#and maybe this mindset is due to not seeing enough queer ships getting canonized

[noridal]

I know it must be an unpopular opinion but part of me wishes they won't canonize Grimmons because it would go against the RvB spirit to do so right at the end. We either get Simmons or Grif going to superhell or something but I won't stand for RT just casually saying "yeah they're a thing now".

You know what would be cool though? If it was something really soft like the whole mayhem goes down and Simmons is like "what do we do now that it's over?" And Grif just replied "yknow. We could still hangout" and keep it as that. Which isn't like they're canon-canon but they also didn't really leave each other right? So it's basically canon too.

[mild-lunacy]

Toward a Taxonomy of the Antis

You know, maybe it should be obvious, but one of the main reasons fandom always ultimately disenchanted me is at least partly because of the *reasons* some people are fans. Or, perhaps I should say, we use 'fan' as a catchall term when there are actually many models and reasons for engagement. It's not as simple as 'fan' and 'anti', but I do think that many times, the type of fan who becomes an anti was always a separate type. One thing that made me think of this is an anti actually outright saying they were only into the Throne of Glass books because of the hype around them. A lot of people say they used to be 'naive' or young, but not usually admitting they weren't really into the story on any genuine level in the first place.

Of course, saying 'genuine' risks fan policing terminology and wank about what's a 'true fan' or not, which isn't where I'm going. I just want to differentiate someone enjoying a TV or book series (like Throne of Glass) due to spontaneously loving the characters or setting, and loving it essentially because other people love it. One is much more likely to last and prove resilient than the other. If you like the 'fan' part of fandom, then as soon as the fire cools-- or other people start getting disillusioned at some kind of tipping point-- inevitably you'll become drawn into the anti mindset. Just like being drawn into the fan mindset in the first place. The only thing that's different is the direction. It's still all about external judgment that ultimately has nothing to do with the story or characters.

I'm not saying that method of engagement isn't valid. In my mind, anything that naturally arises, sociologically speaking, simply *is*. There's no 'valid' or 'invalid' ways of social organization (or writing, for that matter). In fact, it's that mindset that is my biggest difference from the antis. Your average fan may just get bored and unable to finish watching or reading new installments if their interest was social, or limited in the first place. But a few develop a critical interest, usually if other people hate the writer(s) too. Note that modern antis very rarely (if ever) march to the beat of their own drummer. People rarely quietly post anti rants online for their own benefit, disconnected from the relevant fandom, at least not for long. However, longtime lone fans certainly do exist (as I can personally verify).

Aside from this anecdotal impression, I don't think it's a coincidence that most antis these days make primarily social and/or social justice critiques. At the very least, the kind of fan who'd gotten into the Throne of Glass books due to the hype is likely also sensitive to the newest social pressures and mores of behavior. It's not that I fundamentally disagree about the benefits of representation, for example. However, the sort of person who strongly condemns a writer for writing a male character who simply behaves realistically (and amusingly) when suddenly transported into a female body is not primarily concerned with the larger issues of transgender rights and representation, per se. When a critique is not at all reasonable, or connected to the reality of the characters and their situation, the apparent conclusion is that the justification given is just an excuse for the negative bias. The reason there needs to be an excuse is because antis are a community, and their whole point is to share salty thoughts. Everyone can agree that transphobia is bad (who's a Millennial or younger and in fandom, at least), and so that's one of the easiest things to condemn. And as an anti, you have to condemn.

I don't think people purposely come up with things they don't actually feel or believe, by any means. I'm sure any negative (or positive) reaction is almost always genuine. But I also think that for someone vulnerable to hype, their genuine emotional response is itself likely to be fundamentally socially based. That is, you would feel what other people feel. You would genuinely care about those things, but you would care about them without any real introspection to make sure things make sense or are 'fair' to the characters or the writer in the rational sense. Fairness is a much more internal measure than the groupthink (or really, groupfeel) that drives both online hype and witch hunts. I'd go out on a limb and say without the interest in enforcement of the social norms, these people would just be bored rather than outraged.

This explains why antis almost never read the text closely, or outright make up stuff that isn't there. There are people who are primarily critical *and* pay attention, but I hesitate to call those people 'antis'. As I said, it's not a simple dichotomy. I've had good friends and good online discussions with people who're both critical and analytical. In fact, many highly analytical people tend to critical of pretty much everything they love. The motivation here is different, but the effect is also. One of the main hallmarks of antis is really social justice ranting rather than rational critique that may include elements of social justice. One group is focused on studying the text, and the other just likes to sound off. And of course, there's the average online fan, whose mode of engagement is characterized primarily through shipping, crack and/or memes. Antis may have some interest in shipping, but it usually rings false, as they find any excuse to find an unlikely fanon ship and then slam the story for sinking it. Like, usually antis complain about the lack of central queer ships, but in The Raven Cycle, the one that existed wasn't enough. After all, it wasn't the random obscure ship they came up with.

Anyway, I feel somewhat better about this now, because I do take some of their points to heart and let it bother me even if I shouldn't. I'm vulnerable because I'm a mix of the analytical and squee-minded fan, and antis like to masquerade their rants as analysis, even though they actually care as little about analysis as they do about canon. The squeeing shippers can (and do) just dismiss or resent the antis without a care. I end up trying to see if their arguments make sense, and inevitably get irritated when they don't. It especially messes with my mind when they start on about shipping, as I said. Not like ships are supposed to make sense, per se, but they feel free to blast canon het ships for not being believable or developed properly, which is a fair mode of critique. However, the preferred slash ship is generally more nonsensical by far, but it's absolutely immune from critique because it's gay. And we all know being gay is all that matters, riiiiiight up until the point that it becomes canon. Then it's not good enough, by definition. Alas.