Neil Faulkner wrote:
But to make a flat assertion that we are here 'just' to be fans and 'just' to have fun, goes directly against the grain of the common mode of fan discourse that *is* primarily focussed on the source, namely the citation of evidence from canon to support or deny a speculative proposition regarding ambiguities within the canon. I can't help but see some irony here, this statement coming as it does from one who has accused others of trying to 'control' the Lyst and the nature of the discussion that takes place within it, or suggested that they should even go elsewhere to pursue their debate.
In fairness to Dana here, though, I don't think she's saying that she objects to other people engaging in that kind of discourse. (Correct me if I'm wrong, Dana, please!) It's just that she doesn't want to be pushed into that kind of discourse (or taken to task for not engaging in it) when it's not what she's interested in doing. Which seems perfectly reasonable to me.
In my perception, one thing that does seem to be happening here is that the pro-slashers are being... Well, I almost wanted to use the word "attacked," but that's too emotionally laden and probably not entirely accurate. Let's say "pressured" by the anti-slashers to *prove* that there is a homosexual subtext within canon. And the response of most of them has been "I'm not interested in doing that," but that doesn't seem to be considered an acceptable response by many. I don't think anybody's saying (at least, I *hope* nobody's saying!) that having canon-based discussions about stuff is wrong or bad to do. Personally, I often find it tremendous fun, and a nice intellectual exercise (if you couldn't tell that from the fact that I spent several long paragraphs arguing about the nature of Blake and Inga's relationship based on their respective ages and dialog from the episode). But fans who *don't* want to engage in that kind of discourse should be free not to. A lot of what I've seen in recents threads, though, seems to consist on people who've indicated they're *not* interested in doing that being repeatedly challenged to do so. I can understand a certain amount of frustration at this point.
Sorry if any of that seems a little too strong. Again, I'm not meaning to be offensive. I think this is just a major case of colliding viewpoints, where people more often than not seem to be talking right past each other.