Larries as a Functioning Cult Based on Exploitation of Vulnerable Fans by Big-Name Larries: an unedited essay.
Introduction/The Function of Labels
Labels, Identity, and Vulnerability
Cult of Personality, Abuse Tactics
I. INTRODUCTION/THE FUNCTION OF LABELS
So, basically as soon as Harry/Louis shippers decided to repurpose a contentious ship name into a label of identity as Larries, I was like, “Huh. That’s not good.”
It’s not good. Here’s the thing: a loose group of people who all believe in, or enjoy, or whatever, a thing, is just a group of people who like a thing. That’s a fandom, that’s a family, that’s a whatever. “People who ship Harry/Louis” is a totally different animal from “The Larries.” Much in the same way that “people who voted for Bernie Sanders in the primaries” are not the same as “Bernie Bros” or that “men who are misogynists” are not all “MRAs” or that not all people who believe in Jesus Christ as a religious icon are [insert named variant of Christianity here], or whatever. Assigning a name to a group inherently changes the dynamics both internally and externally of that group.
There is no logical reason that any pairing’s fans need a name, and it’s USUALLY something assigned by media outsiders looking for branding money -- Team Edward versus Team Jacob, for example. It’s a way to reduce and exploit consumers as commodities and make money by minimizing their ability to like other things. If you’re Team Edward, you’re going to buy a shit-ton of Twilight/Edward/Cullen stuff and you can be manipulated into spending MORE money than you would, otherwise, by “helping your side win” over Team Jacob (who are also spending a ton of money on basically the exact same stuff, and the real winners are the people who make money off the merch.)
Larries, though, are not about making money -- they’re still likely to spend money, which the Big Larrie Blogs know and will sometimes exploit, but they’re about making a lot of noise and building a power base. Labeling their group, especially by making it look like they were “reclaiming a slur” (which is actually super disrespectful to the ongoing efforts of actually oppressed groups who are in the transitions of reclaiming slurs, like the actual queer community?), was a way to solidify the growing idea at the time that 1D fandom had to be “with us or against us.”
That is not how any healthy group of people operate.
It is not ever healthy to associate with a group that relies on the idea of “you’re with us or you’re against us.”
II. LABELS, IDENTITY, AND VULNERABILITY
But once a label is introduced to a group, it becomes much easier for figureheads, leaders, and/or marketers to start promoting the idea that there are Sides. There is an Ongoing Struggle and You Are On The Winning Side If You’re With Us, and If You Aren’t With Us, You’re Against Us. You’re an “anti.” (Anti what? Well, anti-everything that we believe in, of course, anti-goodness, anti-intelligence, anti-Right, anti-Correct.)
This is an essential assault on identity: people are naturally inclined to categorization, whether we “don’t like labels” or not; something in our lizard-brains likes knowing where things, and people, fit in the world. Poisonous Snakes are a category. Republicans are a category. Stuff That Is Dangerous And Might Kill Me, therefore, become an umbrella category. And introducing a label of self-identification becomes a hook to hang your hat on. Once someone you admire and respect tells you that you’re a Larrie, something in the brain latches onto that differently than just thinking, “I’m a person who ships Harry/Louis.”
“A person who ships [X]” is a person first. A person performing an active action, a choice, and something that can be variable.
“A Larrie” is an identity. It’s not putting the person first, and it’s not an action or a choice to be taken, it’s treating a SHIP like it’s an inherent part of a person’s identity.
That is a brainwashing technique. You are not a person first, you are this element of identity first. You are not choosing to perform an action, this identity is your performance. You will take any and all actions necessary to retain this performance, and will reject actions that do not adhere to this identity.
(Caveat: I also hate how whole fandoms are assigned labels, too, like Harmonizers or Directioners, etc. JUST BE A GROUP OF INDIVIDUALS WHO LIKE THE THING. EVEN AS SOMEONE WHOSE IDENTITY HAS AT VARIOUS TIMES IN MY LIFE BEEN VERY WOVEN INTO MY FANDOMS, I HAVE NEVER WANTED TO RELINQUISH THE IDEA OF MY INDIVIDUAL IDENTITY TO A COLLECTIVE WHOLE. That is what labels are FOR when applied to people! You are not one strand of a tapestry! You are one person who happens to like a color in that tapestry, for lack of a better metaphor!!!)
So, now there’s a label to assert as an essential part of the prey-group’s identity. And like, the term “Larrie” has been around for, what... two years now? Three? At first, there were still People Who Shipped Harry/Louis and also Larries, and you could do one without being the other, and it was... awkward. And inappropriate. But it was just a weird, like, fandom dynamic, and maybe kind of worrisome, but not /literally harmful/ yet.
But here’s the thing about when people create an ideology and a label for their group and their goal is power and not money: the targeting is different. The targeting is PERSONAL and CONSTANT and abusive.
Marketing? Can be problematic. And oppressive. And patriarchal. And racist. And harmful. But it’s too widespread to be *abuse.*
TARGETING is personal and abusive. Big Larrie Bloggers who want -- or psychologically need -- power suddenly had this immense thing at their disposal, in the creation of a label, because now they could offer identity on a whole new plain. You weren’t just two people talking, or following one another, who believed that Harry and Louis were legit dating. You were Larries, you were part of a gestalt, you were two spokes of a giant wheel, you were within the same whole. You were connected.
The idea of connection is seductive. When not actually followed up with caring and affectionate human connection and offered on a deeply conditional basis for one ephemeral and imaginary trait that is not actually a trait, it’s a tool. Connection becomes something that is bestowed by one party (in power/the predator) on another, and not something that is made genuinely and equally between parties.
Cults and other systems of abuse traditionally target vulnerable people -- especially women, because the patriarchy ensures that across the board women are more socially isolated and likely to have been abused in the past, unfortunately -- with the promise of connection and belonging. People particularly likely to be targeted include:
People who have lost their jobs.
People who find themselves suddenly “empty nesters.”
Recently divorced people, particularly when the divorce was a bitter one.
Those suffering from lingering illness, especially one they don’t understand. This includes mental illness, ED, and depression, all of which are particular targets by Big Larrie Blogs and abuse systems that target young women.
Young people away from home for the first time. (I personally think that high schoolers who are anxious about their impending time away from home for the first time also fit here, because it’s also a time of being very socially vulnerable and hoping to find a non-geographic, non-familial group that offers acceptance.)
“One particular predatory tactic is to find out enough information about the person and his or her belief system to explain the tragedy the person has experiencing in a manner consistent with that belief system. This can later be expanded to explain history in general through that belief system, while subtly modifying it to the brainwasher’s interpretation.” This is the Big Larrie Blog method of preying on socially isolated or closeted queer people who feel alone.
III. BRAINWASHING TECHNIQUES
Okay, so I get that the title of this part sounds exaggerated -- but it’s not. And I looked it up, a lot, both unrelated to Larries (because cults are just an interesting phenomenon to me) and specifically to see whether what I FELT like I was seeing really did align with brainwashing techniques. And it does.
“Brainwashing” as an idea tends to feel ludicrous because we see fantastical versions of it in media all the time -- from Kilgrave on Jessica Jones and President Snow in The Hunger Games to Emperor Palpatine in Star Wars and Hannibal Lecter in Hannibal. We’re always shown iterations where the predator is So Obviously Literally Evil that it’s hard to empathize with people snookered in by them, or else they’re cast as Okay They’re Evil But Also They’re Sexy and I’m not even going to get into how much I hate that, and it’s kind of given a hand-wave justification. Generally, the media that involves brainwashing as an actual villain device imbues it with some kind of mystical air, often backed up by actual magic of some kind, to make it feel more intense.
But that is not what brainwashing is -- brainwashing also exists in the media that you wouldn’t expect, and it is STILL BAD there. Regina George in Mean Girls brainwashes the Plastics, and while she’s the antagonist of Cady’s story, she isn’t treated as a full-on Harmful And Sadistic Villain, either. Christian Grey brainwashes Ana (and IMO he’s the villain but whatever, again, not getting into it), and he’s allegedly the freaking love interest. Brainwashing is just a kind of dramatic name for a form of emotional abuse that takes place over time, and it’s more common and subtle in the real world than it is in non-fantastical media.
The most basic explanation I can give for what brainwashing is, or rather how this specific tactic of emotional abuse works, is that it reduces a person’s individuality to a single, shared, desired, controllable trait that they put more importance on than independent thought. It isn’t necessarily accompanied by physical abuse -- it’s not in many cases, actually -- but that does not mean that it’s done accidentally.
Like, I have to underscore that: while the predators in a brainwashing relationship may not be physically abusive, and may genuinely think that they are morally right or ethically right, they are NOT RIGHT and they ARE ABUSIVE and the behavioral modifications they are making on their prey are NOT ACCIDENTAL. The person being brainwashed has no idea they’re being brainwashed -- but on some level, even if they refuse to name it, the predator absolutely knows that they are conditioning their prey.
Like any other system of abuse, brainwashing occurs in a predictable cycle. (In physical domestic abuse, for example, the cycle is pretty well-known [at least on Tumblr as far as I’ve seen] and is an understood system, even though it is still extremely hard to see when you’re part of it. This is like that.)
The cycle and process of brainwashing, annotated to Larrie Culture:
Assault on identity
See above, wrt the labeling of a group as Larries versus The Other, versus Antis, versus TPTB, versus Management. It also entails a constant assault of falsely “enlightening” questions with a lot of aggression that force the prey to constantly reiterate that they’re one of the group, because if they aren’t, they become that hated Other. If you aren’t a Larrie, you’re a homophobe. You aren’t a homophobe, are you? Are you a self-hating gay? Are you a self-hating queer? Why don’t you like Rainbow Direction? Why would that make you uncomfortable unless you’re a homophobe? Why don’t you want Harry and Louis to be happy? Why don’t you like 1D? Why are you so stupid that you’d believe the words they’re saying are actually the words they’re saying?
The Establishment of Guilt
“One of the important brainwashing techniques here is to make the person feel responsible for their faults and the things that go wrong in their life. If they make a mistake, do something poorly, or if things do not go according to plan, it's their responsibility and so they feel guilty.” -- Only in the Larries’ case, it’s not “things that go wrong in their lives,” it’s things that go wrong, or rather, “wrong from the predators’ perspectives,” in One Direction’s lives.
If the Larries were just more effusive about [whatever the thing of the month is], then they could break their contract. If the Larries don’t PROVE that the baby is fake, Louis will be stuck being a father. If the Larries don’t, if they don’t, if they don’t, if they stop believing, then Harry and Louis won’t be ~freed from their evil contracts.
Facts don’t matter here; this is about emotional response. If you use the above step to convince someone that they have to perform a certain personality/trait/behavior to be on the side of the Right, then you can convince them that any actions -- even unexpressed -- to the contrary will have negative consequences.
People should not end up having to send blogs “confessionals that they’re starting to doubt Larry.” It’s a fucking ship. Nothing bad will happen to you if you don’t ship it. I KNOW that saying that straight out doesn’t counteract emotional abuse, but like... it should not have ever gotten to that point.
Anyway.
The Self-betrayal
Essentially the denunciation of relationships outside of Larries. I mean, you can’t be friends with ANTIS. You can’t reblog from ANTIS. You can’t read media by any celebrity-news outlet other than the ones currently either pandering to, or staffed by, Larries (WHICH IS A WHOLE OTHER KETTLE OF FISH. CELEBMIX AND GOSSIP CANDY ARE FUCKING PART OF THE GROUP, THEIR ARTICLES IN LARRIE POV ARE NOT /OUTSIDE CORROBORATION/, THEY’RE PART OF THE BRAINWASHING SCAM BECAUSE THEY’RE BEING WRITTEN BY THE SAME PEOPLE THEN USING THEM AS “OUTSIDE PROOF.” It’s about as “outside proof” as someone on FOX News supporting the Republican party.)
Breaking point
This is a kind of diverging point between brainwashing and mind control; I’ll talk about this one later.
Leniency and Opportunity
Ah, now you’re starting to get noticed by the Inner Circle. Maybe l*pelosa and d*ggingandfl*ff and br*manceshm*mance and l*sbiansl*velou*s and fr*ddieismyq*een and whoever are answering your asks with less snark and condescension now, or one of them even followed you back. One of your posts noticing that Freddie’s cries “sound turned on, almost” gets reblogged by a Big Larrie Blogger. Maybe someone sends you a “rare Larry photo” (that used to be everywhere back in 2011, but you weren’t a fan then, and you don’t know).
You’ve put your eggs in the right basket. These are good people, they know you, they MUST be right. You’re getting some power now, too, aren’t you? You just want to be closer friends...
The Compulsion to confess
It’s not just outside blogs that get “help, I’m doubting Larrie” or “I’m an ex-Larrie” messages: it’s the sheer freaking number sometimes of messages that Larrie Blogs get on days when, IDK, Harry and Louis live their separate lives as adult men who happen to be coworkers in ways that don’t align with the Larrative. (...larrative.)
If you are in a genuine and healthy relationship with someone, they do not have to give you absolution for normal human emotions like doubt. Especially if it’s doubt in an arbitrary thing, and again: fandom is amazing. It’s a great thing to incorporate into your sense of self. But specifics of fandom are arbitrary. You don’t have to ship Harry/Louis. It’s okay if you doubt. It’s SMART if you doubt; it means you’re integrating information on your own and learning/changing your opinions as two strangers, and yourself, grow and change and act in the unpredictable, not-narrative-driven ways that adult humans behave. Lives are not narratives. Sometimes people act in ways that you wouldn’t have thought they could. For example, perhaps they have a baby. Or date a Kardashian. Those WILL change your view of that person, because they’re pretty extreme and public and Big things to do. They SHOULD change your opinion (not negatively or positively, just like, “Okay, I have to integrate this into how I thought about [whoever].”)
You do not need to get absolution for being capable of outside thought.
You do not need to confess outside critical thinking like it’s a sin.
The Channeling of guilt
"Prey reported that instead of just feeling guilt for their past actions, they began to feel guilt for who they were and for the set of beliefs they had in the past. They realized that their point of view was different from that of their predatprs and the more they accepted their predators’ way of thinking, the more they felt guilty for who they were.”
There is a kind of hierarchy attached to fandom as a whole that is icky -- “new fans” and “fake fans” and whatever -- that aids into this step, to be honest. And for people who use shipping as a stepping stone into denouncing actual homophobia, or whatever... good. That is genuinely good.
But shipping a slash ship is not a cure for homophobic thinking. Especially in the case, and behaviors, of Larries. The number of queer 1D fans who have expressed discomfort with their language and behaviors and been mocked or derided (“bad queers” or calling non-shippers “het” even if they’re LITERALLY NOT HETEROSEXUAL) should be, and IMO is, strong evidence that Larries as a belief system do not give a fuck about queer rights. “Rainbow Direction” was only connected to the idea of safe spaces after Larries got shit on hugely for such a visible attempt at outing two strangers.
And any group, ANY group, that believes in “outing someone for their own good” and/or relies as heavily on gay stereotypes and fetishization of gay culture (RBB, for example, and the CONSTANT inappropriate usages of language created by and for use within specifically gay male, or QMOC, groups) does not actually care about the well-being of queer people.
...But anyway.
Re-education: Logical Dishonoring
This one is... hard to explain. I’m gonna copypasta this definition, first:
“The next of the brainwashing techniques was to go beyond feeling guilty to understanding their lives were a series of shameful acts, not only because they did not fit in with the predators’ ideas, but also because they were violating their own (new) personal ideals.
The idea is that each of us has a thesis, a personal creed or ethic, as well as it's antithesis, a weakness which contradicts or works against this ideal.
The predators encourage the antithesis and wore down the thesis of each individual. To some extent the antithesis is that part of us that we normally try to suppress (because we learned it was socially unacceptable). As this aspect becomes more dominant the true identity becomes more suppressed.
Why is this logical? The acceptance of this new identity becomes linked to learning the predators’ doctrine, and they become inseparable, one reinforcing the other. This was the overall aim of the predators.”
Basically, “small Larries” KNOW that you can’t “out someone for their own good,” and they KNOW that they’re assigning sexualities to a stranger, and I think they know, logically and truly, that Harry and Louis are not dating and never have. But all of the above steps have twisted and convinced them that acknowledging those truths, or even addressing them as questions, would mean being an Anti. Would mean being a homophobe. Would mean being “a fake fan,” or somehow doing harm to Harry and Louis and their friends and/or “friends.”
If your thesis, as it were, is that you love Harry and Louis and you want them to be happy, and you also are not a homophobe, then acting against what you’ve been told would mean that you don’t want their happiness, you don’t want them freed from The Other, and you dislike them because of their (UNPROVEN, DENIED, ETC.) sexualities. Even if a rational part of you KNOWS that the “antithesis,” harassing their families, whatever, does not fit into your personal canon of ethics, doing the opposite of that ethic becomes necessary if you want to live out the “thesis.”
Progress and harmony
Basically a repetition of Leniency: you start to be accepted more and more, your posts get more traction, the more stridently you seem to believe and adhere, the more people seem to like you.
Everyone wants to be liked. That is not a bad thing. That’s a human thing. It’s also a thing that abusers WILL and DO routinely use to their advantage.
Final confession
Some kind of rite of passage, usually -- “If you knew what we knew, you would know that Larry is real,” is the promise, and this is a small token that someday you MIGHT know what They Know.
You won’t. Because they don’t know anything. There is nothing to know. As @thisdayin1dhistory put it (paraphrasing): “The big moment is always coming next year, next year, next year.” Surviving on tokens of Someday Salvation is what cults are literally based around. You never ascend to the highest plane. You never climb to the tenth rung. You never get to record that demo with Dennis Wilson and The Beatles.
Rebirth
Congrats, you are now a Full Larrie! You probably aren’t one of the Big Larrie Bloggers who apparently if that one leak was true have a blog where they plan topics for the fandom to discuss and care about week by week, or whatever, but you may be on a first-name basis with at least one Big Blogger. Or maybe a medium blogger. Or maybe you’re just on Tumblr a lot and have fully purged any sign of Antis from your dash.
Release
You become the proselytizer: “I showed my friend a Larry video, and now they believe” or you go write pro-Larrie articles for The Daily Dot or Buzzfeed or in other ways seek to transform, enlighten, convert -- or, on the flip side, demonize and shun -- The Other. Outsiders are not worth your attention; they aren’t smart enough to know the truth.
IV. CULT OF PERSONALITY; ABUSE TACTICS
Now, obviously, there is a difference between brainwashing a single victim, as in cases of intimate partner emotional abuse, and brainwashing strangers en masse. That is where the utility of a cult of personality comes in, which both is and is not a “cult,” per se, although IMO in this case it absolutely is. The cases of most famous/infamous cults (Jonestown, Manson Family, DYAD, etc.) are also illustrations of cults of personality, where the beliefs are ultimately less important than the person espousing them -- and are therefore liable to be changed at the speaker’s whim.
So what is a cult of personality? Basically it’s the result of a charismatic individual using mass media or propaganda to further their own voice as one of authority to the point where their followers will not trust any media that does not come from them.
::looks at the camera like Jim on The Office::
INTERESTINGLY, cults of personality are very similar to extreme celebrity worship! So one would think that a group supposedly dedicated to the devout idea that two celebrities are in a relationship would center their zeal on one or both of those celebrities, right? Like, that Larries would hold Louis’ or Harry’s words as bond.
Because often, the things that Louis AND HARRY say go against what their charismatic leaders say. And that “doesn’t fit the narrative,” or MUST be someone other than Louis ([@]louis_tomlinson versus Louis, MGMT, Jo tweeting for him, whatever the theory of the day is) speaking, what have you.
The fact that Larries hold what popular Larrie bloggers say to be fact about Louis and/or Harry ABOVE what Louis and Harry say about themselves should really, really, really be a signpost that perhaps the belief system being pushed has nothing to do with what Harry or Louis is, or does, or wants.
Somewhere along the way, the actual idea that people who became Larries were drawn to initially -- shipping Harry/Louis, or even just the ideas of Harry and Louis in general -- had to be moved into the background if the cult of personality was going to survive. For the power that had been bestowed on these bloggers because of their charisma to supercede the actual facts and words being spoken by Harry and Louis and their bandmates and families and friends, the objects of authority that Larries listened to had to shift from Larry... to the Big Larrie Bloggers.
Larrie is not about Harry/Louis. It has not been for a very, very long time now.
Instead, it is about the maintenance of power between a small, select, interwoven, and cooperative group of bloggers -- who’ve somehow managed to wrest authority over a large base of diverse people by having more charisma in a text-based platform (Tumblr +/- Twitter) than two boys literally famous for having charisma.
How?! Did a bunch of bloggers somehow become “more charismatic” than LOUIS AND FREAKING HARRY? (And before you jump in with bland frog-face Harry, remember how he was before he was 2 Cool 4 Skool, remember how he is onstage. And Louis’ entire role at first was the charismatic one. So.)
Well -- okay. Because charisma, insofar as inspiring people to follow you, is not the same thing as charisma like two very good boy banders onstage or whatever. Instead, it’s more like a constant onslaught of the ideas expressed in some of the Brainwashing Techniques, coupled with reinforcing behaviors either on the part of the predator, the prey, or interaction between the two.
Cults will also use the following techniques to manipulate that are not necessarily used in the brainwashing techniques described above:
deceit - double agendas - the victim thinks they are getting one thing, but the reality is they are getting something else
love bombing - showering of new members with love and affection to make them feel special
childish games to cause age regression and encourage obedience
no questions or criticism of the leadership is allowed
new members are usually accompanied by more experienced members and are not given time alone to think
cults encourage financial commitment as a way to encourage psychological commitment
loaded language - complex ideas are condensed into short sound bites which means the members think less
chanting, singing, dancing, body therapies - all reduce critical thinking
Things that are common to both brainwashing techniques and mind control tactics:
spying on peers and reporting misdeeds to the leadership
creation of dependency by alternating rewards and punishments for the same behavior
unpredictable behavior by abusers
long boring, convoluted speeches
verbal abuse, criticism, insults
no criticism of the new doctrine is allowed
small rewards for desired behaviors, punishments for unwanted behaviors
all-powerful leaders who decide everything
victims usually ignorant of what happens next
V. THE END OF THE ENDGAME
This is extremely simple: one of the main functions of a cult ideology is to promise a final salvation, right? For example: Charles Manson preached to his followers about a nuclear apocalypse and race war they would rise from the desert to win. The Heaven’s Gate cult believed in a specific date for the end of the world (as do many cults). Jim Jones of the People’s Temple, in a fascinating shift from many other cults, didn’t make specific promises of “an end,” but did make clear delineations between “followers, who will be safe When The End Comes” and “outsiders.” A cult cannot exist without a promised salvation in the end.
Big Larrie Blogs promise this ending salvation as “Harry/Louis will come out of the closet.” They used to ascribe specific dates and events for it, much like the apocalyptic cults that, well, tend to be pretty murder-suicidal.
First they would come out ta the end of X-Factor.
Then then they came to America.
Then when they went to Australia.
Then Wellington. (Ah, Wellington.)
Then Madison Square Garden.
Then when the band ended.
These cult ideologies always “shift their goalposts” when their preaching is disproven. When the members of a cult all wake up the day after a prophetic apocalypse, their leaders are ready in the temple with a new reading of the stars to provide a reason why the promised end is still going to come, just later.
It will always be later, because that promised ending is never going to come.
And yet, the idea that it might is what keeps people in a cult. It’s what makes them shell out for the next OT Level or move to Guyana or help Anne Hamilton Byrne illegally kidnap another child. The leaders of these cults absolutely need their followers to keep giving them power -- whether financial, political, legal, or social, as in the case of most Larries -- because they have nothing except for that ill-gained power.
Even if, in theory, somehow, either Harry or Louis did come out someday as non-heterosexual, the Big Larrie Bloggers would find a way to keep their followers in their thrall, waiting for more. The goalpost would become “Simon is jailed for [some random thing]” or “Sony releases every document about 1D to the public” or “every woman connected to either man, ever, formally and publicly apologizes” or ... something.
The power of the cult leaders relies on salvation never coming, so -- often -- they create a belief system based on something they know will never happen. (The exception to this is arguably when the cult leader(s) themselves are mentally ill or have a traumatic brain injury and thus DO have a true delusional belief, as has been hypothesized about Ti and Do of Heaven’s Gate.) That’s why they rely on secrecy and inner circles and crumbs of information -- as Leah Remini said to Scientology, “If your ‘religion’ really is good and helpful and will save the world, then why won’t you tell people about it? If you’re trying to save humanity, shouldn’t humanity get to know how to save itself?”
Cult leaders do not want their followers to be happy. Ever. If they are mentally and emotionally safe, satisfied, and in a state of understanding, they will not have a need for the cult leader.
The fact that some adult Tumblr users are intentionally harming and emotionally abusing younger and/or more vulnerable bloggers to maintain a veneer of social power is abhorrent.
Creating and doggedly maintaining a social system that intentionally foments bullying to ensure that no one feels safe, satisfied, or secure with their peer group is evil.
Part of why I’m bothering to post about this, after not having been active in 1D fandom in a very long time, is that I see Larries’ tactics spreading into other fandoms as they quietly change blog names or set up side-blogs for a new interest... AKA a new target-group of victims. Their insidious tactics for brainwashing, manipulation, abuse, and bullying have changed the face of fandom, even though tinhatters have always existed and always been loud, aggressive, and territorial.
The structure of Tumblr as a social media site allows for a kind of “open-windows insularity” that really, really serves people who want to take advantage of others because it is so easy, and natural, on Tumblr to create a cyclical blog-chain where ideas are never challenged and “everyone knows everyone else,” so people can be “vouched for” without even saying a word. Watching as Larries’ hyperfocus on toys and dolls leach into Star Wars fandom, for example, and their ways of wording refutations against outsiders become ~de rigeur Tumblr parlance (“trust the marketing/don’t trust the marketing,” “antis,” “shipping as activism,” false claims of real-world or academic expertise in WHATEVER field would be necessary to back up a made-up piece of shipping ‘evidence’) is super upsetting. Do I think every manipulator on Tumblr comes from a Larrie background? No, of course not. But I know for a fact that some do, and it’s extremely visible.
Just because there is a natural difference in power dynamics in fandom as a space with very few straight white men to talk over and subsume everyone else’s identities does not mean it has to be filled, ok. Just because you can see a power vacuum somewhere does not mean you have to jump in to fill it. Fandom is a better experience for EVERYONE when there is a general sense of even balance, although that almost never happens because, well, alas, as you know, people.
The other reason I wanted to post about this is that I have felt guilty since early 2012 for my role in accidentally -- truly, not on purpose -- setting some of the groundwork for Larrie ideology. A few of the Big Larrie Bloggers in 2014/2015 cited some of my H/L fics or (since-deleted, I think?) headcanons as inspirations to look into [whatever theory], and that was never what I wanted. Absolutely nothing about any of my fics should be taken as something realistic or believable or even anything I ever believed in. It’s fanFICTION. I made it up. Everything about Harry/Louis has always, always been made up.
(And it used to be the most wonderful pretend, didn’t it? It was the ship of dreams, but it never existed.)
It breaks my heart, a physical ache, to see people who just want to have friends and have fun and love something within a community of their peers being hurt for wanting to trust, and believe, and find joy. And if ANY aspect of that is my fault, I am profoundly sorry.
An anon stirred shit, so here.
