• Welcome to the Fantasy Writing Forums. Register Now to join us!

Women in fantasy

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'll repeat myself. It's about signal to noise ratio. Do you expect to bust everyones chops if they don't balance their background characters? Should there be some one whose job it is to count how many female and male background characters there are in every book and every tv show and every film? And if it's not balanced enough, shame on them? Where does it end? Do we start counting guys and gals in the Where's Waldo pictures? There's a point where it gets to be too much.

If you nitpick at every old thing, people will stop listening and the real important stuff gets lost in the noise.

Also when you set your parameters to only include vampires, to me that's a bit of a strawman. What if I set the parameters to witches in Buffy. If memory serves they're all female. Is that fair or equal? Why not a warlock or two? If I set my parameters right I can make the category support any argument I come up with.

I don't know about Saellys, but Chilari doesn't seem to be advocating criticizing anyone, just observing patterns. I think you're attempting to counter arguments she's not actually making.

(My own thoughts, if anyone cares: if you're going to be talking to or about a writer, look at that writer on an individual level, and observe everything they do. If you're going to be talking about a genre, look at everything that genre does. That includes minor characters as well as major characters. However, it's a judgment call which observations, if any, lead to criticism.)
 
Last edited:

Chilari

Staff
Moderator
I was using vampires in Buffy as an example - it's something I've noticed recently because I've been watching the series on Netflix. The vast majority of demons are also male - Anya is one exception and one episode had a female demon cult, but the rest are all male. As for witches, that's part of the same problem - for witches, the default is female (though there is one male witch, Michael, in season 3 who appears in one episode) and here because we're talking about witches, yes, it is the tendency to default to female on those and that shouldn't be the case either.

When you say "we can ignore this because it's not as important as something else", you're failing to realise that they're all symptoms of the same thing. Yes, more attention should be given to main characters, but that doesn't mean no attention should be given to others. I'm not saying there needs to be some group policing this, I'm saying we need to discuss it to raise awareness that it is happening and to encourage creators to think about it and if possible for the context, change a few characters from male to female just so it doesn't look like their world is populated almost entirely by men. Half the population of the world are women, and unless you're setting your story in China or somewhere else where a one child policy and the assumption that men are superior is in place, or in a military or naval context prior to women being accepted into armed forces, then half the background characters should be female too.

But if the only people your half-female main cast ever interact with while they're on their journey or quest are men men men, it creates an impression that this world is only made up of men. The default to male mentality is reinforced.
 

Devor

Fiery Keeper of the Hat
Moderator
I happen to think it's better to talk about things other than male/female protagonists. I think if you really want to make progress, it's best to take the perspective of:

How can a male author write well by women while still writing the story he wants to write.

Don't default to male is a perfect talking point if you approach the situation from that perspective. So is give women agency. So is lighten up on the sex. So is give women an arc that isn't about being a woman.

To me, those are exactly the kinds of things people should be saying. They're exactly the kinds of things which - once the antagonism goes away - male authors will listen to.

But write more about female protagonists? That's where you start telling people what kind of stories to write. I could agree with the sentiment loosely, but if I don't feel that writer's passion about the idea of writing from a female POV, then I have no take away to do anything better and nothing has been fixed. And anyways, sometimes you get inspiration from the minor characters. A minor female character who's adviser to the king in one book drops the idea of female advisers into the cultural mindset, and might lead to a book about one by somebody else. And once I've written just a few pages about one, I might really get that passion to explore the character further.

But in general, the rule for persuasion is:

If you want people to help, don't ask them to care too much, think too hard or do a whole lot.

I think that leads to, again, a dialogue which focuses on the secondary characters. I think that's where dialogue can get the most progress.
 
Last edited:
I know I'm totally necro'ing this monster of a thread, but I think this blog calls for it...

What Boys Hear | Adrienne Becker

It's aliiiive, it's alliiiiive.

But seriously, girls are actually complex and boys need to see evidence of this? Pshaw.

But no, seriously seriously, I'd say boys/guys/non-females need to see evidence of this wayyyy more than girls do. People can say that girls, women and females need to get out there and take charge and if there were more strong people in real life there'd be more strong people in fiction all they want, but the truth of the matter is that when girls at all stand up for themselves or are a little active in not being harassed, they usually get threatened with violence, murder and sexual violence. Who are the people threatening them? Usually not women.

On an aside, I don't know if it actually is a changing consensus in the world, or a result of following this(/these) thread(s), following Whatever, the recent Steubenville case (which is nearby to me), and the ridiculous amount of... [removed for being political] ...but to me, a white cisgendered adult male, it seems like sexism and everything related to it is more prevalent in the public mind and more not OK than ever.

If it's not a public thing and it's only that it's more noticeable to me and more not OK than ever to me, then I am very appreciative to this(/these) thread(s) for bringing it to my attention.

Also, I know that most of us are still struggling writers with zero-few published works under our belts, but if you aren't aware of John Scalzi's Convention Harassment Policy, you may want to check it out and if you agree, co-sign: whatever.scalzi.com/2013/07/02/my-new-convention-harassment-policy/
 

Trick

Auror
the truth of the matter is that when girls at all stand up for themselves or are a little active in not being harassed, they usually get threatened with violence, murder and sexual violence. Who are the people threatening them? Usually not women.

I agree with the majority of your post but I think you need to revisit this thought. At all? a little active? I've seen everything from a woman telling a man to back off at a bar to massive feminist marches and all things in between where nothing remotely similar to what you are suggesting happened. Usually is sometimes a useless word and that may be the problem. And, basically, all I'm saying is that this is a blanket statement that comes across the wrong way, an offensive way. If I'm wrong and you did mean it exactly as it sounds, then I apologize and say that I disagree with you wholeheartedly but to each their own.
 

A. E. Lowan

Forum Mom
Leadership
I agree with the majority of your post but I think you need to revisit this thought. At all? a little active? I've seen everything from a woman telling a man to back off at a bar to massive feminist marches and all things in between where nothing remotely similar to what you are suggesting happened. Usually is sometimes a useless word and that may be the problem. And, basically, all I'm saying is that this is a blanket statement that comes across the wrong way, an offensive way. If I'm wrong and you did mean it exactly as it sounds, then I apologize and say that I disagree with you wholeheartedly but to each their own.

Actually, I believe Zero Angel meant it exactly as it sounds, because that's pretty much what happens, cross-culturally. It's worse in some places and more subtle in others, but it happens none-the-less. As girls we're taught that "boys are only mean to you if they like you." And as women we're sent the message loud and clear that "bad things happen to bad girls." There are still places even here in the US where female victims of sexual assault are questioned about their behavior and clothing choices prior to being attacked, and if those choices were somehow "wrong" then they were somehow "asking for it." And in parts of the world, just going out in public alone is transgressive enough behavior to be "asking for it."
 

Trick

Auror
Actually, I believe Zero Angel meant it exactly as it sounds, because that's pretty much what happens, cross-culturally. It's worse in some places and more subtle in others, but it happens none-the-less. As girls we're taught that "boys are only mean to you if they like you." And as women we're sent the message loud and clear that "bad things happen to bad girls." There are still places even here in the US where female victims of sexual assault are questioned about their behavior and clothing choices prior to being attacked, and if those choices were somehow "wrong" then they were somehow "asking for it." And in parts of the world, just going out in public alone is transgressive enough behavior to be "asking for it."

Since this forum is not for debating politics I'll try to avoid that vein of this discussion. I am aware that there are bad men in the world. They do bad things, often times to women, but also to other men. Bad things happen to bad girls? Bad things happen to bad boys too. We are also taught that. And boys that are mean to girls on the playground to show affection need to be taught the right way. However, the differences that exist in the experiences of men and women are something that I appreciate. You both seem to be saying that a woman who stands up for herself will be raped, beaten or worse... usually. That's ridiculous. How many women stand up for themselves everyday? Many! If they did it in a crime ridden area at night with no friends around then we've got a bad situation. Yes, if a man did that he might get mugged or killed but it would be very likely to have worse repercussions for a woman. Unfortunately, there are criminals who prey on women that way and I'm of a mind to make their punishments more severe and to make it easier for victims to come forward in any way possible. There are also countries that have a very different view of these things than my own and I can do very little to change that. There are also women who have done things consensually and then called it something else. They hurt the cases of true victims and that's a shame. The system is broken blah blah blah. Nothing I can do but my part.

My message in a nutshell - I find it offensive, as a man, when women say that they think my whole sex is (usually) violent, sexist and demeaning to women.

If that were the case, why do women still date/love/marry men? Why haven't they revolted against us in a military way? I believe women and men are people equally with differences far and wide that can be strengths or flaws. Not all women are one way and neither are all men, not even usually.
 
Last edited:
I've been debating whether or not to post this, but I think it might actually be relevant here.

Prior to going to college in a town full of hippies, I rarely encountered kids my age who didn't act in accordance with gender stereotypes. The few who acted more unusually tended to be social rejects--not necessarily bullied, but seldom spoken to by their peers. I can't prove causation here, but it seems like reasonable speculation to me that the reason so many girls who seemed to be intelligent only expressed interest in girly hobbies, girly activities, and girly aspirations was that they didn't want to risk social rejection.

At college, everyone seems to feel safer. They can say something weird, do something weird, be something weird, and no one else will tell them they can't. But whenever I go back home, I feel like I'm leaving my little bubble of security, and I think there are still a lot of towns that don't have a bubble to hide in.

Fiction was my first exposure to women who weren't afraid--women who could be whatever they wanted and be praised and admired for it. It provided a model for me to work off of, and I think it might provide the same model for a girl who's debating whether to do something different with her life.
 
Last edited:

Trick

Auror
Fiction was my first exposure to women who weren't afraid--women who could be whatever they wanted and be praised and admired for it. It provided a model for me to work off of, and I think it might provide the same model for a girl who's debating whether to do something different with her life.

I think this is one of the many reasons I'll encourage my kids to read more and watch less. It seems many authors have the wisdom and insight to portray women, and men, in a light that shows children and young adults the possibilities, not the strictures. So many movies and TV shows portray the stereotypes - women who love shopping and gossiping etc and men who love sports and talk endlessly about their obsession with sex. Even in shows I enjoy, ie Friends, the one man who doesn't like sports is also needy and insecure to the point of hilarity (really, chandler was quite funny) but rarely do I see a male character who doesn't fit the stereotype and isn't also portrayed as the weak, unmanly guy. I get a lot more enjoyment out of the characters who break the mold in a good way, male or female, and I see it much more often in books than I do in movies and TV shows.
 
I agree with the majority of your post but I think you need to revisit this thought. At all? a little active? I've seen everything from a woman telling a man to back off at a bar to massive feminist marches and all things in between where nothing remotely similar to what you are suggesting happened. Usually is sometimes a useless word and that may be the problem. And, basically, all I'm saying is that this is a blanket statement that comes across the wrong way, an offensive way. If I'm wrong and you did mean it exactly as it sounds, then I apologize and say that I disagree with you wholeheartedly but to each their own.

Hmm. I surprised you've seen a woman tell a man to back off at a bar actually. I've seen this in fiction, but in real life I've only ever see women pretend to be nice and try to get away, because they know if they're actually rude it will turn south on them, usually they are only successful in getting away with the assistance of other friends, or else they will try to avoid conflict as much as they possibly can. May I ask what sort of area you're from? I'm a bit more rural in Western PA/Northeastern OH. I can imagine something like what you're describing happen in a liberal metropolitan area.

That said, I suppose what I was mostly referring to is when a woman stands up for herself alone. In marches and parades there's some degree of anonymity or at least protection by being a part of a crowd. But when you have instances like what happened to Anita Sarkeesian "Tropes vs Women in Video Games" and what happened when Adria Richards tweeted a photo of two guys making sexual jokes. As the article about Anita Sarkeesian mentioned, the same sort of abuse has recently been leveled at Jennifer Hepler, Aisha Tyler, and Felicia Day.

Not to mention just in general, whenever a group of people disapprove of a woman, whether that's a woman with power, a popular woman, a celebrity, or whatever, it's almost always going to be sexual threats. I'm not saying guys don't get sexual threats, but I have never heard anyone casually suggest a law-abiding guy should be R'ed (I have heard it said about guys that break specific laws and pretty much universally applied to anyone going to jail ever).

To bring it back on topic: It's the same thing in fiction really. When a guy gets captured in an adult novel, I'm usually not worried (I'm not saying I'm never worried, but sexual violence is almost never a possibility), but when a girl or woman gets captured, there's a pit that forms inside my stomach as I dread what the villain is going to do.

...They do bad things, often times to women, but also to other men. Bad things happen to bad girls? Bad things happen to bad boys too. We are also taught that....You both seem to be saying that a woman who stands up for herself will be R'ed, beaten or worse... usually. That's ridiculous. How many women stand up for themselves everyday? Many! If they did it in a crime ridden area at night with no friends around then we've got a bad situation. Yes, if a man did that he might get mugged or killed but it would be very likely to have worse repercussions for a woman.

...I find it offensive, as a man, when women say that they think my whole sex is (usually) violent, sexist and demeaning to women.

If that were the case, why do women still date/love/marry men? Why haven't they revolted against us in a military way? I believe women and men are people equally with differences far and wide that can be strengths or flaws. Not all women are one way and neither are all men, not even usually.
I think the difference here is what constitutes a "bad girl" and a "bad boy" though. To many, a "bad girl" is anyone that doesn't go along with the crowd, or anyone that isn't in a burka or was in the wrong place.

What I find offensive is the idea that men are so depraved that the only thing preventing them from R'ing girls is the girl being in garments covering her from head to toe. I'm going to go out on a limb and say if a girl walks up to me naked as the day they were born, I'm not going to R them. So the idea that a woman is "asking for it" blows my mind. To be fair, this is one area where speculative fiction does an alright job. If R does occur in a novel, it's not usually because a woman was wearing the "wrong thing", and usually because the one committing the crime is depraved. Outside of fiction, we almost immediately start to justify it in any way possible.

As far as why women haven't revolted or hate men, etc, well, quite a lot of them have and do. Many people that choose to not be heterosexual (as opposed to the ones that are born that way) do it because of traumatic experiences. A lot of other women are socially conditioned to accept everything that's handed to them, and many women believe that just like not every American hates Canada, not every guy is representative of what they find distasteful about men.

I used to hate all men (I'm a guy by the way if that wasn't apparent), and thought that all men (with very few exceptions) were disgusting pigs that if the opportunity came up to take advantage of someone, they would, and at the very least they would lie, cheat and steal in order to get anyone into bed with them, would not stay loyal and basically were heartless when it came to treating women like they mattered. Now I'm starting to believe that a lot of what was claimed to be biological differences between men and women is more likely social conditioning and if people are raised better or have better role models they can turn out differently in spite of biology, but that original belief is something I held for a good 8-12 years of my life (from 10-24 or so).

To keep on topic, how does this affect men and women in my novels? Well, I have a lot of jerks for characters to be honest. I suppose without consciously being aware of it, I still go off the assumption that most guys are crap. Interestingly, I don't usually have male villains be evil because of that though, it's usually because of more willful reasons (such as jealousy, being in a cult, wanting to weaken the world's magick so that demons are able to invade because they are a demon, etc). The crap characters are usually minor obstacles or showcases of how crappy locations/people are.

And surprisingly enough, some of my women villains are crappy in the way that I usually think of guys being o_O granted, the one was secretly a demon that was probably male, but appeared as female for a good portion of the first book, the other one is just a complete jerk and is only mentioned in the first book (with larger roles in future books).

Now that I'm a little more aware of that, I'm going to have to make sure I don't fall into any habits with future villains.
 
Maybe it's because I am more tuned in to geek culture than I ever have been before is why I keep seeing all of these examples of terrible things. But here is a summary of what happened in 2012 for geek culture (which I believe as a speculative fiction author, I am solidly placed into):

Daily Dot Article

Again, not only are we (as spec fic authors) existing within this culture, a lot of these examples are actually of women in fantasy, so completely on-topic.
 
Maybe it's because I am more tuned in to geek culture than I ever have been before is why I keep seeing all of these examples of terrible things. But here is a summary of what happened in 2012 for geek culture (which I believe as a speculative fiction author, I am solidly placed into):

Daily Dot Article

Again, not only are we (as spec fic authors) existing within this culture, a lot of these examples are actually of women in fantasy, so completely on-topic.

Looks like they've got all the usual suspects. I am so sick of this manufactured controversy over how the recent Tomb Raider, one of the most feminist games I've ever played, is supposedly sexist. (To be fair, they also have some actual news in there, like all those cases of rape threats.)
 

Mindfire

Istar
Um, a minor point, if you're going to point to people who've been abused for standing up to The Man, Anita Sarkeesian is not a particularly good example. All indications are that she intentionally provoked the backlash she received (or at least indulged or enabled it) so that she would gain martyr points and thus more publicity and funding for her project. Furthermore, the actual points she makes in her videos are not terribly insightful and sometimes contradictory. And just to put the cherry on the sundae, while she has publicly made much hay out of the vicious and hateful messages she has received, she has never at any point (to my knowledge) attempted to engage in discussion with her more civil and thoughtful critics who have legitimate points to make and questions to ask about her work (unlike the good folks we've got in this thread). I wouldn't call this "standing up for your beliefs". And while she isn't nearly as bad as the vitriol-spewing neanderthals who resorted to cyberbullying because they couldn't form a more coherent response to her message, I still wouldn't call what she's done laudable. As I said, I don't find her videos to be terribly insightful anyway.
 
Actually, I was referring to the various rape threats associated with fighting games in the past year or two. The community has really come under fire lately.
 
Um, a minor point, if you're going to point to people who've been abused for standing up to The Man, Anita Sarkeesian is not a particularly good example. All indications are that she intentionally provoked the backlash she received (or at least indulged or enabled it) so that she would gain martyr points and thus more publicity and funding for her project. Furthermore, the actual points she makes in her videos are not terribly insightful and sometimes contradictory. And just to put the cherry on the sundae, while she has publicly made much hay out of the vicious and hateful messages she has received, she has never at any point (to my knowledge) attempted to engage in discussion with her more civil and thoughtful critics who have legitimate points to make and questions to ask about her work (unlike the good folks we've got in this thread). I wouldn't call this "standing up for your beliefs". And while she isn't nearly as bad as the vitriol-spewing neanderthals who resorted to cyberbullying because they couldn't form a more coherent response to her message, I still wouldn't call what she's done laudable. As I said, I don't find her videos to be terribly insightful anyway.
I don't care what your message is or whether it's laudable or not, but R threats are never OK. Maybe you believe that she uses them to get more funding and you're entitled to your opinion, but I'm not going to threaten to R you for having that opinion. And again, she was only one of MANY that were mentioned. Also, it's not standing up to "the Man", it's standing up period that I was referring to.

I also disagree with your assessment here or know what "all indications" refers to. The only indications I've seen are that she did not take down the vitriol—according to her so people can see what's going on—has personally profited from the publicity, and has spoken out against the reactions to her and others.

It seems like this may be venturing off-topic, so if you want to discuss her merits (or lack thereof) with me, then feel free to PM.
 
Also @ Everyone: be wary of the search engines and maybe abbreviate words that we don't want Google associating Mythic Scribes with. That's why I keep saying "R this" and "R that"
 
I don't feel like we can have the conversation without the word. The word is shocking by its mere mention, and I think it should be shocking. If we call it R, we might as well be calling it surprise sex.

I'm not sure I get the specific paranoia over this one word. When I posted a topic about the creation of homemade bombs for use in domestic terrorism, no one panicked and told me to call it T so Google wouldn't think we were Al Qaeda. But if we really can't have the word, let's just ban the topic like we keep considering doing.
 

Trick

Auror
Hmm. I surprised you've seen a woman tell a man to back off at a bar actually. I've seen this in fiction, but in real life I've only ever see women pretend to be nice and try to get away, because they know if they're actually rude it will turn south on them, usually they are only successful in getting away with the assistance of other friends, or else they will try to avoid conflict as much as they possibly can. May I ask what sort of area you're from? I'm a bit more rural in Western PA/Northeastern OH. I can imagine something like what you're describing happen in a liberal metropolitan area.

Yes, I've seen lone women stand up for themselves in a bar, on more than one occasion. I've also seen a women calmly try to avoid a guy who's being too forceful only to have other people, both guys and girls, get up and tell him to leave her alone; only to find out later that they didn't even know her and were just helping out.
Actually, I live in a conservative rural area. That may seem impossible to some people but where I live the women are often doing the same things as the guys: Mud Bogging trucks, riding motorcycles, cutting down and splitting firewood, and all manner of things often falsely thought of as 'guys only.' I'm originally from near Seattle and I wasn't raised in a rural environment but I've been here now for about 12 years and it's awesome. My wife learned to use a chainsaw when she was a teenager. She also loves shopping, specifically for purses and shoes. I mention the second part because I don't want to give the impression of some old time tv show with country ladies who hate everything 'girly.' She, as so many women in my area, is a real woman who may fit a stereotype or two but breaks plenty of others. Stereotypes are what they are and some aren't actually bad - I'm Irish and I love whiskey and Guinness, a stereotype I'm proud to be part of.

What I find offensive is the idea that men are so depraved that the only thing preventing them from R'ing girls is the girl being in garments covering her from head to toe. I'm going to go out on a limb and say if a girl walks up to me naked as the day they were born, I'm not going to R them. So the idea that a woman is "asking for it" blows my mind. To be fair, this is one area where speculative fiction does an alright job. If R does occur in a novel, it's not usually because a woman was wearing the "wrong thing", and usually because the one committing the crime is depraved. Outside of fiction, we almost immediately start to justify it in any way possible.

I agree, no matter how a woman is dressed R is abominable and despicable in all situations. The only caveat I'd add is that sometimes there are definite cases where R is claimed and proven false. I don't know why any woman would do that beyond having a history of abuse that is't brought to light but it does hurt other R cases and that is a terrible shame.

When you say, "we almost immediately start to justify it in any way possible." maybe I'm not sure how you mean it but I disagree. I think the media might do that but I don't think the average citizen does. I've said before, I think any punishment is too light for a R..ist. I'm in favor of harsher sentences for R, murder, child abuse etc...

As far as why women haven't revolted or hate men, etc, well, quite a lot of them have and do. Many people that choose to not be heterosexual (as opposed to the ones that are born that way) do it because of traumatic experiences. A lot of other women are socially conditioned to accept everything that's handed to them, and many women believe that just like not every American hates Canada, not every guy is representative of what they find distasteful about men.

That analogy is poor because I don't think I've ever met someone who hates Canada. Canadians are awesome! I know of disagreements with their government structure but that's about it.

I don't think I need to restate my feelings on cases like that. It makes my skin crawl to even think about that kind of evil. I'm not surprised by the decision of some of the victims.

I was conditioned to believe everything that was handed to me... and I rejected a lot of it anyway. So did the women in my life. They are their own people and pavlovian approaches by authority figures didn't hold them back.

I used to hate all men (I'm a guy by the way if that wasn't apparent), and thought that all men (with very few exceptions) were disgusting pigs that if the opportunity came up to take advantage of someone, they would, and at the very least they would lie, cheat and steal in order to get anyone into bed with them, would not stay loyal and basically were heartless when it came to treating women like they mattered. Now I'm starting to believe that a lot of what was claimed to be biological differences between men and women is more likely social conditioning and if people are raised better or have better role models they can turn out differently in spite of biology, but that original belief is something I held for a good 8-12 years of my life (from 10-24 or so).

Whatever experience or information that led you to believe that about your own sex was unfortunate. Yes, there are many men out there with less self-control than lots of dogs I know. They typically had bad parents. As you say, better role models and being raised by conscientious parents is the solution. I firmly believe it is the responsibility of men to fix the man problem. Why are there so many dirtbags? Because fathers don't teach their sons. They don't work every day to mold their sons in to good men. When they do, amazing things can happen.

As a final note, this is off topic as you say. I'd add that it also isn't in a way. I think it's our responsibility as writers to protray women correctly in our work: as people first! I use the women in my life as the molds for my female characters whenever I can because so many of them are fantastic people and I love to see how they are on the pages of a book :)
 
Last edited:

Mindfire

Istar
I don't care what your message is or whether it's laudable or not, but R threats are never OK. Maybe you believe that she uses them to get more funding and you're entitled to your opinion, but I'm not going to threaten to R you for having that opinion. And again, she was only one of MANY that were mentioned. Also, it's not standing up to "the Man", it's standing up period that I was referring to.

I also disagree with your assessment here or know what "all indications" refers to. The only indications I've seen are that she did not take down the vitriol—according to her so people can see what's going on—has personally profited from the publicity, and has spoken out against the reactions to her and others.

It seems like this may be venturing off-topic, so if you want to discuss her merits (or lack thereof) with me, then feel free to PM.

Well of course r**e threats are not okay. This should be an obvious and therefore unnecessary statement. My point was not to say that the threats were okay. My point is that Anita Sarkeesian is not someone we should seek to canonize into sainthood. There's a big difference between someone standing up for their beliefs on principle and someone intentionally trolling the internet to make a profit.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top