samaburime.bsky.social

Ultimately, the analysis of 71 online discussions related to fictophilia can be summarized into five key themes that describe fictophilia. (1) Fictophilic paradox. Fictophiles do not ‘confuse fiction and reality,’ but overtly address the parasocial nature of their relationship. However, their genuine emotions and feelings toward the characters may generate discomfort since they cannot interact with the characters in the same way as they do with their human peers. (2) Fictophilic stigma. Fictophiles often experience a stigma, which can possibly be lessened by their search for peer support. (3) Fictophilic behaviors. The related behaviors often tangle around various fan-like activities that contribute to interacting with the fictional objects of love or desire. (4) Fictophilic asexuality. For some, fictophilia seems to be connected to asexuality, and although the phenomenon cannot be considered specific to adolescents, it may reflect liminalities of development and growth. (5) Fictophilic supernormal stimuli. Fictophilic relationships resonate with supernormal stimuli effects, i.e., fictional characters appear more competent or otherwise better than their human counterparts. In the following subsections we unpack each theme qualitatively. Selected forum citations are used to exemplify the themes respectively. A recurring feature in fictophilic behavior is that the individual is fully aware of the love-desire object’s fictional status and the parasocial nature of the relationship. The below post is a case in point:
ALT
In this section we briefly address the five themes analytically. The final section then looks at fictophilia in cross-cultural theoretical perspectives and Japanese media psychological literature in particular. Fictophilic Paradox Our results included few indications of those experiencing fictophilia to ‘confuse fiction and reality’. Rather, they were fully aware of the fictional nature of the characters to which they were attached. Unlike in mental disorders like erotomania where the individual has an imaginary belief of a mutual relationship that does not exist (e.g., Kennedy et al., 2002), fictophilia does not usually entail such hallucinations but consists of the person’s self-aware feelings toward a non-organic construct that they know to be ontologically diverse (e.g., Livingston and Sauchelli, 2011; Karhulahti, 2012). At the same time, however, the intensity of emotions and feelings in fictophilia may lead to fantasies of the character in question ‘loving back’ or ‘becoming an actual companion.’ Evidently, such a genuine relationship is practically impossible and cannot materialize – and being aware of this, as fictophiles tend to be, constitutes a fictophilic paradox in which the coexisting awareness of fictionality and a wish to deny that produce emotional confusion. The above echoes Cohen’s (2004) earlier work that found attachment styles to be linked to the intensity of parasocial relationships by the measure of separation distress from favorite television characters, thus “parasocial relationships depend on the same psychological processes that influence close relationships” (p. 198). Adam and Sizemore’s (2013) survey study produced similar results, indicating that people perceive the benefits of parasocial romantic relationships similarly to those received from real-life romantic relationships. The genuine emotions and feelings that surface in fictophilia support and advance the above earlier findings – in fictophilic relationships, [cuts off]
ALT
The otaku, Saito argues, are in fact more conscious and analytical of the nature of their (potential) romantic-sexual emotions or feelings than those who problematize them. This analytical consciousness allows the otaku to cope with their fiction-related emotions and feelings in elegant ways that may be difficult to grasp from the outside: while they do not in any way ‘confuse fiction with reality,’ they are uninterested in setting fiction and reality up against each other … This means not just falling in love and losing oneself in the world of a single work, but somehow staying sober while still indulging one’s feverish enthusiasm … ‘What is it about this impossible object [that] I cannot even touch, that could possibly attract me?’ This sort of question reverberates in the back of the otaku’s mind. A kind of analytic perspective on his or her own sexuality yields not an answer to this question but a determination of the fictionality and the communal nature of sex itself. ‘Sex’ is broken down within the framework of fiction and then put back together again (pp. 24–27). We may recall here those online discussions that dealt openly with questions of ‘naturality’ or ‘normality’ related to fictophilia, i.e., whether longitudinal romantic-sexual emotions and feelings projected on fictional characters should be considered abnormal, unnatural, or even unhealthy (‘It’s just so weird to me and I don’t think this is normal?’). From Saito’s viewpoint, such concerns for ‘naturality’ or ‘normality’ in fictophilia and the emotions and feelings involved may be calibrated as follows: how does the individual understand ‘real(ity)’ and where is their object of attachment (fictional character) located within that understanding? Saito’s perspective forms an integrated context within which ontological distinctions are considered irrelevant in total. If an individual understands their fictophilic orientation as a prolonged unsuccessful attempt to build a bridge between two [cuts off]
ALT
This article is fantastically interesting 👀📚

'Fictosexuality, Fictoromance, & Fictophilia: A Qualitative Study of Love & Desire for Fictional Characters'

I think this discussion is what a lot of young fans may confuse when arguing 'fiction affects reality'

www.frontiersin.org/journals/psy... 🧵
111
7
111 likes
about 2 months
samaburime.bsky.social
TLDR;
infatuation with fictional characters has generally been seen as normal and unobtrusive for people who fully accept those characters as existing to be consumed. It becomes problematic when (the fan) cannot make this distinction or accept the reality a character's existence serves+
about 2 months
1 replies
60
sleepyboi43.bsky.social
📌
about 2 months
1
sleepymarico.bsky.social
Definitely an interesting read. Bestie and I have lately encountered some toxic self-shippers/yumes. This pretty much sums it up. My bestie's a non-sharing self-shipper and I support her and my other self-ship friends because they're still "sober" about it. I'm more annoyed at self-shippers +
about 2 months
1 replies
2