The strong introduction represents a good model of what should be done to bring the topic to light before addressing the question. Aside from the solid formatting, without analyzing the history of the fandom, you can’t get a good picture of what they were dealing with in the past. Though grasping every facet isn’t possible, without the history the picture isn’t close to completion.

If the way a fandom or problem is viewed can vary so much? How is it that any argument can stand up on its own as resounding? Does that mean analysis is just opinion? Of course it has some opinion to it, but is there any true backing?

The more I try to understand and read, the more confused I seem to be.