On Social Justice Stuff

Had posted this to LJ but figured some fandomsecrets people might want to see it too

I've been thinking a lot about what is, apparently, known as Moff's Law in social justice-y circles.

Quote will be long, because I'm hard-pressed to find a one-sentence summation of the "law" in the wall of text provided as its definition [ETA there is one in the comments to the post, my bad]:

Of all the varieties of irritating comment out there, the absolute most annoying has to be “Why can’t you just watch the movie for what it is??? Why can’t you just enjoy it? Why do you have to analyze it???”

If you have posted such a comment, or if you are about to post such a comment, here or anywhere else, let me just advise you: Shut up. Shut the fuck up. Shut your goddamn fucking mouth. SHUT. UP.

First of all, when we analyze art, when we look for deeper meaning in it, we are enjoying it for what it is. Because that is one of the things about art, be it highbrow, lowbrow, mainstream, or avant-garde: Some sort of thought went into its making — even if the thought was, “I’m going to do this as thoughtlessly as possible”! — and as a result, some sort of thought can be gotten from its reception. That is why, among other things, artists (including, for instance, James Cameron) really like to talk about their work.

Now, that doesn’t mean you have to think about a work of art. I don’t know anyone who thinks every work they encounter ought to only be enjoyed through conscious, active analysis — or if I do, they’re pretty annoying themselves. And I know many people who prefer not to think about much of what they consume, and with them I have no argument. I also have no argument with people who disagree with another person’s thoughts about a work of art. That should go without saying. Finally, this should also go without saying, but since it apparently doesn’t: Believe me, the person who is annoying you so much by thinking about the art? They have already considered your revolutionary “just enjoy it” strategy, because it is not actually revolutionary at all. It is the default state for most of humanity.

So when you go out of your way to suggest that people should be thinking less — that not using one’s capacity for reason is an admirable position to take, and one that should be actively advocated — you are not saying anything particularly intelligent. And unless you live on a parallel version of Earth where too many people are thinking too deeply and critically about the world around them and what’s going on in their own heads, you’re not helping anything; on the contrary, you’re acting as an advocate for entropy.

And most annoyingly of all, you’re contributing to the fucking conversation yourselves when you make your stupid, stupid comments. You are basically saying, “I think people shouldn’t think so much and share their thoughts, that’s my thought that I have to share.” If you really think people should just enjoy the movie without thinking about it, then why the fuck did you (1) click on the post in the first place, and (2) bother to leave a comment? If it bugs you so much, GO WATCH A GODDAMN FUNNY CAT VIDEO.

I've thought about this one constantly in my many years since leaving feminist circles (it's not just a feminist thing, but that's where I saw it most.) It drives me crazy and hits me as completely wrong nowadays, even as I tried for many years in those-a-days to live by it. (I will say, though, that I think it came about in response to Avatar, and I do think there's a lot that's critique-worthy about that film. I just don't like the implication that anyone who just wants to enjoy something needs to "Shut up. Shut the fuck up. Shut your goddamn fucking mouth.")

But in all my years of cringing quietly at Moff's Law and similar, I never felt I could say why. How can you argue against people telling you to be thoughtful? Especially when they rightly point out that thoughtfulness doesn't necessarily diminish enjoyment anyway?

I could never find the words, and that's what the "Law" relies on you not being able to do, I think. You can't argue with it, so you're a cat-video-watcher (!!), revealing either your ass or, at the very least, your utter lack of intellect. Ha HA! (How an intellectless fool is supposed to be an advocate for anything, or precisely what the phrase "an advocate of entropy" is meant to mean, I leave as an exercise for the reader. It sounds fascinating, though, and like the sort of thing that would make an excellent villain in a sci-fi epic. Or a role-playing game. Advocate of Entropy: +2 to all Chaos rolls.)

But I've thought a long time, and I think perhaps I've hit on what it misses.

That is that downtime is an important part of everyone's life. Perhaps I have simply not met the greatest of wo/men, but even the smartest person I have ever encountered cannot use her brain full tilt every moment of every day. Many of us have jobs or school, both things which, depending on what we do there, may be very mentally taxing and demanding. If we spend long hours at either, we may come home exhausted and depleted. I know that I do -- providing services to very needy people with very complex problems and, often, very little tact about describing them requires all the energy I have. Some days even bothering to consume media is difficult, and I find myself playing online games because the rhythmic complexity of mathematics and (circumscribed) strategy is much more what my mind is capable of at that moment than the more expansive question "What does this work of art say about our culture, and what ought I take away from it?"

I don't say this to win pity for my exhaustion, and I'm sure someone who loves this Law will want to claim I do. I'm not; I'm simply saying that I don't think it's an unusual experience for even the most intelligent and conscientious person to feel her "batteries" are "drained." And different people have different ways of dealing with that drain. For some people, their fandoms are their safe haven, their place to put those burdens down and enjoy.

Note that I do not say "enjoy mindlessly" -- for me at least, even heavy exhaustion doesn't "turn off my brain." I'm still thinking and pondering. But it may be rejuvenating to me to ponder the nuances of the relationships between beloved, familiar characters, but further draining to me to, say, ponder the nuances of their racial and cultural makeup and what the creator meant by it all.

When people say they just want to relax and enjoy it, they are not necessarily saying that it's improper or not okay to ask about those larger issues. They're saying that that particular media, work, fandom, whatever, is something they associate with their downtime, not their uptime. They're asking for their need for relaxation to be respected, not because they don't care about larger issues (they may or may not, but this says nothing about it either way) but because they are human beings with needs for comforting, relaxing routines.

Now, of course, the question becomes: But am I then saying that it's not possible or appropriate to ask if someone's routine is acceptable? If someone's routine were, say, to watch material that was profoundly and obviously *istic and the person watched only that and kicked back his feet and aaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh... well, yes, I think that might be questionable.

But the thing is, if what you want is for that person to ask why those things are relaxing to him and come up with some kind of coherent answer, you don't get that by saying that he is a zombie who might as well watch cats act silly because thoughtful people can look for *isms in their most recharge-needy of downtimes. You get that by beginning with the premise that downtime is a part of human life, that people's routines for downtimes are profoundly comforting to them, and that that comfort may well come as much from the routine as from any overarching benefit of the media consumed (or any agreement with the problematic elements.)

You get that by clearly recognizing people's humanity, even though it gets in the way. You get that by not sacrificing the reality of human life to the theory of everything is examination-worthy. (It's not examination-worthiness that the Advocates of Entropy are challenging you about, I'd bet.)

"Oh, just shut up and enjoy it" is not any kind of "revolutionary strategy" (yes, I know that was sarcasm.) It's not advocacy of anything. It's a real person talking about real life, snapping at someone who insists she be in some unreal state of always-on and flat-out insulting her intelligence if she admits that, like anyone else including her interlocutor, she is not and cannot be.

I really feel such things as Moff's Law (and the horrible corollaries that often get trotted out in discussions of kink, commanding people to "examine their desires") are not only wrongheaded but deeply destructive when misused, and that their misuse is probably more common than their legitimate use, too.

(And how sad is it that I felt the need even in posting this to be as erudite as I could, in order to forestall an inevitable trollish response that indicates my disagreement itself must reveal me to be that unintelligent person or braindead zombie?)