Our Flag Means [BLOCKED]
Doxxing, Blocking and a Bag of Broken Bottles
On October 18th, 2022, Twitter user @Calloutofmd posted a thread specifically targeting another Twitter user, @yeeyeemtv (AKA Bug) based on Bug’s particular tastes in fiction regarding characters stemming from the hit HBO series Our Flag Means Death. This “call out” thread detailed a disturbing amount of @Calloutofmd’s obsession with not only “trolling” their target but also cyberstalking and harassing which ultimately led to revealing the general area in which Bug lived and possible places Bug could have worked. Their stated intention was to call (and encourage others to call) each establishment to see if they could find out where the target worked specifically in order to potentially get them fired as they would be telling their workplace “that one of their employees is a sex offender who preys on minors.”
The proper first motion here is to state that the doxxer’s “evidence” of Bug’s alleged crimes were based on their “nasty fanfiction storys” [sic] and that she is a “pro Izzy hands, pro Calico Jack account” [sic]. @Calloutofmd claimed, “Back in August I made an account to troll proshippers in the OFMD fandom. These freaks believe in disgusting things like rape, incest, underage sex and other gross things,” betraying just how long this harassment and stalking had been going on as they admitted to anonymously sending Bug messages like “I hope u get nonconned so you can understand why it’s so bad if ur gonna write it. Ur not even good at writing and u should stop” [sic].
Bug, profoundly affected emotionally and mentally by her exposure to this type of stalking, harassment, and doxxing, oscillated between locking and unlocking her account, pleading with people to be kind despite the damage done, lamenting her circumstance as being the one to put others in danger or in harm’s way, and decrying the characterization of her doxxing as “discourse” rather than an act of violence. In a thread, Bug reacts to the “evidence” that the stalker collected of her, stating: “What's wild is that almost all of their damning evidence is about what I've written not who I am. It's a book burning.” Highlighting that antishippers so often do not consider creators as people, Bug goes on to talk about aspects of her humanity, driving home the concept that she is a real living human being with worth and deserving of compassion, that her life is not represented by the books she reads or the material she creates.
Not only was Bug a target but @Calloutofmd also provided a list of individuals who commonly interacted with Bug’s account, encouraging harassment, stalking, and doxxing of those people as well based on their proximity to the original target. Users included in the list were merely people who had been close to Bug in a social media environment, not even just creators of content but some could have simply been commenters or friends. With a public list of people who were being openly targeted for encouraged harassment, there came a sudden fear that anyone could be next. Izzy-related twitter accounts or anyone who had even shown a liking for the character began finding out ways to protect themselves, starting with blocking the user list of a Group Chat dubbed the “izzyhatersgc.” The users on the group chat were, to current knowledge, never publicly shared but that did not matter. Anti-Izzy’s were blocked en masse, cut off from the other “half” of the fandom through blockchains and whisper networks.
Blocking is common and usually encouraged in order to create a safer, more harmonious user experience on any social media. Blocklists go around here and there due to all sorts of reasons and it is oft considered the prudent manner in which to go about curating your online experience. If you see someone whose presence you will not tolerate, you simply block them and they will not show up again (you hope). Block-dodging is considered uncouth as well as unethical though it still occurs from time to time for a myriad of reasons, some of which are innocuous enough, others not so much. But the Anti-Izzy’s took being blocked by half the fandom personally, decrying the mass blocking to be tied to more than simply hating on Izzy, claiming that the blocking of the entire group chat and the wariness around open Anti-Izzy’s was an element of the fandom’s issue with racism. Their claims centered on the notion that the majority of OFMD’s Latine and Indigenous community were encompassed within the block (a claim that is as current unsubstantiated because it is unknown how many Pro-Izzy’s are of Latine or Indigenous background), stating that blocking was “silencing” them.
Unfortunately for the Anti-Izzy’s this tack has been tried by Stichomancery for years and continues to fail time and time again—when one claims that an issue is tied to racism, one must be prepared for the BIPOC who have been against you the entire time to speak much louder so that they are not accused of being white as they have now been lumped in with one of the most openly hated demographics in fan culture today. Some Anti-Izzy users expressed utter apathy toward BIPOC Izzy Fans who were ill at ease over doxxing, racial erasure, and abuse; user @_hedvvig stating: “if youre an izzy fan i dont really care that you feel sad over twitter fandom spaces sorry” [sic]. When pressed, Anti-Izzy user @surprisebuttspx admitted to user @SayingToo that their motive wasn’t about protecting BIPOC or Queer users in fandom but fostering harassment against and attacking Izzy Fans.
Some Anti-Izzy’s have pointed out that it’s “telling” that so much of the blocking caught two well-known indigenous users who often talk about racism and bias in the OFMD fandom, but failed to mention that at least one of those users were known Anti-Izzy’s and were included in the group chat. They also lament that plenty of innocent Anti-Izzy’s who “had nothing to do with” the doxxing or the perpetuation of hate were caught up in the blockchains, expressing that it was unfair for people who were not involved to be blocked for someone unrelated’s actions. Unfair as it may be, this is the nature of blocking—one has the choice to block all the users who “liked” a tweet, retweeted a tweet, or followed someone who was also blocked, and sometimes there is no explanation for it. Even friendly users will be caught up in these chains and “fairness” has nothing to do with it.
What doesn’t help these instances is the Anti-Izzy viewpoint that Izzy’s characterization is in itself racist, the character “exhibiting” racist intentions and in some cases being representative of racism as a concept. Thought experiments and hot-takes on both Twitter and Tumblr have discussed Izzy as inherently racist and thus any support or liking of his character is then a racist act—the same argument used by Stichomancery about Star Wars fandom’s Kylo Ren, fans of which have been characterized as “fascist-loving, tradwife wannabes.” All of this has been refuted by BIPOC fans in both fandoms who have then had to field accusations of being “pick me’s” or brainwashed by white fans.
A constant question fandom seems to grapple with time and time again is “Can liking a character be a sign of a moral failure?” Some characters are meant to have dark points, light points, redemptions, or sympathy. Some are meant to be comedic relief or unwavering protagonists. Can having complex emotions toward and wishing to write fanfiction about a villain or antagonist be reliably utilized to highlight an individual human being’s moral compass? If someone can make a compelling enough argument that a particular character is representative of something negative or is even simply committing a microaggression, are all the people who have ever written fanfiction of that character now guilty by proxy of that same moral misstep despite having never actually done it in real life? Rationality tells us that the answer to this is unquestionable: “No.” There are no studies that support this suggestion, no empirical evidence collected that implies it, and though there are plenty of anecdotes from serial killers and terrorists about how Mein Kampf inspired them, there so far have been very few (if any) who have followed in the footsteps of a villain from a piece of fiction. Even white supremacists who cite The Turner Diaries as though it is a religious text are following the examples set forth by the “hero” of the tale and those who have cited fictional texts as motives are usually deemed to be in some way mentally deficient: even simply the inability to separate fiction from reality a sign of a larger illness.
If we can claim rightfully that the answer to that question is “No” and we can suitably acknowledge that blocking is a personal choice that is likely based on a myriad of things (not at all barring the influence of white supremacy but not centering it either), this “wank” as some might call it, boils itself down into a complete and utter nonissue on the side of the Anti-Izzy’s, most of their concerns boiling down to basic run-of-the-mill belly-aching that’s common in fandom. This is not to say that race isn’t an issue in fandom, it’s just to say that their usage of it here is quite blatantly a fandom version of the Broken Bottle Scam, distracting from the direct act of violence against Bug with a clattering, clanging barrage of accusations based on the consequences of their own involvement in fandom.
So where does this leave us now? The OFMD fandom has been a non-stop rollercoaster of discourse and disaster ever since the first season ended. Is it too much to hope that the next racially diverse and queer representative show doesn’t have an insanely toxic fandom? Is it too much to hope that maybe, just maybe, it’ll all get hashed out sooner rather than later? Is it really too much to hope that those who have come to believe that someone’s morality can be determined from a fictional character might just figure out they’re wrong?
Haha. Yeah right.