(12-12-2019, 03:19 AM)classicdrogn Wrote: I feel like the phrase "toxic fandom" has been thrown around so much in the past few years that it's lost its meaning. Is it just people who complain "they changed it, now it sucks" and/or "they didn't change it, it still sucks," possibly at the same time? Sure seems like it's "anyone who doesn't like this media item I support" while dismissing any actual artistic criticism at this point. Doubly so if you can find some excuse to hang gender or racial issues off of it.
The toxic fandom winds up tarring the ones who just don't like it because it isn't "their" media, if only because the toxic part winds up being the more visible component of the dissatisfaction with the product, because they take especial efforts to not only complain, but to try to destroy.
The toxic part of the fandom is the part that was dropping review bombs on sites before the Ghostbusters was even in theaters. The toxic part of the fandom is the part that drove Leslie off Twitter with hate mail and threats. The toxic part of the fandom is the part that was the Sad Rabid Puppies movement having steam in trying to damage/taint/destroy the Hugo awards. The toxic part of the fandom is the part that doxxed and sent death threats and SWATting attacks at Zoe Quinn and Anita Sarkeesian. The toxic part of the fandom is the part that doesn't just complain about the "new version" and "modern media" that they don't like, they actively try to tear it down in some way or another so that the rest of us can't have it.
"You know how parents tell you everything's going to fine, but you know they're lying to make you feel better? Everything's going to be fine." - The Doctor