Manifesto on Wank

[branchandroot]

So, the discovery that Frienditto is run by the same people who run ljdrama and Encyclopedia Dramatica, and the accusations currently being tossed back and forth over the fd service, have finally crystalized some thoughts I've been turning over for a while. I want to try to get them down in a moderately coherent form, despite my own outrage.

*wishes self luck*

There is no excuse for wank comms.

I'm not going to phrase this in "I believe" terms, because I'm laying out an ethical judgement, here, and while that is invariably a personal endeavor, it is one that, by its nature, extends beyond just myself. I apply this to everyone, and not just as an opinion. There is no excuse.

The people who participate in wank comms, such as Fandom Wank, insist that they merely display a healthy sense of humor. That they are perfectly happy to have their own wanking mocked just as they mock others. And that anyone who posts on the internet should only expect to be targeted, because the internet is a public place.

The sense of humor argument is the one I find hardest to refute, actually, because it has a grain of truth. If, in the middle of some wank explosion, someone were to speak up and say "you know, we're all getting kind of shrill and behaving foolishly, and blowing the original disagreement out of proportion to the point where I'm laughing; congratulations, everyone", that might indeed have some beneficial effect on the wank in question. But only if it comes from the inside--from a participant in the forum affected. Because it isn't the business of anyone who is not affected. For a participant to go outside that forum to another, one which is not affected or involved, to say such a thing is not 'having a good healthy laugh at ourselves'. "Ourselves" does not apply when the participant has removed herself from that context. Instead, this is making fun of other people.

And that's a cruel thing to do. No matter how great or small, it is an immature activity and a cruel one.

That people like the FW members understand this perfectly well is demonstrated by their use of counter-wank as a disciplinary measure. Someone who posts something considered unacceptable is, in turn, mocked. For them to do this, and then say that they are happy to take what they dish out, is extremely disingenuous. To say that they can laugh at themselves, and why can't the people they mock just do the same, is verbal slight of hand that turns attention away from the manifest hurtfulness of what they are doing. That they all seek to avoid being mocked, and use mockery as an internal punishment for their own, shows very clearly that they know it hurts to be the target.

So why do they do it?

I have, by the way, no sympathy for the suggestion that FW is not as bad as it was two years ago, and that it's mostly a social comm now, where people compliment each other's icons. That's a load of bullshit, and the merest skim through the latest posts will show it.

Likewise, any statement that they confine themselves to mocking people who make public fools of themselves is, if not a technical lie, certainly just as disingenuous as the second argument. There is, for example, mockery posted, fairly recently, of some extremely personal matters that one of the members found on a couple of personal journals. When the embroiled parties protested, they were told they had invited this treatment by posting publically and unlocked, as if posting unlocked in an obscure individual journal were equivalent to posting in a community forum. It was implied that the insults levelled at their romantic lives and psychological stability, and the links back to the personal journals, posted in such a high-traffic community as FW, were exactly the same as those same comments and links would have been if made in the FW members' own personal journals.

I am reminded of this argument by the statements now being made that anyone who posts anything on the net, even locked, has no right to protest if the information becomes public. Because the net is a public place, and anyone who posts anything there, no matter how secured, is just asking for it to be publicized.

I am reminded of other arguments about victims "asking for it".

Nor do I consider this an unreasonable analogy to make. There is a voilation of personal integrity invovled. And the perpetrators are denying their responsibility by insisting that it is the victim's job to be aware of all risks and guard against them with such vigor that even the most aggressive perpetrator has no opening. That it is only the utterly, inhumanly blameless who have the right to respect.

And you know what pisses me off even more? If I posted this publicly, I have little doubt it would be pounced upon as Wank! and Drama! and promptly linked and reposted for mockery by people who would say "My God, she's so serious about it, can't she take a joke?" As if to make light of the pain they have caused. As if to say that, because it is "humor", they cannot be held culpable for the cruelty of it. As if to say the cruelty is deserved, because the target didn't behave with irreprochable reserve and purity.

Anyone who works with sexual assault issues or with women's rights issues should recognize this pattern. The fact that it is applied, here, to emotional rather than physical assault, and, usually, assault on a lesser scale, does nothing to alleviate my disgust with anyone who would employ the pattern to excuse themselves.

There is no excuse, and I'm sick of hearing people who have indulged their own pettiness and cruelty claim that they have done nothing wrong, and that it is the victim's fault.

Comments

[kaigou.livejournal.com]

I am reminded of this argument by the statements now being made that anyone who posts anything on the net, even locked, has no right to protest if the information becomes public. Because the net is a public place, and anyone who posts anything there, no matter how secured, is just asking for it to be publicized.

I am reminded of other arguments about victims "asking for it".

Nail. Hammer. BANG.

[moumusu.livejournal.com]

Jesus Christ. I'm so happy you wrote about this. I mean, I'm also sad because you're mad (I am, too), but I'm so happy you feel the same as me. I think there's nothing more horrible than having to live in fear of some revolting third party jumping in and making your life miserable, and that's what wank comms encourage. Like adding another excitable group of people to a problem makes it any better. Can't I link this or something?

[ex-res-judic324.livejournal.com]

I would agree to all of this except in extreme circumstances such as when F_W got a hold of the wankage that was the milk = rape explosion over at feminist_rage which I was a part of, it was totally ridiculous, and I rather doubt anyone particpating in the wankage would have seen it for the rampant idiocy that it is. got bannhamm0red off feminist_rage for calling the owner of the comm a vapid cunt because, um, taking milk from cows != rape, and if everything is = rape we have issues

There is something about these comms that is deeply hurtful because you are mocking people, but sometimes ... I dont know. I can't help it. Have you ever read conservatism or liberal because the rampant stupidity drives you to things like LJDrama because, omfg, beltt003 so totally deserves it. But I hate him, and got bannhamm0red of conservatism for flaming him and making his e-penis shrink.

I think I have a problem with the maliciousness that so often accompanies wank communities and the superior attitudes. But sometimes, dude, 300+ comments flaming each other about suggesting that the smurfs weren't, you know, 100% straight is a little nuts.

[shrugs] I'm conflicted. Mostly because I've been on both sides of the debate and I really do get a kick out of trolling comms that drive me batty. Like anti_lefty. So, enh. I have no good response to this, but it does make me think a little bit more about what I'm doing.

.... though it is unlikely to make me stop trolling conservative comms because I am just not that mature. ^^;;

[ladycrysiana.livejournal.com]

I always feel conflicted on this issue. I agree with you and personally dislike being mocked and therefore dislike mocking others, but I do take interest in say, community kerfuffles. I go to FW off and on because at least some of what they mention is amusing to me, though usually it's seeing what fm_alchemist people are talking about this month.

(On a complete tangent, I was amused to find out that fm_alchemist both has a sister community that counts the days they've avoided being on FW for a record of 27 days, and that there are several FMA fans who are on both lists, who are invariably the ones that post about the kerfuffles there.)

I don't like when people bring up personal issues on people's journals; just the stuff like people arguing over whether X in a series is sleeping with Y or A, but even so I feel guilty when I think about it. I always get the feeling that I technically avoid the issue. Eh.

[jimhines.livejournal.com]

Interesting... I don't know how much I've talked to you about my second job, running an accountability seminar at MSU, but some of the things you mention came up in my sessions today. Namely, the question of who gets to decide whether or not something is offensive. The way people will react by telling you you're being oversensitive, overreacting, and you need to lighten up.

The example I used today was the whole sports mascot issue, since a few years of teaching freshman comp left me painfully familiar with that argument. But one of the trends that kept coming up was the way these young, white, male students would write so passionately about what these oversensitive Indians should and shouldn't be offended by.

Guess what - you don't get to make that call. You don't get to tell someone else whether or not they have the right to be offended or take something personally. Just because you don't feel hurt or threatened or offended by something doesn't mean that another person, with a very different background and set of experiences, shouldn't feel threatened either.

You make a choice. That choice has consequences. Those consequences may include someone expressing and feeling disgust, anger, or any number of things. Regardless of whether you think those things are justified, those feelings are a consequence of your choice and your actions. Try taking some God damned responsibility, people.

I may be overly sensitive on this issue right now... We just got a lawyer bill for $4000 because a certain person feels that the court should have forced him to take a lawyer, even though he didn't request one and chose to try to argue his case without one. Now he's appealing because, as a result of that choice, he got his ass royally kicked by our own (expensive as hell) attorney. Naturally, it's our fault and the fault of the court. In no way could he have any responsibility for his own stupid-ass choice.

Yup. Definitely getting off on a tangent. I'll stop now :-)

[spade.livejournal.com]

I've never actually been to Fandom Wank. I've heard about it through friends, and have a vague sense of what it is. But I've never acutally gone over to look and have absolutely no desire to do so.

But what I sometimes wonder, when I hear about it, is what makes me so different from them. I can't say I've never mocked someone I don't know. What makes what I do with a group of friends so different from what they do as a community? Is it really so different or less cruel just because I'm doing it on a smaller scale?

I know there *is* a difference. Generally, if I'm going to mock something I see as stupid, I'm not going to do it to a person's face because I don't want to hurt that person's feelings. If I talk about it, it's usually to a group of people I actually know, as opposed to a community at large, where anyone can just stumble in and see. And I'm not going to go looking for things to mock. But how much does not wanting to hurt someone's feeling really take out of the fact that it's still mean? Where does the line get drawn between acceptable whinging or complaint and... and wank?

I do agree, the idea of a public community just for making fun of people makes my skin itch. And maybe that's where the line really gets drawn. Because if you join a community like that, it's feels like people are *looking* for something to mock, rather than having a place to do so should something just happen to come up. Town square stocks where anyone can be thrown in without any sense of privacy or moderation.

[the-tower.livejournal.com]

thank you for writing this. *puts into memories*

Hi. My $.02 (AM)

[bellatrys.livejournal.com]

(I think Ankh-Morpork currency is probably the stablest, these days...)

I saw your comment and that you'd privileged me with friending, so I hope you don't mind if I chime in with my experiences...

Two summers ago I learned of the existence of FW quite by accident, when someone who lurked on my site for no reason that made any sense went and made fun of a private, intense, ethical-theological-mythological argument among us regulars, which caused a long FW thread which then got back to us, nyah nyah style. The details aren't relevant, particularly - it was extremely serious stuff, on the ethical side, and we were also using references from works that we were all extremely serious about, and some of it was pretty intensive technical metaphysics, and when you talk about religion or philosophy or fiction, there's a lot of emotion involved. But this was my tiny, obscure, no-hit backwater board, not GAFF or any other high traffic community.

I pretty much blew it off - I have enemies, from fandom, because being a defiant canonista on ffnet will do that, and also so will being opinionated and cocky, if they're not popular opinions, oh well, I'm not impressed with you guys either. And forgot about them. But I had at that time a requirement that was pretty important: let me know if you link to something on my site, because at that time I had very small site, and had to be careful about bandwidth. Even if you're just going to tear it apart, let me know so I can monitor.

And they did it again, and they didn't. So I was pretty ticked, but again, it was just personal, I could afford to overlook it. But then I found a little more about FW - that they bragged about making people cry, and take down their sites. And there wasn't any point to it - they weren't *critics*, they didn't get in fights about style or plot or canon or anything like that - they just found people they thought uncool, and pointed and jeered.

So I set up a trap, to put their claims of having a sense of humor and not taking selves so seriously, to the test. (There must be some kitsune in my family tree, somewhere.)

I wrote a pompous, mock-anthropological "dissertation" examining them. I tore into the pieces that the first and repeat offender had written on her own site, line by line, by her own standards. I used as many polysyllabic words as I could pack into it without the FTP breaking down! checked my monthly bandwidth, posted it on my little site, - and then I waited.

Sure enough, they went crazy. They were besides themselves. It was downloaded hundreds of times in a few hours. They couldn't stay away. How they howled and mocked me! And then I put up the second half, - showing how I'd suckered them, saying why I had done it, that they were vicious losers, posting the numbers for how many times they had downloaded it in how few hours showing that they *did* care very much what I thought of them, that I had the power, and I thought they were pathetic, and I would happily make them dance to my tune if they didn't learn from this. And I took down the link to the "tar-baby" posts, but not the posts themselves. (I warned them that if they tried to troll-flood my boards I would make *another* example of them, too.)

And then I forgot about them, until someone reminded me later. I keep forgetting about them, except sometimes when I check my site stats, I see that those files keep getting downloaded... I got a couple thank-you emails for standing up to them, but except when something like this happens, I forget they exist, because they're boring. So much more fun to fight about real issues.

But you can't just ignore bullies - they *don't* go away. If it had only been me, I would not have punished them, but I'm older and don't care so much. It was them ganging up on the weak and then celebrating it - blaiming the victims as you say - not a fair fight - and I *knew* they wouldn't be able to take what they dished out.

Wow...

[pea-faerie.livejournal.com]

I must admit that I'm not familiar with the "FW" of which you speak, but I'm not particularly surprised at what it must be (having read your post and all the commentary...)

What struck me was the whole "but you posted in PUBLIC!" which seems viable to me (and being a part of a bbs, I understand and agree) turned into "you posted anywhere so you deserve it!" Which is, of course, not the same thing. And, as Mrs. Manners would surely say, someone being an idiot or rude or whatever gives NO reason for a person to respond in kind. (Hey, she can be a hard-assed bitch sometimes, that Mrs. Manners, but sometimes she's got it right...)

Anyway, I'd just like to jump on the "any info is usable and the responsibility of the person putting it on the internet" and request the credit card information of all the people that hold this view. I mean, their using credit cards online to buy stuff (Perhaps copies of "How to bully the weak and mock the fragile" or something.) Since *they* used the credit cards, it is *their* fault if I get them and, say, use them to pay off all my debts???

So, should you find any of their info, kindly send it my way. :)

And beautiful post, btw... I agree 100% with the ethics (or ill-ethics, I suppose) of such behavior.

[arashi-neko.livejournal.com]

I can't say much about fandom wank, having peeked in once or twice only, but there has to be a kinder way to point out to someone that there are those who think they have misconstrued a character. And there's a difference between well, stories that are stories, and stories that are not stories. The latter more closely fits ideas of self-expression using an accepted medium to reach out to others. In some ways rather like some types of original fiction. Critique for one based on parameters for the other does not work, ignoring the purpose for the fic in the first place.