Hostility towards technical fans

[Bakustra]

This was prompted by the latest post in Parting Shots. PM me if you want to know why.

One of the things that interests me is the hostility that is directed at technically-minded fans of sci-fi. This is not from mainstream or semi-nerdy individuals, but rather from full-blown, fanfiction-writing, cosplaying nerds of nerds. The first two would be understandable, as technical analysis of sci-fi and fantasy is fairly unusual and very nerdy, but the declarations of less-nerdly-than-thou from the third group are unusual. For another example, here are two links that should provide another example of what I'm talking about.

I wonder where this hostility comes from, though. It's not necessarily because of any reputation SD.Net has acquired, either, since in the second example, there was no contact beforehand and no "aw geez Stardestroyer.net, what a horrible place" comments that show up in other examples. It's generally (from what I've seen of SomethingAwful) tied up with other hatred of nerdlier-than-they targets. The interesting part is that the only joke generally consists of posting a piece of analysis from a thread and leaving it there. Presumably it stands as a joke by itself, somehow.

I have my own theory, but I'm not sure it accounts for all of the hostility or if it's particularly accurate. The arts are filled with snobbery. Declaring that one work is good and another bad tends to lead into disparagement of the entire genre or all who like the work ("rap is just noise", etc.). One target, within literature and the literati (which spills over into film and TV) is that of genre fiction. Sci-fi, mysteries, fantasies, thrillers, all are considered below "real literature". Within the genres, you have, in sci-fi, contempt (particularly among older writers) for space opera and Star Wars in particular, for example. Fill in the blanks with other genres you know more about. I think that the same thing happens within fandom. More importantly, it tends to happen to groups with whom there is either little crossover and/or smaller groups, so that there is no dilution thanks to people that are associated with both deadening the antipathy.

So, then, technical fans are a fairly small group. They are thus ideal targets, because they are generally too few to really alienate, tend not to crossover with the cosplay groups, (and their fanfic is dismissed out of hand as Clancyesque), and have an unusual hobby. I do think that the unusualness of the hobby has the largest effect, and that it is the perception of crossover, not the actual chance of crossover. See furries as an example. They are hated by large segments of nerddom. While they are a large group in terms of internet subcultures, the general perception amongst anti-furry websites and forums is that furries are easily recognizable and therefore presume that they have no furry members. I do find it interesting that the same groups tend to be the most snobby. So, what do you all think? Anybody that's an outsider to the technical perspective wish to explain to me (via PM if you prefer) why analysis is apparently hilarious?

While I do consider myself a technical fan, I tried to be more objective when writing this post. As to the other aspect of this, which can be described as "Nerd sex lives = instant hilarity", that is pretty simple. Fan A sees a work of analysis from TFan A. He decides that anyone who would write something like that would therefore talk like that all the time, and therefore be incredibly socially awkward. Therefore, he determines that they will never know the loving touch of a man/woman/both, if I may wax poetic. Then, any talk about sex, relationships, or sexuality is funny because obviously anyone that is that nerdy could not possibly have a sex life. They must therefore be making it all up.

[Darth Wong]

One of the things that interests me is the hostility that is directed at technically-minded fans of sci-fi. This is not from mainstream or semi-nerdy individuals, but rather from full-blown, fanfiction-writing, cosplaying nerds of nerds.

It's not actually that surprising that nerds would seize upon any opportunity to attack someone they falsely perceive as being even nerdier than they are. It's kind of like the way blacks pick on Asians. The victim seizes upon the opportunity to victimize someone else.

The first two would be understandable, as technical analysis of sci-fi and fantasy is fairly unusual and very nerdy, but the declarations of less-nerdly-than-thou from the third group are unusual. For another example, here are two links that should provide another example of what I'm talking about.

I wonder where this hostility comes from, though. It's not necessarily because of any reputation SD.Net has acquired, either, since in the second example, there was no contact beforehand and no "aw geez Stardestroyer.net, what a horrible place" comments that show up in other examples. It's generally (from what I've seen of SomethingAwful) tied up with other hatred of nerdlier-than-they targets. The interesting part is that the only joke generally consists of posting a piece of analysis from a thread and leaving it there. Presumably it stands as a joke by itself, somehow.

Oh yes, it's definitely a phenomenon which is much bigger than StarDestroyer.Net. I don't think anyone could seriously believe it really has much to do with us in particular, except that we occasionally get associated with it.

I have my own theory, but I'm not sure it accounts for all of the hostility or if it's particularly accurate. The arts are filled with snobbery. Declaring that one work is good and another bad tends to lead into disparagement of the entire genre or all who like the work ("rap is just noise", etc.). One target, within literature and the literati (which spills over into film and TV) is that of genre fiction. Sci-fi, mysteries, fantasies, thrillers, all are considered below "real literature". Within the genres, you have, in sci-fi, contempt (particularly among older writers) for space opera and Star Wars in particular, for example. Fill in the blanks with other genres you know more about. I think that the same thing happens within fandom. More importantly, it tends to happen to groups with whom there is either little crossover and/or smaller groups, so that there is no dilution thanks to people that are associated with both deadening the antipathy.

It's more specific than that. The arts aren't just filled with snobbery in general; they are filled with hostility toward scientists in particular. Tell me, try to imagine that you're watching a movie, and you hear an educated person say "there has to be a rational explanation". You just know he's going to be proven wrong, don't you? That's part of the arts, and it starts in school. Arts faculty profs just love to bash the sciences, and claim that all of the people in science fields are "close-minded" or "not well-rounded".

So, then, technical fans are a fairly small group. They are thus ideal targets, because they are generally too few to really alienate, tend not to crossover with the cosplay groups, (and their fanfic is dismissed out of hand as Clancyesque), and have an unusual hobby. I do think that the unusualness of the hobby has the largest effect, and that it is the perception of crossover, not the actual chance of crossover. See furries as an example. They are hated by large segments of nerddom. While they are a large group in terms of internet subcultures, the general perception amongst anti-furry websites and forums is that furries are easily recognizable and therefore presume that they have no furry members. I do find it interesting that the same groups tend to be the most snobby. So, what do you all think? Anybody that's an outsider to the technical perspective wish to explain to me (via PM if you prefer) why analysis is apparently hilarious?

While I do consider myself a technical fan, I tried to be more objective when writing this post. As to the other aspect of this, which can be described as "Nerd sex lives = instant hilarity", that is pretty simple. Fan A sees a work of analysis from TFan A. He decides that anyone who would write something like that would therefore talk like that all the time, and therefore be incredibly socially awkward. Therefore, he determines that they will never know the loving touch of a man/woman/both, if I may wax poetic. Then, any talk about sex, relationships, or sexuality is funny because obviously anyone that is that nerdy could not possibly have a sex life. They must therefore be making it all up.

It might also be a side-effect of rampant anti-intellectualism in general. Technical fans commit a sin greater than being geeky, or nerdy: they're intellectuals, which is just about the worst thing you can say about someone nowadays. Other fans take pains to distance themselves from this, even as they freely admit to doing stupid shit like camping out overnight to watch a certain movie.

[Bakustra]

The first two would be understandable, as technical analysis of sci-fi and fantasy is fairly unusual and very nerdy, but the declarations of less-nerdly-than-thou from the third group are unusual. For another example, here are two links that should provide another example of what I'm talking about.

I wonder where this hostility comes from, though. It's not necessarily because of any reputation SD.Net has acquired, either, since in the second example, there was no contact beforehand and no "aw geez Stardestroyer.net, what a horrible place" comments that show up in other examples. It's generally (from what I've seen of SomethingAwful) tied up with other hatred of nerdlier-than-they targets. The interesting part is that the only joke generally consists of posting a piece of analysis from a thread and leaving it there. Presumably it stands as a joke by itself, somehow.

Oh yes, it's definitely a phenomenon which is much bigger than StarDestroyer.Net. I don't think anyone could seriously believe it really has much to do with us in particular, except that we occasionally get associated with it.

I have my own theory, but I'm not sure it accounts for all of the hostility or if it's particularly accurate. The arts are filled with snobbery. Declaring that one work is good and another bad tends to lead into disparagement of the entire genre or all who like the work ("rap is just noise", etc.). One target, within literature and the literati (which spills over into film and TV) is that of genre fiction. Sci-fi, mysteries, fantasies, thrillers, all are considered below "real literature". Within the genres, you have, in sci-fi, contempt (particularly among older writers) for space opera and Star Wars in particular, for example. Fill in the blanks with other genres you know more about. I think that the same thing happens within fandom. More importantly, it tends to happen to groups with whom there is either little crossover and/or smaller groups, so that there is no dilution thanks to people that are associated with both deadening the antipathy.

It's more specific than that. The arts aren't just filled with snobbery in general; they are filled with hostility toward scientists in particular. Tell me, try to imagine that you're watching a movie, and you hear an educated person say "there has to be a rational explanation". You just know he's going to be proven wrong, don't you? That's part of the arts, and it starts in school. Arts faculty profs just love to bash the sciences, and claim that all of the people in science fields are "close-minded" or "not well-rounded".

Yeah. I'm familiar with the feeling. I have no idea why there's such hostility, though. I mean, it's not like there's some grand, moronic rivalry between, say, the engineering and the science faculties, or the business and law faculties, or, for that matter, history and the social sciences versus the hard sciences. I mean, I know that there are people reading this and thinking that it's because of statements like yours, but I've seen it in other places. The only place where you see rationality triumph is old Scooby-Doo cartoons. It's starting to get a little old after approximately six thousand years of it.

So, then, technical fans are a fairly small group. They are thus ideal targets, because they are generally too few to really alienate, tend not to crossover with the cosplay groups, (and their fanfic is dismissed out of hand as Clancyesque), and have an unusual hobby. I do think that the unusualness of the hobby has the largest effect, and that it is the perception of crossover, not the actual chance of crossover. See furries as an example. They are hated by large segments of nerddom. While they are a large group in terms of internet subcultures, the general perception amongst anti-furry websites and forums is that furries are easily recognizable and therefore presume that they have no furry members. I do find it interesting that the same groups tend to be the most snobby. So, what do you all think? Anybody that's an outsider to the technical perspective wish to explain to me (via PM if you prefer) why analysis is apparently hilarious?

While I do consider myself a technical fan, I tried to be more objective when writing this post. As to the other aspect of this, which can be described as "Nerd sex lives = instant hilarity", that is pretty simple. Fan A sees a work of analysis from TFan A. He decides that anyone who would write something like that would therefore talk like that all the time, and therefore be incredibly socially awkward. Therefore, he determines that they will never know the loving touch of a man/woman/both, if I may wax poetic. Then, any talk about sex, relationships, or sexuality is funny because obviously anyone that is that nerdy could not possibly have a sex life. They must therefore be making it all up.

It might also be a side-effect of rampant anti-intellectualism in general. Technical fans commit a sin greater than being geeky, or nerdy: they're intellectuals, which is just about the worst thing you can say about someone nowadays. Other fans take pains to distance themselves from this, even as they freely admit to doing stupid shit like camping out overnight to watch a certain movie.

I really don't get why being seen as an intellectual is considered such a bad thing. For that matter, people I know from various walks of life are fairly supportive/awed by my choice of major in Physics, but there is still anti-intellectualism in general. Of course, for the average person this is probably due to literary theory becoming part of intellectualism, which discredits all intellectuals. But at the same time there is an intense dislike of scientifically-minded people from segments of the arts (and literature/film criticism and production in particular. I haven't seen any of that from theatre or fine arts people.).

[adam_grif]

I'll throw in the all-time-champion retort for coming across something nerdy or nerdier than you: Get a life!

Not quite as common, bus still heavily used: Yes, but I've had sex. With a woman.


Social conventions exist, and there's a range of things that are considered by the general population to be acceptable hobbies. When somebody does something wildly outside of this, they're eccentric. When there's a solidly large minority of people doing it, they become a prime target for jokes because they're eccentric enough to warrant it but common enough for everybody to have heard of it.

Playing video games was one of these things in the past, but now everybody does it. So the goalposts shift, and now it's a more specific sub-set of it, just people who play certain kinds of games or play them obsessively.

The idea that people already part of the social mud-heap would pick on people part of an even more obscure group is not surprising. Not just in a "they want revenge" kind of way, but they have the same desire to pick on certain groups of people like everybody else.

[Oskuro]

I really don't get why being seen as an intellectual is considered such a bad thing.

Quite simply because most people base their opinions on their gut instinct, and hate it when someone proves them wrong. Science has a tendency to mercilessly squash stupid ideas, pointing out how stupid they are. People don't like being shown to be stupid, so they try to stigmatize logical thinking as an instinctive reaction.

It is not just with science fiction, I really have lost count of how many times I've had people knee-jerk aganist scientific notions because they clashed with their philosophical preconceptions, often switching to solipism as a last resort, trying to point out that "science doesn't know everything and could be proven wrong". And those are the rational ones that don't degenerate to outright ad hominem defamation.

[Darth Yan]

i've seen users who are in most cases reasonable becoming vicious, hostile, and nasty the moment someone starts to analyze things rationally (the guys at hero chat, and SuperSaiyaMan are examples of this). they start flinging feces, calling people idiots, and generally acting like spoiled children. TFN is home to quite a few (though it has gotten a bit better.)

[Sinewmire]

I recall the Atreides story of one man saving himself from drowning by launching himself from the shoulders of of another, further submerged mariner. Excusable at sea, but inexcusable at the dinner table.

More succintly, shit rolls downhill. It's a point of false reassurance, one I've often made before in my less honest moments. "I might be X, but at least I'm not Y!"

[NecronLord]

Of course, technical fan does not mean sane or reasonable. Those guys who seriously argue that the United Federation of Planets could defeat the Time Lords, make websites saying TIE fighters have 60 watt lasers, and so on, are also 'technical fans' despite their apparent immunity to actual science or sanity. This does little for our street cred.

We also tell people things they don't want to hear. Such as 'the only way the UFP could defeat the Galactic Empire is with divine intervention.'

[Formless]

I'm going to offer another possibility: most technical analysis goes over the average person's head. High level math and scientific concepts are strange and unfamiliar to the average person (the group Nerd culture harkens from whether nerds want to accept this fact or not), and unfamiliar things tend to get dismissed or condemned by this kind of person as a defensive mechanism. Nerds (whose real specialty is in fact memorization, not thinking skills) especially don't want to admit that they don't understand, so they just point and laugh and claim that its stupid to try and analyze something fictional (unless we're talking literary analysis which is much more understood by the world at large).

[Simon_Jester]

Related to this, when nontechnical people see technical analysis, they often hear this little subtextual voice going "Hah! I am smarter than you because I can do calculus!" whether the author intended to put it there or not. If they can't do calculus (never learned, lack the inclination, whatever), that can trigger rebellion.

People do not have to be stupid to fall prey to this, though it helps.

[Rye]

I really don't get why being seen as an intellectual is considered such a bad thing.

Quite simply because most people base their opinions on their gut instinct, and hate it when someone proves them wrong. Science has a tendency to mercilessly squash stupid ideas, pointing out how stupid they are. People don't like being shown to be stupid, so they try to stigmatize logical thinking as an instinctive reaction.

It is not just with science fiction, I really have lost count of how many times I've had people knee-jerk aganist scientific notions because they clashed with their philosophical preconceptions, often switching to solipism as a last resort, trying to point out that "science doesn't know everything and could be proven wrong". And those are the rational ones that don't degenerate to outright ad hominem defamation.

There's that, and there's also the fucking nonsense propounded by post-modernists and even some of the fringier pop-science types out there that means "intellectuals" are purveyors of ivory-tower bullshit. There's also the problem that humans as a species generally think in the same way in day-to-day life, it's just that "intellectuals" can dress up their prejudices in fancier language, and this won't ever change. As an example, George Orwell railed (quite rightly) on post-war Britain's intellectuals (more specifically, literary critics), because they were a masturbatory clique of leftists with a habit of soviet apologism. "True" intellectuals are pretty rare.

Mike got it for why nerds think other nerds are worse people than them, it's pretty typical of how people think, like I said. We're a tribalistic species that yearns for acceptance and recognition within the genres and limits we accept and recognise. It's mostly a matter of conditioning as to where those limits and definitions lie.