In response to a recent discussion on slash and the dislike of it expressed in a way I find offensive.

While I used to be a squeeing slash fangirl when I first entered fandom, these days my personal preferences tend to centre around more female-centric fic; as a matter of fact, while I still love some slash pairings such as Harry/Draco, I can say that in general slash isn’t my personal favourite either.

So what’s wrong with other people not liking slash, you ask? After all, we can’t control what suits our personal tastes. That, though, is not my problem: my problem is a dislike of slash and femslash expressed in such terms as appear outrightly homophobic. Here are some quotes:

And I ask: why? Yes, I do realise that some people believe their religions to forbid homosexuality. (It’s rather amusing that something to which around seven verses in the entire Holy Bible are dedicated in somewhat ambiguous ways has taken up so much of various Christians’ time and energy to get upset about.) But what about, to use a famous line, the shellfish that are also condemned in Leviticus? And here are some other things that various religions are at least equally against, or have been said to be:

- not being a follower of that religion
- eating shellfish
- divorce
- eating pork
- interracial marriage

So where is the consistency? Why are some people so upset about the idea of a same-sex relationship when they don’t seem to mind all their other religious precepts being violated? I can see no other explanation but prejudice.

And I really, really don’t see any non-religiously based arguments against homosexuality. All but one psychological organization in the USA believe that to attempt to ‘cure’ it is downright dangerous (source: religioustolerance.org); it has been observed in nature and is useful to a species in, for example, keeping population levels down. Yes, males and females have *ahem* compatible parts, but if intercourse was limited to the interaction between those parts it would be a lot more boring, and romantic relationships are about a lot more than reproduction. Is there really a reason to stop two people choosing to have a relationship when they’re not harming anyone else?

I think it would be wonderful if children were exposed to same-sex couples in the media. (I shouldn’t have to clarify this, but this is not the same as advocating showing them pornography. No, the mere fact of a same-gender relationship does not mean the people involved will shag like weasels in public.) There is a lot of scientific evidence that being gay is not something you can change. Can you imagine how it’d feel to know that through no fault of your own, you’re not a normal person—and even if you’re able to find someone like you, your family and friends probably won’t approve of you loving the person you love? And can you imagine how wonderful it’d feel to be shown by stories that you are not alone in the world? People with an exclusive attraction (or non-exclusive attraction, for that matter) to members of the same gender exist, as they have for thousands of years. No, they will not go away, even if you wish very very hard. Where’s the harm in showing them on the screen in a positive light, especially since it will help reduce prejudice and give people like them something to identify with?

"Kids who are 10, 8, even 15 like me watch the show and then see these stories where their favourite character is converting to Judaism or praying with another of the characters and it just...is very, very wrong."

No, this is not at all prejudiced!

And now I’ll switch the topic to the specific one of slash fiction.

Dragon Booster is a masculine wish-fulfilment fantasy which has one of the most irritating, clichéd examples of tokenism I’ve ever had the misfortune of watching—ie, only one important female character (anorexic-looking, helping the main male character outstrip her in her speciality, and in many episodes virtually irrelevant aside from vocalising the sort of lines only referred to as witty by mentally defective tweens, but I digress.). Hence, by the canon’s very nature, the majority of important relationships are between male characters—making some extremely obvious possible slashy situations. It’s also an attempt at setting up a complicated fantasy universe rather than something more specifically directed at young children—meaning that, yes, NC-17 situations are extremely plausible in the universe (*). Two of the adult male canon characters almost certainly had sex at some point in the past—and the words ‘with each other’ could be very plausibly tacked onto the end. It’s a universe where people can immediately deduce information about another person’s skills and personality based on the colour of their vehicle/dragon familiar, and a universe ostensibly without racism and with many (sidelined) women in positions of power—is it really possible that in this universe homosexuality would be regarded with prejudice? (Though, as it’s also a universe extensively reflecting modern-day America, some prejudice may have been inherited, I suppose, but even that certainly doesn’t mean same-sex relationships would be non-existent.) Which all adds up to: even if you still believe it’s wrong to write about same-sex relationships, it’s undoubtedly plausible fanfic material.

And with all this—what is the problem with other people writing DB slash again? Even if you think it’s wrong to be gay, I have to ask: do you write about: stealing, death threats, lying, arguments, killers (all of which must be much worse on a scale of crime than a consensual romantic relationship)? And do you think about what might be logical for the world rather than gratifying your own prejudices and biases?

I hate homophobes. No, I’m not against free speech—if I was, I wouldn’t be replying with words. But it’s one of the basic laws of social interaction to accept other people’s beliefs and preferences as long as they don’t harm anyone else. No, I don’t think you’re at all a good person with whom to interact if you say that a subsection of the population’s consensual romantic relationships are unnatural and dysfunctional when evidence strongly suggests that it’s very natural. Intolerant, dictionary definition: refusing to accept people who are different or live differently, for example, people of different races or religions. I don’t care what your personal preferences are, but I accept them until the instant they start to infringe on others’ lives; believe that same-sex relationships are wrong if you like, but condemn them wholesale and until you provide non-religious evidence you are, quite frankly, behaving in a manner comparable to that of a small-brained toad.

We should be intolerant of intolerance, I believe. Yes, there are some obvious crimes that deserve intolerance, but the examples quoted above I find thoroughly offensive, and entirely deserving of the intolerance they attempt to promote.

* On NC-17 and Dragon Booster—yes, I know the intended audience is around thirteen, and hence it’s fair enough that the messageboard has an upper rating of PG-13, but the canon offers some extremely obvious possibilities for NC-17 fanfic, and as long as it’s properly rated and warned I don’t see the problem. This is an entirely separate issue to slash, but along the way some people appeared to have conflated the two.

(applause) I think I saw this when I looked up Dragon booster slash on google. I agree one hundred percent.

So do I. I have nothing against same-sex couples. And about the fanfic: If you don't like it, don't read it.