Yet another post about why Six Apart sucks

[rusty_halo]

If you haven't seen it, check out bubble_blunder's open letter to Six Apart (and, y'know, sign if you agree).

Lots of interesting stuff in metafandom today.

I'm too busy reading to post any coherent thoughts, but I will say that one of the things that really gets to me is the underlying sexism and homophobia going on here. Both users were suspended due to homoerotic art. Would we have seen the same response to a piece that depicted a heterosexual couple? The younger party was clearly post-pubescent--he could've been anywhere between 16-24. If that had been a young woman instead of a young man, would Six Apart still be screaming kiddie porn? The idealized woman in our youth-obsessed culture is 16-24, so I have a hard time believing there'd have been a similar outcry.

I think that part of SixApart's underlying discomfort with this type of art is that it reverses the male gaze. The (male-dominated) company is worried about upsetting its (male-dominated) advertisers who are worried about a offending a (male-dominated) culture. Sexualize young women, fine, we'll look the other way. But sexualize young men and now we have a problem. They're getting a taste of the same discomfort that women have to put up with every day, and they don't like it--so they're banning us and trying to make us feel like dirty perverts.

It makes me really sad, because this community has been such a wonderful place for women to explore their sexuality in creative ways--and a refuge from a culture that objectifies us and stigmatizes our desires. Now the real world is intruding on our safe haven, and it totally sucks.

[I'm cross posting this to my InsaneJournal, which feels totally scary!]

Comments

[jerrymcl89.livejournal.com]

From all indications, I don't think Six Apart is organized enough to act with the kind of motive you are ascribing to them. I suspect they'd similarly overreact to something that showed, say, Spike having sex with an ambiguously-aged Dawn, assuming it generated similar complaints (which is, admittedly, the place where a double standard is likely). But I also think they have every right to ban that sort of thing if they wish to - they are legally responsible for what they allow, after all. I think where they fail massively is in communicating the rules, and warning people away from the boundaries before they shoot them.

[rusty_halo.livejournal.com]

I doubt they're *consciously* motivated by homophobia and sexism. But I think it underlies their reaction--the kind of reaction that looks at a sexualized young male body and goes "eww, perverted," but wouldn't think twice about a sexualized young female body. Of all the porn out there on LJ, they could've easily found het examples, but they went after the slash. Why? Do they actively hate gay people? I doubt it. But did the gay porn just "seem" more egregious? Probably.

(As for the Dawn thing, well, this horrid movie was in mainstream theaters everywhere and was treated as completely normal. Swap Trachtenberg for Radcliffe in this photo and you'd probably be accused of kiddie porn.)

I also highly doubt they deleted anything out of concern for the *law*. They were concerned about losing advertiser money (and maybe about selling the company).

I agree that Six Apart has the legal right to delete anything they want off of their servers--and I have the right to think they're assholes and to take my business elsewhere. (Especially considering their failure to clarify their policies, communicate with their users, and allow the accused to defend themselves or even to save a copy of their deleted content.)

They want us to come in here, pour out our hearts, build lifelong friendships, and buy paid accounts ... and they want to be able to randomly and arbitrarily delete any of us at any time. Legally, sure, they can do that... and I can point out how stupid it is, and leave.

[jerrymcl89.livejournal.com]

I think there's a distinction between Michelle Trachtenberg, who is a real person with a real birthdate whose age can be determined, and either Dawn Summers or Harry Potter, who are not. But that is really neither here nor there.

As long as people rely on for-profit companies to host journals, those companies will be susceptible to pressure, either legally or in terms of advertising. That's perhaps unfortunate, but it's true. I don't expect any of the LJ alternatives currently being bandied about to be more ideologically pure in the long-term than LJ is. Although I guess it can be hoped that they will have more PR sense.

[shipperx.livejournal.com]

The poster who did the Snape/Harry picture also had a picture of a bound Hermione being raped and from what I read there was a time period where no one was really sure which picture she was TOSed for.

And the issue with the Harry/Snape picture to me is that while someone might argue that if you squint and try Harry can be interpreted as being older than 18, it's really difficult to say that this would be the general assumption given the context which frames these pictures. The context being series which is a young adult/child series where Harry is in fact a minor throughout the near entirity of the series. And by the time he graduates and is 18, Snape is dead. So while within the context of fandom, I can see someone approaching it from a fanfictional point of view and perhaps restaging the event into some nebulous point in the future where Harry is legal and Snape isn't dead, I think it's a bit of a jump to think that the reasonable assumption of people uninvolved with the fandom would be that Harry is under aged. Frankly, it's somewhat difficult for me to buy too whole heartedly into the interpretation that Harry is past the age of consent and that it isn't statutory rape. Harry certainly looked adolescent-like to me.

Anyway, if LJ is after slash on the basis of slash, I'll be as upset and willing to protest as loudly as anyone. But, these particular pictures, which are most easily interpreted and would reasonably be assumed to be graphic depictions of sex with minors aren't the test case that I'd prefer to hang my hat on if I could have my "I'd rathers".

I understand and empathize with being suspicious and vigilant about this, and perhaps LJ is acting out of homophobia. But I don't know that that can be determined with these cases, which I think most people uninitiated with fandom would tend to assume as portraying kids, not adults.

[rusty_halo.livejournal.com]

But how can you want to risk your content--your journal, your writings, your friendships, all these things that are so important to our lives--to a company that has made it very clear that it 1) will arbitrarily delete paid users without any warning or recourse (or refund) and 2) will mock and ridicule those who complain?

There's so many serious issues here about what art is or isn't "acceptable" and to whom. Not to mention the issue of what explanations, clarifications, or review processes a company owes its paying users. Instead they are laughing at our serious questions and mocking us behind our backs.

Sure, they are only targeting Harry Potter fan artists now, but (in this, and the breastfeeding debacle, and even the original deletion of fandom wank) they've made it very clear that they will target anything that threatens their revenue or randomly annoys them. If some crazy conservative group DOES target slash (or something else that affects us directly), LJ sure as hell isn't going to stand up for us.

[shipperx.livejournal.com]

I don't know that I see LJ as being particularly different from other services. And there are many services out there that are alternatives.

I remember back in the old days when there was a lot of AOL posting going on, that AOL was fairly swift with the TOSes (and AOL accounts were paid in those days). TWOP is quick with the TOS. Fandom_wank is quick with bannation, and none of these have anything to do with legality. It's basically a company owned thing that sets their own paramaters of what content they will accept on their servers. We then make our own decisions accordingly, based on whether we find those terms to be acceptable. We can argue about it and become outraged with the company, and that's 100% within our rights. But they have the right to set what legal liability that they're willing to accept and what terms they want to set on their service. LJ is it's own entity and we are free to go or stay. Because of that, it's not really a matter for freedom of speech.

While I do believe that 6A has handled this terribly. There really should be a warning system and a way for users to argue their own cases. And, if banned, LJ should refund the paid account. Beyond that, it seems to be a situation not particularly different than other services on the web.

And, if a group does target slash (and it's entirely possible. I'm not claiming that it's an unfounded fear) there will be a hell of a backlash. However, I do think that slash has a far more firm footing in being legal than sexual depictions of minors. It's perfectly legal to buy gay pornography and other types of pornography, but pornography involving minors is illegal, so while I can easily agree that vigilance about LJ pursuing slash is worthwile and while I think wariness is a perfectly reasonable reaction, I think that slash has a far easier argument that it doesn't pose the same kind of legal liability for LJ that pornography involving minors does. I don't think that LJ as a corporation (as opposed to jackass employees) approaches this on as an emotional question as much as "can they sue us and possibly win" question.

I can support caution, wariness, and suspicion with regard to LJ's actions, but as of this bannation, they've abided by the TOS parameters they've previously set.

If they were to target slash and I were to get all worked up and angry about it, I can't help but feel that at least then my righteous indigantion would be truly heartfelt. As it is, I can't totally shake the feeling that I may possibly be defending the glorification of the abuse of minors and that tends to tamp down my sense of indignation just a little.

[jwaneeta.livejournal.com]

I was on vacation at Comic-Con and only heard about this through the grapevine. I'm just catching up.

The long and short is, as far as I can see, to stop giving these assholes our money. Right? Even a free account in a mark on the slate that 6Apart is showing to advertisers, and I feel it's really time to make a coordinated migration to a site that's not suddenly an insane corporate entity.

You know my opinion -- JournalFen only gets better and faster with every paid user. And if anyone wants a free account, I can do that too. We don't have to lose community... and we can keep our pride.

[rusty_halo.livejournal.com]

Oh, I agree completely that it's time to move.

But the problem with JournalFen... well, the servers die a lot. The home page is full of broken links. New people can't figure out how to create accounts. The whole thing seems several years out of date.

I would *love* for them to get their shit together and for fandom to migrate there... but, uh, that's up to them... and I don't get the feeling that becoming the new home for fandom is their priority at all.

(That could change... or another fan-created alternative could spring up... either way, I'll embrace it, but it has to seem workable and run by people who are going to keep up with it...)

[shipperx.livejournal.com]

I've heard rumors that JournalFen also isn't as financially solvent as we might wish it to be as well.

[jwaneeta.livejournal.com]

They've always been finacially insovent, because they're a community by fen, for fen. When push comes to shove ZorroRojo and the rest pay for bandwidth out of pocket.


I wouldn't do it, but I can admire it.

[jwaneeta.livejournal.com]

I know that when I try to read a thread of 50+ at LiveJournal, my screen freezes for five minutes. That doesn't happen at JF with their current load.

And the canard that they're all about Fandom_Wank is baseless. People who feel tainted by association with F_W can relax: it's a huge server with many communities and journals.

What JF is, is a non-corporate community with a dedicated group of owners and volunteers. They've made a hell of a thing on nothing and I like giving them money. The alternative is SixApart, no?

If anybody wants a free account on JF, just email me at Cyn (dot) Martin (at) gmail (dot) com. I'll be honored to hook you up.

The only reason this 6A shit is nasty is because we're not using our feet, our money, our power. Which is so stupid and sad.

[rusty_halo.livejournal.com]

But... couldn't they change all the references to "LiveJournal" on their site to "JournalFen"? Update their code to take into account the latest changes? At the very least, update the "Create Journal" page to explain how to create a journal (or why you can't)?

I don't know them personally--maybe they are wonderful people. But they are either negligent or overwhelmed; neither possibility bodes well for their potential as a long-term solution.

Please don't get me wrong; I think that, in concept, they are much, much better than the other alternatives. I am criticizing them because I *want* to have confidence in them. But as they are currently, I just wonder how dedicated and sustainable they are. (And SixApart isn't the only alternative; InsaneJournal is up now and various fan-created others are in development.)

(And, of course, I am very grateful to you for setting up JF accounts for people who want to move. I think it is awesome that you are being proactive about this and helping people.)

[jwaneeta.livejournal.com]

But... couldn't they change all the references to "LiveJournal" on their site to "JournalFen"? Update their code to take into account the latest changes? At the very least, update the "Create Journal" page to explain how to create a journal (or why you can't)?

I'm forwarding these questions to JF admin. The code is deliberate, and they have a thing; the account creations deal is because of outraged trolls hacking per Fandom_Wank and crashing the whole server. But they can answer better than I can: I'll paste what they say.

All in all, I consider J_F fabulous. They read every TOS report. I'll never forget the admin response, live, during CrystalWank:

"Don't quote the TOS to me, you moter [sic] fucking retard. I wrote the TOS."

That's the kind of involvement I want from my fan-friendly community, you know?