like I'm on firm ground re: Buffy/Faith.) I can't speak for Cass/Steph, although I've read the pairing; I'm just glad I know who they are, and would like one day to know them better.

Have I been clear at all?

[cathexys.livejournal.com]

I can't speak for either your or glossing's experience, but I do wonder whether there's a temporal aspect to this as well. As I've been told numerous times over the past couple of years, "my" perception of slash is fairly restricted to a certain generation of writing (if not writers), and while these types of stories still exist, their dominance is decreasing as we speak type.

Otoh, setting Cagney and Lacey aside, I think we're looking at f/f slash coming into its own a near two decades after m/m slash, and, esp with XWP nearly independently and with its own rules/norms/tropes/terms... So, I wonder whether we're really comparing apples and firetrucks, i.e., when I describe a certain type of m/m, that may not be the type that you should be comparing f/f to...the context, writers, etc may be very different.

Maybe glossing's closer to the truth by looking at writers who move back and forth and share very similar goals/ideas/approaches...

Now, of course, I want to see theearly nineties m/m vs f/f slash trope comparison :D

[executrix.livejournal.com]

When I was a tiny wee pervert, I lived in Boston, which at that point had mixed gay bars, and I always think about events as occurring at LGBT center or under LGBT auspices. I think it's fair to say that lesbians have done a damn sight more for AIDS issues than gay men have done for any women's health issue, but in a homophobic world (real or fictional) hanging together beats hanging separately. (OB Disclaimer: yes, I think slash is about exclusively gay characters and bisexual characters.)

BtVS fandom has always had approximately a bazillion pairings, but then so does BtVS canon (and some of them actually coincide!) I know that Buffy/Faith is a popular pairing, but my limited experience with Buffy fandom is that it's fairly civilized vis a vis pairings, and nobody will poison your dog just because you write stories that break up their OTP. (I could be wrong about this, of course.) I've never seen any OTP-related wank in Firefly fandom.

[heyiya.livejournal.com]

This post is once again making me think about how odd it is that I, a dyke, tend to find myself so much more drawn to m/m slash than f/f. I *like* f/f slash, but I don't get obsessed with it the same way. I had always tended to attribute that to my general liking for m/m porn and sexual fascination with queer masculinity: for me the queer is way, way more important than the masculinity, and when I desire a male body it's usually through identifying with another male body. Plus there's the fact that I know what lesbian sex is like and if the porn doesn't read pitch-perfect hot to me I drift off into thinking about other personal sexual matters...

Anyway, my point is that the generic differences you've highlighted in your post give me another potential lens through which to read my preferences. I'm generalising, given that I have read a relatively small amount of f/f compared to the quantity of m/m I've devoured, but I haven't seen in f/f many of the things that in m/m are totally compelling to me, in fact are guilty pleasures in my oh-so-nonheteronormative life. The emoporny explorations/subversions of masculinity, h/c romance, even genderswap (which I often do not like at all, but am kind of fascinated by); these seem to come out of the cross-gender writing that m/m slash usually is, and they're the tropes I find in m/m slash that I feel I can't get (satisfactorily) anywhere else. Of course they're far from the only things I read fic for... but I do always go back to them.

[ithiliana.livejournal.com]

here from metafandom--and oh, wow, I'm writing a paper on this very issue to give at a conference soon, and want to talk more when I am not nearly crashing from tiredness, because I'm voicing some of the same ideas.

[msilverstar]

Combat military personnel are almost entirely male. Used to be so for fighter pilots but it's getting better :-/

[thirdblindmouse.livejournal.com]

The differences between the two genres are legion.

Besides the OTP issue, what are these? They are not immediately obvious to me. I've always considered the boy- and girlslash two sides of the same thing, and in many ways the same as UC het pairings. I'm not saying there aren't differences between all three, but I'd like to know which ones stand out for you.

[alias_sqbr]

This is rather random, but I sat staring at the sentence "I know fpreg exists, but it's not exactly as common as mpreg" for some time before it made sense to me :)

Anyway: I've read very little femslash, but would assume this particular trope would be avoided since the partners immediatte reaction would probably be "You've cheated on me!" not "WTF pregnant man, yay now we can make babies". (I realise this is a gross oversimplification but hopefully you get my point :)) Otherwise, I have nothing intelligent to say about your actual point, so will vanish again into the aether.

(Here from metafadom btw)

Here via metafandom

[zyna-kat.livejournal.com]

Firstly: as someone who's interested in m/m pairings, and not at all in f/f or f/m pairings, I tend to agree with you.

Now: I notice the people who disagree with you here refer to male/male as "boyslash". Personally, I don't call male/male "boyslash", and I don't think it fits with what I read/write/enjoy in fandom. I tend to prefer men, usually men in their late 20s, 30s and 40s. Calling these men "boys" just seems odd to me. (When I see the term "boyslash", I tend to think of--rightly or wrongly--teens, boybands, and/or anime.)

It may just be semantics, but there may be more to it. YMMV, and all that. Interesting post!

Re: Here via metafandom

[alixtii.livejournal.com]

Typing "boyslash" into LJSeek didn't exactly confirm my own suspicions--it turns out that it is used beyond the femslash community which I've seen use it (because that's where I hang out). It seems to be pretty strongly a media fandom term, not a popslash one--so Buffy, Farscape, Supernatural, Harry Potter, Firefly, Torchwood and Doctor Who, House, Studio 60, etc.--and certainly not just about teens or characters we would typically think of as boys.

Part of the appeal of the term "boyslash" might be that demeaning character of "boy" might be seen to parallel any demeaning character found in the term "femslash." I know there have been plenty of people who have objected to the supposed implications of the affix "fem" in femslash. but I agree that boyslash as a term for m/m slash is problematic (although probably no less so than femslash as a term), but part of the problem is that saying "m/m slash" or even just "m/m" all the time can seem sort of clunky.\

But in general, the only generalization I'd make about people who use "male" is that they all find the way the term "slash" is used in fandom to be problematic, and (probably) that they find other possibilities (manslash, m/m, male/male, whatever you might call it) too lack, say, poetic ring?

[alixtii.livejournal.com]

I'd love to hear your thoughts when you're not crashing!

[alixtii.livejournal.com]

Yes, that is certainly one reason why female/female pregnancy stories would, sociologically speaking, perform different functions in an interpretive community than would male/male pregnancy stories. Also that the concept of female/female pregnancy doesn't feel nearly as subversive as that of m/m, requiring signigicantly less potent magic or technology, and that many women already know what it is like for a woman to undergo pregnancy (while mpreg is unexplored territory) and wouldn't feel as great a need to explore the idea through fic.

But, in general, this is only one of many ways that stories about men (in societies like ours) are different than stories about women (in societies like ours), and that (mostly) women writing stories about men (ISLO) is different than (mostly) women writing stories about women (ISLO).

Not to butt in or anything :P

[thirdblindmouse.livejournal.com]

I use "boyslash" because it specifies what I'm talking about and has a straightforward parallel in "girlslash". Perhaps calling grown men and women "boys" and "girls" sounds odd, but a lot of people refer to their favourite characters that way ("I love to see my boys get up close and personal," etc.).

Re: Here via metafandom

[zyna-kat.livejournal.com]

Hi! Thanks for replying!

"Boyslash"
it turns out that it is used beyond the femslash community

Oh, yes! I didn't mean to imply that it was a fem-slash-ish term, though, as usual, that was much more clear in my own mind than it was when I typed it.

It seems to be pretty strongly a media fandom term, not a popslash one

*nods* Yes, not surprising. My perception of the term "boyslash" is simply that... my perception. I'm not surprised to find out that perception wasn't accurate.

I guess what I kinda meant to say was: it seems to me (in general) that people who use the term "boyslash" are into fandom for reasons that are really different from the reasons I am (and my close fannish friends are) into fandom. That might be another false perception, but, on the other hand, people my fannish "group" tend to scoff at the term "boyslash" being applied to what we like.

Or, maybe I'm just a snob. :)

As for "boyslash" being parallel to "femslash", I tend to see "boyslash" more a parallel to "girlslash".

but part of the problem is that saying "m/m slash" or even just "m/m" all the time can seem sort of clunky.

A few years ago, I might have agreed. But now I tend to use the term more often than not. (I probably use "m/m slash" most often, unless I'm amongst close friends who understand exactly what I mean when I say "slash".) (Also: part of the reason I don't find "m/m slash" so clunky is my exposure to Harry Potter fandom, where "slash" could mean anything from m/m to adult/child to bestiality to non-canonical. Harry Potter fandom is bad for one's sanity.)

But in general, the only generalization I'd make

Heh. Y'know, I have no idea. Right not, I'm not even sure what I believe.

(I really enjoyed your post and responses, and I apologize for rambling all over your journal. I should probably get to sleep now...)

Re: Not to butt in or anything :P

[zyna-kat.livejournal.com]

:)

Maybe I'm completely wrong, and it is just semantics. (And I do recognize my perception is just that... my perception.) I do sometimes use the term "boys" when I casually talk about them, but for some reason, the term "boyslash"... just doesn't work for me in what I do for fandom.

Could also mean that I'm an old fuddy-duddy. (I'm 40, and most of my fannish friends are "older" as well.) Or maybe I'm just *really* tired.

I'll definitely be keeping a more open mind about "boyslash" et al. I appreciate the insight! :)

Re: Here via metafandom

[crystel-dream.livejournal.com]

I've always wondered about whether the prefix "femme/fem" is objected to in the same way "boy" is objected to by some of the m/m fandom as, to me at least, it doesn't have the same objectional/out of place connotations to me as "boyslash" does.

"Femme" in a lesbian perspective generally implies neither "Butch" which are the more masculine dressing/acting lesbians nor "Lipstick" which are the more feminine dressing/acting ones and is often thought of more as a general term so as to avoid classifying a "type"/"stereotype" of lesbian.

"Femme" is also the French word for "female" - any age/sexuality of human female and so I've always thought of it as the least objectional term that could be used.

I have to admit I always took the "fem" form to be a shortened version of "femme" rather than giving it purely the connitation of "feminine" which is where our milage may be differing.

Whereas "boy", to me, more often than not carries the implication of "immature" or "young" which, when writing about male characters over the age of about 25 can sound very demeaning and/or out of place.

Personally I hate the term "boyslash" and have a tendency to refer to the two types as "slash" and "femmeslash" in order to differentiate. But that could just be me.

again with the butting in

[thirdblindmouse.livejournal.com]

I guess what I kinda meant to say was: it seems to me (in general) that people who use the term "boyslash" are into fandom for reasons that are really different from the reasons I am (and my close fannish friends are) into fandom.

What difference to you think it implies? It probably proves me hopelessly naïve or prone to overgeneralizing, but I tend to assume that everyone is in fandom for basically the same reason: we love the canon and want to explore it further.