Coal All The Way

[coalcube]

It's coal-bo time.

 Coal Friending Meme


Yuleporn | Make the Yuletide Gay / TNB+ | Femslash Festivus 
YuleBuilding | Two for One | Crueltide | Misses Clause
YuleSwaps | IF | Wrapping Paper 

Yuletide Discord for Hippos. Google Group for PHs. F_F wiki for history.

yuletide | yuletide_admin | Writing Post
2019 Collection | 2019 Madness
2019 App | Letter Post (LJ) 
 

Flat / Recent | Top-Level (Last) | Search

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

So no Inglourious Basterds or World on Fire? No Bent?

[(Anonymous)]

If you thought Inglourious Basterds or World on Fire were sympathetic to the Nazis that seems like more of a you issue, honestly.

Bent is probably out by this criterion, but since it has all of one fanwork for it on AO3, and that not produced for an exchange as far as I can tell, that seems like a sacrifice fandom can afford to bear.

[(Anonymous)]

that seems like a sacrifice fandom can afford to bear.

Fandom "can bear" sacrificing all the tiny fandoms (and honestly, all the large ones too), but the question is: why should it have to, when the easiest solution is 'don't offer or request fandoms and ships you find offensive'.

[(Anonymous)]

Because that solution is insufficient to solve the problem of Aquatics.

Really, Nazi kinksters in fandom should be taking this whole kerfuffle as a salutary lesson in why they shouldn't be assholes about their weird kink. If Aquatics weren't such a consistently bad actor no one would be lobbying for Desert Peach to be banned either.

[(Anonymous)]

Except there is no problem with Aquatics other than their weird behaviour on FFA, and you're not going to get rid of that by banning their fandoms in an exchange. I dare say that problem would probably go away if everyone ignored it for long enough.

[(Anonymous)]

Eh, people have been ignoring their creepy recruitment attempts for years now and they're still at it. Some wankers are persistent.

The reason people don't want to write for them in exchanges is their weird behaviour on FFA, so these two things aren't unrelated. If they just quietly nominated Desert Peach among a slate of more matchable fandoms for most exchanges and then requested it along with some other rare ones for Yuletide, most people would have no issue with them or with the nomination. In fact, they did match on it this Yuletide, and got a fic, and the initial response here on Coal was "Oh, I'm happy for them." It was only when they pulled their creepy bait-and-switch routine over at FFA that all the Nazi wank resumed.

I think it's a problem that they're making people uncomfortable in exchanges, and since I'm against banning individual exchange participants for behaving badly on anonmemes when they haven't actually broken any exchange rules, making the canon about which they've been creepy ineligible is a better solution.

[(Anonymous)]

I just don't think people not wanting to write for them is a problem. Have they held up any exchanges at all this year? They certainly held up fewer exchanges than I did, and I have a good egg rep and fandoms that are very low on the 'problematic' scale. They always seem to find PHers very quickly, and nonnies/coalies blow this up into a problem that doesn't exist.

[(Anonymous)]

Or The Pianist, I guess? It shows Nazi Germany as being horrible, but I'm sure someone people who consider the one good guy officer enough for a ban.

[(Anonymous)]

Again, if you think a character sparing one guy from the mass murder he's happily engaged in because he's a good musician counts as a "sympathetic portrayal", that sounds like a you problem.

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT

How is that different from the fandoms you want to ban, then? Where do you draw the line at "sympathetic portrayal"? And I assumed your "sympathetic portrayal" assumption wasn't just for the canon but also for the request - and yes, the majority Pianist fic that was written after the movie came out would absolutely count as sympathetic for me, considering that 90% of it was sappy shipfic.

[(Anonymous)]

NC

Where do you draw the line at "sympathetic portrayal"?

If I were the mod? Wherever the fuck I'd felt the line belonged to.

[(Anonymous)]

So, hot evil Hollywood Nazis only, right?

[(Anonymous)]

Maybe if you were the mod.

[(Anonymous)]

I hate this kind of modding. It's like the Nonconathon mods being all "we can't give a clear definition of noncon vs. dubcon, but dubcon is not allowed". It's perfectly fine to draw lines of what should and should be allowed in your exchange, but for fuck's sake, explain where they are in advance. People who can't do this, should stay away from modding.

[(Anonymous)]

And yet, nonconathon runs fine. And we all know the dubcon ban is to avoid the types who think fucking after a few beers counts as dubious.

[(Anonymous)]

Just skip the exchanges with rules and modding you don't like, and let the people who are fine with them participate in peace.

[(Anonymous)]

You're up for checking out all the canons yourself to judge and not just going off popular opinion or wikis, I'm sure. 🙄

[(Anonymous)]

Your persistent assumption that if we'd only read ALL of it (because you give this shit to people who've read a lot of it), we'd magically convert to Nazi kink, is super creepy, dude.

[(Anonymous)]

I'd draw the distinction at:
- Was the sympathetically portrayed supporter of the Leopards Eating People's Faces Party trying to stop leopards from eating people's faces before the leopards tried to eat their/Germany's face? (Schindler is fine; Erwin Rommel and not)
- Were they a mentally competent adult at the time they pledged their support? (Jojo Rabbit is fine)
- Is the portrayal in fact sympathetic? (Canons where Nazis are sparing individual Jews for obviously transactional reasons like they're fucking them or they appreciate their piano skills, designed to highlight the grotesquerie of the situation, are fine)

The majority of Hannibal fic is sappy Hannigram shipfic, but it doesn't mean the canon is sympathetic to cannibalism. These edge cases are not actually hard to arbitrate.

[(Anonymous)]

Judging from your comment re: Hannibal, I'd say you simply have a vastly different definition of "sympathetic portrayal" than I do.

[(Anonymous)]

I can't sum these. You'd specifically ban all portrayals where individual Nazis (defined as everyone in the armed forces) o

[(Anonymous)]

do things that aren't in support of the regime, unless it's for personal gain?

[(Anonymous)]

What? No, obviously you can be drafted into the Wehrmacht and never ideologically support the party or the regime. But that's not the position of someone like Rommel (or Schindler, for that matter).

If a Nazi is, say, war profiteering on the black market, he may be undermining the Third Reich but it's hardly an act of resistance. The same applies to protecting individual Jews for reasons of blatant self-interest. At the end of the war Himmler had some insane plan to convince the Allies he was a good guy by freeing everyone at Ravensbrück. If he'd gone through with it this would not have made him a heroic figure analogous to Schindler, and you could easily make a movie about that alternate history without it qualifying as a sympathetic portrayal.

[(Anonymous)]

Not that hard, huh.

Did you think Der Untergang was Nazi apologist? What about your acquaintances? All in agreement there?

[(Anonymous)]

I mean...Jojo Rabbit definitely had sympathetic adult Nazi characters (Sam Rockwell and Alfie Allen), so.