Look. I'm not going to say that there are no wankas who are asshats. Some fandom_wank regulars are asshats who will mock you for disagreeing with them and no other reason. Some of them are asshats who appear to take great pleasure in hurting people. There are some n00b-types who don't really understand what f_w is supposed to represent but they act for all the world as part of the 'crew'. There are people there who carry grudges against particular fandomers/groups of fandomers. None of this is a secret if you follow the comm with any regularity. But where the FUCK do people get off claiming that all wankas are the same?
Let me introduce you to my little friend; I like to call her "simple arithmetic with a dash of statistics".
fandom_wank has over three thousand members, of whom maybe five hundred are regularly active, plus an uncountable number of lurkers/anonymice. There are some towns here in Ontario whose population is less than 500. Would any one of you 'f_w suxx0rz!' people ever claim that one such little town is a human clone farm? No? Then how fucking stupid do you have to be to claim that wankas are all the same, that they all stand for the same principles (principles?? >_< It's fandom, you whackjob!) or that they all agree with one another? And if you do think that all wankas are the same, how come you can't abide it when f_w slams your ship/fandom niche? If it's possible for all wankas to be the same, why isn't it possible for all Harmonians or Slytherin fans to be the same? Logic, please.
In general, even wankas don't make the claim that, for example, all H/Hr shippers or Slytherin fans are the same -- sure, it seems that way sometimes, but if you politely protest in a comment, you'll get far more people saying "yeah, I realise that, sucks that you guys have to share your ship/fandom niche with such lunatics" than people saying "omg hor how dare u disagree with teh cabal". Of course, if you're wanky in your protesting, you'll get laughed at, but that's just because you're being wanky, not because they disagree with you. The only thing that all wankas are supposed to agree on, in theory, is this: fandom is fucking funny. Though even so, there are wankas who only think fandom is fucking funny as long as you're not laughing at their fandom or their OTP. This isn't an argument for wankas as misunderstood woobies or victims. This is an argument which basically states that fandom_wank is a diverse community. Which really should go without saying, I would have thought, but alas, apparently it doesn't with some people.
f_w is a community with a long online* history, and sometimes wank reporters or commenters will take shortcuts and make generalisations that the community at large understands are tenuous. Because it is assumed that the community at large is composed of relatively sane people who won't get their knickers in a twist over every perceived slight to their fragile egos. Not that there are NO wankas who are also wankers; some wankas have been featured on f_w, some even repeatedly. There are even a couple of people there whom I've wanted to club for being pretentious twats with shit for brains, and I'm fairly certain there are people at f_w who regard me just as highly. The point is, it's a community, a loosely organised group of people, with a stated purpose and a set of rules. The purpose of fandom_wank is NOT to hurt people. It's to mock the following:
The people being mocked are NEVER invited to the party; wankas and mice alike have been banned for trolling people who are wanked and commenting with links to wank reports. If someone does invite them and they choose to read what's being said, or defend themselves, that's their choice. I won't argue that it isn't difficult to close a window and choose not to know what people are saying about you. It is difficult. But if a friend of yours links you to fandom_wank and says "dude, you've been wanked!" -- the choice to read is yours. The choice to get upset is also yours. It is not fandom_wank's responsibility to refrain from mocking you if you deserve it; this is also sometimes known as 'freedom of speech'. It's on you to be able to recognise when you deserve it and take the lumps. And if you don't feel you deserve to be laughed at, you've got to be able to make a logical case for it and not reduce yourself to spewing insults and/or making haughty posts about how you're sooo above it all. Hint: You aren't above it all if you have to make a post like that.
f_w is NOT a fandom arbiter, they're not REQUIRED to keep everyone who might be offended in mind. If you're deeply offended by a generalisation in a wank report, you're an oversensitive newbie. Not a victim of harsh mockery. Last week fandom_wank was laughing at Slytherin fans who take the metaphor a bit too far, and comments were rife with all kinds of mockage directed at Slytherin fans. Do you see me spazzing out? No, and this is not only because I'm not the type of fan they were mocking, but because I realise that general statements on f_w are NOT intended to inflame every single individual who falls under the generalisation that's being made.
The only victims of mockery are those who are being named, and most of the time? They deserve it. And not because fandom_wank members are all Mean Girls Who Look For People Who Supposedly Deserve To Be Mocked So They Can Feel Better About Themselves. But because believe it or not, there are things on this earth that deserve mocking. What a shocker, I know. We point out moments of "fandom is fucking funny" and laugh about them. That's the purpose of fandom_wank -- to laugh at things that are funny in fandom. You might say that one person's absurdity is another person's deeply held belief, and that's when I begin to mock you. Because I think that deeply held beliefs based on a work of fiction are absurd -- ab ovo. None of it is real; whatever your fandom, it's FICTION. If you're basing your deeply held beliefs on a work of fiction, fandom_wank thinks you're funny and so do I. And no smartass comments about the Bible from the peanut gallery, please; the jury's still out on whether that's a work of fiction or not. :P
There can be no middle ground here; you're entitled to believe whatever you want, and I can certainly sympathise with being so involved in a fandom that you feel like it's a part of you. That in itself is not a crime; and a lot of people get emotionally involved in fandom, it's true. But the minute you start to posture about it, or write tl;dr, batshit insane essays on the subject, or get all your fangirls to build you shrines for being so OMG!devoted, or flame people who disagree with you, or attempt to "prove" that your belief is somehow "real" -- you'll be welcomed to fandom_wank. I'm sorry, there is nothing sane (or healthy) about becoming so involved in a fandom that you actually forget where the fictional universe ends and the real one begins. And I will accept no mutterings from the metaphysics crowd; I'm still recovering from that time I broke my pancreas laughing at post-modernist deconstruction of Harry Potter.
I've seen wankas turn on an obviously biased wank report and defend the person who was supposed to be wanked. I've seen grudgewankers mocked instead of the person they were hoping to drag through the mud on f_w. I've seen wankas dismiss reports as not wank because there really was no wank, just someone thinking a little too hard about an aspect of fandom. I do wonder about the most recent wank where someone compared fandom_wank in passing to supporters of the Iraq war. I don't think that's wanky enough to warrant an entire report (or to be labelled with HP), but that's why I'm not a f_w mod. I thought the OP just made an offhand remark about fandom_wank in the middle of a larger post. It's not the first and last time I wonder about how legitimate a particular wank report is in terms of actual wank quotient, but I also know that in any community, some amount of in-group pride and out-group stereotyping is inevitable. When someone lashes out against fandom_wank, wankas usually lash back -- but what exactly is wrong with that? When you're part of a community and someone attacks your community, it's, um, natural to want to defend your community. Is that, by definition, wanky? Yes! But fandom_wank doesn't claim that it's never wanky, yo.
It's not fun to watch a friend get roasted on fandom_wank, particularly if you don't think she deserves it. But with all due respect, the majority of people who get wanked do deserve it. And if you really don't think your friend deserves to be mocked, what the fuck is stopping you from showing up and defending her? Nothing. You'll get attacked if you're wanky, whiny, if your argument for "she doesn't deserve it" is "omg you guys are someeeeeeen!1" But um... if you have a sane reason for why you or your friend don't deserve to be mocked, there are quite a few wankas who will, um, consider what you say, actually.
I know, I'm just fulla shockers tonight, it's astonishing.
But what usually happens when people show up to defend themselves or their friends is that they whine, accuse the wankas present of being heartless bitches with dried-up vaginas, tearfully condemn the vile people who mock her cancer/AIDS/TB-riddled friend. Illnesses do not make you exempt from being a tool. Though if you have a malignant brain tumor, people might be a little more sympathetic. Sometimes people detracting fandom_wank will attempt to claim that [wank du jour] is not funny, really. Well, when there are 300 comments of people laughing, I think you're sort of shooting yourself in the foot when you say that it's not funny, really. On the other hand, not everyone will find the same things funny; no one is asking you to agree that fandom is fucking funny.
If you really don't think fandom is ever funny, do EVERYONE a favour and just stay the fuck away from fandom_wank already. You are in control of your own browser. On your computer? You rule, not fandom_wank.
* Added for the benefit of the semantically challenged.