# Why are sci fi fans more mature?



## CmdrShepN7 (Jan 13, 2020)

If you see many of the football forums on the internet you can see much unintelligible dribble and immaturity. I never see any of that on this forum.

What makes us more mature?


----------



## Brian G Turner (Jan 13, 2020)

Because we're a UK-based website that puts civility above all other considerations?

Otherwise it really could get quite flammable here.


----------



## Mouse (Jan 13, 2020)

You clearly missed the pics in @dannymcg's Christmas tree thread...


----------



## Wyrmlord (Jan 13, 2020)

CmdrShepN7 said:


> If you see many of the football forums on the internet you can see much unintelligible dribble and immaturity. I never see any of that on this forum.



They don't read and are likely to get their news from Facebook meme pages.



Brian G Turner said:


> Because we're a UK-based website that puts civility above all other considerations?



Ehhhh. I've been on some boards with UK-based users, and they were absolutely atrocious.

Not here though


----------



## .matthew. (Jan 13, 2020)

Do football fans read? and if not isn't their dialogue going to comprise solely of repeating what they heard at the match? which is generally atrocious.


----------



## Wyrmlord (Jan 13, 2020)

.matthew. said:


> Do football fans read? and if not isn't their dialogue going to comprise solely of repeating what they heard at the match? which is generally atrocious.


They can read forum posts.


----------



## tinkerdan (Jan 13, 2020)

Definitely not Sci-fi fans being mature; its the way this web-site is moderated.


----------



## -K2- (Jan 13, 2020)

tinkerdan said:


> Definitely not Sci-fi fans being mature; its the way this web-site is moderated.



Yep... they told me, _"if you want to join the forum, you'll have to stop picking your nose."_ 

So, in just my short time here, I have really manured a lot 

K2


----------



## Jo Zebedee (Jan 13, 2020)

We’re mature?! Say, wha.... ? 
Also I know many smart football fans


----------



## nixie (Jan 13, 2020)

.matthew. said:


> Do football fans read? and if not isn't their dialogue going to comprise solely of repeating what they heard at the match? which is generally atrocious.


Lucky for you I'm not easily offended.

Wonders if it's too early to enter candidates for this year's guy, whilst patting Wally.


----------



## .matthew. (Jan 13, 2020)

Heh. Sorry. Just personal experience rearing it's ugly head I suppose. I've known plenty of smart football fans, but honestly none that read for fun (and many who looked at me in outright puzzlement when they saw me reading on lunch). Virtually without exception they happened to be massive gamers or heavy drinkers in their spare time.


----------



## StilLearning (Jan 13, 2020)

I know some very unpleasant Sci Fi fans and very smart and erudite football fans - and I've seen how they act down the pub after a big match, yes. It's the team games effect - people really are better in smaller groups or one on one.


----------



## M. Robert Gibson (Jan 13, 2020)

-K2- said:


> So, in just my short time here, I have really *manured* a lot


Is that a typo, or are you admitting to producing your own fertiliser?


----------



## M. Robert Gibson (Jan 13, 2020)

I actually thought the thread's title was referring to age, as in Sci-Fi fans are more mature like a fine wine or a cheese.


----------



## -K2- (Jan 13, 2020)

M. Robert Gibson said:


> Is that a typo, or are you admitting to producing your own fertiliser?



Does 'manured' read matured to you? 

K2


----------



## tegeus-Cromis (Jan 14, 2020)

Well... As far as I can tell, people on here are actually more mature, as in older. Very different from, say, Tor.com comment threads. So I wouldn't say it's a matter of SF versus other genres.


----------



## Extollager (Jan 14, 2020)

tegeus-Cromis said:


> Well... As far as I can tell, people on here are actually more mature, as in older. Very different from, say, Tor.com comment threads. So I wouldn't say it's a matter of SF versus other genres.



That's my impression too -- that many of us here at Chrons are well into middle age, though I don't think people in their teens and twenties would feel unwelcome here.


----------



## Teresa Edgerton (Jan 14, 2020)

We used to have quite a number of teenage members here but they either left for one reason or another or are still here but, unsurprisingly, over the course of the decades the forum has been here ceased being teenagers.  Meanwhile, some of us who were spry youngsters in our fifties got _really_ old.


----------



## Danny McG (Jan 14, 2020)

Teresa Edgerton said:


> We used to have quite a number of teenage members here


They all think Star Wars began with _The_ _Phantom Menace_!


----------



## Star-child (Jan 14, 2020)

This forum is not as polite as it likes to believe. It just isn't as awful as so many others are.


----------



## Teresa Edgerton (Jan 14, 2020)

It _tries_ to be polite, which makes it different from many.  It's not the only forum that values civility, but perhaps we try a little harder.  If we don't always succeed, well, we are only human.  But I've been here for many years, and I think we are getting better at it all the time.


----------



## Alex The G and T (Jan 14, 2020)

M. Robert Gibson said:


> I actually thought the thread's title was referring to age, as in Sci-Fi fans are more mature like a fine wine or a cheese.


Mature wines are said to have a prominent "nose"; whilst aged cheeses tend to reek.


----------



## Teresa Edgerton (Jan 14, 2020)

And it wasn't as easy as it perhaps sounds.  It wasn't, "oh, we're all British and therefore well-behaved."  (For one thing, we _aren't _all British.  We are an international forum, with members of all ages and from all walks of life, and that sometimes means we have to make a special effort to avoid misunderstandings.  It also means that we don't always manage to avoid them.)

We've worked hard to make this place what it is today.  And I don't just mean the moderators, but members old and new as well.


----------



## Rodders (Jan 14, 2020)

The Chrons is a very nice place to be and I think the moderators do a great job keeping things civil. 

SF fans though can be a prickly bunch and sometimes horrid. Remember all the abuse that Star Wars fandom has doled out recently? Ahmed Best considered suicide. Kelly Marie Tran had to withdraw from social media for a while because of fan abuse. That's just Star Wars. This abuse is spewed out by people my age. 

I'm sure I remember much heated discussion when BSG made Starbuck a woman (my dad still won't watch it), or when a new captain is announced on Star Trek. 

We are a passionate people, but it can be appalling.


----------



## Toby Frost (Jan 14, 2020)

Rodders said:


> SF fans though can be a prickly bunch and sometimes horrid. Remember all the abuse that Star Wars fandom has doled out recently? Ahmed Best considered suicide. Kelly Marie Tran had to withdraw from social media for a while because of fan abuse. That's just Star Wars. This abuse is spewed out by people my age



I don't think that's "fans" so much as bigots, and for reasons I can't go into, bigots currently feel that they can get away with it.

One thing forums do attract is people who can't manage to sound reasonable, even if they want to. You get quite a lot of aggressive-sounding posts out there along the lines of "No. You are wrong. I am right. This is why I am right and I win. And you are wrong" that give the impression that the poster would find normal conversation quite difficult. We seem to avoid the worst of that here. There are also the people who regard themselves as intellectual rebels and just want to argue. Again, they don't seem to last.


----------



## Dave (Jan 14, 2020)

I appreciate that some people don't like any conflict, and will run a mile rather than to get involved in a conflict situation, but I personally love a good argument. I believe that arguments are a good way to learn new things. However, that does require one to be open to changing one's mind in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary of the position that one holds. Many, if not most, discussions that I see online are not about "facts" but about "opinions." Those opinions often have no basis in fact, but are ideological positions on which people will never shift. This is especially true in the case of politics, religion, abortion (all of the subjects that are taboo here on SFFChronicles) but also Sport, Veganism and other subjects. Just as @Toby Frost described in the previous post, those people often are not arguing at all, but simply "telling" or "lecturing."

In any case, in the real world there is never one single "truth"; no black or white, but rather a wide range of different greys of lighter or darker shades on which people can take up a position depending upon their own life experience, or by manipulating statistics. So, I see nothing at all wrong with a civil argument or a heated discussion, provided that it is the real thing, with evidence submitted to back up the positions. If not, then it is simply that _Monty Python's Flying Circus_ sketch where the argument is merely "contradiction" and "the automatic gainsaying  of anything the other person says."






Why is SFFChronicles more "civil" than other parts of the internet?

I agree, that is down to the work of the moderators. There is an incredible amount of work that goes on behind the scenes to keep it so. I think that the internet, and in particular "social media" is just a reflection of the real world. However, I agree that people online say things they would never shout out in the street; that they feel anonymous enough online to spew hate and abuse that they would never do in a town centre High Street, but they still hold those views. Without the internet to channel them, they would still hold those views in private and say them to the like-minded. Social Media is simply very good at connecting together like-minded people and producing echo-chambers where they can believe that "everyone" thinks exactly as they do. However, that is surely an argument for having more places like SFFChronicles where views have to be backed up with evidence within a civil discourse?

Also, "ad-hominem" attacks, against the person rather than the argument, are a sure sign that the argument has been lost, so they never worry me. The kind of "troll," who deliberately writes to inflame others, merely because they enjoy stirring the pot, and seeing the reaction they cause, I think that might be a new phenomena, never seen before in real life. On the other hand, I have heard family history stories of a great uncle who would listen to the Communists proselytising on Newcastle Town Moor, and come back a week later to debate the Fascists with those arguments. He would then return the following week to debate the Communists with the alternative Fascist arguments. Does that not count as the same?


----------



## StilLearning (Jan 14, 2020)

I think Dave hit the nail on the head with:


Dave said:


> I personally love a good argument. I believe that arguments are a good way to learn new things. However, that does require one to be open to changing one's mind in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary of the position that one holds. Many, if not most, discussions that I see online are not about "facts" but about "opinions." Those opinions often have no basis in fact, but are ideological positions on which people will never shift. This is especially true in the case of politics, religion, abortion (all of the subjects that are taboo here on SFFChronicles) but also Sport, Veganism and other subjects.



To my mind an argument (in the most civilised sense of a reasoned discussion) based on evidence and reason, about something that is tangible and testable, isn't a conflict because it's based in a reality of testable facts - both sides will in the end be able to agree on a conclusion, at least in principle. It should always be civil, it needn't become heated, and it does require that both sides go in willing to change one's mind in the face of overwhelming evidence, and_ be able to trust each other to do the same_.

I'm always up for one of these. But it is an art, and it needs both a lot of humility, self discipline, an actual appreciation of reasoned argument and logic, and an understanding that the aim is not to 'win', but to find the truth together. In short it is quite rare to find an opportunity to have one. One problem seems to be that 'winning' is more important than the truth to a lot of people, and the trust needed to argue properly is hard to build where that is the case.


----------



## Parson (Jan 14, 2020)

Dave said:


> The kind of "troll," who deliberately writes to inflame others, merely because they enjoy stirring the pot, and seeing the reaction they cause, I think that might be a new phenomena, never seen before in real life.



I'm very sure this is nothing new. Three decades ago I was the chairman of a denominational church board. We had a lot of business to resolve and a lot of the obvious votes turned into a discussion, some of which were fairly heated, because of one man. At lunch I asked why he kept bringing these things up: "I love to watch the process." --- I suppose I should mention that he was a college professor and he had no real stock in the outcome but loved to see people "debate." SIGH!!


----------



## Al Jackson (Jan 14, 2020)

… and SF fans are more mature than that! .... because they are older!


----------



## -K2- (Jan 14, 2020)

Al Jackson said:


> … and SF fans are more mature than that! .... because they are older!



There's no need to be insulting...

K2


----------



## Dave (Jan 14, 2020)

-K2- said:


> There's no need to be insulting...


It was more insulting to be called more "manure."


----------



## Teresa Edgerton (Jan 14, 2020)

There is nothing insulting about being old.  There is much to be said for the wisdom and experience of age.

And I'd tell you all about that if I could, um, remember what we were talking about.


----------



## Stephen Palmer (Jan 14, 2020)

Could it be because football fans act and operate in groups, and SF fans are individuals?
Just my 2 pence.


----------



## Al Jackson (Jan 15, 2020)

Teresa Edgerton said:


> There is nothing insulting about being old.  There is much to be said for the wisdom and experience of age.
> 
> And I'd tell you all about that if I could, um, remember what we were talking about.


Yeah there is nothing insulting about being old or mature are old and mature.
(We never defined 'mature' in this thread.)


----------



## Al Jackson (Jan 15, 2020)

Stephen Palmer said:


> Could it be because football fans act and operate in groups, and SF fans are individuals?
> Just my 2 pence.


An odd thing in popular culture is how 'science fiction' means only movies and TV as if the prose form never existed.
This is pretty wide spread.
The prose form we readers know is by a wide wide margin more varied than the visual narrative form, tho , in recent times that has been changing a little.


----------



## Vince W (Jan 15, 2020)

Stephen Palmer said:


> Could it be because football fans act and operate in groups, and SF fans are individuals?
> Just my 2 pence.


If SF fans congregated in pubs quaffing liberal amounts of lager/ale while watching films and arguing the finer points of books I have no doubt SF fans could be every bit as immature as your average Spurs fan. At least I like to think so.


----------



## StilLearning (Jan 15, 2020)

I can confirm that physicists and engineers, even the seemingly respectable ones, are just as immature as football fans when drunk and down the pub. And they are disturbingly inventive with the trouble they cause. I literally carry scars. Scars from teeth.


----------



## Guttersnipe (Jan 15, 2020)

I always thought American football was stupid. I like football/soccer. I read somewhere that reading fiction can make one more empathetic. Also, of course, hardcore readers will have a higher vocabulary, assuming they're reading a wholesome book.


----------



## Wyrmlord (Jan 15, 2020)

Are there other sci-fi centered forums that are a little more ... volatile?


----------



## Dave (Jan 15, 2020)

Wyrmlord said:


> Are there other sci-fi centered forums that are a little more ... volatile?


There used to be many forums, and several SFF forums I can think of were more "volatile," but they all closed down. Some forums were like the wild west and anything went.

I don't think there is any cause and effect between those two things, since most forums that were around have now closed. The reasons are both that Forums are seen as old fashioned and they cost money to run. Facebook, Twitter and Instagram, are all free to use, except that they harvest your data for marketing (and whatever else they want, if you read the newspapers.) I've been looking into this subject for genealogical project that I admin. We used to use the old message boards, but they have now almost gone completely (even the historical messages getting wiped soon.) We thought about using Yahoo Groups but they are closing soon. So, now we use a Facebook Group, but many project members refuse to use Facebook on principle. The only other alternative would be a forum but that costs money in forum software and webhosting. I'm fairly sure it is the cost that has killed off other forums rather than their lack of moderation. I think forums could still make a comeback with the reaction to social media data security.


----------



## -K2- (Jan 15, 2020)

@Dave ; I used to own/administrate a forum and website. In fairness I need to also state that I refuse to use facebook and all of the many varied social media platforms, even going back to various messenger programs, ICQ and so on due to their tracking of your activity on the web. Regardless of my tinfoil concerns and acknowledging that I'm ignorant to facebook/etc., what I've seen regarding facebook and its ilk I don't like for one reason.

There is zero organization that I can see past a chronological timeline of posts.  Meaning, unlike here where discussions are categorized and sorted according to their topic's theme--and I can instantly go to them--on facebook I'd need to scroll past countless unrelated posts to get to what I'm looking for.  Comments also don't work well (IMO) toward having a discussion...especially if the posts are lengthy to any degree.  It makes it so that each subject is here today--gone in a minute.

That said, many/most forum software is free.  Even great improvements on it.  Yes, webspace costs money. But, that's offset by numerous other advantages such as massive/unlimited storage, as many email accounts as you choose, etc.-etc., up to the final benefit.  Absolute control.  I like the idea that forums are dictatorships to whatever degree the site owner determines. If they are overbearing, move on. Too loose allowing chaos, move on. A forum is whatever the administration deems it to be--without restriction.

I can't speak to SFFC's host provider, but the one I used I could post massive amounts of linked data and members had access to it. And it cost me nothing more. In fact, I wish I hadn't let it die in that it was unlimited server space, emails accounts, downloads, etc., all for $178.20-36 Months (4.95 USD/mo) in 2018, the domain fee was free (having had it for a few years), and when I didn't renew they even offered the whole package for half that.  Most importantly, Lunarpages was a great web host.

It was an easy decision to keep it even after I let the forum slip into disuse... Stupidly, I let it go.

Facebook or a Forum? There is no question in my mind. A link is a link and a search engine result is a search engine result. People have allowed themselves to be coerced into just using facebook.

Just my opinion.

K2


----------



## Alex The G and T (Jan 15, 2020)

I'mmature!


----------



## Alex The G and T (Jan 15, 2020)

Aaaarrrgh kids these days... they..they... well they don't have any good role models for the art of civil discourse.

Most "Topical" television talk shows feature "pundits" who consider it to be a legitimate form of "winning" a debate as never letting their opponent finish a sentence.  Shouting down, talking over, interrupting, yammering nonstop.  Things which would have been considered unbelievably rude, not so long ago.

And this just in...  There's a CA attorney who runs a weekly legal advice column; which my local rag carries.
This weeks topic was a Father concerned that his kid might be sending the wrong message on his application to Law School.

The kid was a member of his high school debate team.  Apparently, it is now an acceptable tactic, in formal scholastic debate,  to present an unintelligible flood of incomprehensible "talking points;" "Auctioneer-style," to which the respondent can't possibly make a coherent response.  (They practice fast-talking.)

To his credit, the columnist responded that including a tape of this horse-hockey with the Law School application would probably get the applicant eighty-sixed; but I can't believe that the faculty advisors to the debate team would allow this sort of nonsense.


----------



## Dave (Jan 15, 2020)

-K2- said:


> That said, many/most forum software is free. Even great improvements on it. Yes, webspace costs money. But, that's offset by numerous other advantages such as massive/unlimited storage, as many email accounts as you choose, etc.-etc., up to the final benefit. Absolute control. I like the idea that forums are dictatorships to whatever degree the site owner determines. If they are overbearing, move on. Too loose allowing chaos, move on. A forum is whatever the administration deems it to be--without restriction.



With the genealogical project, there is no budget to pay for anything. While I completely agree with you about the benefits of forums, I'm not the only person making the decision there. As for the cost - good software with support, security (and regular upgrades) and "reliable" webhosting does cost something. Sure there are free things, but you do get what you pay for. The biggest problem online is spam. Do you see much spam here? Did you think we were just very lucky? You have no idea of the war going on in the background here, fought by the moderator foot soldiers and helped enormously by the software. In fact, I'd also put the demise of message boards and Yahoo groups about 90% down to spam. 

Sorry for the thread detour! To get back on track:



Alex The G and T said:


> Most "Topical" television talk shows feature "pundits" who consider it to be a legitimate form of "winning" a debate as never letting their opponent finish a sentence. Shouting down, talking over, interrupting, yammering nonstop. Things which would have been considered unbelievably rude, not so long ago.



I also dislike that kind of TV show but I had no idea that it had spread outside of TV. Is the old-fashioned kind of formal debate dying too? Most universities and schools used to have a debating society. The producers of TV shows may think that it makes good TV to have guests with their hands at each other's throats, but I'd strongly disagree. The audience also learns very little because the guest (and it is generally politicians) is never called to account for what they claim, can fail to properly answer any questions set, and can just continue to parrot the same catchphrases.


----------



## Toby Frost (Jan 15, 2020)

I used to be on a small forum about miniature painting, with about 50 members, of whom 20 would regularly participate. Sadly, most are now on a Facebook group, which is useless for any sort of long post and doesn’t make it easy to look up older pictures. In fact, I would say that the default internet mode of communication used to be the email-style “post”, but is now the text message. It is harder to troll people or leave stupid one-word answers and not get found out on a forum: partly because of the expected style, and partly because of the layout. Even internet dating sites seem to be moving to the text-based conversation rather than post-type messages.

Personally, I’d suggest we avoid standards of debate in universities, as that is a whole can of (political) worms in itself.


----------



## -K2- (Jan 15, 2020)

@Dave ; Okie dokie... As to the problems Chrons is having, adjust your filters and check with XenForo. Vacuously suggested, naturally.

K2


----------



## olive (Jan 15, 2020)

I don't think these two groups should even be compared. When you say a football fan in Chrons, I get this is someone who is here for the forum but also enjoys sports and posting to the football section and they are highly likely nowhere near what we call 'football fans' who usually don't actually enjoy sports, but a specific kind of game for one team in general. I know football fans from the UK, the US and where I live. I even met people who were banned from stadiums for life. Let's say, they are not really the reading type.

I'm a newbie, maybe I don't know much about the forum, but I have never been to a site like this in 25 years online. It looks like a special place so far and the people who run the place seem to do a good job. It's not an easy one.

But if we compare the UK and the US; European and American, the difference is pretty much the same general difference between the cultures from a foreigner's point of view. I have no idea who is from where in this forum, or who is dominant, I am not paying attention to it honestly, but I get the impression as if there is a decided negative look towards Americans and the US sites in general and it is unfair in my opinion. Because my experiences with American or UK culture in general as a Middle Easterner in various different contexts is the opposite of this. Yes, in spite of everything said and shown in the media that is the case. And I am not alone, it is the general consensus. I am talking about the people and their attitudes in general which is important at any space.

Contrary to the common belief, the USA and American culture online is far more foreigner-friendly, welcoming and politely put, far less discriminating than any European cultures, not just the UK.


----------



## mosaix (Jan 15, 2020)

.matthew. said:


> Do football fans read? and if not isn't their dialogue going to comprise solely of repeating what they heard at the match? which is generally atrocious.



Ahem...

Do you realise that there is a football (soccer) forum here on the Chrons? And, surprisingly, some Chrons members, who are known to read from time to time, actually post there. 

Worth a read.


----------



## Phyrebrat (Jan 15, 2020)

Once you’ve been spoiled by Chrons your tolerance of poor forum etiquette reduces drastically.

I recently (last May) quit playing a SW video game after I was bullied and accused of rage quitting on its associated forum. I didn’t really understand the concept of trolling beyond someone saying something silly/irrelevant in a thread and took the whole thing very personally.

Everyone I know knows what a huge SW fan I am, so for me to exit the forum, and stop playing the video game the forum supported was a big deal. I later found out from the mods I was just the latest target for these trolls. It affected me far more than I would’ve expected. 

I have a membership at Absolute Write but quite honestly I’m afraid to post there after some of the nastiness I’ve seen.

What also helps is the IRL element of Chrons: we regularly meet up (the London contingent) and recently the North - and across the Irish Sea - people from Chrons meet up. It’s great to develop deeper friendships and I can’t imagine writing without being able to sound off at Dan, Peat, Harebrain, Zöe, Dave and Boneman (to mention a few). I always leave those meetings inspired (and drunk).

But I caution you all to beware @Venusian Broon who attends both the Northern and Southern Chrons meet-ups; I suspect a mole...

pH


----------



## .matthew. (Jan 16, 2020)

mosaix said:


> Ahem...
> 
> Do you realise that there is a football (soccer) forum here on the Chrons? And, surprisingly, some Chrons members, who are known to read from time to time, actually post there.
> 
> Worth a read.



Okay, okay, okay. I've already explained once that my direct real life experience of football fans is exactly that, just my experience.

Can you also maybe realise it was a joke directed not at EVERY football fan but aimed at the fans who post all the abusive stuff on their forums (mentioned in the post above mine). 

Perhaps reading it as "Do 'those' football fans read?" might help you see it as the light quip it was.

Football is a hugely popular sport and I was in no way thinking that anybody would take what I said as meaning EVERY fan, nor a deliberate insult against those who love the game.

If you or anyone else took actual offense you and they have my total apology for the misunderstanding.


----------



## Jo Zebedee (Jan 16, 2020)

Vince W said:


> If SF fans congregated in pubs quaffing liberal amounts of lager/ale while watching films and arguing the finer points of books I have no doubt SF fans could be every bit as immature as your average Spurs fan. At least I like to think so.



That’s certainly my experience...


----------



## -K2- (Jan 16, 2020)

I can tell... Can you spot the rabble-rouser? 







K2


----------



## tegeus-Cromis (Jan 16, 2020)

Toby Frost said:


> Personally, I’d suggest we avoid standards of debate in universities, as that is a whole can of (political) worms in itself.


I'm not sure I follow this point...


----------



## Phyrebrat (Jan 16, 2020)

tegeus-Cromis said:


> I'm not sure I follow this point...



current affairs are not allowed to be discussed on Chrons. We used to have a current affairs forum.

We no longer do...

pH


----------



## mosaix (Jan 16, 2020)

.matthew. said:


> Okay, okay, okay. I've already explained once that my direct real life experience of football fans is exactly that, just my experience.
> 
> Can you also maybe realise it was a joke directed not at EVERY football fan but aimed at the fans who post all the abusive stuff on their forums (mentioned in the post above mine).
> 
> ...



No offence taken, Matthew. My post was intended to be light hearted and I would have posted a :smilie: to go with it except, for some reason, when I post on my smart phone the forum drops any smilies that I include.


----------



## Montero (Jan 19, 2020)

When I first saw the title, I was expecting the thread to be about why are sf fans more mature than fantasy fans - and was then wondering if that were true...... I get the impression that there are a lot of teenage sparkly vampire fans, but equally teenage sf fans......
So does anyone know if there are more young fantasy fans than sf?
Or am I reading sf as science fiction when I should read it as speculative fiction?


----------



## .matthew. (Jan 19, 2020)

Montero said:


> I get the impression that there are a lot of teenage sparkly vampire fans, but equally teenage sf fans......
> So does anyone know if there are more young fantasy fans than sf?



Time to throw myself into trouble again.

I get the impression the sparkly vampire lovers are teenage girls, while teenage boys would likely prefer either sci-fi or more traditional fantasy. But judging by the popularity of YA sparkle fiction these days and the distinct lack of YA that seems to target the male demographic, I'd wager they are more into the sci-fi.


----------



## tegeus-Cromis (Jan 19, 2020)

Guttersnipe said:


> Also, of course, hardcore readers will have a higher vocabulary, assuming they're reading a wholesome book.


There are plenty of unwholesome books with rich vocabulary!


----------



## tegeus-Cromis (Jan 19, 2020)

.matthew. said:


> Time to throw myself into trouble again.
> 
> I get the impression the sparkly vampire lovers are teenage girls, while teenage boys would likely prefer either sci-fi or more traditional fantasy. But judging by the popularity of YA sparkle fiction these days and the distinct lack of YA that seems to target the male demographic, I'd wager they are more into the sci-fi.


From my experience with my two kids (seventh and ninth grade, respectively) and their friends: girls read fantasy (usually of the 600 pages a volume variety); both boys and girls read dystopian fiction. Not much SF being read otherwise.


----------



## Extollager (Jan 19, 2020)

Toby Frost said:


> Personally, I’d suggest we avoid standards of debate in universities, as that is a whole can of (political) worms in itself.



Yes, I think so.  The official standards for debate may be good, but in practice it’s far too common for universities to countenance suppression of those who dissent from a “progressive” agenda that becomes more narrow as the weeks pass.  Documentation available elsewhere, mostly.  Conversely, the implied standards for discussion here are pretty good. I say that as someone who has occasionally stepped over a line and drawn moderator attention.  

I’d say, then, that, if there’s a pretty good level of maturity here at Chrons, one manifestation of it is a willingness to do without controversies based on hot-button topics that can be discussed elsewhere.  Here, I see a readiness to allow people to comment on the basis of opinions and convictions some of which are de facto prohibited on campuses (on one hand) combined with a pretty high degree of mutual forbearance and toleration (on the other hand).  The arrangement might not be up to the measure of an ideal, but it permits grownup discussion of many topics in a context of trust.


----------

