But why is my criticism not landing the way I want it to, tho?

Look, I think this is a fundamental misunderstanding of the point of criticism.

Criticism in a creative environment and Academic criticism are fundamentally two different things and it's always people with Academic backgrounds who seem to get their wires crossed.

It's a matter of function:

Criticism in a creative environment is for the benefit of the creator: therefore it is the creator who defines what is and isn't useful criticism. When a writer tells you "I understand your corrections are for the sake of grammatical accuracy, but I am making a stylistic choice to discard them" it is not them having a thin skin or refusing criticism. It is them setting a boundary and trying to make you participant of the creation process.

Think of someone making a painting in the style of cubism. Abstracted, exaggerated forms with sharp angles that very much do not faithfully describe reality the same way a painting in the style of realism. Would you consider the artist "thin skinned" or "refusing critique" if they pointed out that they're doing it on purpose? That they're making a choice and they KNOW and are CAPABLE of creating a "realistic" painting, but they're making a choice by NOT doing so? I would hope not.

Academic criticism is focused on approaching truth. You choose a subject and describe it to the best of your ability, and your efforts will get critiqued and torn apart because the POINT of Academic writing is to withstand scrutiny. People will poke at your phrasing and whether it's clear and precise enough: anything that sacrifices the integrity of the message should be removed, because what matters is the message, not the artistry of the writing!*

*This is a lie. The best and most enthralling Academic texts are often also aesthetically inspired. But this is in fact a common mindset that is both taught and expected of people in Academic circles. The content is king, the form is just... sophistry.

Academic criticism is also very skewed to be in favor of the person making the critique. When you write a critique of a book or a thesis or another researcher's writings, ultimately you're hoping to approach truth which should benefit everybody, but the real, tangible benefits of writing a critique are for the person who does it. This is why college is chock full of essays on all sorts of topics: We don't expect college students to revolutionize a field with their writing, but in writing a critique, in doing research and becoming acquainted with a topic enough to speak about it and posit an idea or a thesis of their own, they flex muscles that will eventually allow them to grow into the kind of researcher that DOES write field significant contributions.

What is often perceived as a failure in fandom and creative spaces, I would posit is merely a misunderstanding of purpose.

Fandom is a creative space. Creative works exist primarily to explore a given person's experience and emotions and thoughts regarding a source material, or exploring their skill in a given medium. There is no ultimate, foundational truth that is being pursued here. The point is not to make a "true" work, but to make one that reflects as accurately as possible the author's intent.

Of course Academic style criticism will fall flat on its face, in that scenario. And of course someone trained in Academic critique will feel like their skills are underutilized and that people are not making full use of what critique can offer.

But if fandom is for the benefit of fans, I would say it makes sense that criticism in that space should prioritize the needs of the fans doing the creative work. Or at the very least that Academic critique is kept separate and contained, so as to not directly impact or inhibit the creative output of people who signed up to write omegaverse porn of their fave because it's hot, not to have some random self-appointed critic tear their work to pieces and write a treatise on misogyny and harmful abusive behaviors.

I'm not saying that's not valuable or a worthwhile conversations to have! But like... put it in the corresponding box, with the appropriate label, and just like any other writer, don't get bitchy because only some people chose to click and engage with it, as opposed to the entirety of the space.

Read the room, dude.