InsaneJournal

Meta: Fandom as a Safe Space
I've been a member of fandom for over ten years now (and boy, it sure doesn't feel like it's been that long). Over the years, there have been numerous wanks, flame wars, kerfluffles, fails, etc., etc., on a wide variety of subjects, some of which seem to consume the entire online fandom, not just bits and pieces of it. Currently, the issue is warnings. A few months ago, it was race. I usually try to stay fray-adjacent, even when it's an issue I care deeply about. (I really don't like conflict, and fandom is my safe space away from conflict, among other things.) Over the years I've noticed some patterns that I think will be useful to more people than myself.

First, while people come to fandom for various reasons, they stay because fandom is a safe space for them. What it's safe from varies, and varies wildly, depending on the person. Some people, it's just a place to escape the daily grind and geek with people who 'get' it, safe from being mocked as a geek/fangirl/whatever. Some people, it's a place where their race/gender/sexual orientation/religion/politics/other defining or self-defining characteristic doesn't have to restrict them in the ways it does in the real world. Some people have been abused, mentally, physically, emotionally, sexually, and fandom is their safe space where they can relax and not have to be afraid as much as they do in real life. Some people have issues that don't fit in the standard boxes. But however serious or trivial a person's issues may be, however much or little they impact their 'real' life, they are real to that person and the freedom not to have to deal with it, or at least not have to be as restricted by them, is a large part of what keeps that person in fandom.

I mean, sure, the shows/movies/books are awesome, and we all love the characters and the actors who play them (or at least love to hate them), but that's not what keeps us in fandom over the long haul, keeps us moving to new corners of fandom as old ones slow down from cancellation or whatever. Be honest. How many of you got into fandom because of one show and then found another part of fandom when that show was canceled and/or you lost interest in it?

Second, every major fail or wank I've ever seen was caused by one basic thing: a failure to recognize when you're stepping on other peoples' issues when those issues are opposing, compounded by a failure of basic courtesy. Everyone has issues, some big, some small. And everyone has trouble recognizing other peoples' issues, and treating them as valid, particularly when they are diametrically opposed to one another. Even when you think someone's just whining, it's a valid issue to them, and part of the reason why they stay in fandom. Let's be perfectly honest. Sometimes, it is just whining. But sometimes it isn't. And even when it's not a 'serious' issue, that doesn't give you the right to beat people over the head with a stick about it. Let's take the current warnings argument as an example.

There are five main groups of people participating in this particular wank. First, there are people who genuinely have triggers--where reading certain things causes extreme mental and emotional (and sometimes physical) stress that can ruin their whole day. Most common in this category are survivors of sexual abuse, for whom non-con, dub-con, incest, etc, can trigger panic attacks. They are a small minority, but that does not make their needs irrelevant, and it is not a license to say who cares if fandom is a safe space for them when it's a safe space for most people. Second, there are the people who have things they really don't like, that spoil their enjoyment of a story or disappoint them or gross them out, but do not trigger a panic attack. These people champion the cause of those with triggers because they don't want to bother wasting time reading stuff that's going to squick them in the end, and use the fact that some people have triggers as an excuse to further their own agenda (note that their agenda is, at heart, to make fandom 'safe' for them in their definition of safe). Third, there are the people who don't have any personal stake in the issue but are either very empathetic and want to make sure fandom is a truly safe space or want to appear empathetic for whatever reason. Fourth, there are the people who don't like the idea of being told what to do, particularly in fandom which is supposed to be their safe space from such things. Often they're opposed to warnings for artistic reasons, but whether that's true or not, in opposing 'mandatory' rating systems and the like they are trying to make fandom safe for themselves in exactly the same way that the second group is, albeit with diametrically opposing goals. Fifth, there are the people for whom anyone else attempting to control what they write and how they share it--even just the warnings!--is a genuine trigger just like people in the first group are triggered by other things. Most common in this category are survivors of various kinds of mental and emotional abuse, wherein family members or authority figures tried to control their writing as a way of trying to control their thoughts.

So what happens when the warnings debate gets stirred up? The first and second groups band together, and the fourth and fifth groups band together. Everyone plays up their own issues, what they need for fandom to be a safe space for them, and downplays everyone else's needs and issues. Both sides try to claim the moral high ground with varying degrees of success. In the process, mistakes are made and basic courtesy is forgotten. And for the duration of the wank, fandom isn't a safe space for anyone.

At its heart, the warnings debate (just like the race debate and every other major, fandom-spanning debate I've seen in the last ten years) is an argument about how to make fandom the safe space it's supposed to be. I can't tell you how to accomplish that, on this or any issue, and in fact given the diversity of fandom I don't think it's possible for fandom ever to be completely safe for everyone on every issue. I don't think that's a bad thing, because having to check your own assumptions is essential to a free society. Basically, no one's perfect; everyone will make mistakes. Be willing to admit when you've made a mistake, be willing to listen, and be willing to apologize. In other words, being a courteous adult should take care of it.

I can tell you two sure-fire certain ways to make fandom unsafe, however. The first is if everyone assumes that their own needs and issues are the only important ones in fandom, and doesn't care about making fandom safe for people who might be different. The second is if people try to come up with and implement universal rules to force others to accommodate each and every need of each and every person.

This entry was originally posted at http://beatrice-otter.dreamwidth.org/139529.html. Please comment there using OpenID.