![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shadowkatI'll probably regret this post in the morning, then again maybe not. One never knows. About posts that this. One of the many hazards of writing and/or posting on the inter-webs. Some people never regret what they post. I envy that. Of course they don't tend post the silly things or post without editing first, I do. So there is that.
Reading Good Reads discussion threads and ahem Mark Watches review of Smashed (wish I hadn't, although his reaction I saw coming a mile away) this week...made me realize something, no matter where you go on the interwebs to discuss stuff, you will face the same people - no not the same "people" but the same...well posting personas. And dealing with them is a tricky business, particularly if you are like me, not that you are of course (perhaps I should stop using the personal pronoun you? Be safer at any rate), and have a tendency to fall into the same behavioral pattern yourself.
1. Trigger Boy or Trigger Girl - You've met this guy or gal. You may be them. (I was at different points - we are all to a degree, but there are extremes, and the extreme is the person who basically is nothing but one big trigger. The whole show is about them!). You'll be knee deep in a debate about a favorite character, and all of a sudden they tell you that wait - they were raped. Or abused by their ex-boyfriend. Or beaten by their parents. Or witnessed it. Or an evil boss bullied them. And the abuser/rapist/bully bares an uncanny behavioral resemblance to the character and/or relationship you happen to be debating. "This is a trigger for me" - they'll state. Or "You have to understand _____________ relationship reminds me of the abusive relationship I had with my ex. Who (raped/beat/abused) me for (period of time)." Then they will go into graphic detail. (For a recent example of Trigger Boy go to Mark Watches review of Smashed. Pretty much covers it. MARK is the poster child for "Trigger Boy". Trigger Boy/Girl perceives everything through an emotional lense and often relates it all back to their own horrible past. Note in most cases, they are happy now, and the abuse they are discussing is long over. ).
What to do? Back away slowly and do not engage. No good will come of it. You will look like a nasty bitca. And you're discussion successfully derailed. It's no longer objective, it's subjective. And it's emotional.
Although rest assured someone will engage them.
2. The Pedant or Grammar Nerd - Grammar Nerd will hijack your argument by correcting your punctuation, grammar, or syntax. Others may join in. Before long you have an entire discussion about whether your sentence was grammatically correct. Your whole argument is forgotten. And if you post again? You are self-conscious and want to have someone edit every post.
There's a lovely thread on Good Reads that demonstrates this: Effectively Slayed By Grammar Nerds on Good Reads. Read it, it's the most extreme instance of the grammar nerd that I've seen.
Possibly because the thread is about grammatical mistakes in Twilight, so that alone will attract every bored grammar nerd on the site.
How to handle? Politely thank them for correcting your grammar. And ask if they would like to be your personal beta for the duration? You can email all your posts to them so they can personally edit them first.
3. The Holier-than-Thou Culture Police: They like to attack fans for loving controversial characters, relationships, stories, and books. And will disparage anything that appears to them to be misogynistic, sexist, homophobic, racist, etc. From their perspective - all cultural items must be politically correct.
They will often state that a book is offensive to women and shouldn't be published. Or that fans of a character are sick or there's something wrong with them. Often they'll state that what disturbs them most is a fan loves an "obviously" abusive relationship or bad boyfriend and there's a risk this poor deluded soul will seek them out in reality. Another complaint? That the show or book or film is racist, misogynistic, or homophobic. They do not understand how it is possible that people see books or tv shows differently. Obviously this is racist, they will state, and if you can't see it? This is anti-femist! This is offensive to all women! If you can't see it? You are either a fool or racist/anti-feminist or misogynistic too.
How to handle? Do not engage. Back away slowly. No good will come of it.
4. The Culture Vulture: This person considers anything that is not "quality" as they define it - crap and should not be watched or read. They will mock it. They will say how it is beneath them. They will rant about how badly written it is. Filled with grammatical errors. Or it's a bad show.
How to handle? Do not engage. Back away slowly. There's no win here.
5. The Snark: This persona likes to make fun or mock things. They are quick with a one-liner. It's often sarcastic. (I unfortunately am guilty of this, although it is fun.)
And this is often used as either a defense mechanism or it's meant as a joke. There are degrees...though, the extreme version is really nasty and mean - see TWOYP thread for an example. That site attracts a lot of snarks.
How to handle: Don't take them seriously. And don't engage. Or..snark back. Make fun together, keep it light.
6. The Cheerleader - this persona loves everything. Squees about everything. Wants everyone to like them. They are chatty and nice, and often post GIPs. They also cheer on underdogs.
How to handle: Stay positive. Don't make fun of them. And trade GIPs.
7. The Devil's Advocate: They love to argue. They will literally debate anything. You have no idea what their true stance is. They often argue both.
How to handle: Don't get emotional. Stick with rational argument.
8. Emo Girl or Boy: They get emotional over everything. Take everything personally. Can't see sarcasm at all. And will often provide hugs at the end of every post. And are highly empathetic to others. They don't tend to deal with the Snark or Devil's Advocate very well. And are combustible when you put them with Emo Boy or Girl.
How to handle: Difficult. Depends on the situation and who they are up against. In most cases, they are lovable souls. But avoid snarking to them at all costs, and try to keep them away from the Devil's Advocate.
9. The Expert: This person knows EVERYTHING there is to know about the book or show. They will often litter their posts with links, exact dialogue, interview quotes, etc. They know all the writers, titles, dialogue, and can spell the names of every character. They also know everything that happened back stage. (sigh, I unfortunately have fallen under this category - go read my posts). They are detail oriented and feel at times like a human encyclopedia of trivial information. (Actually I think 95% of my flist is like this - geeks seek each other out. I love the Expert.)
How to handle? Probably best to be nice and thankful. Polite corrections only.
10. The Fact Checker: Requests back-up or proof of everything. They will nit-pick your accuracy on facts. If you misquote a writer - they'll tell you. They will ask for links to any interview you provide - as back-up. And often will provide links that show you are wrong.
How to handle? Thank them for the catch. Back away after that. Possibly even correct your post and credit them. Don't fight them - it doesn't end well. I know it is tempting.
11. The Troll: Often spams discussion threads. Breaks the rules of the thread deliberately. Is there to cause trouble.
How to handle: Summarily Ban. (Disclaimer - I've not banned any trolls on lj.)
12. The Trickster Clown: This person just goofs off, everything is a joke to them. They come up with funny posting names, and don't take anything seriously. The internet is just a big sandbox. They will play pranks and tricks. Post nonsense.
How to handle: Have fun with them. Don't take them personally. Don't react.
13. The Great Debator: Not to be confused with internet bully. They want to win the argument and often are aggressive. They don't stop until they win.
How to handle: Just say it's time we agreed to respectfully disagree. They'll back off.
14. The Internet Bully: Bullies people into seeing their point of view. Often has a bunch of groupies. Who they gather up to invade posts. Their aim is to cause a flame war. Often discussions with the internet bully will end in name-calling. They don't give up. They will harass and will stalk. Can come across self-righteous.
How to handle? Summarily ban. And ignore. Ban their friends if they bring them.
15. The Self-Appointed Defender : This is a fan of a writer, show, character, actor, actress - and they feel the need to swoop to this person's or show's aid. If you so much as frown at it - they will be all over you. Attacking you as if you attacked their baby or puppy.
How to handle? Back away slowly. Do not engage. They will bring reinforcements. Just politely state that you view it differently and that you are sorry you offended them.
Finally...on all discussion boards, blogs, etc...you will be at the mercy of The Moderator - this is the person or persons who moderate and often facilitate the discussion, they may own the site. They make the rules. The site or blog is their personality. If they don't own it, they are friends with or employees of the site. Their job is stop flame wars and keep the peace. And they have a tough job.
How to handle? Be their friend. Respect them. Keep in mind they get all the email messages. And that if a flame war breaks out - it's in their home. Don't piss them off. Don't bully them or spoil them. If you post long posts - thank them and ask if it is okay. They have the power to ban or boot your ass off the forum if you don't behave.
Disclaimer: This is purely based on my own experiences on the net. Mileage may vary. And I've seen these personas on every fan discussion board or forum on the net. The key I've found to surviving an internet discussion is politeness, backing away or leaving when you get angry and never posting in anger, staying away from people who make you crazy or angry.
If you get into a heated discussion and you realize it's going to derail...politely state it is time we agree to disagree. Then leave.
With my brother...whenever we argue, I often think, damn, I need the last word. It's stupid. I know. Having the last word doesn't mean you won. It may just mean the other person got tired of arguing with you or bored of the discussion.
Reading Good Reads discussion threads and ahem Mark Watches review of Smashed (wish I hadn't, although his reaction I saw coming a mile away) this week...made me realize something, no matter where you go on the interwebs to discuss stuff, you will face the same people - no not the same "people" but the same...well posting personas. And dealing with them is a tricky business, particularly if you are like me, not that you are of course (perhaps I should stop using the personal pronoun you? Be safer at any rate), and have a tendency to fall into the same behavioral pattern yourself.
1. Trigger Boy or Trigger Girl - You've met this guy or gal. You may be them. (I was at different points - we are all to a degree, but there are extremes, and the extreme is the person who basically is nothing but one big trigger. The whole show is about them!). You'll be knee deep in a debate about a favorite character, and all of a sudden they tell you that wait - they were raped. Or abused by their ex-boyfriend. Or beaten by their parents. Or witnessed it. Or an evil boss bullied them. And the abuser/rapist/bully bares an uncanny behavioral resemblance to the character and/or relationship you happen to be debating. "This is a trigger for me" - they'll state. Or "You have to understand _____________ relationship reminds me of the abusive relationship I had with my ex. Who (raped/beat/abused) me for (period of time)." Then they will go into graphic detail. (For a recent example of Trigger Boy go to Mark Watches review of Smashed. Pretty much covers it. MARK is the poster child for "Trigger Boy". Trigger Boy/Girl perceives everything through an emotional lense and often relates it all back to their own horrible past. Note in most cases, they are happy now, and the abuse they are discussing is long over. ).
What to do? Back away slowly and do not engage. No good will come of it. You will look like a nasty bitca. And you're discussion successfully derailed. It's no longer objective, it's subjective. And it's emotional.
Although rest assured someone will engage them.
2. The Pedant or Grammar Nerd - Grammar Nerd will hijack your argument by correcting your punctuation, grammar, or syntax. Others may join in. Before long you have an entire discussion about whether your sentence was grammatically correct. Your whole argument is forgotten. And if you post again? You are self-conscious and want to have someone edit every post.
There's a lovely thread on Good Reads that demonstrates this: Effectively Slayed By Grammar Nerds on Good Reads. Read it, it's the most extreme instance of the grammar nerd that I've seen.
Possibly because the thread is about grammatical mistakes in Twilight, so that alone will attract every bored grammar nerd on the site.
How to handle? Politely thank them for correcting your grammar. And ask if they would like to be your personal beta for the duration? You can email all your posts to them so they can personally edit them first.
3. The Holier-than-Thou Culture Police: They like to attack fans for loving controversial characters, relationships, stories, and books. And will disparage anything that appears to them to be misogynistic, sexist, homophobic, racist, etc. From their perspective - all cultural items must be politically correct.
They will often state that a book is offensive to women and shouldn't be published. Or that fans of a character are sick or there's something wrong with them. Often they'll state that what disturbs them most is a fan loves an "obviously" abusive relationship or bad boyfriend and there's a risk this poor deluded soul will seek them out in reality. Another complaint? That the show or book or film is racist, misogynistic, or homophobic. They do not understand how it is possible that people see books or tv shows differently. Obviously this is racist, they will state, and if you can't see it? This is anti-femist! This is offensive to all women! If you can't see it? You are either a fool or racist/anti-feminist or misogynistic too.
How to handle? Do not engage. Back away slowly. No good will come of it.
4. The Culture Vulture: This person considers anything that is not "quality" as they define it - crap and should not be watched or read. They will mock it. They will say how it is beneath them. They will rant about how badly written it is. Filled with grammatical errors. Or it's a bad show.
How to handle? Do not engage. Back away slowly. There's no win here.
5. The Snark: This persona likes to make fun or mock things. They are quick with a one-liner. It's often sarcastic. (I unfortunately am guilty of this, although it is fun.)
And this is often used as either a defense mechanism or it's meant as a joke. There are degrees...though, the extreme version is really nasty and mean - see TWOYP thread for an example. That site attracts a lot of snarks.
How to handle: Don't take them seriously. And don't engage. Or..snark back. Make fun together, keep it light.
6. The Cheerleader - this persona loves everything. Squees about everything. Wants everyone to like them. They are chatty and nice, and often post GIPs. They also cheer on underdogs.
How to handle: Stay positive. Don't make fun of them. And trade GIPs.
7. The Devil's Advocate: They love to argue. They will literally debate anything. You have no idea what their true stance is. They often argue both.
How to handle: Don't get emotional. Stick with rational argument.
8. Emo Girl or Boy: They get emotional over everything. Take everything personally. Can't see sarcasm at all. And will often provide hugs at the end of every post. And are highly empathetic to others. They don't tend to deal with the Snark or Devil's Advocate very well. And are combustible when you put them with Emo Boy or Girl.
How to handle: Difficult. Depends on the situation and who they are up against. In most cases, they are lovable souls. But avoid snarking to them at all costs, and try to keep them away from the Devil's Advocate.
9. The Expert: This person knows EVERYTHING there is to know about the book or show. They will often litter their posts with links, exact dialogue, interview quotes, etc. They know all the writers, titles, dialogue, and can spell the names of every character. They also know everything that happened back stage. (sigh, I unfortunately have fallen under this category - go read my posts). They are detail oriented and feel at times like a human encyclopedia of trivial information. (Actually I think 95% of my flist is like this - geeks seek each other out. I love the Expert.)
How to handle? Probably best to be nice and thankful. Polite corrections only.
10. The Fact Checker: Requests back-up or proof of everything. They will nit-pick your accuracy on facts. If you misquote a writer - they'll tell you. They will ask for links to any interview you provide - as back-up. And often will provide links that show you are wrong.
How to handle? Thank them for the catch. Back away after that. Possibly even correct your post and credit them. Don't fight them - it doesn't end well. I know it is tempting.
11. The Troll: Often spams discussion threads. Breaks the rules of the thread deliberately. Is there to cause trouble.
How to handle: Summarily Ban. (Disclaimer - I've not banned any trolls on lj.)
12. The Trickster Clown: This person just goofs off, everything is a joke to them. They come up with funny posting names, and don't take anything seriously. The internet is just a big sandbox. They will play pranks and tricks. Post nonsense.
How to handle: Have fun with them. Don't take them personally. Don't react.
13. The Great Debator: Not to be confused with internet bully. They want to win the argument and often are aggressive. They don't stop until they win.
How to handle: Just say it's time we agreed to respectfully disagree. They'll back off.
14. The Internet Bully: Bullies people into seeing their point of view. Often has a bunch of groupies. Who they gather up to invade posts. Their aim is to cause a flame war. Often discussions with the internet bully will end in name-calling. They don't give up. They will harass and will stalk. Can come across self-righteous.
How to handle? Summarily ban. And ignore. Ban their friends if they bring them.
15. The Self-Appointed Defender : This is a fan of a writer, show, character, actor, actress - and they feel the need to swoop to this person's or show's aid. If you so much as frown at it - they will be all over you. Attacking you as if you attacked their baby or puppy.
How to handle? Back away slowly. Do not engage. They will bring reinforcements. Just politely state that you view it differently and that you are sorry you offended them.
Finally...on all discussion boards, blogs, etc...you will be at the mercy of The Moderator - this is the person or persons who moderate and often facilitate the discussion, they may own the site. They make the rules. The site or blog is their personality. If they don't own it, they are friends with or employees of the site. Their job is stop flame wars and keep the peace. And they have a tough job.
How to handle? Be their friend. Respect them. Keep in mind they get all the email messages. And that if a flame war breaks out - it's in their home. Don't piss them off. Don't bully them or spoil them. If you post long posts - thank them and ask if it is okay. They have the power to ban or boot your ass off the forum if you don't behave.
Disclaimer: This is purely based on my own experiences on the net. Mileage may vary. And I've seen these personas on every fan discussion board or forum on the net. The key I've found to surviving an internet discussion is politeness, backing away or leaving when you get angry and never posting in anger, staying away from people who make you crazy or angry.
If you get into a heated discussion and you realize it's going to derail...politely state it is time we agree to disagree. Then leave.
With my brother...whenever we argue, I often think, damn, I need the last word. It's stupid. I know. Having the last word doesn't mean you won. It may just mean the other person got tired of arguing with you or bored of the discussion.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2012-07-21 01:53 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-07-21 02:10 am (UTC)Good Reads Threads are hilarious, because I've seen all these personalities pop up and even worse than they were in the Buffy fandom.
The Grammar nerd kerfuffle has to be seen to be believed. Seriously, talk about some bored English PH.D's.
no subject
Date: 2012-07-21 02:12 am (UTC)2. Grammar Nerd. If one is dyslexic like you or I, these folks are pretty unpleasant. They do seem to feed off each other. It would be nice if they'd stick to their own sites and giggle about how dumb everyone else is where they can't be heard.
3. Culture Police. I don't remember encountering anyone like this, but I'm positive they are out there. I think they'd quickly get run out of most sites I've been.
4. Culture Vulture. I'm at least partially guilty of that. I mock Romance novels and never got hooked even as a kid on adventure comics rather than funny ones. Too many friends like these things, so I behave myself a little better now. But even now whenever I see Captain America I feel this irresistible urge to mock. ;o)
5. The Snark. Guilty. Maybe we snarks should stick to our own sites so we can giggle about what everyone else is serious about.
6.Cheerleader. ATPO's official cheerleader was such a nice kid it was hard to gripe.
7. Devil Advocate. I could do that, but that's kind of an act that works best in high school.
8. Emo kids. They and I are unmixy things.
9. Expert. It would be easier to count the ones that weren't on ATPo than those that were. Maybe ATPo was the site where we experts giggled about everyone who wasn't.
10. Fact Checker. I'm guily of that too. Other's don't hate you as much if you let them catch you in mistakes, too. (see experts)
11. The Troll. Another thing that seems a lot cooler to be in high school.
12. The Trickster. These are the folks that just don't ever seem to figure out how unpopular they are and give up. On ATPo I don't know who was worse "Claudia" or "Boke.com"
13 The Great Debator. I think any serious discussion site attracts these. I'd be one, but I think I've learned that your arguments work better if you make your case and then shut up and let the other person think about it. At least I can do that in real life.
14. Internet Bullies. We were pretty good at stomping these on ATPo. But not so good on other sites I've been on.
15. Self Appointed Defender. Without really good arguments these folks would get very lonely on the sites I've been on. I think this is why ATPo scared people. ;o)
no subject
Date: 2012-07-21 02:17 am (UTC)Frankly, I was rather appalled by the conduct of the mods and admin in this debate. They're the ones supposed to keep the peace and be level-headed, and they were the ones slinging most of the hostility and insults. Not cool, not cool at all.
I think I'm pretty much done with Mark's sites. The nominal enjoyment I get from reading the reviews just isn't worth the hostility and drama, or the unease I get about posting anything there.
no subject
Date: 2012-07-21 02:50 am (UTC)After I read the Smashed Review (I avoided the comments thread like the plague and have been since the beginning and never post) - I knew exactly what would happen. I actually predicted it when he first started posting on Spike. He reminds me a great deal of a guy that I interacted with on a fan board way back in 2002-2003. This guy was a lot like Mark. So much so, I sometimes wonder if they are one and the same. Trigger Boy big time. He over-identified with Willow/Tara, and saw Spike as his evil ex. You couldn't discuss the show with him. He wasn't rational.
I read the Wrecked review - it's not bad. Which was surprising. So clearly something happened, and Mark figured out that he had to be a bit more careful in his reviews. According to the comments...there were apparently 10 million responses, and most were filtered or deleted. So, I'm guessing, really bad kerfuffle?
Not at all surprised. His review on Smashed was...a perfect example of a Trigger Boy post. And he'd stated various times in earlier posts how he had this horribly abusive relationship in high school or in his early 20s. So yep, Trigger Boy.
no subject
Date: 2012-07-21 03:07 am (UTC)Oh yes. Very Guilty. Five of my Buffy comic reviews are pure Snark. Was doing it for a bit with Vamp Diaries...but the snark was pissing people off, so I stopped. I also snark about romance novels, which pisses people off. I make fun of what I like and mock it. But..not everyone does.
8. Emo kids. They and I are unmixy things.
Yes, Emo and Snark are very unmixy things. You do not want them together on a thread.
I know whereof I speak. And, alas, this is why I've had to tame my snark on the net at times.
Another person who hates snark is the Self-Appointed Defender, they despise snark.
Grammar Nerd. If one is dyslexic like you or I, these folks are pretty unpleasant. They do seem to feed off each other. It would be nice if they'd stick to their own sites and giggle about how dumb everyone else is where they can't be heard.
Oh yes. They drive me nuts. Whedonesque has quite a few of them. There's this one guy who invaded a post I did on Dollhouse and literally reamed me for using the word "squick". LOL!
You are right, they feed off each other like crazy. The Good Reads Thread is a thing of beauty. It has got to be the most hilarious instance that I've seen to date.
What happened was this - a English Ph.D major made the mistake of posting about Twilight's grammatical errors. And someone came back and said that she should make sure her grammar was accurate before going after Twilight. (Self-Appointed Defender). Which resulted in someone else tearing apart her sentence and explaining in detail where she erred. And then they began arguing over how to write her sentence correctly. It just went on from there.
At some point she comes back, understandably pissed, and says - "OMG, I can't believe you are tearing apart my sentence. It's a discussion board.
WTF? How much time do you have on your hands?"
I laughed my head off, because I know what that feels like and the grammar nerds really did look like idiots. Who just kept digging themselves deeper and deeper into a hole.
no subject
Date: 2012-07-21 03:18 am (UTC)I think Drzzzt is sort of a combo of Trickster and Troll. But was also harmless.
The ATPO board was different from a lot of fan boards, because it was older.
The vast majority of posters were above the age of 30. It was also a board that attracted "The Expert" personality, Devil's Advocate, and Great Debator like crazy. These three personalities tend to scare off Emo, Trigger Boy, and
Self-Appointed Defenders. Although on lj Self-Appointed Defender's travel in packs, I've discovered. I got invaded by a bunch of Charisma Carpenter SAD's a while back - it was ugly.
The other big difference was that it was not a spoiler board. Spoiler boards attracted a much larger group of people.
no subject
Date: 2012-07-21 03:19 am (UTC)-Mark, obviously, freaked out about the whole thing in his review
-Several people tried to offer their alternate interpretations; that Buffy was more to blame, or that both Spike and Buffy were responsible for things because the relationship is super messed up. One or two people said that they were surprised Mark didn't identify with Spike more, given his experiences.
-These people were immediately shut down by other people (mostly mods) claiming that this meant they blamed Buffy for Spike ignoring Buffy's boundaries, and anyone trying to defend Spike or Spike's actions was a misogynist and rape apologist. There were a lot of 'When a woman says no she means no!' comments
-Anyone who tried to explain themselves or take a position counter to Mark's was shut down even more violently, with a lot of insults and posting gifs and pictures saying 'STFU and GTFO.' (I saw several posts of a pic of Gollum with the text LEAVE NOW AND NEVER COME BACK.)
-Mark specifically called out and insulted a few of the people, claiming they were dismissing and belittling his experience and it was creepy that they used his life to make a point or defend their position.
-Lots of people got banned.
-Apparently there was crazy drama going down on Tumblr, with people sending rape/death threats on both sides-- I heard random Spike/Buffy shippers on Tumblr got dragged into it.
-Most of the people who got banned gathered on LJ to collectively say "WTF is wrong with these people?" also "Didn't we already have this fandom war?"
-The mods retreated to the Mark Spoils blog and started a thread to "hide from the comments on Markwatches" and basically talk about how awful all of the commenters were and how terrible it all was for Mark. (I lurk there sometimes, which is how I found out about the drama.)
-Also there was more of Mark's "ableism" crap with a few commenters describing Buffy's actions as 'bipolar' and getting reported for using the word.
For the record? None of the comments I saw from those who were banned were really out of line; people were generally making their point reasonably and politely. What they got in return were insults and hostility. There was actually one person who wrote a very nice, disarming comment trying to explain that maybe Mark was overreacting, and Mark straight up told him/her to "get off my site, you MRA piece of shit."
It was a drama storm of epic proportions. I'm still kind of hoping someone more involved and with a better understanding compiles it all up for a fandom_wank report, because holy crap.
I don't understand the half of it myself because I haven't even seen the episodes being discussed: my understanding of S6 is mostly that, well, everything is awful for everybody, and Buffy/Spike is a complicated mess of a relationship. It's a big part of why I've resisted watching the later seasons, but now I'm kind of curious just to see what sparked so much controversy in fandom.
no subject
Date: 2012-07-21 03:32 am (UTC)So then he comments today in several places about how bitter Spike fans have spoiled him on this event and how it's really upsetting and how terrible it is to be spoiled for something.
The LJ group can't seem to decide if this is a clever ploy to allow him to talk about being spoiled and blame it on someone else, or if he really didn't know and is genuinely upset. I feel like it could go either way, honestly. I do sometimes question Mark's unspoiled status on these big pop-culture shows. I mean, hell, I had never seen an episode of Buffy until a year ago and I still knew Angel was a vampire, Spike was evil but then he became good, also he got a chip in his head, and that Buffy died at the end of one of the seasons. I knew all that going it and it was just from random Internet osmosis. So Mark's "I know nothing" seems to strain belief, even if he did apparently grow up under a rock.
Anyway, it's an interesting little subplot to the whole mess. Mark has apparently put up a big long text post on his most recent Angel review addressing the situation. I don't know that I believe his assertion that he's going to prevent any further Spuffy meltdowns. As far as I understand, S6 is FULL of upsetting and controversial writing, so there's pretty much guaranteed to be some major drama no matter what.
no subject
Date: 2012-07-21 03:37 am (UTC)But that's partly because the people I'm reading don't read Mark Watches - they stopped a long time ago, because they figured out much as I did that he would not react well to Spuffy and well, been there done that. If you've been in fandom long enough, you can see the signs.
The Spike/Buffy romance in S6 is basically kinky/rough/BDSM sex - which one of the writer's, Marti Noxon, pitched and based on her own college experiences - she'd been in that type of relationship. Except Marti had been in the Spike role from beginning to end. So we have a female writer - writing a male character in the role that she had in reality. It was gender bender of epic proportions.
It's very controversial and I've never seen anyone do anything like it on network tv before. HBO maybe. But not on a network tv show at 8pm. And not in 2001. It was basically the 50 Shades of Grey of its time. Many of the comments people have about 50 Shades of Grey are similar. I was on a thread on Good Reads - which had very similar comments, although extremely polite and far more understanding than what you reported on Mark Watches and Tumblr.
The Spuffy relationship in S6 is what brought me into the fandom. I got obsessed. Because I didn't think they'd ever do it. And how they did it was different.
You'd like Smashed, I think, the bit with the Trioka (Warren, Jonathan, and Andrew) and Spike is actually a sci-fi geek's heaven.
And the sex scene is great - one of the best filmed scenes of the series. Scholars have written lengthy papers on it. And made presentations.
S6 is actually an interesting season. Possibly one of the riskiest seasons ever done on tv. It's insane what they do with the characters and how far they push the envelope.
no subject
Date: 2012-07-21 03:47 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-07-21 03:51 am (UTC)But if you think there's a storm now, just wait till he gets to Seeing Red. I doubt there's ever been an episode that controversial on any show. Honestly, it seemed like the whole internet just exploded.
Like you, I'm pretty skeptical of Mark's unspoiled status.
no subject
Date: 2012-07-21 04:09 am (UTC)Oh I'd definitely agree with them. I've thought this for some time now. And that's not the only thing he's being somewhat dishonest about. I've caught him a few times. He's constantly contradicting himself on things.
And..You can tell what he's doing. Half of his readership is reading him for the unspoiled reactions. But if he's spoiled, half the fun's gone. Heck, I'm losing interest.
Also, there's no way you can be as present as he is on the internet and interact with pop culture geeks and not know things about Buffy. There are people who don't, but not people who are on the internet as much as Mark.
Mark has apparently put up a big long text post on his most recent Angel review addressing the situation. I don't know that I believe his assertion that he's going to prevent any further Spuffy meltdowns. As far as I understand, S6 is FULL of upsetting and controversial writing, so there's pretty much guaranteed to be some major drama no matter what.
LOL! You've no idea. He may be less spoiled than I think, if he believes that he'll be able to prevent that. Because trust me when I state that Smashed is tame in comparison. So is Wrecked. Up-coming? In one episode Buffy beats Spike to a pulp, after he attempts to stop her from turning herself in to the cops for a crime the Trioka framed her for. In another episode, an invisible Buffy gives Spike oral sex, after he attempts to throw her out. And then of course...the big one Seeing Red.
I knew he'd have a problem after I did my poll. The results? 54 % were reading Mark Watches. Of the 54%? 75-100% preferred Spike over Willow and were Spuffy fans.
Now, if Mark were someone like me or you, just blogging, not wanting to sell his work or make money at it...this would not be a problem. But he's doing it for the money. Which means people expect more from him. A higher level of maturity. He can't afford to be Emo/Trigger Boy. He has to be careful. The Buffy fandom is not like the Twilight fandom.
Also, whoo boy, the Spike Wars. People remember them. They split the fandom in half. They were worse than the Comic Book wars. People left the fandom over them. People stopped watching the series. It was nasty. Sort of a much larger and more wide-spread version of the fandom kerfuffle you described on Mark Watches. On 20 different fan sites.
And I haven't even touched on the wars over Willow. In S6, more people hated Willow than Spike. Serious hate. You caught a little bits of it on my recent polls. Xander? Even worse. People despised him. Many Xander fans despised S6.
Buffy? Also got her share of hate.
That was an insane season. But rich in subtext and meta. I loved it. But I also had retreated to a sane and scholarly board, free from many of the personas listed above. Oh there were a few, but you could safely ignore them.
The board I was on was more analytical and less emotional. Mark's problem is he's more emotional and I don't think there's an analytical bone in that boy's body. He's reading the whole thing emotionally - which means he can't see past his own interpretation of it.
What amuses me to no end, is all three of Mark's favorite characters will die horribly and have horrific arcs.
no subject
Date: 2012-07-21 04:11 am (UTC)Mark's reaction to it was insane and over-the-top.
no subject
Date: 2012-07-21 04:13 am (UTC)Although Dead Things and Entropy were controversial as well.
no subject
Date: 2012-07-21 07:46 am (UTC)Only five? I think the majority of mine are. Certainly after the bankrobbing, when I stopped being able to take them remotely seriously. It surprised me a bit, because I'd not know I had quite such a talent. But... it *is* fun, and the Self-proclaimed Defenders somehow never had a problem with me (probably because the rest of the time I'm an Expert and a Cheerleader). But oh, I could mock for England...
Anyway, fabulous post. The majority of the hardcore Mark-crowd seem to be composed of Trigger Persons and the Holier-than-Thou Culture Police. I got a smack on the wrist yesterday for using the word 'lunatics' (re. the mad fringes of the Buffy & Harry Potter fandoms...). Had to bite my tongue not to mention that ACTUAL lunatics I'd met online. (One especially who I sincerely hope is getting genuine help. He actually scared me.)
no subject
Date: 2012-07-21 09:22 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-07-21 10:40 am (UTC)I've come to the conclusion that no matter what, that part is always true. People might try to fight it, some will be more aware of it than others, but at the end of the day, we're not as rational as we like to believe, and all of our discussions are colored by our own subjective views, all the feelings getting in the way.
Rationally you might know that what character A did isn't all that bad but it bugs you, or character B sorta looks like someone you know, and eventually rationality goes out the window and all that's left is an attempt at rationalizing your feelings.
Fandom discussions end being as much about the person making them, as about whatever they truly are, but it's depressing that we're still having fandom wars about Buffy in 2012.
no subject
Date: 2012-07-21 11:51 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-07-21 11:53 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-07-21 12:30 pm (UTC)Great post, btw. I think the Holier Than Thou Culture Police are the worst of the bunch.
no subject
Date: 2012-07-21 12:35 pm (UTC)I'm intrigued by S6 because of all this controversy, and because I was interested in where they started going with Spike in S5. I'm not terribly interested in the rest of the plot-- watching people self-destruct isn't really my favorite thing-- but I'm not too attached to any of these characters so maybe it won't be so bad. And I watch True Blood, so it's not like I'm not familiar with writers making sure no one has nice things.
no subject
Date: 2012-07-21 01:14 pm (UTC)Well, it helps if you aren't rec'd to Whedonesque when you are doing it. (which is what happened to me).
Actually the one's I've had the biggest problems with are Emo Boy/Girl and Trigger Boy/Girl - regarding snark. They do not take it well. They act as if you are mocking them personally and their best bud. And if you attack a popular Trigger Boy or Girl - watch out for
Self-Appointed Defenders (or Fanpoodles).
The majority of the hardcore Mark-crowd seem to be composed of Trigger Persons and the Holier-than-Thou Culture Police.
Oh yeah. And there's also the Self-Appointed Defenders in the bunch or as rahirah called them "fanpoodles". Put them together and you have a combustible combination.
All you need to light the fuse and bring out the Internet Bully is
The Great Debator, Snark or Devil's Advocate...
Had to bite my tongue not to mention that ACTUAL lunatics I'd met online. (One especially who I sincerely hope is getting genuine help. He actually scared me.)
There are some truly frightening people online.
no subject
Date: 2012-07-21 01:57 pm (UTC)It is surreal. I don't understand Mark. He clearly needs that sort of validation on some level. But he has to know on some level that by doing this he's going to attract stalkers, right?
Some actor, I think it was James Marsters may have been George Clooney, stated that fame is toxic to the human soul. No that was Marsters (who would know), Clooney said it was the Cancer of success.
That's true to a degree. People who crave fame for the fortune they believe it will bring, don't understand the pitfalls of it.
Mark who worries about stalkers unfortunately has gone out of his way to make a safe haven for them on his site and has told them that he will come and visit them and be their best bud (his tours). This guy is groupie/stalker fan's dream come true. Plus he gives them videos of himself.
He's attracting them like flies. They don't have to worry about any one questioning their behavior or sanity. If he keeps doing this, he's going to need to hire a few body guards.
I'm intrigued by S6 because of all this controversy, and because I was interested in where they started going with Spike in S5. I'm not terribly interested in the rest of the plot-- watching people self-destruct isn't really my favorite thing-- but I'm not too attached to any of these characters so maybe it won't be so bad. And I watch True Blood, so it's not like I'm not familiar with writers making sure no one has nice things.
It is sloppily written in places. The production value is poor - but keep in mind they didn't have much money and it was made prior to the advances in CGI and other SFX effects. Also they were on UPN. Which on the plus side?
Had no standards and practices board. Which meant the writers didn't have anyone censoring their content or the parents were not in the room. But on the minus side - there was no one ensuring quality standards either.
What you get is perhaps one of the riskiest seasons of television I've ever seen. They literally through the characters off the cliff. Which made it a painful season for obsessed fans of the series, because if you were emotionally invested in any of these characters....
no subject
Date: 2012-07-21 01:59 pm (UTC)