Dealing with Toxic Fandom in the Star Trek Universe
With all the reboots and retcons, Star Trek fandom can be a very divisive place. If you’ve been to any of the various Star Trek-related blogs, Facebook groups, or Twitter streams, then you certainly know what I’m talking about. But if we really step back and think about it, is the recent rift in Trek fandom so unique? I’m willing to bet history will tell us otherwise.
If you found your way to this discussion and you are not necessarily a Trek fan, you are in luck, because many of the same principles will most certainly apply to insert-fandom-of-your-choice. So, feel free to substitute the fandom that you love, and play along while thinking of the Trials and Tribble-ations of Toxic Fandom.
Toxic fandom has gotten out of control. In fact, it can be found in almost any fandom. But what happens when that same toxicity hits one of the most storied franchises in television and movie history. Before diving into specifics around the Star Trek franchise, let’s first attempt to define toxic fandom, talk about the different stages of fandom, discuss specific examples of toxicity in the Star Trek Universe, and lastly reflect on how we can be good stewards of the franchise; to foster a more inviting atmosphere for young and old fans alike.
What is toxic fandom? While there is no hard and fast definition for toxic fandom, we can certainly take the root meanings of the two words and come up with a pretty good guess. I would summarize it as a state of possessiveness and entitlement, which leads to a feeling of superiority among a fan community.
My personal definition is based on Rachel Lepler’s, in which she states, “Possessiveness, entitlement, and a feeling of superiority are the three main ingredients in the toxic fandom stew.”
Possessiveness is obviously well suited to contribute to this toxic soup. When we really love someone or something to the point of obsession, we often feel a sense of ownership over the said thing, even if we have little to no control over its outcome. It’s not hard to see how a toxic fan can take that obsession a step further, by attempting to assert his or her thoughts and knowledge onto the fandom as a whole, in an overly hostile way.
When you really start to boil down where this sense of possessiveness comes from, it’s mostly rooted in love. This love is not only the key to becoming a great and loyal fan, but it is also the point where fandom can lead to ruin.
But the notion of love for a property unto itself is not the real issue here. We congregate around our love for a property all the time. That’s why people join Reddit and Facebook groups, listen to podcasts, and attend conventions. So we really need to start to think about where the poison comes into play. There’s a good reason why the phrase “it’s a thin line between love and hate” is used so much. Because it’s true.
We as fans have the right to be possessive and protect our sense of ownership, but I also feel we have the obligation to expound on those viewpoints so that those thoughts and views feel like they are coming from a place of love, and less from a stance of “it’s mine, and you can’t have it.”
Next, let’s take a look at the notion of entitlement. Entitlement is the belief that one is inherently deserving of privileges or special treatment. Entitlement is a tricky thing. We often associate entitlement toward Trek, or any other property for that matter, with how many episodes we’ve seen, how many books we’ve read, or how long we’ve been around with the franchise over the years. And while each of these entitles you to your opinion, let’s be honest, it’s just your opinion.
Don’t get me wrong, it DOES give you the right to speak as somewhat of an expert on the matter, as long as you can do that in a friendly and welcoming way. What it DOES NOT give you is the right to lash out at a fan for liking something you don’t.
Often times this sentiment gets levied at the fan community when in actuality it’s the showrunners who may be making folly of what you deem so precious. And don’t get me wrong, criticism from a subject matter expert certainly merits weight, but WE as fans begin to steer off course when that negative reaction is sent toward other fans that simply like something you don’t. Hating someone for liking something has never been a good idea. The most you can do is attempt to communicate with a sense of respect and convey your thoughts as civilized as possible.
So both of these, a sense of possession and a sense of entitlement, often will lead to a sense of superiority. The feeling of superiority and how it’s directed can be a positive thing, but often it reverberates like an echo chamber of negativity. It can lead to the disenfranchisement of the fan base, and can even change the direction of a series in progress, for good or ill, especially in the modern internet age. Again, possessiveness and entitlement unto themselves are not a bad thing, not at all, but how we convey the resulting feeling affects the different levels of fandom very differently.
What are the levels of fandom? Intra-fandom interaction can be just as contentious as one fandom against another. The levels of fandom are vast, and stating your position among the hoards can be as contentious as stating your religious beliefs or a political position. But before we can begin to understand toxic fandom, we may have to understand what fandom means to different people who are at different levels within the fan base.
Trek-Casual: A casual fan is one who sees one episode, either recommended to them by a friend or loved one, and they say to themselves “Hey, that was pretty good.” Then somehow the next batch of episodes may get lost in their ever-growing television queue. Said person may wait happily until their Trekkie friend recommends another episode. They’ll watch an episode here and there but are not fully committed.
For this fan, toxic fandom is not an issue as they are not yet fully invested. They may just look on in amazement at the onset of negativity through social media and other news outlets and wonder, “Wow, is it really that serious.”
Trek-Curious: The casual fan begins to get a bit more invested. They begin to watch more episodes. They may look up actors and writers. They may begin to research a bit more about the franchise. They may even commit to watching an entire season of a single series. If this person hears of any toxicity in the fandom, they may begin to research a bit to see why the community may feel this way. But it still may not affect their overall enjoyment of the franchise. The community will oftentimes see this person as a newbie and may discount their opinion, whether good or bad. From a fan perspective, this is probably where they begin to be most vulnerable because now they really care.
Trek-Follower/Enthusiast: This person is really starting to take the bait. Not only are they interested in the series they are currently watching, but they begin to dip into other series or books in the franchise. This person will start to think about timelines and the different things going on in the Star Trek universe. How does series A play into series B? How are they the same or different? This person will begin to try out another Trek series because they are becoming invested in the universe. They may even venture out to social media to connect with their newfound tribe.
As a recently indoctrinated Trekkie, they are now at a delicate stage in the fandom, as this is the point where they not only have to toe the line between consuming the massive abundance of information but also deal with others in the community. This is the point where they want to voice their opinions of this newfound thrilling franchise.
Trek-Elite: They have seen every single episode of every series, seen the movies, and even have read books. They live and breathe Trek. They may have even visited a few conventions. They are not afraid to let their Trek flag fly, and may even be an evangelist for the cause. They may have even dressed up as their favorite character. They are 100% invested.
At this level of fandom, things can be the trickiest, as these people are the most devoted to the cause. And at this point, a sense of possessiveness and entitlement could be at the highest. And while being in this position does not make you a contributor to toxic fandom, all the signs are there. With great power, comes great responsibility!
And of course, this is not an exact science, but seeing the different levels can further aid in our discussion of how they play into the overall fandom, and how each could potentially be placed on either end of a toxic fan base.
(Honorable mention) Trek-Advocate/Ambassador: The Ambassador usually falls between the enthusiast and the elite. You might find them on panels at conventions, doing presentations, and enjoying the general companionship of fellow fans. Hopefully, to spread the gospel (and not hate). And yes, they even host podcasts.
What are the types of toxic fandom? Toxic fandom can be levied toward a few places. It can be directed towards the creators or even actors of a particular property, it can also be directed at other fans within the fandom, or even fans of other fandoms.
If we think the recent rift in fandom over Star Trek Discovery is a new thing, I hate to tell you, but you are wrong. With each inception of a new Star Trek series, there have always been those who have been around just a little bit longer, who then feel their precious property is being ruined. And while many of these examples occurred in the pre-internet era, they are clear examples of Toxic Fandom that would have undeniably been reverberated across social media if they had taken place today.
The early criticism would not have come from social media or online groups as it would now, but from writers at newspapers and magazines, or attendees at some of the earliest conventions. So for the following example, I want you to use your imagination and ask how the reaction would be in the world of today.
My theory is that most of the time, toxicity in the Star Trek Universe is almost always centered around the show being reinvented for a new generation. Enter pre-launch and this article entitled, The Next Generation, written by Dave Thomas.
The first few paragraphs of this article read, “Star Trek is coming back to TV — without Captain Kirk, Mr. Spock, Dr. McCoy, and the rest of the crew. And Trekkies around the world are up in arms. Outraged fans are beseeching Gene Roddenberry, creator of the original series, to halt plans to launch the starship Enterprise this fall in a syndicated series called Star Trek: The Next Generation.”
This article goes on to talk about Patrick Stewart being a relatively unknown British actor. It also laments over the absence of the beloved Original Series crew, stating that casting a new Enterprise crew would be like remaking a John Wayne movie with an unknown in the Duke’s saddle. Saying, “it’s a rip-off series, Roddenberry is just trying to cash in.”
To further back the lack of acceptance of the TNG crew, here’s a quote from Marina Sirtis.
“The fans hated the fact that we were on,” she says. “I mean people assume because we became [so] successful, that it was always that way. But no, I would go to conventions where there were like 30 people, and they’d all be sitting with their arms crossed going, ‘how dare you take the place of our heroes.’ So we really had to win [over] our audience.” — Marina Sirtis
Again, this is just one example, but imagine this happening in the current internet era.
Obviously, “The Next Generation” goes on to huge success, with even more iterations coming down the pike, all with quirks of their own. We get a tonal change with Deep Space Nine, which is much grittier and shifts to serialized storytelling. Voyager goes where no man has gone before, 70,000 light-years from Federation space. Next, you have Enterprise, which played in a time frame of 100 years before the events of TOS. Then the Kelvin movies come along and execute a graceful reboot of our beloved characters. Each of these situations was initially met with ire until they could be well evaluated.
To the “New Generation” of Trek fans, we should be mindful of what a new series could mean to them. Whatever series is out at the moment may be all they know. For all intents and purposes, “it‘s their Trek.”
Then there is toxic fandom between fans and non-fans. This should be the least controversial and most playful banter between warring franchises or intellectual properties.
This is frequently a statement of pride. A time to poke fun at other franchises we might feel are not up to snuff. It’s an age-old battle. And for as long as I can remember, it has always been Star Trek versus Star Wars. One is gritty and worn, while the other is perceived as bright and optimistic. In reality, loving one or the other is certainly not a bad thing, but when people are mocked or ridiculed for doing so, it’s clear to see we are going a bit too far. Now, I could use the Star Trek versus Star Wars example, but we have a more recent example. Enter Star Trek Discovery versus The Orville.
From the very beginning, Star Trek Discovery had so many marks against it. First off, the notion of playing around in a very delicate time frame 10 years before the events of The Original Series. Secondly, retconning the history of a beloved character by introducing a sister we never knew about. Next, establishing a captain and vision that seemed misaligned with ingrained Star Trek values. Also, a visual aesthetic out of line with canon. And lastly, being put behind the coveted CBS-All access paywall.
Then, on the other side, we have Seth McFarlene’s seemingly slap-stick take on a Trek-like universe. But to much surprise, The Orville embraced much of the optimistic episodic feel-good qualities of the TNG-era of Trek. Now, don’t get me wrong, The Orville isn’t Star Trek, but with many of the same writers, directors, and even actors participating in this grand new Seth McFarlene vision, it was close enough. And it was free to watch.
What makes this battle of fan against fan so odd, is that for the most part, it is an intra-fandom war. An enormous amount of The Orville fans are Star Trek fans. But the rift over the direction of Star Trek Discovery, along with it being put behind CBS-All Access, aided in this great divide, with a large amount of the fandom swearing off Discovery, and the other portion embracing Orville.
Personally, I don’t find it an either-or situation. I think you could love both, or love one and hate the other. But this organic occurrence seems to have set up the perfect storm for toxic fandom to fester.
Again, we have differences, but let your criticism come from a place of love. If you don’t have anything good to say, sometimes it’s better to say nothing at all. And from the enormous amount of hate I’ve seen on various Star Trek-related Facebook groups, I have to simply say, keep it to yourself.
Next, let’s take a look at the stages of a Toxic Fandom, as declared by fantasy author Sam Sykes on Twitter.
- I love this.
- I own this.
- I control this.
- I can’t control this.
- I hate this.
- I must destroy this.
The simple way to deal with toxic fandom is to follow the golden rule. Be an educator. Feel free to state your opinion of disagreement about a character or a storyline, but also attempt to convey your reasoning politely. That’s what we try to do each week on our podcast.
“Your rights to the fandom ends, where the next persons begin.”
In dealing with Toxic Fandom, I invoke the Three Tenets of a Nerdom, as conveyed by Adam Rogers of Wired, but twisted ever so slightly to include fandom.
- A fan must not harm another fan, or through inaction, allow any fan to come to harm.
- Fans must cooperate with other fans, except where such cooperation would violate the previous tenet.
- Fans must protect the existence of fandom, except where such protection violates the first two tenets.
Finally, in the words of one of my favorite podcasters, Jeff Cannata, “Think about what you put out into the world and help make it a better place.”
