|
|
Post by Lady Ten on Dec 17, 2012 0:34:35 GMT -6
part of a series? maybe.
Shipping, itself, may not be a deplorable thing, but there are many deplorable things that come out of it (on a mass scale, as an institution, if you will). Let's talk about one of the many good reasons for hating it: the rampant sexualization of nonsexual relationships. This is not even beginning to cover the influence of rape culture, or the romanticization of unhealthy relationships, or asexual erasure. Those and other problems can have their own threads.
For now, let's look at ships that make romantic/sexual couples out of friendships, platonic relationships, and regular acquaintances. For quick reference, "rex" will refer to either/and/or/both romantic/sexual involvement, not because the two necessitate one or the other, but because shipping normally pertains to both and it complicates measures to use one word to mean both or to be constantly repeating both. It's going to act like a non-gendered "they" for the time being.
Under a model that frames a friendship or even unfriendly acquaintance as a starting point and rex as "something more", it may not seem like all that bad of a thing, to ship two characters who have a relationship that isn't canonically rex. That's kind of what shipping is about, after all. Not all ships have to be canon from the start in order to be worth shipping.
But here's why I hate it: sometimes, a friendship or an antagonistic relationship is more interesting to me without rex. Bear with me. I'm going to use an anecdote. When I saw my first two episodes of the Legend of Korra, Tenzin was already incredible. And the Chief was already incredible. They're both great characters. And seeing them interact was even greater. There's a scene where they have a tense exchange that makes me giddy with fannishness, where Tenzin enters the room and...
These two lines and the way they're delivered, it's just perfect. And when I say that, what I mean is there's so much character in them, so much implied, so much contrast, and it's so interesting. They have chemistry, you might call it. A special, interesting-interaction type chemistry, for banter and begrudging tolerance, that has nothing to do with rex.
Then, once I started sifting through the fandom's reactions to this episode and these characters, I found that now people were shipping them and, worse, were talking as if this exchange was proof that the characters must be exes still bitter from an old break-up. It was infuriating because this is such a cool scene that has nothing to do with rex and already the shippers were appropriating it for their nefarious ends. I liked these characters having a relationship that never included rex. They came off as reluctant coworkers, people whose jobs forced them to interact on an official basis but who showed unconcealed distaste for each other on a personal level, not because one is the villain, but just out of sheer personality clash, and I find that fascinating. If anything, I'd like to anti-ship them, shipping them in a way that finds their interactions appealing and wants to see more of them with a deliberate desire to keep them non-rexual.
And then... it turned out to be canon. They turned out to have been ex-lovers with a previous romantic involvement of some sort. And I was so disappointed.
I was so disappointed.
Shipping is awful because even when two particular characters getting together for rex wouldn't be awful, sometimes seeing more of their relationship is more interesting when it's not about rex, and shipping makes no space for that.
|
|
vbfdoee
Young Warrior
%\1\%
Posts: 158
|
Post by vbfdoee on Dec 17, 2012 18:17:07 GMT -6
I mentioned this in passing on the Blue/Fire thread, but another problem I have with shipping is the implicit devaluation of platonic relationships (which I define here as relationships without rex).
I feel like the mindset is, "Oh, these characters have a really interesting/complex relationship that I really like to read, so there's no way their relationship could be platonic! After all, all platonic relationships are boring; what's a relationship without rex?"
And this, I feel, is a mindset symptomatic of a culture which completely excludes the possibility of truly deep and powerful platonic relationships. Ugh, I can't find a way to verbalize everything I'm trying to say, but I feel like shippers think that if a relationship is interesting then it has to have rex and if it doesn't have rex it's boring, while at the same time believing that a character has to eventually fall in romantic/sexual love in order for them to have a truly fulfilling character arc (which is one facet of a society that results in asexual and aromantic people internalizing a lot of erasure, dismissal and hatred)
Sorry, I just have a lot of strong feelings about issues that touch me personally (but who wouldn't?)
|
|
|
|
Post by Lady Ten on Dec 17, 2012 18:57:40 GMT -6
NO saying sorry. I feel like the mindset is, "Oh, these characters have a really interesting/complex relationship that I really like to read, so there's no way their relationship could be platonic! After all, all platonic relationships are boring; what's a relationship without rex?" Yes, this. And this happens even with relationships that aren't friendly (not unhealthy, either, just adversarial and/or unfriendly). Boggles the mind. And see, this is another problem inherent with the concept of shipping: the word "ship" itself, meant to be a shorthand for "relationship". And it's honestly ridiculous that our culture so often assumes "relationship" = rex. That's inaccurate. You can have a relationship with your parents, your friends, your teacher, your doctor, your therapist, your local voodoo priestess, anyone off the street, and that doesn't necessitate any form of rex. And it's still a relationship. But here's the thing. Sometime relationships, as with Tenzin and Lin, are very interesting, and I want to see more of them -- I like them being in the same scene, I like seeing them interact, I'd probably even like fanart of them together -- but not "together", which is another stupid euphemism. I don't want to see them kiss or get undressed or get married to each other. Maybe with someone else, but not to each other. And this is where shipping creates a problem, because for all intents and purposes, I support, enjoy, and am entertained by their relationship -- but if I say I "ship" them, or want to read a fanfic/look at fanart for that ship, everyone will assume rex. And there's not really any commonly-accepted means or terms to ship any other way. |
|
|
|
Post by Grey on Dec 17, 2012 20:04:58 GMT -6
I'm going to make this as succinct as possible, since I'm not really my best at the moment.
My first question is what is this thread trying to say? I've read over it a few times, but an actual intention isn't becoming clear to me - besides the fact Ten doesn't like rex shipping.
That's fine, but I cannot possibly imagine what that has to do with the rest of the population. They - hereby having a heavy implication of a female teenage audience - like doing that; it's how they interact with the material. They enjoy seeing people in romantic and/or sexual relationships, for whatever reason, and that's equally as valid as your dislike of that kind of thing.
Do you see what I'm saying? Your interests are not necessarily the same interests of everyone else, and your phrasing here seems to suggest that those that enjoy shipping are doing something wrong/lessening your enjoyment of the canon material.
I can understand lamenting the lack of platonic relationships in media, and I can completely agree that there aren't enough (and I could talk about ace erasure for a long time as well), but this thread doesn't seem to be directed at media in general so much as it's directed at fans who ship things.
Yes, but what does that have to do with your headcanon, exactly? They are looking at the exchange through Shippers' Goggles and you are looking at the exchange through Ten's Goggles, and I don't follow at what point these two things naturally intersect. As far as I can see, they don't and they shouldn't, because everyone's allowed to interpret and interact with the material as they so choose.
You are sounding very much like the Grinch at the moment.
I agreed with you for a while, but then, no, not really. More interesting to you, perhaps, Ten, but not everyone is like you or I or anyone else, for that matter. Your argument here is by and large you saying, "I don't like it".
No one is asking or expecting you to like shipping - well, I am certainly not - but I don't see why the fact you prefer platonic relationships to rex ones is a reason for shipping as a whole to be "awful".
I could understand this thread better if the discussion were, for example, "why do shippers so actively avoid or alter the sexuality of canonical asexual characters" or "why are sexual or romantic ships given such media attention", "the greatest Sherlock mystery: is the BBC version gay or ace, and which should he be?" or "what makes shipping so attractive to people - wish-fulfilment, titillation or something else?" There's a lot to be said.
But "reasons to hate shipping" does not qualify as something much worth discussing, in my opinion. Trying to quash shipping impinges on individual liberty, and I'm not down with that.
This is what I'm talking about. Actually, everything VFD's said is exactly what I'm talking about.
And so is this. Even now, the term 'ship' irritates me somewhat, because there's an underlying expectation of romantic and/or sexual conduct involved, when there's no word for something otherwise. I think it is because of this that the troll quadrants of Homestuck appeal to me so much - based around the (fascinating) Greek theory of multiple loves, it is possible to have utterly platonic and perfectly valid 'ships'.
This is my meaning precisely. Platonic relationships of all degrees do not have their own word - you do not "raft" them, or use any other kind of boating slang (as fun as that would be). Because of this, platonic relationships are invisible in comparison to rex ones, and that's the only real flaw I can see with shipping phenomenon - both with fans, and with media. There is no equality when it comes to categorising or expressing fan-involvement.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lady Ten on Dec 17, 2012 20:55:55 GMT -6
My first question is what is this thread trying to say? I've read over it a few times, but an actual intention isn't becoming clear to me - besides the fact Ten doesn't like rex shipping. Apologies. It is unclear. However, you must have misunderstood me, because I'm not opposed to all ships involving rex. That's not inherently bad in my book. So, I guess my point would be this: the phenomena of shipping assumes that adding rex to a relationship makes it more interesting or worthwhile, when that's not always the case. Yes. lol grey. ^^^ now you're back on track. oh gosh that whole thing. I could write another rant about all that, but it would probably be uninformed and inarticulate. Somebody somewhere suggested using "plant," once, as in, "I plant that," but I don't see that catching on. Rafting is a cool idea. Still, with the term "ship" being a clipping of "relationship," we'd still be implying that only rex makes for real relationships, and while rex and non-rex do deserve some distinction, reserving "ships" just for rex is still invalidating to other kinds. |
|
Rolo
Apprentice
%\1\%
Posts: 51
|
Post by Rolo on Dec 20, 2012 22:02:57 GMT -6
I'm going to reply to you in a round about way. However, first, I'd like to tell you why I find your arguments and post unconvincing, and why the point to this thread is so unclear. I'm going to critically analyse this as I normally criticise a research paper or essay. I wouldn't do this if I didn't think you could handle it.
First off, this post seems to lack a purpose. Or rather, it's caught between two. One as a personal blog-style piece, filled with your lamenting about the perceived evils of shipping. The other is as a persuasive piece, trying to convince others that shipping is a bad thing (in it's bluntest form).
This post would be fine if it were the former. There would perhaps be a discussion about similar situations, where others have disliked a certain ship or talked about the insanity of fandom. However, as you have written this in a semi-academic kind of way, attempting to talk about 'institutions' and the romantic/sexual differentiation, this post is attempting to be persuasive. You use terms like 'let's look' and 'we will refer to' as if you're a teacher, as if you're trying to educate us. In fact, your very title is 'Why to hate shipping'. "To" not "I". You're trying to teach us something, enlighten us, and ultimately persuade us.
However, none of your post actually provides a decent reason why we should hate 'shipping', as an action. Your reason here is that friendships and antagonistic relationships can be more interesting than rex. A fair point, but that's NOT a reason not to ship. 'Shipping' is a personal thing someone does, when an individual feels that they like a certain pairing together in a romantic way. It's not something you have to do, just because others are doing it. It's something /YOU/ CHOOSE to do, because you feel the characters are good together, and ship them. It's also not the act of writing characters into a romantic relationship, that's another issue entirely (so the fact that they actually were romantically involved isn't even a point for this thread). So you're perfectly fine to think Tenzin and The Chief have an interesting relationship without romance, there's nothing stopping you. However, you might choose, in another situation, to see a couple romantically instead, simply because you find that more satisfying.
And here you are now, slapping your head, going 'Oh Rolo, you're telling me something I already know'. However, it's an important point, because it means your reason for hating 'shipping' is not persuasive.
Which brings me onto the next point. In actually, your argument is not with the act of shipping, but with 'shippers'. Which is another matter entirely. You paint people who ship as these people who just HAVE to have romance between every character, ignoring the subtlety and sometimes just as awesome other types of relationships. But that's not true. It just so happens that, just as you appreciate one pairing as a platonic relationship, they find it more pleasing to look at it in a romantic manner. This might not be the case for other relationships, they may prefer the antagonism or friendship to romance in another pairing of people. Which means, essentially, there is /no/ institute of shipping, as you claim to be. It's just an action which some people choose to partake in, which you may do as much or as little as you like. Heck, I've shipped before, and I still appreciate more cryptic relationships. You can whine all you want, they're just enjoying a work of fiction in the way they choose. And therefore, it's a negative thing to try and convince others it's something to be loathed. I understand you may have felt you suffered because no one felt the same as you in preferring complex relationships (of all sorts), I've felt the same sometimes. But shippers are not the same 'shipping as an action', and therefore your first post is fundamentally flawed. Talking of shippers as a collective is a pointless exercise anyway, because, as I said, they're not a collective.
However, simmering under the surface, I can see the real points you meant to make. You're trying to tackle the issue of people not often appreciating those relationships that don't fit into romantic territories, suggesting it's a shame that our focus on romance can detract from what is there. Indeed, it is a shame that society is so focused on it, and that there isn't more variation in relationships in writing. Hell, I even wrote a fanfic touching on the idea, with the characters rejecting a 'label' for their relationship. Don't think I misunderstood that point you were trying to make, because I agree with it. However, you tackle the point in the wrong manner and from the wrong angle, and that's where your problem lies.
If you were discussing the 'unhealthy focus on romance between characters', these points would be completely valid. However, your current points/evidence would still be personal, and not a grounds to bring anyone to your side. The lack of interesting non-romance relationships in fiction would also be an interesting discussion. Or, alternately, just a place to go 'Argh, shippers!' in a light fashion, with gripes about situational problems, would make sense, but you're acting as if you're trying to teach us something. VBFdoes post makes more sense to discuss, remaining on an academic level. It talks of society, it talks of the damage that romance-fixation does, which is a decent conversation starter.
And this is something Grey tried to bring up, I think, in less strong words. He's right in that it's hard to know what you want us to discuss. Is it the general issues that shippers provide in fandom? Problems with the act of shipping, as an action for one individual (is it immoral, base, illogical etc)? Or is this just a place where you want people to gripe about similar problems, where shipping has got in their way? If people don't know whether to remain academic or whether to just talk personally, they'll do neither.
Additionally, you were incredibly patronising the moment someone contradicted you. I refer to Grey's post. Oh, you might have felt his arguments were silly, simplistic or whatever, but it's still VERY patronising to laugh at someone, and then to suggest 'they're back on track' like a teacher to a student when something you agree with comes back. It's a horrible way to act, and it makes you sound superior and belittling. I quite seriously slapped my head in frustration when I saw it. It was incredibly rude, and if Grey feels half as bad as I did when I read it, I'm sure he's peeved about it.
In fact, it just gives the impression that you've outright ignored all the points against your theory/argument, while making you look incredibly immature. Because, frankly, Grey made very good points, and you didn't even refute them. And don't give me the 'It's irrelevant' stuff, because a good theorist answers their critics intelligently. Ultimately, it shows you as someone who can't properly defend their points, as you skirt around the issue rather than facing them head on.
You want debate? Answer your detractors properly and mature your reasoning and argument. Because otherwise, you're only going to put people off talking and/or never have a proper discussion.
|
|
|
|
Post by cloudbat on Dec 21, 2012 11:56:46 GMT -6
"Let's talk about one of the many good reasons for hating it: the rampant sexualization of nonsexual relationships."
Stop the robotic snake.
I'm not a big fan of shipping myself, but trumpeting reasons to hate something is a no. Reasons to examine it carefully? Yes. Reasons to discuss it and its products? Yes.
Hate? No. I'm not one of the wet-wipes who thinks "oh no! Hate is a terrible word and should not be used!" but I think it's a wee bit strong for something as silly as shipping. Just a bit.
Also "rampant" makes it sound like a either a disease or crime. This amuses me.
"But here's why I hate it: sometimes, a friendship or an antagonistic relationship is more interesting to me without rex."
That's...nice? So you don't like it because of your own personal preferences; why should the rest of us hate it again?
I mean. I agree with you. But why does this mean we should hate shipping itself?
"I found that now people were shipping them and, worse, were talking as if this exchange was proof that the characters must be exes still bitter from an old break-up. It was infuriating because this is such a cool scene that has nothing to do with rex and already the shippers were appropriating it for their nefarious ends."
PFFFAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Ahahahaha
Heeheehee *wipes tear away*
Ten, you're hilarious.
"Nefarious?" You're using that word to describe shipping? Seriously? Last time I checked it wasn't against the law or morally wrong.
I agree with you, but you're taking it waaaaay too seriously. Shippers act on things that often don't make sense. That's what they do. It's just how they are and what they like.
That being said I haven't even watched LoK, and I agree with your preferences in general, but I still don't see why this is even an issue.
The way I can sum up everything you've said so far: You like things one way, get frustrated when you see things done another way, and seem to think it should be prevented/stopped? Tell me if I'm misinterpreting here, but that's a bit...mmm, over-reactive shall we say?
"And then... it turned out to be canon. They turned out to have been ex-lovers with a previous romantic involvement of some sort. And I was so disappointed.
I was so disappointed."
I'm...sorry? I mean, I'd probably feel the same way, but...I think you're taking it a wee bit too seriously.
"Shipping is awful because even when two particular characters getting together for rex wouldn't be awful, sometimes seeing more of their relationship is more interesting when it's not about rex, and shipping makes no space for that."
Back up just a second here.
Shipping is not inherently awful. Also, you use the word "sometimes." I'm not even sure you realize you're using it. "Sometimes" seeing a character's relation is more interesting when it doesn't pertain to romantic stuff. This does not mean always.
I agree.
I don't agree that this makes shipping awful. Shipping's just an activity, a hobby, a fandom habit if you want to call it that. It's silly, it's confusing, sometimes it doesn't flat-out make sense or can be repulsive depending on an individual's taste.
It's not. That big. Of a deal.
Also you appear to think that just because some people ship something, that automatically means you can't interpret it how you want. I think your interpretations are fine and you're entitled to them. So are they. You think yours are more interesting. So do they, probably.
Long story short, live and let live. It's a non-issue.
|
|
|
|
Post by mistytail on Dec 21, 2012 12:06:10 GMT -6
I agree with Rolo - I think that brushing off Grey's arguments and then saying "Now you're back on track" was really, horribly rude, and I was honestly shocked and appalled that you would do something like that. You essentially ignored half of what he said simply because you didn't agree with it, and not only that but you implied that he was somehow not making a point.
Which he was. You really are being the Grinch about this, or you are coming across that way.
There are tons of problems with shippers, all of which you listed at the end of your first paragraph. So why didn't you talk about those? Those are the real, concrete problems with shipping that need to be discussed.
This, honestly, is just an extremely long post about why you personally hate shipping. And that's fine! Nobody is saying that you're bad or no fun for not shipping, you just enjoy media in a different way. There are plenty of people like you who feel lost amongst all the shipping material and want other people to talk to about different aspects of the media they're interested in. I agree with them sometimes. I personally think the BBC Sherlock fandom is absolutely drowning in ship material and seems to ignore a lot of really fantastic, interesting elements in the show.
However, that doesn't make shipping inherently less interesting or less fun. I'm an extremely avid shipper and I always have been. I love shipping because it gives me new ways of looking at characters and their interactions and allows me to speculate about their development. It's not all just cut-and-dry mushy-gushy romance bologna. Some of my favorite pairings are dysfunctional or nonsensical or only work within a certain framework of logic, which, if I find it interesting enough, I try to set up so other people can understand my thought process.
I think even your use of the word "rex" simplifies shipping even more than it already is. Romance and sexuality are fascinating aspects of human interaction. There are people who study these things in a scholarly manner for a living. There are therapists who work solely with romance issues and sexual dysfunctions because they are so consuming of people. Are romance and sexuality highly idealized and misrepresented by many forms of popular media? Yes, absolutely, and that in and of itself is not only reflective of the obsession our culture has with sexuality (and many other cultures have entirely different obsessions with sexuality and romance than those of first-world countries), but it is also the reason why so many people have these issues that they seek therapeutic assistance for. To simplify the vast array romance and sexuality are expressed with one word is like taking the entire universe and calling it a star.
Of course there are going to be tons of people that stick to tropes, cliches, and ignore character development, that happens in every fandom and it even happens in the canon of many works. Those are signs of inexperienced writers, not a sign that shipping is in and of itself deplorable. The bottom line is that while you personally may not find shipping interesting, there are many people that do, and I think it is unfair to instantly write it off as horrible. Be honest: After learning I am a shipper, do you think I am now less interesting or less intelligent of a person? I would sincerely hope not.
I do want you to know that I like you a lot, Ten, and I do respect you greatly, but I just very strongly disagree with what you said here. I don't mean to attack you or make you feel like a bad person, and if I did make you feel that way then I sincerely apologize, but I really wanted to make my opinion known to you.
|
|
|
|
Post by cloudbat on Dec 22, 2012 14:43:32 GMT -6
Oh for-
That was NOT intended to be nasty. And Rolo, you ARE telling us what to do. Thanks very much. =/ And I get made to feel like an absolute prick when I WAS NOT TRYING TO BE ONE. Freakin' heck. Thanks for calling me out and making me look like an utter idiot.
Was what I said mean? Perhaps. Do I reget it now? Hell yes I do. But frankly I'd like Ten herself to tell me if she felt hurt or misjudged.
There's a lot of other things I'd like to say, but I'd also not like to start a fight in the middle of a thread.
|
|
Rolo
Apprentice
%\1\%
Posts: 51
|
Post by Rolo on Dec 22, 2012 15:56:00 GMT -6
Cloudie, I don't think you ever intended to be nasty. AT ALL. I know you Cloudie. You're not like that. I was trying to point out the behaviour and not you... but I really really didn't effectively get across what I meant. I seriously seriously apologise. I don't think you're a prick in any sense at all. I just feel that laughing, even in jest or in a light way, can come across badly over the internet. I was sure from the outset that it wasn't your intention for it to sound or come across negatively...
I'm sorry I overstepped the line. I WAS trying, pretty desperately, to make sure Ten's feelings didn't get hurt. I have no intent to hurt anyone. AT ALL. EVER. But I'll sort this out with you on skype or something. AND delete that post now for you.
|
|
|
|
Post by cloudbat on Dec 22, 2012 16:26:34 GMT -6
All is forgiven, Rolo. Stuff happened, misunderstandings, and with luck no one else's feelings will be hurt. I'm sorry too.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lady Ten on Dec 23, 2012 23:01:20 GMT -6
I should have checked this thread sooner. Well, sorry for being a jerk, everyone. I apologize for writing badly, and being condescending, and for not explaining myself well, or much at all. I'm not going to quote much, since there's not much to argue with, but there is one thing I'd like to respond to. Be honest: After learning I am a shipper, do you think I am now less interesting or less intelligent of a person? No. Honestly, no. That's not how it works. If my posts gave you that impression, please know that was not any part of my intended message and is incorrect. That's not what I wanted to say at all, and it was a failure on my part to let it seem that way. I also want to say that y'all are an amazingly self-regulating lot, and much politer than I am, and if that sounds patronizing too then it's only because I don't know any other way to say it. You're all great. Also, I'm still going to make a thread for part three. |
|
Rolo
Apprentice
%\1\%
Posts: 51
|
Post by Rolo on Jan 14, 2013 9:39:47 GMT -6
|
|
