"you'll never convince them"

[pauraque_bk]

There's a wank going on that's as old as the hills (aren't they all), and a lot of people are making extraordinary fools of themselves (don't they always). The epicenter wasn't in my part of fandom; my windows rattled but nothing fell down.

It does strike me, though, that in these sorts of things there's sometimes a tendency to suggest that all argument is useless because you'll never convince your opponents that you're right. I really can't agree there. If your point is a good and valid one, you should make it, not for your opponents, but for those reading along.

On the internets there are always more lurkers than participants. The ones opening their mouths are the ones who already have a strong opinion, and the more they talk, the more they have invested in never giving any ground or learning anything new, because in their eyes that would not be learning, but "losing".

The ones *not* speaking are the ones who aren't sure. Those are people your argument can reach, whether or not you ever find out about it. (Just try not to claim that the lurkers support you in email.)


And seriously, "victim privilege"? Bitch, PLEASE.


ETA: There's now a rundown on unfunnybusiness if you really want to know. Warning for nausea at others' ridiculous behavior, at the very least...

Comments

[skywaterblue.livejournal.com]

Old wank is indeed, tired and old.

[pauraque]

This wank was old the first time I heard it, which was 15 years ago.

[skywaterblue.livejournal.com]

There are many days when I think we should just scrap fandom and start over.

[scarah2.livejournal.com]

"Victim privilege?" I admit I'm lost here.

[pauraque]

The wank's about warnings. It seems to have started when one person made a post about how warnings for rape in fic are really, really necessary because of the hurt it could cause to rape survivors otherwise, and then some asshats piled on bitching about how having to put warnings ~violated their artistic vision~ and so on. Talking about supposed "victim privilege" is how at least one person tried to turn it around on the OP. Barf.

[scarah2.livejournal.com]

Went to the unfunnybusiness and I just.. whoa. Seriously?

[pauraque]

Hoo boy, and I just found out why the name Zvi sounded so darn familiar... she's one of the leaders of Dreamwidth.

Prrrrrroblematic.

[lilacsigil.livejournal.com]

I also ran into it about 15 years ago, which made me realise that some of the participants this time might not even have been born then. /happy dinosaur

[lilacsigil.livejournal.com]

But don't you know it's sooooooo haaaaaaaaard to put warnings on things and anyway Joss doesn't have to?

(Zvi slapped me down once before, but I thought I was just being over-sensitive. Have defriended (un-subscribed?) now.)

[pauraque]

Hahaha, I actually said the same thing when discussing it with _hannelore earlier. Almost as scary as realizing that one of my co-workers is 3 years younger than my "baby" brother.

[pauraque]

She certainly comes off as callous, though not as ruthlessly vicious as some! When I started looking at it I was like "blah, warnings wank again", but wow. It's a bloodbath.

[rexluscus.livejournal.com]

Wow. Just...really? When I got to the bit about "free-floating rage" my fail-o-meter broke.

[lilacsigil.livejournal.com]

I'm really confused and kind of hurt because more than one of the people who explained things carefully and consistently through RaceFail are now claiming that people with triggers have no right to ask for consideration or to help re-shape fandom conventions.

[pauraque]

I expect their rage is not floating quite so freely now that it has been presented with such an attractive target upon which to alight.

[scarah2.livejournal.com]

Oh fuck. Holy erupting can of worms Batman!

[gorious.livejournal.com]

I feel so bad for people who have to post warnings on their fics. I mean, it's such an incredibly arduous task, I don't know how they manage.

[http://users.livejournal.com/_hannelore/]

I'm crossing my fingers for those silent lurkers. It might make for an interesting outcome this time around.

Also, that filk is *awesome.*

[thimble-kiss.livejournal.com]

The amount of bulldozer callousness against people who flay themselves open bearing personal witness is what gets to me – it's sickening. Reminds me of the anecdote Stephen Fry has told of an old Oxford don's advice to a young colleague: "A word of advice: don't try to be clever, we're all clever here – only try to be kind, a little kind."

But that simple request always gets certain people's hackles up, it seems. Even if in this particular instance they haven't been very clever nor kind.

[mimine.livejournal.com]

It's mind-boggling. Warnings are easy. Rape, controversial crap that might squick the hell out of your audience. It goes without saying. What the hell is wrong with people? What are they going to argue about next? Ratings? Pairings? Whether fics should have titles? What is this shit?

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I'm sure that's totally the experience of being victimized by anything. Great! Now I get to force people to feel badly enough to do things for me! Except for those people who won't even warn for a fic where triggering somebody is a fairly common result of not doing that! Where's the privilege, exactly?

[wootsauce.livejournal.com]

don't give them any ideas, dude!

[pauraque]

To give my story a title would violate my artistic vision, because the reader mustn't know any information about the story before they start reading it. In fact, it's best if they don't even KNOW they're about to read it; ideally the story just pops up on their screen at a random moment.

[pauraque]

Poor flailing LJ ate attempt #1. I was trying to say that kindness is not often popular on the internet, but the fact that so many people in this wank are now calling for kindness (or at least human decency) means to me that the other side's behavior has been so atrocious that it's backfiring on them.

[pauraque]

It's an awesome filk, and it was also already old 15 years ago, so it seemed appropriate.

[alice-and-lain.livejournal.com]

Lurkers aren't necessarily unsure. I'm sure but I don't speak up because others say it much more eloquently than I and I've banned myself from debating on the internet. Actually, I've banned myself from debate in general. Not everyone is great at argument!

[pauraque]

I was generalizing! In any case you're not a lurker, you just spoke up. ;)

[mimine.livejournal.com]

ideally the story just pops up on their screen at a random moment

lmao! Even better if it's at work with their supervisor behind their back! ta da!

[idlerat.livejournal.com]

Zvi was an early booster of Dreamwidth and a volunteer, but she's not "one of the leaders" in the sense of being on the staff. She's posted a lot of much linked stuff about it, though.

Denise, however, *is* the co-owner of Dreamwidth, and she has posted that she will not warn, and is disturbed by the language of moral absolutism blah blah.

I actually don't think Zvi was one of the worst offenders here. I think some of her stuff was somewhat misquoted and misunderstood. She has a very abrasive and often unclear style.

[idlerat.livejournal.com]

Wait, "lurkers support me in email" (the quote) was already old 15 years ago? Where is it from?

Anyway, I think I disagree with a major theme of your post, namely that this is all such old hat. I have actually read posts by a number of pretty prominent (and less so) authors saying that this has been a real eye-opener and they have changed their policies after many years. It was the same with RaceFail09 - old as the hills, but different. Repetition with a difference the deconstructionists say :)