# Notorious fanwanking instances **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [September 28, 2005, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notorious-fanwanking-instances/323908 "2005-09-28T20:18:05Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2005, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notorious-fanwanking-instances/323908/1 "2005-09-28T20:18:05Z")
I’m working on the [Wikipedia article on fanwanking](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fanwank), created earlier today by some nameless schmuck and expanded on by a schmuck named Maxie. I wouldn’t mind some good examples of the practice: I aim to have three comic book examples, three movie examples, and three television examples. Any suggestions? ---
**Author:** ![Nonsuch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nonsuch/32/2922_2.png) [@Nonsuch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nonsuch)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2005, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notorious-fanwanking-instances/323908/2 "2005-09-28T20:31:45Z")
**Doctor Who** once included a scene in which the Doctor’s companion Romana, who like the Doctor had the power to “regenerate” a new body, appears to “try out” a number of different bodies before finally settling on the one she wants. This flew completely in the face of established Doctor Who continuity for two reasons: 1) Time Lords were only supposed to regenerate when at the verge of death, not on a whim; and 2) Time Lords were never seen to be able to choose the appearance of their new selves, nor to be able to experiment with several looks before finally settling on one. The fan consensus appears to be that, because Romana chose to regenerate (why I don’t know; that’s a [fanwank of its own](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romana#Romana.27s_regeneration) I guess) while still in the prime of health, she was able to exert much greater control over the process, whereas a typical Time Lord regenerates in a weakened state that allows them no control over the outcome and leaves them exhausted and confused by the experience. Others have theorized that Time Lord girls regenerate differently from Time Lord boys, but that seems so … simple. ---
**Author:** ![Ethilrist](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ethilrist/32/4604_2.png) [@Ethilrist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ethilrist)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2005, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notorious-fanwanking-instances/323908/3 "2005-09-28T20:45:47Z")
The Mirror Universe episodes at the end of the _Enterprise_ series. They had absolutely nothing to do with the rest of the series, weren’t necessarily consistent with the other Trek franchises, and seemed to exist purely for the purpose of saying, “Okay, we made a Mirror Universe plot; now shut up and leave us alone. Here, have a handiwipe…” ---
**Author:** ![Lee\_Stexspectid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/d78d45/32.png) [@Lee\_Stexspectid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lee_Stexspectid)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2005, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notorious-fanwanking-instances/323908/4 "2005-09-28T20:52:15Z")
I’m glad I read the definition. I was under the impression it meant…n. - when a fan (at a sporting event) behaves in a wanker-ish manner (cutting the cheese on the 18th during the Open Championship at Royal & Ancient, streaking the Olympic hammer throw, etc.). ---
**Author:** ![Odinoneeye](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/97f17d/32.png) [@Odinoneeye](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Odinoneeye)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2005, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notorious-fanwanking-instances/323908/5 "2005-09-28T20:53:34Z")
Last season of Justice League Unlimited when they showed a long shot of several different DC heroes. This season when they show a wide shot of various DC villains in Grodd’s headquarters. ---
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2005, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notorious-fanwanking-instances/323908/6 "2005-09-28T21:00:36Z")
> [@Odinoneeye](#): > > Last season of Justice League Unlimited when they showed a long shot of several different DC heroes. > > This season when they show a wide shot of various DC villains in Grodd’s headquarters. How is that fan-wanking, O Lord of the Aesir? It appeared on screen and thus is obviously canon. Fanwanking is an xplanation by FANS that attempts tor reconcile discrepencies in the narrative. ---
**Author:** ![Odinoneeye](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/97f17d/32.png) [@Odinoneeye](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Odinoneeye)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2005, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notorious-fanwanking-instances/323908/7 "2005-09-28T21:14:54Z")
> [@Fabulous Creature](#): > > How is that fan-wanking, O Lord of the Aesir? It appeared on screen and thus is obviously canon. Fanwanking is an xplanation by FANS that attempts tor reconcile discrepencies in the narrative. I’ve always thought fanwanking was something put on screen for no other reason than to make fans go “wow, that’s cool” Do we have a Webster’s definition of fanwanking? ---
**Author:** ![aktep](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f0a364/32.png) [@aktep](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aktep)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2005, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notorious-fanwanking-instances/323908/8 "2005-09-28T21:23:42Z")
> [@](#): > > I’ve always thought fanwanking was something put on screen for no other reason than to make fans go “wow, that’s cool” I think that’s “fanservice”. ---
**Author:** ![Kyla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/eada6e/32.png) [@Kyla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kyla)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2005, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notorious-fanwanking-instances/323908/9 "2005-09-28T21:23:46Z")
I added a much needed verb to the first sentence of that article. I love Wikipedia. Sorry, that’s all I got. But…grammar! It’s useful for coherence! ---
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2005, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notorious-fanwanking-instances/323908/10 "2005-09-28T21:23:54Z")
> [@Odinoneeye](#): > > I’ve always thought fanwanking was something put on screen for no other reason than to make fans go “wow, that’s cool” > > Do we have a Webster’s definition of fanwanking? No, we have the definition offered in my OP. Earlier today someone else began a wikipedia on the subject which I am expanding. I’d call what you just mentioned fan SERVICE. ---
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2005, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notorious-fanwanking-instances/323908/11 "2005-09-28T21:26:37Z")
> [@Fabulous Creature](#): > > No, we have the definition offered in my OP. Earlier today someone else began a wikipedia on the subject which I am expanding. I’d call what you just mentioned fan SERVICE. [Here’s the wikipedia article on fanservice.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fan_service) ---
**Author:** ![Push\_You\_Down](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/push_you_down/32/9095_2.png) [@Push\_You\_Down](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Push_You_Down)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2005, 10:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notorious-fanwanking-instances/323908/12 "2005-09-28T22:12:19Z")
… Fanwanking to me is where the show (or comic or whatever) does something specifically to get the fans to go “Wow” or “That was for us!” The show (or whatever) is administering a creative hand job to the fan. Hence… Fanwank. This thread is the first time I have hear it used to mean “The fans making up stuff to have it make sense.” and I have never until this thread heard the term “fanservice”. I therefore call this supposed definitive meaning to be suspect. ---
**Author:** ![Cliffy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/59ef9b/32.png) [@Cliffy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cliffy)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2005, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notorious-fanwanking-instances/323908/13 "2005-09-28T22:17:29Z")
I am not comfortable with any definition put forth so far. –Cliffy ---
**Author:** ![Erinaceus\_europaeus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e47774/32.png) [@Erinaceus\_europaeus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Erinaceus_europaeus)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2005, 10:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notorious-fanwanking-instances/323908/14 "2005-09-28T22:19:48Z")
> [@Push You Down](#): > > … Fanwanking to me is where the show (or comic or whatever) does something specifically to get the fans to go “Wow” or “That was for us!” The show (or whatever) is administering a creative hand job to the fan. Hence… Fanwank. I’ve seen the term fan service used for what you’re describing here (especially in the manga/anime world). I’ve never head of fanwank before. ---
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2005, 10:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notorious-fanwanking-instances/323908/15 "2005-09-28T22:24:53Z")
> [@Push You Down](#): > > … Fanwanking to me is where the show (or comic or whatever) does something specifically to get the fans to go “Wow” or “That was for us!” The show (or whatever) is administering a creative hand job to the fan. Hence… Fanwank. > This thread is the first time I have hear it used to mean “The fans making up stuff to have it make sense.” and I have never until this thread heard the term “fanservice”. > > I therefore call this supposed definitive meaning to be suspect. Your privilege, of course; I didn’t make it up. [Here](http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.comics.marvel.universe/search?hl=en&group=rec.arts.comics.marvel.universe&q=fanwank+OR+fanwanking&qt_g=1&searchnow=Search+this+group) [are](http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.books.tolkien/search?hl=en&group=rec.arts.books.tolkien&q=fanwank+OR+fanwanking&qt_g=1) [some](http://groups.google.com/group/alt.tv.buffy-v-slayer/search?hl=en&group=alt.tv.buffy-v-slayer&q=fanwank+OR+fanwanking&qt_g=1) [usenet](http://groups.google.com/group/alt.tv.law-and-order/search?hl=en&group=alt.tv.law-and-order&q=fanwank&qt_g=1) [threads](http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.comics.dc.universe/search?hl=en&group=rec.arts.comics.dc.universe&q=fanwank&qt_g=1) in which the “fan-created explanations of plot holes” definition is used. I admit that you can probably find some support for your position too. (Dear God, I’m proffering cites in CS. Guess my resolution to stay out of GD was utterly pointless.) ---
**Author:** ![ouryL](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ouryl/32/6067_2.png) [@ouryL](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ouryL)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2005, 10:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notorious-fanwanking-instances/323908/16 "2005-09-28T22:40:50Z")
So is it fanwanking when JLU brings in elements from previous incarnations which were not canon? Such as WW twirling or that her costume was her mother’s? ---
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2005, 11:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notorious-fanwanking-instances/323908/17 "2005-09-28T23:37:55Z")
> [@ouryL](#): > > So is it fanwanking when JLU brings in elements from previous incarnations which were not canon? Such as WW twirling or that her costume was her mother’s? Judging from this thread, it depends on your definition. In my wiki I use the “fan-originated retcon,” but acknowledge the existence of the other usage. ---
**Author:** ![Peter\_Morris](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/peter_morris/32/359_2.png) [@Peter\_Morris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peter_Morris)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2005, 11:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notorious-fanwanking-instances/323908/18 "2005-09-28T23:45:20Z")
> [@Nonsuch](#): > > **Doctor Who** once included a scene in which the Doctor’s companion Romana, who like the Doctor had the power to “regenerate” a new body, appears to “try out” a number of different bodies before finally settling on the one she wants. This flew completely in the face of established Doctor Who continuity for two reasons: 1) Time Lords were only supposed to regenerate when at the verge of death, not on a whim; and 2) Time Lords were never seen to be able to choose the appearance of their new selves, nor to be able to experiment with several looks before finally settling on one. I beg to differ. At the end of _The War Games_ The Doctor is offered the opportunity to select his next body. (He starts to argue, so the Timelords select a body for him.) In _Planet Of The Spiders_ it is shown that a Timelord can project an image of his next form, if he knows he is about to regenerate. Romana said she was 125 years old. Plausibly, her regeneration was due to old age, and she knew in advance she would have to do so. This is totally consistent with previously established continuity. ---
**Author:** ![Arien](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e0b2c6/32.png) [@Arien](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Arien)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2005, 12:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notorious-fanwanking-instances/323908/19 "2005-09-29T00:08:32Z")
When Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire came out, a lot of fans created an explanation for why James and Lily came out of Voldemort’s wand in the wrong order Then it turned out to be a simple editorial error. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2005, 12:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notorious-fanwanking-instances/323908/20 "2005-09-29T00:25:42Z")
> [@Arien](#): > > When Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire came out, a lot of fans created an explanation for why James and Lily came out of Voldemort’s wand in the wrong order > > Then it turned out to be a simple editorial error. Clarify, please. She blamed an _editor_ for that? Given some of the snark I’ve read about Rowling in this forum in the past, I might have thought her manuscripts were never touched by an editor. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notorious-fanwanking-instances/323908.md?page=2)