Don't know what I'm doing here

This is probably me stepping on a soapbox. But I can't not do it with this topic.

Gonna start with a clarification: I'm talking about fiction and fictional characters whenever I talk about bashing. Because I wouldn't call talking about real people bashing. There are other terms for that that are more fitting. (Which, of course, might be a language problem on my side, because English isn't my first language and communicating in English is a hard-won skill.)

I stand by my point: Character Bashing in itself is neutral. As is every other trope and literally structure or method used in the art of creating fictional worlds.

Fanlore defines Character Bashing this way:

Character bashing is defined in different ways by different fans and communities. 1. any expression of hostility towards a character by fans 2. the portrayal of characters in fanworks as worse than they are in canon 3. characters in fanworks being hated for or facing consequences for actions they did in canon

I'll argue each point in a separate message for the sake of conversations about each point. But the biggest problem is already in the first line: "It's a question of which community you're in to determine what definition is used." That's one reason I went to fanlore to look up the "official" definition. I think in this case, it's also that people sometimes deliberately use an unfavorable (twisted) definition so they can justify why they use someone bashing a character as an excuse to harass that real person over their fandom interpretations.

"any expression of hostility towards a character by fans"

I argue that the first point is absolute rubbish. "Hostility" means acts of aggression, right? Acts intended to cause harm. You can't cause harm to a fictional character. They're essentially dolls, but only in our heads, so you can't even destroy them like you could an actual doll. Even if you kill or otherwise harm the character in a story, it's not causing any actual harm to the character.

Can bashing under certain circumstances be used as an act of hostility against the fans of that character? Yes. We've been going through this with Tommy for nearly two years now. 

But there is much more character-bashing around that's not supposed to be aimed at the fans of that character. Things that are tagged correctly, so anyone who doesn't want to see or engage with them can avoid them, are not an act of hostility against other fans. Even if some fans do take every negative word about their fav as a personal attack. But that is very much a problem of interpretation, both in fan fiction as well as in fan art.

An example: Imagine there is a drawing of your fav out there where they're hurt, or even killed. You look at it, and you might see the depiction of your fav character being whumped. You feel the pain of the character's injuries, and it might be cathartic because what you think about is the healing process. Or maybe the death of the character is the end of a hero's journey, and you feel relief because they're finally free of their burden. Or you might look at it and be horrified and appalled because you can't stand seeing your fav hurt. And you might think the artist set out to cause you this pain, and they drew this art specifically to harm fans of the character.

But the thing is that you don't know. Maybe the artist drew it because they hate the character. Or they wanted to work through something with drawing this pain. Or they enjoy seeing their own fav in pain (as so many people in fondom do, this discord included). Whatever you see looking at this art or reading this fic, it's your interpretation, born out of your own life experiences. You don't know the person behind the art or fic; you don't know their intention. You don't even know their full intention if they left a one- or two-line note with this piece of art, indicating one or the other, or one of the plethora of other possible interpretations.

In any way, just because that art exists and floats around fandom spaces doesn't make it a hostile act, especially not against a fictional character.

2. "the portrayal of characters in fanworks as worse than they are in canon"

Yeah, that definition does make a lot more sense. Sometimes you need a villain for your fanfiction. And this one character fits it perfectly. (Especially if it comes in relation to the third point of the definition and the story takes off based on a canon event by that one character.) Or the author just doesn't like the character and enjoys writing them as the villain.

Which is perfectly valid, by the way. It is stupid to assume an artist or author has certain beliefs because they use one character or another as the villain in their stories. It's also stupid to assume everyone has to like a specific character. That's never going to happen. And that's just human nature. No one can expect you to like someone else or something else. In real life, you learn to avoid people you don't like. In fiction, you can also avoid. Or you can explore things you can't explore in real life, because in fiction, you aren't causing anyone harm.

Not very surprisingly, this only becomes a problem with characters people like. It's not a problem if it's a character that most people don't like because they were intended by the narrative of the source material not to be liked.

Like, I've made Vincent Gerrard into a murderer, even a serial killer, on more than one occasion. No one will come at me and start harassing me for this. Because no one cares for Gerrard. I didn't even bother tagging that bashing because I know no one will blink an eye about it. Though, according to the definition above, it is bashing, because he isn't a murderer in canon, so I portrayed him worse than he is in canon.

On the other hand, writing a story about Maddie or Chimney behaving just even slightly worse than in canon (e.g. Chimney not regretting the punch and even being proud of it, though we don't even see him regretting it in the show; or Maddie acting just a little more obnixious than she alread did with forcing their parents back into Buck's life) will get you harrassed immediately, no matter how carefully you tagged bashing and critisims and even made sure to mention it in your author's note a second time.

"worse than in canon" is also, once more, very much a question of interpretation for every single person. I'm a little hesitant to use this as an example because it's such an explosive topic in the fandom, but I'll still do it: In season 5, Chimney punched Buck. And afterwards, there was no resolution. We don't see on screen an apology. We don't even get much of a mention of it. Chimney says to Hen that he and Buck hashed it out (mind you, after we watched him tell Hen weeks after the punch he'd like to kill Buck, then revive him, so he can kill him again). Buck says to Maddie that he owes Chimney a punch. Some people interpret that there was a conversation between those two at one point, including an apology. Other people interpret that there was no conversation about it at all, and they both went on ignoring it. Both interpretations are valid from what we see on the show. One interpretation is certainly more favorable than the other. But we don't have an apology or any kind of resolution in canon, so neither of those interpretations is "worse than canon" because there is just nothing in canon here. (But because of the mood in this fandom, I've never seen the second interpretation at last explored in fanfiction without the bashing tag for Chimney. Can't talk about Tumblr because I wasn't on Tumblr at that time.)

3. "characters in fanworks being hated for or facing consequences for actions they did in canon"

I'm going to circle back to something I already said earlier: There is no problem in hating a character. Not a single one. Even if it's a character that others dearly love. The problem begins if you make it a problem of the other people by harassing them over your dislikes and your likes. Because it does go both ways.

Sure, I make fun of people who hate on Tommy, too. But I do that in safe spaces where I know people who hate him won't necessarily see it, like this server or a friend's DMs. Or places others can easily avoid, like a Tumblr blog with appropriately tagged posts, or my AO3 account with appropriately tagged fics that also have author's notes with warnings for fan fiction. (I know at least one person on this server who celebrates any spite fic born of something I saw in fandom spaces I thought was stupid.) That provides everyone who doesn't want to see it every chance not to interact with it, and using those chances is their responsibility, not mine.

The same goes for fics or fan art dealing with the actions of canon and the consequences. As long as it's tagged, it's not an attack on anyone. It's a tool for the creator to work through whatever they feel about that canon action. And everyone is allowed to have whatever feelings they have about events in canon.

For a third time, it comes back to interpretation, mostly based on personal life experiences. Everyone is allowed to have whatever reactions they have to events in canon. Their interpretations are valid. Talking about those, exploring them, isn't a problem, no matter what shape those interpretations take on.

Like when Eddie got into Buck's face in 8x17. Most people here on the server were horrified. Other people barely shrugged about it. And other people again somehow saw something romantic in it. Can I understand the last interpretation? No, and I also don't want to go to the effort to try to understand it, while I might do that work with other canon events. But okay, the only thing I'll take from it is that I won't want to interact with the person with that interpretation a lot or at all in the future. As long as they don't accuse me of whatever because my interpretation fell into the first group mentioned above, there is no problem.

Bashing Eddie based on 8x17 and having him face consequences, and if those consequences are only that his friendship with Buck falls apart completely, isn't a problem. That's my freedom to work through the emotions that canon scene caused in me. It would become a problem if I sent this person, who saw it as a great moment between Buck and Eddie, any kind of Eddie bashing story or interpretation on anon or in their DMs or whatever. Or if I wrote a story with tags drawing in this person and conveniently forgetting the Eddie bashing tag.

As another example, I think Buck's baking away (and failing) the heartbreak after the breakup with Tommy is deeply painful. And that everyone else's reaction to it feels cold and dismissive, and that they're letting him down. Others interpret it as a sign that everyone else sees a truth that Buck isn't able to see, and that they're really great friends and supportive of Buck by taking his phone away to stop him from calling Tommy. That's their right, as long as they leave me alone and I don't have to interact with their interpretations.

To summarize a very long post of taking apart three (of probably even more) different definitions of "character bashing": The bashing in itself is always a neutral expression of interpretation.

Both of these things are true about it, though:

It can be used as a tool to attack others.

It can be misinterpreted as an attack.