![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
asimplechordSlash is not pedophilia. I can't believe I even have to say that, but there it is. WTF WFI?
Fan fiction is FICTION. It's not REAL. Not even when we're writing RPF. Because, yeah, we're using a face of a real person, but we have no idea if they'd really behave the way we're writing them. It's like playing paper dolls.
Bad shit happens in life.
Bad shit can happen in fiction.
But just because bad shit gets written in fic, doesn't mean we would do it or condone it being done in real life.
Having said that....
I am an adult. I am responsible for myself. I am NOT responsible for anyone else. There's a warning on my userprofile, but life doesn't come with a warning label.
When I click on an internet link, if I find a story disturbing or not to my taste, I can close the tab or click the back arrow. And I will. I accept that responsibility when I read fan fiction, when I watch TV or a movie, when I read a book. It's nice that fan fiction often comes with warnings (I have a love-hate relationship with wanting but not wanting warnings, BTW), but life and books don't, so I'm not terribly upset if there aren't any. Like I said, there's always a back button and some fluff to cheer me if I find something that makes my eyes or brain or squick-cells hurt.
Now, some might argue that children could read some disturbing fan fiction on the internet, and that authors are responsible for that. I call bullshit on that one. You might think my response is rude. It's not directed at anyone in particular. Here it is: Other people's kids are not my responsibility; I am nobody's mother. Parents should, you know, PARENT. Know what their kid is reading. Have a block on the TV or internet if they're concerned. Discuss it with their kids. Don't blame someone else for a lack of supervision or understanding.
And OK, internet users behaving badly, listen up. Saying things in comments that you wouldn't say in real life? Not on. I'm not sure why people think it's OK to be rude behind a layer of anonymity, but apparently that sort of thought is widespread.
The most recent bit of bad behavior arose from the Season Three spoilers released for Supernatural.
I'm a bit concerned, yes. I like the show because it's all about Dean and Sam on their quest, fighting evil with a few laughs thrown in. There are other recurring characters, but they're not the focus. The Winchesters have had relationships, but that's not the focus; the main point is Sam and Dean's "epic love story" as brothers. All their energy and emotion is put into their search for the YED, and whatever's left over is for family. I love that S1 was all set-up and that S2 was all about what Dean was willing to sacrifice for Sam and that S3 will hopefully be about Sam coming to grips with his "abilities" and struggling to use/not use them to save Dean.
I am not eager to see two female hunters appear and screw the dynamic all to hell. I understand that the network wants this, as they wanted Jo's character to be a love interest for Dean originally, in order to off-set the "hottie" factor in S1. I'm OK with them picking up random chicks, and I sorta like the idea of circumstances being the only thing that keeps Dean from hanging on to Jo like there's no tomorrow, making the Jo/Dean thing a point of UST (on either or both sides). I'm OK with new occasionally recurring characters. But I'm not sure I'll like two new hunters in every episode, clashing with Sam and Dean. Although I can see where more hunters might be needed, given the "army" released in AHBLpt2, I'm not sure why they have to be the same, recurring hunters.
But I'm willing to give Kripke the benefit of the doubt.
I just hope the network's decision doesn't change the whole tone of the show.
Fan fiction is FICTION. It's not REAL. Not even when we're writing RPF. Because, yeah, we're using a face of a real person, but we have no idea if they'd really behave the way we're writing them. It's like playing paper dolls.
Bad shit happens in life.
Bad shit can happen in fiction.
But just because bad shit gets written in fic, doesn't mean we would do it or condone it being done in real life.
Having said that....
I am an adult. I am responsible for myself. I am NOT responsible for anyone else. There's a warning on my userprofile, but life doesn't come with a warning label.
When I click on an internet link, if I find a story disturbing or not to my taste, I can close the tab or click the back arrow. And I will. I accept that responsibility when I read fan fiction, when I watch TV or a movie, when I read a book. It's nice that fan fiction often comes with warnings (I have a love-hate relationship with wanting but not wanting warnings, BTW), but life and books don't, so I'm not terribly upset if there aren't any. Like I said, there's always a back button and some fluff to cheer me if I find something that makes my eyes or brain or squick-cells hurt.
Now, some might argue that children could read some disturbing fan fiction on the internet, and that authors are responsible for that. I call bullshit on that one. You might think my response is rude. It's not directed at anyone in particular. Here it is: Other people's kids are not my responsibility; I am nobody's mother. Parents should, you know, PARENT. Know what their kid is reading. Have a block on the TV or internet if they're concerned. Discuss it with their kids. Don't blame someone else for a lack of supervision or understanding.
And OK, internet users behaving badly, listen up. Saying things in comments that you wouldn't say in real life? Not on. I'm not sure why people think it's OK to be rude behind a layer of anonymity, but apparently that sort of thought is widespread.
The most recent bit of bad behavior arose from the Season Three spoilers released for Supernatural.
I'm a bit concerned, yes. I like the show because it's all about Dean and Sam on their quest, fighting evil with a few laughs thrown in. There are other recurring characters, but they're not the focus. The Winchesters have had relationships, but that's not the focus; the main point is Sam and Dean's "epic love story" as brothers. All their energy and emotion is put into their search for the YED, and whatever's left over is for family. I love that S1 was all set-up and that S2 was all about what Dean was willing to sacrifice for Sam and that S3 will hopefully be about Sam coming to grips with his "abilities" and struggling to use/not use them to save Dean.
I am not eager to see two female hunters appear and screw the dynamic all to hell. I understand that the network wants this, as they wanted Jo's character to be a love interest for Dean originally, in order to off-set the "hottie" factor in S1. I'm OK with them picking up random chicks, and I sorta like the idea of circumstances being the only thing that keeps Dean from hanging on to Jo like there's no tomorrow, making the Jo/Dean thing a point of UST (on either or both sides). I'm OK with new occasionally recurring characters. But I'm not sure I'll like two new hunters in every episode, clashing with Sam and Dean. Although I can see where more hunters might be needed, given the "army" released in AHBLpt2, I'm not sure why they have to be the same, recurring hunters.
But I'm willing to give Kripke the benefit of the doubt.
I just hope the network's decision doesn't change the whole tone of the show.
