It's Different Because They're *People*!
Mar. 16th, 2005 08:48 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
neadodsI joined ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-community.gif)
metafandom because it posts interesting links to fannish happenings around LJ, and hey - if fanthropology is good, than more of the same must be better.
We'll see how long I last now that my first post has led me to Sprat's commentary on Real Person Slash: "I know this is a sensitive area in fandom, and I know there are a lot of people for whom this is, like, A Really Major Deal--not just a personal squick, but an actual ethical issue having to do with the right to privacy of the actors in question. And the thing is, I honestly do not understand why."
Because they're people, that's why!
I commented in the thread, and I tried to keep my tone reasonable, but I am one of those folk with "an actual ethical issue" about this, and it's very simple to explain why - whether the actors in question know it or not, whether they read it or not, whether they care or not, real person fiction demotes a human being to the same level as a fictional character.
There are levels of this, some not all that offensive. For instance, obligatory disclosure, I once wrote a real person fic. I put a fictional character on a Julia Childe cooking show, which necessitated having Julia Childe in the story. But I don't feel that I denigrated her because I showed her doing her doing her job. And I've read plenty of fanfics where the actor gets sucked into the character's world, or vice versa. When the real person is written in a situation dealing with their job, and written in a manner that fits their character as known, then - well, you can argue that a line is crossed, but it's harder to argue that a person has been damaged or insulted.
But when you start talking about private issues - love, sex, family - in a public fiction, then you start treating people not just as moderately fictional, but as dancing meatpuppets. Real person slash - particularly slash about het humans (I get the impression that Sprat is writing about Paul Gross, who is married) depersonalizes the subjects even farther into breathing sex toys. Sex toys that are getting their workout not in the confines of someone's skull, but right out there in public for the amusement of the masses.
How can you not see that as ethically creepy?
There appear to be two arguments in favor of RPS. First, that the actors are attractive and sell their sexuality in their work. But just because they're selling the sizzle, it doesn't mean they're signing away their rights to control the steak. Where is the ethical line between saying "if actors wanted privacy they wouldn't be actors" and "if women don't want to be raped, they shouldn't wear miniskirts"? Because from where I'm standing, I can't see that line at all. RPS may not be as violent or violating as an actual rape, but it springs from the same mindset - that anyone that attracts is responsible for slaking the sexual arousal - regardless of that person's opinion, interest, or even intent. The same can be said for stalking. It's a fine, fine line between just writing about fantasies with someone and making those fantasies real.
And y'know what? Even if you NEVER plan on making said fantasies real, if you publicly post something torrid about an actor and then go see them, what is it going to look like - to the actor, to the authorities, even to the rest of the fandom? Better pray nothing happens to that actor when you're around, because you've made yourself public suspect #1 without ever banging more than your keyboard.
Second, is the argument that "what they don't know won't hurt them." Well, yeah. The odds of someone finding a specific story about themselves are pretty low. BUT - that doesn't mean it won't happen, not with the global, lingering nature of the Internet. Plus, while the odds of a single person finding a single fic might be low, what about the widening pool of people associating with that person? Their spouse, their children, their friends, their parents - is it really safe to assume that none of these people will trip over the story? Equally important, is it safe to assume that because the story is not about them personally that they won't be hurt/shocked/upset/appalled? Do they deserve to be hurt just because you wanted to get your ya-yas off with a person instead of a character, and wanted to do so in a semi-public forum?
Not to mention that just because they don't say anything directly to you doesn't mean that they don't know. If you suspected someone of stalking you, would your first impulse be to talk to them, or to gather up your information and quietly talk to the authorities? Particularly if they might be going somewhere, say, a convention, where you might attend and they were worried about their safety? (I work conventions, I've been in fandom for decades. I am so not joking here. It only takes one stalker scare for a fan club to lose their star or for a previously wonderful guest to stop coming.)
Is it really all worth it just to be able to write a story about a real person? A person you don't know anyway? Trust me, no matter how friendly they are, how many interviews they give, you don't actually know them.
Think they're hot? Think they ought to be with someone of your choosing? For the love of sanity, write about their character and you can safely bang 'em like a gong. Fictional people doing fictional things is a victimless crime. But for heaven's sake, if you're attracted to an actual person then grant them the dignity of treating them like people!
And no, the golden rule doesn't apply if you wish people were writing torrid RPS about you. Get a sex life of your own!
metafandom because it posts interesting links to fannish happenings around LJ, and hey - if fanthropology is good, than more of the same must be better.We'll see how long I last now that my first post has led me to Sprat's commentary on Real Person Slash: "I know this is a sensitive area in fandom, and I know there are a lot of people for whom this is, like, A Really Major Deal--not just a personal squick, but an actual ethical issue having to do with the right to privacy of the actors in question. And the thing is, I honestly do not understand why."
Because they're people, that's why!
I commented in the thread, and I tried to keep my tone reasonable, but I am one of those folk with "an actual ethical issue" about this, and it's very simple to explain why - whether the actors in question know it or not, whether they read it or not, whether they care or not, real person fiction demotes a human being to the same level as a fictional character.
There are levels of this, some not all that offensive. For instance, obligatory disclosure, I once wrote a real person fic. I put a fictional character on a Julia Childe cooking show, which necessitated having Julia Childe in the story. But I don't feel that I denigrated her because I showed her doing her doing her job. And I've read plenty of fanfics where the actor gets sucked into the character's world, or vice versa. When the real person is written in a situation dealing with their job, and written in a manner that fits their character as known, then - well, you can argue that a line is crossed, but it's harder to argue that a person has been damaged or insulted.
But when you start talking about private issues - love, sex, family - in a public fiction, then you start treating people not just as moderately fictional, but as dancing meatpuppets. Real person slash - particularly slash about het humans (I get the impression that Sprat is writing about Paul Gross, who is married) depersonalizes the subjects even farther into breathing sex toys. Sex toys that are getting their workout not in the confines of someone's skull, but right out there in public for the amusement of the masses.
How can you not see that as ethically creepy?
There appear to be two arguments in favor of RPS. First, that the actors are attractive and sell their sexuality in their work. But just because they're selling the sizzle, it doesn't mean they're signing away their rights to control the steak. Where is the ethical line between saying "if actors wanted privacy they wouldn't be actors" and "if women don't want to be raped, they shouldn't wear miniskirts"? Because from where I'm standing, I can't see that line at all. RPS may not be as violent or violating as an actual rape, but it springs from the same mindset - that anyone that attracts is responsible for slaking the sexual arousal - regardless of that person's opinion, interest, or even intent. The same can be said for stalking. It's a fine, fine line between just writing about fantasies with someone and making those fantasies real.
And y'know what? Even if you NEVER plan on making said fantasies real, if you publicly post something torrid about an actor and then go see them, what is it going to look like - to the actor, to the authorities, even to the rest of the fandom? Better pray nothing happens to that actor when you're around, because you've made yourself public suspect #1 without ever banging more than your keyboard.
Second, is the argument that "what they don't know won't hurt them." Well, yeah. The odds of someone finding a specific story about themselves are pretty low. BUT - that doesn't mean it won't happen, not with the global, lingering nature of the Internet. Plus, while the odds of a single person finding a single fic might be low, what about the widening pool of people associating with that person? Their spouse, their children, their friends, their parents - is it really safe to assume that none of these people will trip over the story? Equally important, is it safe to assume that because the story is not about them personally that they won't be hurt/shocked/upset/appalled? Do they deserve to be hurt just because you wanted to get your ya-yas off with a person instead of a character, and wanted to do so in a semi-public forum?
Not to mention that just because they don't say anything directly to you doesn't mean that they don't know. If you suspected someone of stalking you, would your first impulse be to talk to them, or to gather up your information and quietly talk to the authorities? Particularly if they might be going somewhere, say, a convention, where you might attend and they were worried about their safety? (I work conventions, I've been in fandom for decades. I am so not joking here. It only takes one stalker scare for a fan club to lose their star or for a previously wonderful guest to stop coming.)
Is it really all worth it just to be able to write a story about a real person? A person you don't know anyway? Trust me, no matter how friendly they are, how many interviews they give, you don't actually know them.
Think they're hot? Think they ought to be with someone of your choosing? For the love of sanity, write about their character and you can safely bang 'em like a gong. Fictional people doing fictional things is a victimless crime. But for heaven's sake, if you're attracted to an actual person then grant them the dignity of treating them like people!
And no, the golden rule doesn't apply if you wish people were writing torrid RPS about you. Get a sex life of your own!
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-03-17 10:51 pm (UTC)But they won't. They know it's not real.
There's another reason why they might not act if they know it's out there-- they sure as hell don't want to draw attention, even negative attention, to this. They may find it does more harm to file a C&D than to *try* to ignore it. That doesn't necessarily mean they don't hate it, or they'd prefer not to be depicted that way.
The LOTR guys are aware of RPS from what I've seen, sure. And they seem to giggle at it. But they don't speak for all actors.
Besides, isn't it just -- bad manners, for cripe's sake, to depict someone in a way that they could take exception to? To use their name and quirks in a story without asking permission first? Most people wouldn't treat anyone they actually *know* like that. Does someone have to get sued, before it's obvious they've crossed a line? That's usually the last resort, isn't it?
no subject
Date: 2005-03-18 01:52 am (UTC)Well, I suppose you could consider it that, but I prefer to look upon it this way: for every person who has publicly lampooned a public figure in the press, on tv, in political cartoons, in comedy clubs -- there is a fan writing an RPS story and posting it on a comparatively remote internet site, one that no one really has interest in except the fans. It's hardly as public as David Letterman raking his victim du jour over the coals of his Top Ten list. Under your definition, comedy, political cartoons, parody, satire and the rest must be truly vile indeed.
no subject
Date: 2005-03-18 03:00 am (UTC)Yeah, actually, sometimes I do. All those Michael Jackson jokes? Not funny. Elizabeth Taylor jokes are both stale and often cruel. The difference is that bad manners is not equal to illegal or wrong. Tactless and tacky, yes. Wrong, no.
So far as I can tell the line gets crossed when reality gets ignored completely, and when it gets sexual. Comedians work with actors' and politicians' actual *actions*; they don't make stuff up entirely. Satirists might depict George Bush in bed with Tony Blair, but the medium, in this case, makes it clear that this is not true. Stories, on the other hand, are much harder to parse or allow the reader to make that distinction. Not least because the actors who are usually RPS material might be well-known, but they're not well-known enough for anyone outside the fandom to know what is real, and what is the author's depiction of their 'persona.' RPS fans are all pulling from the same public pool of info, maybe. But the rest of us are not aware of this stuff. "No, that's *my* Dom/Elijah/Viggo/whoever," you can say. But unless you go point-by-point and explain to me all the places where it's not the *real* Elijah, how the heck is a casual reader gonna know that?
Re: Access... Sure, the internet isn't Jay Leno. It's better: it has Google. And the Internet Wayback Machine. Either of which can bring up the supposedly remote little story, one you may have even erased a while ago, cached and saved, at the touch of a button. The actor, his publicist, his family, his employers-- they can all find this in 10 seconds. So forget the idea that it's some little tucked-away thing that they're never gonna know about. Actors *can* work computers, you know (despite the rumors).
no one really has interest in except the fans.
I assume you mean RPS fans? Because if not, then every fan of Russell Crowe, or Elijah Wood, who is too new or too out-of-fandom to even know fandom exists, is going to be shocked as hell when they encounter RPS. Of course these people can find the stories too, the same way I just mentioned : Google Lynx WebCrawler Lycos etc. Sure, they'll probably back away, shocked and disgusted, and never comment on it. But you never know what'll get back to the actor, and what won't.
One other point about Satire/Parody: most of those apply to public works, not public people. If you take anything you say about a public person too far, yeah, it is slander or libel.
"Oh, but I'm not saying anything bad..." Maybe it's not intended that way. But messing with someone's alleged behavior and sexuality to the point of unrecognizability can still be regarded, by them, as detrimental. In the end, they get the final say about what they consider harm. The RPS writers don't. Even if they mean it nicely, and adore the actor-- if the actor doesn't want it, they will/can sue, as you mentioned. I just don't get why you'd want it to get to that point. Fantasize, write about it, knock yourself out. But why make it public? Why not have a private list? That's the part I really, really don't get.
no subject
Date: 2005-03-18 03:12 am (UTC)Be that as it may, the only problem with private lists is that for most of us, the time of lists has passed, in favor of the ease of live journal. It's a matter of preference, and a dislike of the unwieldy nature of lists. ::shrug:: That's a mere footnote to this discussion, which I hope you agree has been done to death by now by both sides. So I won't add more than a "I respectfully disagree with you," and wish you a good night and thanks for a lively stating of your POV.