[ SECRET POST #4168 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4168 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.
[South Park]



__________________________________________________



02.
(The Scarlet Pimpernel 1999)


__________________________________________________



03.
[Daniel Mallory Ortberg]


__________________________________________________



04.
[Twin Peaks]


__________________________________________________



05.
[Fried Green Tomatoes at the Whistle Stop Cafe, by Fannie Flagg]


__________________________________________________



06.
[Lip Sync Battle: Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Channing Tatum, Tom Holland]


__________________________________________________



07.
[Ariana Grande and Selena Gomez]












Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 42 secrets from Secret Submission Post #596.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

You're assuming people are giving caveats to get around your dislikes. That usually isn't the case. Most people give them either because they don't know what your specific issues are but know a lot of people have trouble with, say, onscreen rape, or because they do know you have trouble with onscreen rape but aren't entirely sure if you have trouble with rape that occurs offscreen but still has an impact on the plot or characters and want you to be able to make an informed choice about the thing they're reccing.

[(Anonymous)]

I don't know -- it sounds like you're giving caveats as a substitute to actually talking to your friends about issues that affect them. Like, if someone says they don't watch media with onscreen rape, wouldn't it be better to ask them if they're okay with offscreen rape that impacts the characters and move on from there? It certainly would be easier and more effective than reccing them potentially triggering media with a bunch of caveats that wouldn't be necessary if you just talked to them.

[(Anonymous)]

Different anon than who you were talking with: How about not thinking of it as a caveat? Talking about them openly about stuff that might be harmful to them is okay and it's what caring people do. I think people on the internet giving caveats are in the same heart as trying to be caring with anybody who might be interested in a certain type of story. It's just that on the internet you're not really going to have the chance to sit down and have an honest, friend-to-friend conversation with strangers in the format of AO3 tag list.

I don't think I've seen a bullet pointed list of caveats. I've seen trigger warning tags. I've also seen shitposts that say "so-and-so may be a kusoge, but it's dear to my heart". I'm pretty sure any brief list of caveats is just due to the limited and often impersonal nature of the internet. I'm sure if you wanted to have a conversation where you get to ask if they're okay with offscreen rape and move on from there, you can, but most of the time those personal conversations are well... personal, and don't get posted/seen as often.

[osidiano]

I'm not assuming that. I used the word "especially" to describe the kind of recs with caveats that I disliked the most, which seemed fair given all the examples in the previous post that I was replying to.