gategrrl | Shipper tendencies

Can someone explain to me why there's such a compelling need to sexualize and Romantic-ize characters? I've been there myself, but I seem to have gone past that as a "serious" endeavor. I'll *play* with characters and their sexuality -- but the *need* to pair them up romantically just isn't a priority, and it seems so unnecessary, and somewhat Mary Sueish, especially if it's certain types of het and slash writing.

It's not so much the sexualizing -- that I get, it's fun to imagine your favorite characters whupping it up with the whipped cream and cherries, and get down and dirty and sweaty. But at the same time, what I'm puzzled more about is the need to Harlequinnize decent characters who already have complex, nonsexual relationships with each other, that get totally boring when they DO get together.

Anyone?

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

From:

gategrrl.livejournal.com

I guess...I've noticed a need to hook up two characters who already have a fascinating relationship that does NOT involve sex...and then, as Grac says above, make them *boring* by domesticating them.

I'm mostly speaking of fanfic, not original fic, because original fic is wholly created by that writer.

(prostitutes by the park?? wow, you're really having a day, aren't you! **pets Moonshayde**)

I guess...I've been bushwacked lately by the insistence of other posters on OS, frex, about the Daniel/Vala shippiness -- and many of these folks detest the Jack/Sam ship, whereas for me, they're both the same (only the Daniel - Vala relationship is infinitely more complex and interesting).

And it's the whole "shippy-tude" that I've grown to detest in general. It's so squee-girly. I'm not expressing myself well.

I don't mind playing with the characters: I do that too: it's the zealotness of it. The OTPingness of it.

And I'm grumpy. >:-(

From:

moonshayde.livejournal.com

Ah, my friend. Can we say hypocritical?

*whistles and slinks back into the shadows before the Daniel/Vala people kill her*

From:

gategrrl.livejournal.com

Well...I'm not sure it's hypocritical, but to me it *does* stem from the same well as the Jack/Sam shippers -- I don't care if one pair has more chemistry than the other pair, it doesn't matter if, to me, both pairings are distasteful (for different reasons altogether) or that one pair is starcrossed because of regulations and other because she's a sexual predator (and I *like* that character).

It's just...I'm baffled, I tell you!

From:

moonshayde.livejournal.com

No, I stand by my assessment, even if it is an unpopular one.

Some people really do believe in their pairing, whoever that pairing might be. That doesn't bother me much. I don't get it, but whatever. Whatever makes you happy. We're all here playing in the same pond. We might just catch different fish.

But, I do get a little uneasy when a camp that says they are anti-ship starts shipping themselves.

Mind you, I get just as angry with people that tell me to be quiet and deal with the loss of Jack while it's okay to be upset with the loss of Daniel inS eason 6. I am adult enough to know there are different circumstances, but I have a right to like or dislike whatever characters I like. Everyone does. Just don't shove it in everyone's face.

That being said, I find there are quite a bit of hypocrites out there.

From:

graculus.livejournal.com

But, I do get a little uneasy when a camp that says they are anti-ship starts shipping themselves.

To which the immediate response would be: are these people anti-ship or are they anti-ship on the show or are they anti-SamJack or are they anti-SamJack as it's presented on the show? There's a wide variety of what 'ship' is as much as there is what it means to be 'anti-'.

Personally, my view is that people ought to get on and ship whatever they want in fandom but I don't want to see it on-screen, thanks very much. In any circumstances. ;)

From:

moonshayde.livejournal.com

Since I am not naming names here (and I won't) and this is just for the sake of conversation...

Never ever had a problem with people slashing or shipping (even Sam and Jack) in the fandom. I just don't like it when it becomes the end all be all. Different strokes for different folks.

But, I have seen various variations of this. Some people totally anti-ship suddenly shipping, some anti-Sam/Jack, etc, etc. They have a right to do it, it's just that it seems a bit hyporcritical to me with some of these folk.

Then again, I'm all about gen and only explore ship and slash, most of which I don't see, in fanfic just to do something different. All our opinions are biased.

But that just happens to be the way I feel about it. ;)

From:

graculus.livejournal.com

I have to say, I've yet to see a het pairing that does much for me. Because usually they're done with the sledgehammer of shippiness and I prefer at least a little subtlety.

Why does detesting SamJack mean people aren't allowed to like Daniel/Vala? Unless you're saying people like it because it's not SamJack and haven't we had quite enough of those kind of accusations on OS? I'm sure there are some people where that is their reaction, but others doubtless would ship anyone with whom Daniel had that kind of spark or genuinely just like the concept of that pairing.

Of course, if tptb get anywhere near it, all the fun will get sucked right out of it, and serve the shippers right. ;)

From:

gategrrl.livejournal.com

Hmmm.

Why does detesting SamJack mean people aren't allowed to like Daniel/Vala? Unless you're saying people like it because it's not SamJack and haven't we had quite enough of those kind of accusations on OS?

I'm not trying to sling mud around (I love/adore OS), honest. And no, I'm not saying it's because it is NOT Sam/Jack. (shivers) It's more like, what's with this? It's not the pairing itself that bugs me. It's the *why* the pairing. It's like...(to anyone with the inclination) "Oooo, look, she made him kiss her! Make him kiss her again!" I'm sticking my foot in my mouth. I guess, in a way, I'm a purist, and since these two characters are so well=drawn, to me, why *want* the show to make it happen? Again.

others doubtless would ship anyone with whom Daniel had that kind of spark

Uh huh. OTP, indiscriminate pairing...sure, as CrazymadJo is saying below here, it's What's Turns You On. It's this kind of mentality that baffles me. And it's not just hetters that make me scratch my head, it's slashers like this also, as you pointed out earlier.

Ah well. Since I don't know exactly what it is I'm trying to get at (this happens once in awhile).

From:

graculus.livejournal.com

I guess, in a way, I'm a purist, and since these two characters are so well=drawn, to me, why *want* the show to make it happen? Again.

The triumph of hope over experience? ;)

From:

superbadgirl

"I guess...I've been bushwacked lately by the insistence of other posters on OS, frex, about the Daniel/Vala shippiness -- and many of these folks detest the Jack/Sam ship, whereas for me, they're both the same (only the Daniel - Vala relationship is infinitely more complex and interesting)."

I do not buy the Daniel/Vala ship for one second. Sure, the characters have chemistry together...but you can have chemistry without it being romantic. There is nothing romantic shippy about those two. Maybe folks want to see them 'do it', but while it would be in Vala's character to fuck without feelings, I don't think the same is true of Daniel. I guess that's my own perception of his character.

Back to your actual question, I can't answer because I cannot figure it out. There are people who will watch shows simply to ship/slash characters who are 'hot', and that boggles. It might be a completely different subject also. ;)

From:

gategrrl.livejournal.com

Sure, the characters have chemistry together...but you can have chemistry without it being romantic.

Exactly. That's what I've been wondering about. If the chemistry is *there* (or even if it isn't, but anyway) what's the need to augment it with sex? And Romance? Aren't they interesting *enough* without it? Why would Daniel have sex with her, unless he's portrayed as being a loose, relaxed, WTF kind of guy. Even Jack wasn't portrayed that way.

This "couple" specifically, I don't see as romantic. She's as soon screw him and run with the gold, than stay and be a sex-partner for good. And, from what we've seen of Daniel in the past, he's pretty devoted when he *does* do it.

From:

superbadgirl

"Exactly. That's what I've been wondering about. If the chemistry is *there* (or even if it isn't, but anyway) what's the need to augment it with sex? And Romance? Aren't they interesting *enough* without it? Why would Daniel have sex with her, unless he's portrayed as being a loose, relaxed, WTF kind of guy. Even Jack wasn't portrayed that way."

I don't think I'm qualified to answer that, because I do write slash. ;)

For me, I write it because I see it (vs seeing it because I write/read it) - it's the great what if. I think there's a pretty big difference between seeing chemistry and asking what if and wholeheartedly pursuing romance of any kind with any two (or more) people. When people claim to see that chemistry and I don't, it baffles me. I just can't see it, no matter how many scenes they site this supposed UST exists in.

Like Daniel/Vala. Like Sam/Jack. Like Grissom/Sara. Like Jack/Paul Davis. ;)

I think the answer to that question is going to vary so much by each individual. Even my what if is more specific than that. Prior to certain seasons and events and if I was wearing the right pair of glasses, I could see Jack/Daniel. I had no interest in actually writing any of it myself, but I could read and enjoy it. Then Jack and Daniel's *friend*ship changed onscreen, so much so that I wanted to fix it, if you will. It got fucked up and someone had to put it right - to make myself feel better and to cope with the sudden distance and departure on screen.

But I blather on and on so.

"This "couple" specifically, I don't see as romantic. She's as soon screw him and run with the gold, than stay and be a sex-partner for good. And, from what we've seen of Daniel in the past, he's pretty devoted when he *does* do it."

Oh, exactly. Not a healthy 'relationship' at all. Not one I'd encourage between two people I know, so why would I want to encourage that for fictional characters?

People can see and do what they want. What happens in fandom should stay in fandom, though. One of the biggest revulsion points for me about S/J was that I think certain people in the cast and crew were led to believe that EVERYONE wanted to see this. I'm guessing - but RDA was pretty much anti-romance until a certain point, and then during one of the late season lowdowns suddenly started commenting about how "everyone wants" Jack and Carter to get together.

Ship until your own little heart's content, but do it in your own space. :)