Talk:Slash fiction

"canon" and it's bethren

This word, canon, and it's derivatives are used way too much. Let's use a thesaurus shall we? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.105.212.232 (talk) 08:16, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Intro and femslash

I've substantially rewritten the opening as a lot of it appears to be needlessly repetitive and opaque, and to clear up some of the "subgenere" confusion about femslash (because not all fen, by any means, accept that women in relationships are a "subgenre" of men in relationships, which is seen by some fen (myself included) as offensive.) I think/hope there's more clarity and accuracy now, and that I've retained the original meaning of the passage. Lindleyle 15:11, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

I can't understand why femslash is considered a sub-genre, the only reason i can think of is because it has an adendum to "-slash" it's like saying that being a lesbian is a subgenre of being a gay man, or that a computergame is a subgenre of a boardgame. Come on, seriously? 83.183.219.250 (talk) 23:50, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

If I may, I definitely do not consider femslash to be a subgenre of slash. Both male slash and femslash have very different issues they are facing. Femslash is far less common in the fanfiction community and some don't understand its importance or even say its just a reaction to the male slash writing so that straight men can read it. Male slash also has its problems because in general male homosexual relationships have always been more controversial due to the way the patriarchy structures masculinity. Ultimately I think the best way to acknowledge the issue would be to call femslash a related genre thereby acknowledging male slash (or just slash) and femslash are two different concepts.-Rainbowofpeace (talk) 18:42, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Why does 'squick' redirect here of all places?

When I entered "squick" into the Wikipedia search, it redirected to this page. That seems very wrong to me. Slash obviously doesn't squick everyone out, and if it redirects anywhere, somewhere more about sex or kink in general would seem much more appropriate. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.13.222.219 (talk) 06:45, 14 March 2007 (UTC).

I agree; I thought I recalled a previous separate article specifically dealing with the term, its origins, and frequent use. Scienda 08:58, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

In fact I'm more familiar with squick as defined in alt.tasteless in the early '90s; while this is more than enough reason to redirect to a Slash page rather than describing the act originally described as 'squicking', I feel like the term's illustrious AT history is getting short shrift here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.85.160.100 (talk) 20:52, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Only gay?

As far as I'm aware even though it is usually used to denote homosexual pairings, it isn't exclusively for them- it can be used for all fan-pairings...?

Nowadays, "Slash" refers to same-sex pairings.

That's not entirely correct and not entirely decided. The verb "to slash" and its gerund, "slashing", are almost definitable usable in any pairing context, including heterosexual relationships. This article should reflect it. John Holly 01:33, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

No. Fans use "ship" to mean het or same-sex pairing -- but slash means same-sex at least 99 times out of a hundred. If you want to claim otherwise, start lining up some examples. Sherrold (talk) 05:11, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Chip and Gadget

Why are Chip and Gadget, as a pairing, mentioned in this article? Chip is male and Gadget is female, I don't see how that's at all relevant to slash fiction. I would just edit it but I wanted to see if someone knew something I didn't first. LOBSTRA 15:11, 26 January 2006 (UTC)LOBSTRA

Duly noted and removed. Jude(talk,contribs) 01:44, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

However, some forms of slash have proved particularly controversial; in particular, slash involving underage characters (such as Harry Potter) or real people (often the members of boy bands) are considered distasteful by many who otherwise find nothing to object to in slash.

Though, to be fair, since *NSync slash has gotten so popular with a lot of the old guard, slashing real people is becoming less and less anathema these days.

FMO Against RPS

-asilvahalo

Slash is enjoyed by girls of all ages. Crush and love happens to everyone. The authors of most of the Harry/Draco fictions are straight girls of the same age as Harry and Draco. There is nothing controversial about same aged people liking characters the same age as them and fantasizing about them. It happens to all and sundry.Astronauttothemoon (talk) 07:29, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Anathema

Less and less anathema to whom? I think the current phrasing seems more than fair. - Puffy jacket 11:06, 27 Dec 2003 (UTC)

The attitude towards RPF really depends on who you are and how you are introduced to RPF. The old fan fiction guard, generally more intolerant towards RPF. If you came in to it via that method, generally no problems. Most people who look at fan fiction from the outside seem to have less problems with RPS than they do with say Star Trek slash. --PurplePopple 04:11, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

Issues

There's a sentence in the History section that reads: "From there, increasing tolerance of homosexuality and frustration at portrayal of homosexual relationships in mainstream media fed a growing desire for authors to explore the subjects on their own terms with established media characters." However, I think it's debatable how much slash, written and enjoyed predominantly by heterosexual women, was about exploring homosexuality as an issue. In Warrior Lovers: Erotic Fiction, Evolution and Female Sexuality (ISBN: 0300093543), Catherine Salmon & Donald Symons argue that slash is much closer to the romance genre than anything else.

Agreed, though I wrote the sentence as more of "explore the subject" as a source of pleasure, not, "explore the subject" as a social issue. The first part of the sentence merely attempts to show that homosexuality became less taboo as a source of pleasure and as such, people no longer felt so restricted in its exercise. Perhaps we should change it to "...desire for authors to explore the eroticism of the subjects on their own terms..." ? I could go either way. Sdauson 16:11, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

The main reason why slash is enjoyed by so many straight girls of all ages is because they just simple cannot identify with the female character that the main lead character of the movie/TV show/book fancies. A lesbian girl would have no problem identifying with that same female character as their sexuality is the same as that of the heroes. A straight girl will always fancy other attractive boy/men rather than another woman. When enjoying any form of fiction, one identifies with the lead character of either gender, and they put themselves in the position of the lead character. Straight girls tend to pair off any other attractive male character of that fiction with the lead character. This has all to do about ones sexuality and nothing more. A straight girl would never be attracted to another girl no matter how attractive, period. Also, one of the main reasons why they do it is because they find the girl that the hero fancies to be highly irritating.Astronauttothemoon (talk) 07:46, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

More to add...

I feel that this artical is missing some very important details about the slash/fanfiction world, such as the banning of fanfiction by some authors, Anne Rice being the most notable. and the banning of NC-17 on fanfiction.net. This was one of the most difficult changes made to the fanfiction world and has caused many splinter websites to be created. Also a short time ago the was an attempt made by J K Rowling to ban slash fanfiction from the web, but not all NC-17 work. This caused many websites to be taken down as a result, most notably the potter slash archive, and though they are now up and running again, because this endevour proved to be fruitless due to the sheer number of archives created for the potter world, they now have to be serverly modified and watched to ensure they do not break any pornorgraphy laws and have sutible warnings. No one minds having warnings on their work, as it was mentioned in the article it is polite to allow readers to know the full content of the piece whether it be just the characters sexual orientation or the sexual acts they are involved in, it did cause many people's work to be lost and new writers to stop. There have also been new laws in Australia, which aim to combad child pornorgraphy but are causing many problems for several websites i know of. I don't know much about these but i am sure someone does. As you can see the historical chain of events is very complicated when it comes to the slash domain and all of these changes have only happened since i first became a loyal devotee, some 3 years ago. Yours, Lady Allylandra

J K Rowling? If I remember correctly, it was Warner Bros not Rowling who tried to ban Potter slash. -- Andromeda

That was my recollection too. The crack down with the cease and desist battles came from Warners Brothers. If you check the notices on Chilling Effects, they say Warner Brothers too. JK Rowling's few quotes on fan ficiton have been "It is like Christmas in July." and stuff to that effect. The anti-slash stuff isn't always anti-slash. A lot of it is anti-adult material and anti-children depicted as sex objects. That has little to do with slash. --PurplePopple 28 June 2005 16:03 (UTC)

Yes, that's what I've read too. It all started when the first movie came out. -- Andromeda

When did the movie come out? Because on January 13, 2002, RestrictedSection, a Harry Potter fan fiction site, received a Cease and Desist. (http://www.chillingeffects.org/fanfic/notice.cgi?NoticeID=522) That's the date I have at any rate... and I thought that was a bit after the movie... The second one that I know of happened in 2003, www.psa.shadow-wrapped.net received a Cease and Desist for adult Harry Potter content. (Chilling Effects)

2000 was the Domain stuff... which I think may be what you're thinking of: In December, Warner Brothers sent Claire Fields a Cease and Desist letter in regards to the domain name she owned. In response to this, PotterWar was created by Alastair Alexander. Another fan group, Defense Against the Dark Arts, partnered with PotterWar to help them in their effort. There was cross fandom interaction at one point when both groups had some assistance from the Buffy Bringers group. (MaryTheFan: http://www.livejournal.com/community/fanthropology/76445.html?replyto=1630621)

Er. The funky wording is pulled from my own notes and timeline of events. I can't recall off hand when the Scotsman article came out. That's on another computer.

--PurplePopple 28 June 2005 16:49 (UTC)

The movie came out 14 November 2001, acording to imdb. It seems that it was when the WB people found out about slash that they tried to "protect the image" of their investment, saying that "children can find it" and that "corrupted the image of the franchise" (not quotes, just things I remember from then). Of course, links like yours are very useful in determining a true timeline and contrasting information to add to the article.

-- Andromeda 30 June 2005 17:07 (UTC)

Does anyone have sources for any of these bannings?YobMod 09:17, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Anti-Slash

Thought I would add, Anne Rice, again, that has little to do with the anti-slash area. That had to deal with control issues. Two good bits on anti-slash can be found at the following urls:

• http://www.livejournal.com/community/fanthropology/85649.html
• http://www.livejournal.com/community/fanthropology/89446.html

The 2000s aren't covered but a lot of it isn't about slash. It is about adult material. It would be much more relevant to an article on adult fan fiction or the general fan fiction page. And some of those anti-slash bits are covered in the timelines. --PurplePopple 28 June 2005 16:08 (UTC)

Yes, Anne Rice is not an anti-slash issue per se, but an anti-fanfiction issue. She's not the only writter who had publicily asked her fans to not write fanfiction (of any rating) about her works. Some fans decided to honor these wishes (even becoming pretty vocal about it), some not, and that's a disccussion in itself. -- Andromeda

The Anne Rice stuff was weird. Very weird. And a lot of that went down in 1999, 2000 on Usenet. I have the quotes from her website and the related webpages somewhere from that time period. She launched the crusade and some one close to her followed up and did the actual harrassment, including employers, etc. and posting a lot of private information to Usenet. It made a number of people very, very uncomfortable.

Some dates from my own notes:

1999-2000

• Anne Rice threatened fan fiction writers with legal action. (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fanfiction-writers/message/19196 )

20001

• FanFiction.Net received a Cease and Desist letter from Anne Rice.

But yeah, it isn't, wasn't about slash. A article dedicated to Cease & Desists in the fan fiction community, yes, fine... a article about author attitudes towards fan fiction, cool... but on a page about slash, it doesn't fit.

--PurplePopple 28 June 2005 16:49 (UTC)

Images

The boy-band pic is beautiful (I see the heart, yes, yes) but I'm very concerned that the images on this page are not used with permission and the copyright holders are going to be coming after us. Not good.

Why, for example, is the artist not identified, even on the page for the image. Something smells.

The slash artwork image is a tricky one. Personally I don't have any connections to that fandom, so it's gonna be really hard for me to find an image that suits our needs here. PLEASE SOMEONE find an image, or create one of their own, that is an appropriate replacement. The current picture is one I've seen simply floating out there on the net with no attributable source, so while I doubt we'll have any copyright holders coming after us in the next few weeks, it is unacceptable as a long-term solution. Please, someone find a suitable replacement. Pictures are what make Wiki articles come alive, and slash artwork is a perfect section in which to place an image. All other images on the page though are fair game and appropriately sourced and tagged: the slash was created by me, the book cover *is* promotional material, and website screenshots are considered fair use.Sdauson 14:48, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Would it be appropreate to add a picture of a fan-made object? I currently own a graduation robe decorated with a slash theme. I could add it if ya'll like. Kiki 15:45, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

After communicating with the artist and the Wikimedia Commons people, I added a Harry Potter series fan made artwork by Yukipon. And yes, I have the permission of the artist to upload this piece for her, and her permission statement has already been received by the Wiki Commons people. Hope this helps flush out the article. (Gentle taipan (talk) 07:06, 19 February 2009 (UTC))

Killing Time

What homosexual relationship in "Killing Time"? Bullshit, there is none. It has K/S, which was hastily removed in the second edition, but it is only implied. Furthermore, the inclusion of the K/S was illicit, against the policy of the editors. Again, in the second printing and all following, it is gone. (The author was a K/S fan who wrote an NC-17 Kirk/Spock story in the notorious 1981 fanzine The Price and The Prize.)

There are bisexual characters in numerous other TOS books, so it's simply inaccurate to use "Killing Time" as an example. "Dwellers in the Crucible" has bisexual Deltans (who die, like all gays in fiction), while the Star Trek II and III novelizations have a gay couple (who died on Regula I in Khan's attack).

There are also gay characters in Voyager novels; in Jeri Taylor's hardback about the Voyager crew, it is revealed that Harry Kim's roommate at the Academy was gay. (Taylor, one of the producers on Voyager, wanted to introduce gay characters into the series but was overruled from above.)

Even if you want the first K/S hint in a Star Trek novel, you'd have to go back to the Bantam books, not Pocket. In "Planet of Judgment" by Joe Haldeman, Spock sacrifices his life out of love for Kirk. (Of course, he doesn't really die.) And in one of the "New Voyages" books, Spock begins dreaming after coming into contact with a race of telepathic butterflies and begs Kirk to come away with him, saying, "We don't need all those others." Kirk hastily shuts him up. There is also a K/S-themed poem in one of the "New Voyages" books. (These books were compilations of fan fiction, rather than stories by professional authors. They were officially published under the Star Trek name, however.)

The reference to "Killing Time" is a vestige of earlier incarnations of this article. I have not read Killing Time and am/was unaware of the actual romantic contents of the story. I have, however, read "Section 31: Rogue" and feel that this is a very appropriate title for this paragraph, as it contains an explicit homosexual romance. The other novels you mention sound like they do not, instead featuring only gay characters. I believe this paragraph should reference Trek novels that contain slash elements-- that is, a story in which a homosexual romantic relationship at the focus. If "Killing Time" does not satisfy this, I suggest we remove the reference, and perhaps find another Trek novel (is there another?) that is more appropriate. Sdauson 14:54, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

The Blake's 7 sequel group apparently only "discovered" slash some time after they got involved in the project - and had a slight hissy fit as a result.

How does the breakdown of slashfiction and gay fiction (they *do* read differently) change with "undefined in series characters" and ones who clearly "look one or both ways" (for example Dr Who's Captain Jack Harkness?

History

On the UK ST scene, one of the pivotal moments was fan-publication of a work entitled "Spock In Manacles" which openly portrayed (slightly parodically) the K/S relationship with no euphemisms. This was (probably) around 1975 or 1976, and the fanzine itself found its way onto a wider stage with the '76 and '76 WorldCons

Spock in Manacles was later, early eighties. It was written by UK fan Kate Solomon and the stage version (with music by Ian Sorenson) was done at Beccon 3 in Basildon in 1985. I was there. (There is a video of this performance in existence.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.153.25.205 (talk) 09:02, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

Literary Criticism

I find no mention of Joanna Russ' influential essay on slash fiction. I think that this should be remedied.

Slash isn't necessarily "gay"

For many slash writers - myself included - not all slash is "gay" slash, and the author does a disservice not to mention this distinction.

For many of us, although the characters may display gay behaviors in the story, they do not necessarily have gay sensibilities as well. Most often in slash, the characters have not had previous same-sex relationships, do not 'cruies for' or notice others of the same gender, and would not seek out another same-sex relationship after the one in the story. For many writers, the encounter is often a first time 'experimentation' and may or may not lead to future intimacy (in the same story or future stories) with the same character.

It's this lack of gay sensibilities that some gay readers say makes them find slash incomplete and unsatisfying, and the same reason that so many women are comfortable reading slash but yet don't read much gay fiction or gay erotica, if at all.

--Kate

20:25, 9 January 2006

Funny that you should bring this up Kate...particularly following the comment about no mention of Joanna Russ' essay about slash. Russ points out that it was predominantly by women, for women and that the sex, while ostensively between two men, was NOT gay sex... She theorized (very plausibly to my mind) that one of the male's was actually standing in for a female and was "coded" female thus making slash actually heterosexual when you really looked at it. Spock, the ultimate other, stands in for the women reading/writing K/S so that it fulfills their fantasy of heterosex between equals (in a way that writing about a man and a woman couldn't work for them...) Do you see why I think there should be a paragraph about her essay? I'll have to find it... Emyth 21:01, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

I do agree, in part, about male/female coding in slash, but I believe that it is Kirk who is coded female, not Spock. Kirk is the emotional and intuitive one in canon, and in fic he's near-invariably the bottom, and always the sub in K/S BDSM fic. Yes, Spock is 'other', but from a woman's perspective, male is 'other', not female. --Kelly holden 12:45, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

I would have to say that I disagree with the general theme of this thread; while I agree that not all slash fiction is gay fiction I have found that, especially with newer fandoms like Angel and Stargate Atlantis, the relationships and stories are more and more focused on slash pairings as gay relationships. I have seen many stories that deal skillfully with such gay issues as coming out to parents, gay adoption and Don't Ask, Don't Tell. And you would be hard pressed to convince many slashers from a variety of fandoms to read a fic where their OTP (one true pairing... oh man, internet slang is amazing) is having a one time encounter that is merely "experimentation." Again, I'm gerneralizing; stories that imply no long term commitment can be just as well written and fulfilling as those that do. But I do believe you would find that the majority of fics out there (while often focusing on the couple's first time together or one or both of the characters' first homosexual experience) are built on the assumption that the pair will continue their relationship.

Also, I would also have to disagree with your statement that "while ostensively between two men, (slash)was NOT gay sex... She theorized (very plausibly to my mind) that one of the male's was actually standing in for a female and was "coded" female thus making slash actually heterosexual when you really looked at it." As a lesbian who reads and enjoys slash I can pretty clearly state that, to my mind at least, there is no "coded female" role in slash pairings. I would agrue that the mark of truly good slash fiction is that the characters remain themselves, with their own voice and canonical masculinity (however great or small that may be) and that their interactions with their same-sex lovers stem from that base.

Slash is of course a varied and complex medium and I understand that this thread was created to point out that it isn't NECESSARILY gay, but I can't help but feel that we cheapen it by reducing it to a vehical for heterosexual women to enjoy egalitarian sexual encounters with men. To my mind it is a subversive glimpse into what could be, a chance to explore human sexuality in new and often taboo ways, an intriguing scruitiny of what really drives a character or characters or sometimes just a funny or sexy story to brighten up an otherwise crappy day. Whatever it is to you, I can't help but believe that slash and homosexuality are perpetually linked and that anyone willing to look beyond the often narrow sexual and romantic perspective of canon should be ready to accept human sexuality in all its forms and variations and take up the fight to have it freely expressed.

But that's a whole other story :)

Timeline cleaning criteria

Which criteria was used to clean the timeline? Why the LOTR and Master and Apprentice archives (with no disrespect to them) entries are worth keeping and the others aren't? I think it's really unfair. --Andromeda 17:20, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Feel free to revert any edits that you think were unfair. As far as I know, there doesn't exist a specific criteria for timelines. My edits were a rough attempt to cull the mass of archive creation entries and non-significant events which didn't seem extremely significant to the development of slash as a sub-culture. Jude(talk,contribs) 01:15, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

I just think there should be a defined criteria for this. We can add all major archives, none or only those for "major" fandoms. Of course, then "major fandom" and "major archive" should be defined. The second, I think it should be the main archive(s) for a fandom, not just any archive out there, but thes one that are reference for all the fandom. Ideas? --Andromeda 00:43, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure timelines even belong on these fan fiction articles, but if they are included they probably ought to present only the events which would be of interest to people outside the slash-writing community, to help them better understand what slash is. In other words I'm agreeing with Jude. Bluejay Young 00:48, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

As Bluejay said, the creation of archives is of no note or interest to people who are outside of that fandom and/or the slash community. As it is, it is impossible to define something as "major" in an unbiased way. For example, a major archive in one fandom is of no note to a member of another fandom. On a final note, with the proliferation of fandoms over the internet, to choose a "main" (slash) archive for a fandom is likewise as subjective as picking "major" and "minor" fandoms.

I feel the criteria for inclusion on the timeline should be something along the lines of: "[The event] is noteable and of interest to someone who is not a member of the slash community, or is a major/highly-noteable event that assisted in the development of the slash community". Jude(talk,contribs) 03:45, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree, there is a definitely lack of RPS links in the timeline. It is important to give people an idea of when RPS came along after FPS, since RPS remains so controversial. Sunhawk 01:31, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Not sure why the 2006 Nick/Greg CSI slash acknowledgement is mentioned--it doesn't seem particularly significant in the history of slash. Not my field, so I'm posting for discussion rather than deleting. --LQ 18:34, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Proper Wording

Paragraph 1, last sentence, reads: The confusion of the "/" and "X" marks is highly discouraged, however, as it may be a cause for confusion. Should be reworded by someone with more vested interest in the topic than I.

--Gedrean 18:53, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Hetslash?

Given that there are now lesbian and gay characters in some SFF series, I'm surprised no-one's discussed the issue of slash that depicts those characters in exclusively heterosexual relationships- for example, Willow Rosenberg after she broke up with Oz and made her relationship with Tara official in Buffy the Vampire Slayer, although as Doctor Who's Jack Harkness is either bisexual or omnisexual, it probably wouldn't apply in his case. Has that attracted any controversy?

User:Calibanu 15.17, 30 July 2006

I believe calling something "hetslash" would be something of a self-neutralizing term. I've never heard the term before, where is it published? And no, I don't think that kind of situation attracts as much controversy as slash itself Sunhawk 03:39, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Hetslash is used on Harry Potter slash communities. I do agree it is "self-neutralizing" but then again so is pop-punk. Kiki 15:45, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Do you think you could link to that? Because I have only ever seen "slash" used in opposition to "het" on HP communities (and everywhere else, except for older discussions). --Principessa 21:07, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

In fandoms I've been in (mostly smaller), hetslash refers to one character experiencing sexual/romantic interest in a character s/he believes to be of the same sex, but who is really cross-dressing (for example, Orsino and Viola/"Cesario" in Shakespeare's Twelfth Night). I think "hetslash" is too ambiguous a term to use. - Mel, 29 January 2007 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.135.131.194 (talk) 22:39, 29 January 2007 (UTC).

Slash Timeline

I'm starting to think this article has outgrown the Slash Timeline section-- it's never going to be (never can be) a complete, authoritative, or balanced history of events, and instead serves now to only "pimp out" editors' pet fandoms with a mention and a link. I think the article would lose nothing without it. Sdauson 19:36, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Does anyone have a link to this article referncing Nick and Greg from CSI? I can't find it anywhere...

I agree. I would like to keep some of the influential dates (first zine, people involved in the original source reacting to slash, etc.) but if they can't be separated from the pointless pimping, I think the whole section can be taken out. --Kittymalicious 20:53, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Most of it seems pretty trivial. I'd recommend removing the whole think. But I definitely removedthe ridiculous tag ancouraging people to add more, which just invites more vanity posting and spam. DreamGuy 20:12, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Definition

It seems confusing to me that the main definition given of slash is "explicit" when the rest of the page uses "same-sex relationship". I also think that that the "explicit" definition is obselete, or, at least, in much, much less use than "same-sex relationship". --Principessa 21:11, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Wingfic

The wingfic page redirects to here, but there is no mention of wingfic in the article... --Careless hx 00:54, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Neutrality, Original!Fic, and Ethnography

Hey, so I have some issue with this entire squick section. It's a touchy subject because what is squick for one person is not for another (I mean, slash as a whole has been referred to as a squick) and I'm not sure using phrases like "usually make the reader physically nauseated enough to throw up" is appropriate. Also, is squick genuinely considered a *genre* of slash fiction or just an element of it? I've seen "squick" listed on warnings alongside things like BDSM, rape, incest, a certain pairing, etc. or used as an adjective or a verb to describe/react to certain aforementioned things but I haven't really seen someone take the time to write "squickfic" as it is defined in this wiki for the pure purpose of disgusting their readers.

Also, I'm questioning a particular line in the Original Fic section: "Such writing is not easily defined as homoerotic as erotic content is variable and plot and emotional development tends to take precedence over sexual scenes." Is this sentence implying that orig!fic is not slash because it is not homoerotic? In any case, it is a sweeping generalization since there are plenty of ultra-sexual original fic and, in opposition, slash fic that concentrates on plot over sexuality--does anyone protest its removal?

Lastly, I'm unsure about the following in the "Slash in Academia" section: "They focus only minimally on textual analysis. Though they take an ethnographic approach, which comes from anthropology, they are with the exception of Jenkins, somewhat uninformed on current trends and debates within ethnography." I'm unsure what the trends and debates of conducting ethnographic research has to do with the listing of some academic works on slash. Additionally, the materials listed have ample textual analysis--Cicioni is basically pure slash text analysis and Jenkins has an almost complete focus on the texts generated by the Terra Nostra Underground, etc. These sentences also seem out of place in terms of neutrality--both deeming those listed "somewhat uninformed" and Jenkins as the exception. I suggest we keep the first sentence of that paragraph under the list and delete the rest. --Kittymalicious 12:08, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Plugging Specific Writers

I think this whole plugging specific writers or sites thing is going too far. Regarding the www.craiggilmore.co.uk site, I'm removing the reference because it adds no notable knowledge to the article. There's really no need to put up the web sites of specific people, but I feel a little unfair cleaning up all the new ones while still allowing the old ones (like those under "Original Slash") to remain. I'm open to being convinced however--anyone who has a problem with this, speak now because I plan on removing those random author plugs the next time I edit this article. Kittymalicious 02:36, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

In full agreement, I am removing the recent addition of a paragraph using the example of a Dragon Age slash roleplay website. It adds nothing to the article. Also, I'm one of primary writers and was surprised to be told it was here... it looks like a blatant advert to me. Not cool, y'know? Vehlr (talk) 22:18, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Removed whole slew of external links and names

Wikipedia is not a webdirectory. The article used o look like someone ws just going through and adding their own names to various places and directly linking to their own websites. See WP:EL for why that is not appropriate.

On top of that, naming a long list of individuals for fan fiction just to prove there were different genres seemed pointless. It was just vanity cruft, and encouraged people to show up and add their own names for no encyclopedic reason. See WP:NOT and WP:ENC. DreamGuy 20:10, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

"Slash" pic

That's ridiculous. A jpeg of a "/" elucidates nothing. It looks like a joke - I'm taking it down.Snackmagic 16:17, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Mustbepop.JPG

Image:Mustbepop.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:23, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:RogueSection31.jpg

Image:RogueSection31.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 07:39, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Gender of authors

Camille Bacon-Smith's book Enterprising Women discusses in depth the fact that most slash writers are women writing about men in relationships with other men. This is a fascinating phenomenon and worthy of discussion. yet there is no mention of the gender of slash writers here. Maybe men took over half of slash while I wasn't paying attention, but it seems somewhat unlikely. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.92.73.217 (talk • contribs) 03:54, June 12, 2007 (UTC)

This is primarily because there haven't been any actual studies of the gender composition of slash writers. Within communities and existing academic work, it is understood by participants/observers that slash is predominantly female because our interaction with each other very clearly elucidates our gender. However, most of the actual studies are focusing on "why" slash, not "who" slashes, which means that--as far as I know--there has been no formal quantitative study or estimate of how many slash community participants are women. To some extent, if you can't cite it then it doesn't count. Kittymalicious (talk) 11:50, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Size of slash audience?

Have any studies been done estimating how many people read slash or participate in slash communities? I know that slash is a fairly widespread cultural phenomenon, but exactly how widespread? Have any of the academic studies about slash addressed this question? What about coverage in mainstream media? The size of the audience seems like an obvious question to ask, but I can't find any information on it. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 22:22, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for additional data

Many thanks to whomever added extra facts - family names, names of the series - to the list of favorite couples. Good job. Das Baz, aka Erudil 16:51, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Missing reference in DS9

There's another sexual reference in the Star Trek series when the carrier of Dax, a simbiote, feels a connection to a lover in a past "life" (when he was a man) and has implied sexual relations. I would edit the article, but I would probably write it badly. 80.91.81.87 (talk) 14:53, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

List of Pairings

The massive list of pairings needs to be taken out. It is completely unnecessary, the article it pretty self-explanatory as it stands, and there are already some references to pairings in the body. The list detracts from the article and should not be in a serious encyclopædic article, as the Wikipedia strives to be. In addition, it is, by necessity, grossly unrepresentative of slash fandom as a whole. If no one objects, I'm going to take it out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by World's Vortex (talk • contribs) 12:53, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm queasy about removing the list. Very unfamiliar with the subject and perusing the article for the first time, this list stood out as an interesting item, at least to me. __meco (talk) 15:45, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Maybe if the article was edited, then, to include more examples within the text, or at least significantly paring down and organising the list? As it stands, it's just way too long and doesn't appear to be organised in any manner.--World's Vortex (talk) 00:41, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Original Slash Paragraph

Re: Original Slash This paragraph seemed odd to me and remains so even after Grammar, Punctuation and Spelling clean-ups that I did... It's the logic of the opening statement that I find questionable:

Properly termed "homoerotic fiction" but very often called "original slash", perhaps in an effort to better relate to the vast slash fan-fiction audience thriving on the Internet, or perhaps because several of the authors participating in the genre previously participated in slash fan-fiction.

This is a false equation of "homoerotic fiction" and "original slash": While all "original slash" may be "homoerotic fiction", it is most certainly NOT the case that all "homoerotic fiction" is slash, much less "original slash"... This is a fuddled misuse of catagories and needs to be worked on and cleared up.

Just what is the point of this paragraph? It should be made clearer and more accurately stated. There is factual and conceptual content to the "/" in all slash fiction that is NOT inherently present in "homoerotic fiction". And then the "original" must have some semantic content as well that adds to the compound term. Thus, conceptually, "original slash" is at least twice-removed from "homoerotic fiction"... Therefore this section of the article needs to be fixed.

I won't be able to do it, but I need it done for I need to have a good article on "Slash" to which I can point neophytes when I'm trying to discuss the use of homosex in literature. I would appreciate anyone's good faith attempts to clear this up.

Thanks... Emyth (talk) 13:51, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Popular pairings section

Do we really need a 'popular pairings' section? The body of the article already names and links to about a dozen different examples, all of which by their inclusion as examples are safely assumed to be 'popular', as opposed to 'obscure'. How do we decide what counts as 'popular'? Is this list really for anything other then providing a way for people to try to insert their new favorite pairing? I'm going to take it out, but if anyone wants to talk about it, let's talk. - matt lohkamp 10:13, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Moved

That canon works have gay characters does not make it slash fiction, hence i moved this here, pending citation: Though not in line with the original definition, some people assert that some published works constitute slash fiction despite the fact that they are not fan-created. This is likely due to the relative void of canon homosexual relationships in source media. For example, Star Trek virtually never portrayed gay or lesbian relationships on screen outside of the mirror universe (it was done once in an episode of DS9); however, the original version of the 1985 novel Killing Time by Della van Hise included hints of a homosexual relationship, as have several subsequent works, including 2001's Section 31: Rogue by Andy Mangels and Michael A. Martin. Other authors' works that deal with homosexual themes or characters are sometimes described as slash fiction as well. More commonly, though, fans describe such professional fiction as "slashy" rather than actually claiming it as slash fiction.

Science fiction

Am i right in thinking that slash fiction involves fan fiction based on any genre of work? It was suggested that making a feaured topic out of Gay science fiction would possibly require the slash fiction being GA. Am i right to disagree as slash is not inherently science fictional, it is just that many of the most popular franchises happen to be science fiction or fantasy, or is there a closer link?YobMod 18:38, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Keeping in mind that I'm primarily coming at this from a yaoi perspective and have not read much on slash specifically... Slash fiction can be based on any genre, but historically speculative fiction works (sci fi, fantasy, "history") have been very popular, due to their being "Boys Own" - female characters in these series when slash began are either background or one-off bimbos who are discarded by the end of the episode so that the heroes can continue on to more adventures. The "freeing" aspect of not being in the here and now that speculative fiction provides also makes it possible to imagine that by the 24th Century, homosexual relationships will be accepted, and as such, will be much more common. (Or that the greater taboo in a Legolas/Gimli relationship is the elf/dwarf divide.) --Malkinann (talk) 00:13, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Potential web-based sources

This is for potential web-based sources that are freely available, with a view to evaluating them and including them in the article. --Malkinann (talk) 09:45, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

• "Normal Female Interest in Men Bonking": Selections from The Terra Nostra Underground and Strange Bedfellows
• glbtq entry on Slash fiction
• PERFORMANCE, PROPERTY, AND THE SLASHING OF GENDER IN FAN FICTION
• Minding One's P's and Q's - Homoeroticism in Star Trek: The Next Generation.
• Slash Fandom on the Internet, Or, Is the Carnival Over? - Rachel Shave
• My Secret Life as a Slasher (contains excerpts)
• Hey Spock, Lookin' Good ...
• Perverse Universes: SLASH FAN FICTION (note this is by the same author as one of the books)
• Everyone's a Superhero: A Cultural Theory of 'Mary Sue' Fan Fiction as Fair Use - free download
• Slashing the Borg: Resistance is Fertile

Fix the Wording

This might be the most poorly written entry I've ever read. Try and decipher this: "Slash fiction involving male-characters is more common male (or less commonly, female) characters, who While the term was originally restricted to stories in which one or more male media characters were involved in an explicit adult relationship as a primary plot element, it is now more generally used to refer to any fan story containing a pairing between male characters." The entire article is clumsy, riddled with poor sentence structure.--Poh Tay Toez (talk) 16:51, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for letting us know. :) At the moment, I believe the focus is on reading up about slash fiction, and copyediting will come later in the piece. --Malkinann (talk) 20:38, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Main image

Would it be possible to find an image where the two characters are of the same age, as opposed to that Harry/Sirius pic? --Silvestris (talk) 16:08, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

I've readded the Harry/Snape image down in the chanslash section. --Malkinann (talk) 22:56, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Hey guys, I noticed that this article cited my article 'Slash Friction', I didn't add it--someone else did. The link is broken as gaywired closed and so the url redirects to another site that does not have this article, so I updated the link to a copy of the exact same article on my blog. Someone reverted it to the old broken link. If you want to cite thos article it appears here: http://erecsite.blogspot.com/2009/09/quoth-lambda-redux.html -- or you could remove the cite. But insisting on using a broken link seems a little odd. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.203.27.102 (talk) 17:15, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Proposed move/split

Because this article continues to grow beyond its original scope, it should clearly be moved to Slash fandom or Slash fanwork, with the fiction (vs. art, etc.) material being a section. If the fiction material is deemed or become too long, it could be a separate article, with a summary in the general article and {{Main}} linking them, per normal WP:SUMMARY style. Needn't happen in this order; e.g., the non-fiction-writing aspects of this article could move to Slash fandom along with a summary of slash fiction. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 02:00, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Fag hag tyranny

I'd like to point out that "slash" fiction has evolved from fag hag circles, or simply heterosexual women who get off on the idea of two (or more) men having sex with each other (kinda like the female version of Howard Stern). Unfortunately, this genre has evolved to encompass ALL gay literature, which is unfair and unrealistic. Gay men do not write slash. Only women write it. Fiction that happens to have gay themes or gay characters in it does not make it slash, unless it's a female Howard Stern sexualizing gay men for their own sexual pleasure. Slash is neither art nor literature. Slash comes from the term "trash." This article is misleading. Based on the wording, you'd have to include E.M. Forester and a great number of classic literature as "slash" simply because there are gay themes.--MarioSmario (talk) 23:24, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Slash fiction arose from science fiction fandom, Mario. There have always been gay men among writers and readers of slash. (And the etymology of the term is already quite clearly known, as the article makes clear.) Get your facts straight, and quit the hating. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:00, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Public domain slash

Interesting topic, but looks like original research and is wrong in any case. Jane Austen fan fiction has been around since before it was in the public domain, so I don't see how the first slash could have been written only two years ago.--Duesouthfan (talk) 18:50, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

"Slash"

The usage of Slash (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) is under discussion, see talk:Slash (musician) -- 70.24.244.158 (talk) 05:40, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

To those who think Slash is not "gay"

I see three main things wrong with your argument. 1) Slash is read by men. Yes not as much as by women but gay men do read slash. 2) Slash is sometimes written by men. I have known several gay friends who write slash. 3) If slash isn't gay it is something far worse. Appropriation and exploitation. It could be seen as heterosexual women exploiting and stereotyping the lives of gay men. It would be similar to blackface.-Rainbowofpeace (talk) 07:30, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

See Slash vs. Gay at Fanlore for article references and discussion of this issue from several different perspectives. --Bluejay Young (talk) 20:10, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Introduction and Edit Proposal

Hello fellow Wikipedians:
I'm Athletiger, nicknamed Ath by the other wiki community. I'm currently working on a research project for my English class, and one of the assignments is to edit/add useful information to a Wikipedia page. Therefore, for my assignment, I would like to propose expanding to the section of "Critical and queer attention" in regards to how and why people read/write slash fics - this will touch a little bit on gender and identity, the removal of gender stereotypes, and the emotional development of a m/m relationships, as well as input some statistics for the demographics of those who write slash. Depending on where I take my information, I might include information into the subcategory "femslash" as well.
Furthermore, I would also like to research and begin to expand on the subcategories that needs citations (chanslash, reverse slash, and original slash.) Please let me know if I can help improve on this page, as well as input these information more effectively.
Athletiger ^Talk~The road less travelled is more fun. 23:38, 14 February 2017 (UTC)