Fandom is so toxic right now

[Grendelsbayne]

Something else I was thinking about. Has their been any toxic reaction to any show or movie that was great? I've sort of noticed a great deal of complaints come from things were the end product is bad or on the fringes of being good. That's not to say sexism and racism doesn't get involved with some people because like I said bad to medicore female characters can get more critized than male characters who don't quite work. Which sort of plays into that idea of how a women has to work twice as hard to just be accepted. But this is why you don't hear a peep about "Wonder Women" or "Black Panther." I know the critics started to die down with Starbuck once that show established it's greatness. You could say the the complaints people make are often valid but not o the level people take it.
Also one thing I miss is how bitching and moaning about stuff was often the pass seen as funny because people didn't take themselves so serious. People had some perspective. Now though I think because of the internet people take what they now call virtual singling though in the pass it was called, playing to the crowd, people feel the need to somehow not just rant to get something out of their system or just have fun but now they feel a excessive need to win arguments. I also know that term was invented by those on the right but I also know the biggest joke is they are often just as guilty if not more so of doing that exact same thing. I noticed both sides kind of take terms the other side and use them. That's why you see those on the right sort of sounding like they on the left by using things like toxic,problematic,in the bubble in how they talk. Liberals then stole snowflake from them and also the reason we seem to change our name ever 5 years is because those on the right make it a slur. First we were radicals then liberals and then proggressives and now SJW's until someone gets scarred of it and creates something else.

Jason

This completely ignores the fact that the whining horrors usually start long before there's even a character to judge.

DSC was 'Star Trek: Diversity' (shock! horror!) from the day the casting announcements came. This on the basis of a cast list with a whole six minority actors, and 10 women out of 19 or 20 significant characters total. After decades of female characters being trapped below 30% of the cast (except in voyager where they managed a whole 40%), suddenly it's too much to ask for the male cast to have even a fraction less than 50% representation.

In 2013 Marvel launched a new X-Men book (not even remotely the only book at the time, mind you, just a new one) starring the characters Storm, Kitty Pryde, Psylocke, Emma Frost, Rachel Grey, Jubilee and Rogue. These are all female characters, but more importantly, they're all popular, classic X-men characters who've been around forever. All Marvel did was make a series starring them and say these great x-men characters are getting their own series alongside the other x-men teams already with their own ongoing series. A few news sites, of course, made some headlines about the first all female x-men team. And fans could not stop falling over themselves to denounce the entire series as pc sjw bs gone too far for months before the series was even released.

Ghostbusters, of course, was an internet meme from the second it was announced.

The female doctor isn't out yet at all, but that doesn't stop people from going ballistic over her.

When people aren't even willing to wait and see what they're actually talking about before starting an internet crusade, they clearly aren't all that interested in any fair judgement of the subject matter. Maybe an absolutely amazing product can ultimately make them shut up, after all (if only because of the extreme pushback they'd receive from everyone else), but their problem is not about quality. It's about the fact that they don't want certain characters or concepts to exist.

ETA: And for everyone who's apparently convinced some characters are 'safe' from the toxicity, I just found this gem at the very top of a discussion about the Captain Marvel trailer:

Person 1: 'Please don't involve social justice. Please don't involve social justice. Please don't involve social justice.' (Repeats like 30 times. Seriously)
Person 2: 'At least we know it can't possibly be any worse than Wonder Woman.'

 

[Jayson1]

This completely ignores the fact that the whining horrors usually start long before there's even a character to judge.

DSC was 'Star Trek: Diversity' (shock! horror!) from the day the casting announcements came. This on the basis of a cast list with a whole six minority actors, and 10 women out of 19 or 20 significant characters total. After decades of female characters being trapped below 30% of the cast (except in voyager where they managed a whole 40%), suddenly it's too much to ask for the male cast to have even a fraction less than 50% representation.

In 2013 Marvel launched a new X-Men book (not even remotely the only book at the time, mind you, just a new one) starring the characters Storm, Kitty Pryde, Psylocke, Emma Frost, Rachel Grey, Jubilee and Rogue. These are all female characters, but more importantly, they're all popular, classic X-men characters who've been around forever. All Marvel did was make a series starring them and say these great x-men characters are getting their own series alongside the other x-men teams already with their own ongoing series. A few news sites, of course, made some headlines about the first all female x-men team. And fans could not stop falling over themselves to denounce the entire series as pc sjw bs gone too far for months before the series was even released.

Ghostbusters, of course, was an internet meme from the second it was announced.

The female doctor isn't out yet at all, but that doesn't stop people from going ballistic over her.

When people aren't even willing to wait and see what they're actually talking about before starting an internet crusade, they clearly aren't all that interested in any fair judgement of the subject matter. Maybe an absolutely amazing product can ultimately make them shut up, after all (if only because of the extreme pushback they'd receive from everyone else), but their problem is not about quality. It's about the fact that they don't want certain characters or concepts to exist.

ETA: And for everyone who's apparently convinced some characters are 'safe' from the toxicity, I just found this gem at the very top of a discussion about the Captain Marvel trailer:

Person 1: 'Please don't involve social justice. Please don't involve social justice. Please don't involve social justice.' (Repeats like 30 times. Seriously)
Person 2: 'At least we know it can't possibly be any worse than Wonder Woman.'

Yes I agree that the complaining starts way early before a show or movie is even made but that's always been the case. I'm sort of the idea that people don't know what they really want until they see it. People think they know what they want but that's not really true if they got it and people are capable of being surprised and sometimes it's just a matter of time with people getting use to a idea. Seems like half of the great stuff I like took a few years before opinions started to change. Trek fans seem to hate everything at first but then after a few years they end up getting a more solid footing on how they feel. Shows like Breaking Bad,X-Files, took time to build a stronger fanbase. How many things are truly loved right out of the gate?
I do think fans have a bigger issue in politcs the more topical they feel. Fans are more use to stuff being more subtle and also being told in methphor. If you deal with racism it would be aliens in which you tell the story as opposed to a black hero facing it. The idea that you don't have to hide your social commentary does factor in how people feel plus people have more behind the scenes knowledge of who is making the shows and their intent which leads to the idea of a show trying to be political. In the past I don't think people knew much about the politics of the show runners or writers. Maybe a assumption they are liberal because everyone thinks everyone in Hollywood is liberal but nobody knew specifics. That lack of knowledge helped makes things more civil. If you were a fan you didn't know the poltics of the creators or even most of the fans. You didn't know their was a bunch of racist or sexist out their liking the thing you like. Or even people from a different party. I know I was surprised just how many republicans liked Trek due to the kind of socialist vision of Roddenberry. Basically that old idea of never talking about religion or politics with strangers was still in effect. Those were more private things that you don't talk about since you know it will cause trouble. Now it seems people relish the idea of the conflict, because on the internet you don't really have to face the people you are insulting.

Jason

 

[Grendelsbayne]

Yes I agree that the complaining starts way early before a show or movie is even made but that's always been the case. I'm sort of the idea that people don't know what they really want until they see it. People think they know what they want but that's not really true if they got it and people are capable of being surprised and sometimes it's just a matter of time with people getting use to a idea. Seems like half of the great stuff I like took a few years before opinions started to change. Trek fans seem to hate everything at first but then after a few years they end up getting a more solid footing on how they feel. Shows like Breaking Bad,X-Files, took time to build a stronger fanbase. How many things are truly loved right out of the gate?

No one says they have to love it right out of the gate (or even at all). There is a huge amount of space between instant love and instant hate, yet instant hate is what they go for. Again and again and again, and very clearly targeted at specific types of characters (right down to having movements, plural, specifically aimed at undermining those characters).

The politics stuff may have some influence on some people, but again, the pattern here is pretty clear and it doesn't rely on creator politics and it doesn't rely on show quality. It relies on female and minority characters in starring/main roles of major franchises.

 

[Jayson1]

No one says they have to love it right out of the gate (or even at all). There is a huge amount of space between instant love and instant hate, yet instant hate is what they go for. Again and again and again, and very clearly targeted at specific types of characters (right down to having movements, plural, specifically aimed at undermining those characters).

The politics stuff may have some influence on some people, but again, the pattern here is pretty clear and it doesn't rely on creator politics and it doesn't rely on show quality. It relies on female and minority characters in starring/main roles of major franchises.

I know what your talking about. The guys who make the youtube video's. I agree those people are bad but to me that stuff has less to do with fandom and more about politcs as a whole. Since everyone it seems hates everyone because of how toxic our actual leaders have become, of course people are going to be more paranoid about people's intentions. Every criticism of anything is seen as a secret bash on males or females. Everything is either a secret Nazi or SJW plot. If people so distrust each other that they are never able to give people the benefit of doubt you are naturally going to have this kind of stuff. Then you toss in all the fake news from the Russia inspired stuff to others who are just trying to get clicks and it's hard not to keep getting triggered no matter who you are these days. It does feel like their is stuff on the internet that is their for no other reason than to piss off liberals or conservatives. Thus it's hard to tell where the truth really is when reading stuff on the internet.

Jason

 

[bolak]

If you're casting on the basis of gender, race or any other distinction then you're biased. People might want to introduce shades of "good-or-bad" bias, but that's the core truth.

And that's one reason why the Ghostbusters remake was so vilified. Deliberately casting only women "to prove a point" is just as bad as deliberately casting only men.

I don't see how fictional productions can get around that problem, even with blind-casting; establishing a set of attributes that the character is to exhibit and then having random actors interpret that in an audition. But what if that means that the cast ends-up as 99% male or whatever?

 

[SPCTRE]

If you're casting on the basis of gender, race or any other distinction then you're biased. People might want to introduce shades of "good-or-bad" bias, but that's the core truth.

And that's one reason why the Ghostbusters remake was so vilified. Deliberately casting only women "to prove a point" is just as bad as deliberately casting only men.

I don't see how fictional productions can get around that problem, even with blind-casting; establishing a set of attributes that the character is to exhibit and then having random actors interpret that in an audition. But what if that means that the cast ends-up as 99% male or whatever?

"it's such a scary time for men"

 

[M'rk son of Mogh]

I wonder if for the Ghostbusters example, if the cast made it like the original and wrote it for themselves because they loved the idea as opposed to a seeming agenda being used to hire them, if that would have created less backlash.

 

[Nyotarules]

I do recall some fans who frowned at the idea of Russ as Tuvok, all because "there are no black Vulcans". It may not have been widespread, but the resistance was there. ..and this from the (allegedly) most open-minded sci-fi fanbase of all.

If they ever introduce toilets in Star Trek I am going to war. There are no toilets on starships ever!

 

[The Old Mixer]

If they ever introduce toilets in Star Trek I am going to war. There are no toilets on starships ever!

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

0:47

 

[Nyotarules]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

0:47

Where is it!?

 

[The Old Mixer]

Kirk's sitting on it.

"DO NOT USE WHILE IN SPACEDOCK"

 

[Nyotarules]

Kirk's sitting on it.

"DO NOT USE WHILE IN SPACEDOCK"

 

[Grendelsbayne]

If you're casting on the basis of gender, race or any other distinction then you're biased. People might want to introduce shades of "good-or-bad" bias, but that's the core truth.

And that's one reason why the Ghostbusters remake was so vilified. Deliberately casting only women "to prove a point" is just as bad as deliberately casting only men.

I don't see how fictional productions can get around that problem, even with blind-casting; establishing a set of attributes that the character is to exhibit and then having random actors interpret that in an audition. But what if that means that the cast ends-up as 99% male or whatever?

Casting isn't done on the basis of a general idea of what sort of people might be interesting to see. Characters are already largely formed before anyone sees a single actor or actress (unless a role is written with someone specific in mind). Now, it may be possible in many cases to still 'blind-cast' as far as minorities are concerned, because many roles really don't have much at all to do with ethnicity so the same character on the page could just as easily be played by a white man or a black man or an asian man. But that only works when the *already written* character allows for it, and when you're talking about female characters in main roles, odds are much higher that they actually do involve their gender in the characterisation. At that point, 'blind-casting' would essentially require rewriting the character, which a production is not going to do unless an actor gave them a different idea for the character that is actually better than the original idea.

In any case, writers are not hired to write a generic cookie cutter script where every single character could potentially be played by any ethnicity or gender person. They're hired to write a good script about specific characters and they're not going to appreciate having every single character they write potentially totally upended by casting. The only logical place to address these issues is in the writing room, not the casting room. And that's exactly what Ghostbusters, Discovery, etc, did.

 

[mos6507]

And that's exactly what Ghostbusters, Discovery, etc, did.

Which is fine, but when the end product sucks, people are entitled to criticize it without being accused of only hating on it because...bigotry.

Remember that Comic Book Guy got his reputation for being negative, basically the nerd snob archetype, and while it's not exactly a positive role model, he wasn't equated with the KKK.

 

[suarezguy]

The internet attracts hate like sugar attracts flies

It attracts a lot of positivity and gushing too, no?

I don't know about that but people do tend to focus on the negative. People want to be happy I think but people also love to complain and focus on the negatives in life.

I don't know about with the Star Wars sequel trilogy but otherwise a lot of the criticism about media seems pretty constructive and reasonable in that it's arguing a franchise or character has been done better before, could/should be done better now.

There will understandably, even reasonably be some bitterness and desire to express your opinion when something you regarded as awful is hugely successful with a lot of viewers and especially financially (especially with the latter, that will lead to there being a lot more similar movies & TV).

 

[Noname Given]

If they ever introduce toilets in Star Trek I am going to war. There are no toilets on starships ever!

Oh, you're full of sh!t. (sorry, couldn't resist)

 

[suarezguy]

You clearly weren't a member of this board (or a lurker) in the early 2000s.

I don't recall there being a lot of negativity, let alone hate, of Enterprise on this board then, the most that came up (after at least a few months) was that it was boring.

 

[suarezguy]

Threatening someone's livelihood or wishing that harm (professionally or personally) comes to them, is toxic, and is part of what I consider to be "quasi-criminal" acts.

Wishing personal harm yes is toxic, professional harm in the sense of wanting them to be replaced seems a pretty unavoidable part of having a profession that tries to appeal to the public. In 2014 a lot of people were hoping that Avi Arad would no longer make Spider-Man films so that Kevin Feige at Marvel Studios could make them and were thrilled when that change did happen the next year, do you think either of those feelings was toxic?

 

[Jayson1]

Wishing personal harm yes is toxic, professional harm in the sense of wanting them to be replaced seems a pretty unavoidable part of having a profession that tries to appeal to the public. In 2014 a lot of people were hoping that Avi Arad would no longer make Spider-Man films so that Kevin Feige at Marvel Studios could make them and were thrilled when that change did happen the next year, do you think either of those feelings was toxic?

I agree. To me this is no different than wanting the coach of your favorite football team to be fired because the team isn't winning. I don't think anyone has ever taken these feelings to a point where they don't feel like this person should no longer also to have a career. Even with Berman back in the day for example I know many were happy with the idea of him basically handling the business side of Trek but simply didn't want him to have creative input on the show. I thought Lucas did a terrible job with the prequels but I didn't want LucasFilm to go under and I am one of the few people who even liked "The Crystal Skull" movie. I sometimes think the hate of that movie revolves around one scene and that is the fridge. Which to me also felt silly but not any more silly than the raft scene in the second movie. Aliens don't seem such a stretch from flying ghosts or imortal beings and in fact match very well with a 50's setting since you started getting more Sci-FI in that era.

Jason

 

[Nerys Myk]

I was around and an active part of sci-fi fandom at the time. That meant your friends, conventions big and small, comic shops--anywhere. SW had an immediate effect on sci-fi fandom with many ST long-timers, and fans of so-called "hard sci-fi" novels already taking a negative position against it (calling it "stupid", "childish"--which was also aimed at the film's fans), while SW fans thought that first film was a revelation, and everything else was "nothing" compared to it--mild compared to what they said of TOs fan, the actors, etc.. There was a time DC vs. Marvel fandom was a terrible thing to be around, but the vitriol swirling around SW and ST fans left the comic book wars in the dust.

I was around in '77 and I'm glad to say that wasn't my experience. My friends and I were big Trek fans and we looked forward to seeing Star Wars. Sitting in the theatre and watching as that Star Destroyer crossed the screen seemingly over my head is cherished movie experience. As was Mr. Scott's tour around the refit Enterprise a few years later. My friends and I devoured any info about the new productions in both franchises equally.