a wank by any other name

wrangletangle:

Probably the biggest complaint I have about the word “discourse” is that it conflates two concepts that used to be separate: wank and meta. The differences are important.

Meta was a discussion. It was meant as a jumping off point to look at a complex issue. It dignified its subjects by treating them with the maturity they deserved. It was reflective and enriched by multiple points of view. Whether serious or light-hearted, meta thrived on presenting evidence and discussing the impact of that information. Its purpose was to get everyone involved thinking more deeply about a topic, often including the OP.

Wank was wank. Whether it was ship wars or personal vendettas, wank was about in-fighting. It was ~ drama ~. It was there to start a fight it planned to win, and winning was its only goal. It was frequently superficial and careless in its impact, and it generally rested entirely on either false evidence or no evidence at all. It was the stuff that made gawking into a major fandom passtime, via fandom_wank and other resources.

This doesn’t mean there wasn’t poorly thought-out meta, or that no wank ever did something good. (Some wanks were very good at teaching everyone important lessons, like that you need to know what you’re doing in order to run a con, and not to harass actors.) It’s not about the tone, either – I’ve seen some very angry meta and some light-hearted wank bait.

The difference is entirely in approach. Meta frames itself as part of a dialogue and actively invites participation and alternate interpretations of the data. Wank declares itself the one true way and actively invites popcorn and/or everyone running for cover. Meta understands that there are multiple truths in terms of personal experience but that facts, such as they can be determined, are important as a base to work from. Wank is about what someone thinks should be the facts, in the face of all evidence to the contrary.

Prior to tumbl-hell, it was understood that feeding the trolls was a bad idea. When fans wanked, most others noped out. But now, with this new “discourse” term elevating ship wars to some sort of art form and dignifying arguments which we used to understand were full of baloney, people feel required to engage. Instead of pointing and laughing from a safe distance, we’re feeding the very worst trolls and giving them the power to convert others to trolldom and harass anyone who doesn’t conform to their wank-defined rules.

The thing is, we did this before. In the 90s. It sucked. The point of the term “wank” was to recognize the self-congratulatory nature of the (probably universally human) behavior, box it, and set it to one side. We couldn’t stop it from starting, but we could choose not to feed it. Now it’s out of the box again, and it has not improved with age, let me tell you. Phew.

So, petition to bring back both terms and drop “discourse” like a rotten potato. It’s not useful, because it conflates real conversations with standing in a room screaming with one’s fingers in one’s ears.