[LMB] Slash was re: Levels of Sexuality
elbju at yahoo.se
Thu Jan 6 13:06:05 GMT 2011
Kirsten Edwards wrote:
> Weinrich posted the curmudgeonly
> "One of the (many) things that bug me about modern
> (possibly just American, but I have no proof) culture is the ongoing
> assumption that all relationships are sexual. History,
> literature, and personal experience indicate (to me at least) that there
> are many very close relationships that are not at all sexual.
> That is probably what disturbs me so much about slash,
> the assumption that everything is sex."
> Elin B replied that "the standard answer to that objection
> among slash writers is probably that there are also many close
> relationships that are not sexual between men and women" and went on to > claim that this, and the insistence in het slash fic (if you'll pardon
> the clumsy usage) that male-female friendships all have to be All About > Teh Sexors too, doesn't bug us.
> To which I state and I'd bet (were I a gambling woman) Mr.
> Weinrich would second: "The blazes it doesn't."
Well, it certainly bugs me as well, but if it does bug Mr Weinrich, he didn't mention it in his initial post, only singling out slash (which I took to mean non-canon m/m, as the usage I'm the most familiar with, but I acknowledge that I may have been mistaken) as the point of disturbance. Hence my remark.
Although my intention (which was clumsily expressed, for which I apologise) was to not only imply heterosexual shipping in fanfiction but the way mainstream pop culture will also often interpret close relationships between men and women who are assumed to be straight. Which does gall me.
More information about the Lois-Bujold