I get kind of riled about criticism of slash from a gay male point of view, because, really, how much different is slash from the traditions of camp? Was Judy Garland "exploited" by gay male audiences when they made her into their icon? I'd think, rather than being critical, that gay men would feel some spark of recognition and sympathy here.
I mean, next time somebody brings it up, just say, "I want to speak with Ru Paul, please."
Oh, you know, that's a really excellent point. And I, of course, never even thought of it. @@
Neither gay men or women (lesbian or straight) have been able to express our desires under patriarchy, and it's only a matter of time and place and circumstances who's getting beat to death for trying -- or "merely" being hushed or laughed at. One might *think,* given the suffocating blanket of Het! Sex! Allthetime! in our culture, that heterosexual women are free to speak (write/paint/film) our desires, but one would be wrong. We still have to tell so much of it "slant," even to ourselves, and I think this is (part) of what slash is about.
Dude, word, word, and word. This is so exactly how I see it.
(One thing it's about is *ordinary* women writing sex and making sexual art, not just extraordinary women. We can't all be Madonna or even Susie Bright. We don't want to be famous, or notorious -- just normal everyday pornographers. Argh! You know what I mean!)
I do. What's more, we don't want to have to be famous, or viewed as notorious, in order to lay claim to our own desires. A man can say, "I'm horny," and it will be shrugged off as the natural state of things. If a woman says, "I'm horny," she lets herself in for all kinds of grief, from being accused of being a slut to being asked (in hushed tones) if she's menstruating, to random bypassers trying to psychoanalyze her. Because it's not "natural," and it's not "normal," according to the patriarchy, that a woman have such desires, let alone talk about them.
I don't know if there will come a day when slash is no longer "needed" in this way -- and maybe we'll look back at slash the way gay men look back at the heyday of the musicals, but it's gonna take a real sea change to get us there. And in the end we might just go, "slash was good all along! We wuz right!"
I think slash will always be needed. It may become more open. Original slash, or TPTB-approved media tie-in slash, might become official literary genres with their own space on the bookstore shelf. It will still be around, though, because it fulfills needs no other genre does.
no subject
I mean, next time somebody brings it up, just say, "I want to speak with Ru Paul, please."
Oh, you know, that's a really excellent point. And I, of course, never even thought of it. @@
Neither gay men or women (lesbian or straight) have been able to express our desires under patriarchy, and it's only a matter of time and place and circumstances who's getting beat to death for trying -- or "merely" being hushed or laughed at. One might *think,* given the suffocating blanket of Het! Sex! Allthetime! in our culture, that heterosexual women are free to speak (write/paint/film) our desires, but one would be wrong. We still have to tell so much of it "slant," even to ourselves, and I think this is (part) of what slash is about.
Dude, word, word, and word. This is so exactly how I see it.
(One thing it's about is *ordinary* women writing sex and making sexual art, not just extraordinary women. We can't all be Madonna or even Susie Bright. We don't want to be famous, or notorious -- just normal everyday pornographers. Argh! You know what I mean!)
I do. What's more, we don't want to have to be famous, or viewed as notorious, in order to lay claim to our own desires. A man can say, "I'm horny," and it will be shrugged off as the natural state of things. If a woman says, "I'm horny," she lets herself in for all kinds of grief, from being accused of being a slut to being asked (in hushed tones) if she's menstruating, to random bypassers trying to psychoanalyze her. Because it's not "natural," and it's not "normal," according to the patriarchy, that a woman have such desires, let alone talk about them.
I don't know if there will come a day when slash is no longer "needed" in this way -- and maybe we'll look back at slash the way gay men look back at the heyday of the musicals, but it's gonna take a real sea change to get us there. And in the end we might just go, "slash was good all along! We wuz right!"
I think slash will always be needed. It may become more open. Original slash, or TPTB-approved media tie-in slash, might become official literary genres with their own space on the bookstore shelf. It will still be around, though, because it fulfills needs no other genre does.