thefourthvine: Two people fucking, rearview: sex is the universal fandom. (Default)
Keep Hoping Machine Running ([personal profile] thefourthvine) wrote2009-02-20 12:04 pm

[Poll] The Science of Slashiness

Recently, [livejournal.com profile] cimness posted a graph of genius, comparing level of canon gay and quality of canon writing across several fandoms.

I, of course, immediately looked at it and thought: this calls for science. Because clearly what we need are definitive numbers for each of these values for many, many fandoms, so that they can be plotted on graphs. This will make me HAPPY. Possibly it will also make you happy - or perhaps you are just interested in increasing overall happiness in the universe! - in which case I direct you behind the cut.

ETA: [livejournal.com profile] lolitakun has provided us with some preliminary scientific results here. Go and behold!



A quick note on the selection of the fandoms: I picked ones I thought a lot of people would have opinions on. If I left something critical out, feel free to tell me in the comments.

A quick note on voting: When I say "slashy," I include femslash. Buffy/Faith, Gabrielle/Xena - these are pairings worth considering! Also, if you haven't seen an episode of the show, please don't vote on canon writing quality. (Ideally, you would have seen three! Or even more!) But if you think you can make a fair estimate of slashiness based on vids or YouTube pieces or transcripts, by all means, vote on that.

ETA: For quality, 1 = worse than anything you could find on fanfiction.net, even if you were funded by a grant solely for the purpose of finding the worst writing the world has ever known. 10 = genius unparalleled. For slashiness, 1 = straighter than a ruler. 10 = they could suck cocks or finger each other right there on the screen and it would only reduce the overall slashiness. Thanks for pointing out the ambiguity, [livejournal.com profile] lolaraincoat!

And now it's time for...SCIENCE.

[Poll #1352713]

[identity profile] rheanna27.livejournal.com 2009-02-20 08:56 pm (UTC)(link)
I started thinking about graphs -- in Excel! Pie charts! OMG PIVOT TABLES! -- and then I got too excited and had to go and lie down for a bit. I am WHOLLY IN FAVOUR of this very scientific exercise.

[identity profile] thefourthvine.livejournal.com 2009-02-21 12:00 am (UTC)(link)
I am totally planning Excel-related shenanigans with these numbers. How could I not? And yes, it IS very exciting. Join me in my science squee! Send me some graphs! And pie charts! I had not planned on them, but I see now that I was limited and wrong in my thinking!

*bounces in numerical glee*
celli: a calculator and papers with numbers on them, captioned "celli" (accounting Celli)

[personal profile] celli 2009-02-21 04:17 am (UTC)(link)
ANALYSIS YAY!