I think the 'subversion' aspect of slash is an accident of sociology, not a raison d'etre
Jesus Christ, yes. That's where this post rubs me the wrong way. I don't go out there saying "ooh, I'm gonna be edgy and write myself some slash."
Sure, one can use the definition that slash=non-canon, but in that case Modesty/Willie is slash and the whole slash/het/gen breakdown (which is actually understandable 95% of the time) is pointless and wrong. I'm not wild about this idea.
The way I see it, I write fanfic. Sometimes that fanfic involved non-canon pairings. Sometimes it involves same-sex pairings. The fact that I use the term "slash" for the second category rather than the first doesn't in any way mean I want to "fictionalize" real same-sex relationships, any way than my use of the word "het" means I want to fictionalize real opposite-sex relationships. And I'm really, really not keen on the idea of trying to determine people's views on sexual politics by their use of one frickin' word.
no subject
Jesus Christ, yes. That's where this post rubs me the wrong way. I don't go out there saying "ooh, I'm gonna be edgy and write myself some slash."
Sure, one can use the definition that slash=non-canon, but in that case Modesty/Willie is slash and the whole slash/het/gen breakdown (which is actually understandable 95% of the time) is pointless and wrong. I'm not wild about this idea.
The way I see it, I write fanfic. Sometimes that fanfic involved non-canon pairings. Sometimes it involves same-sex pairings. The fact that I use the term "slash" for the second category rather than the first doesn't in any way mean I want to "fictionalize" real same-sex relationships, any way than my use of the word "het" means I want to fictionalize real opposite-sex relationships. And I'm really, really not keen on the idea of trying to determine people's views on sexual politics by their use of one frickin' word.