[ SECRET POST #5359 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #5359 ⌋

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


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.









Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 24 secrets from Secret Submission Post #767.
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

[meadowphoenix]

It's tag of risk. It is actively saying that you are taking a risk with the story, the same way you would take a risk with a new novel and didn't have access to reviews or tbqf...any fanfic on a non-specific hosting site prior to AO3.

Look, I'm not really a fan of this warning (I think the point is to work against tagging norms that ironically pretty much only cropped up with AO3, so that authors have more freedom to write the stories without whiny or flamey comments, but "don't flame if you were warned" is a norm in of itself, so I think if you use the tag, you should be prepared for whine in the comments because you've already indicated that norms aren't what you care about here), but I also don't have to read stories I don't want to risk, regardless of the tags used. Everyone has agency! Yay!

[(Anonymous)]

The point isn't to work against norms, it's to acknowledge the fact that the warnings debate isn't settled, and was even less settled when AO3 was created. It gives people the flexibility to opt out of using specific warnings they disagree with, while still giving readers a heads up that the content of that writer's story isn't necessarily safe. It's also very useful for edge cases, or cases where the presence or absence of a specific warning would not only be a huge spoiler, but could wind up with readers who are upset or feel deceived. "Caveat emptor" as an acknowledged, valid warning is a critical part of AO3 norms, regardless of how many people want to kick and fuss about it.

[(Anonymous)]

+1

It's also a norm to be able to opt out of giving specific detailed warnings, but give enough of a heads-up that a risk-averse reader can opt out of reading that story. It's as much a part of fanfic culture as anything else.

[(Anonymous)]

And sometimes fics can have content that might be uncomfortable for some people but that really isn't the kind of thing that has a specific warning associated with it.

[meadowphoenix]

Look, if it wasn't a norm, then "i'm not going to do that" wouldn't be required as a alt to tagging archive warnings (because archive warned wouldn't be required for posting at all). But it is, and it's something that only makes sense to do if you acknowledge that a critical mass of people do think tagging is normative and do not think "you take a risk when you look at anything" is. This is especially true because AO3 does have ratings which are just as much about "safety" for the reader (and which fandom-wise most people had to use previously to decide what was safe pre-multi tagging). I don't think people should rely on tagging or ratings, but you're still setting up expectations with a rating that will undercut a "assume nothing about content" tag.

t's also very useful for edge cases, or cases where the presence or absence of a specific warning would not only be a huge spoiler, but could wind up with readers who are upset or feel deceived.
unless tagging is normative, it's not useful for these things at all, and there is no tag that should even be given the expectation of avoiding expectations on the part of readers. There's nothing with that kind of pull even in situations in which content warnings are NOT normative.

I get that when they write their articles about this, "the debate wasn't settled" is the perspective they use and probably mean, but that doesn't mean they haven't by their processes taken an fandom understanding nor does it mean that norms weren't established.

[(Anonymous)]

DA

There's no point in arguing about norms, because more than one norm can exist at once in the situation. Living in an apartment is normative and living in a house is normative, even if you can't do both at once. Tagging is normative and saying "read at your own risk" is also normative, whether or not people like that or not.

If you want to argue what should be a norm then that's your opinion, and that's a conversation that can be had, but there is no conversation to be had if you're denying that "no tags here; don't like don't read" is not one of the normative ways to post fic. Because then it's just like ok, be factually wrong then. Nowhere to go from there.

[meadowphoenix]

There’s every point in arguing about norms. And that you’ve given that example means that tbqh, you don’t seem to know what norms are. The norm at this point in time is that people live in buildings. Things being common is not the same as something being a norm. Norm, as it’s being used in my comments, is actually not short for normal but normative social value. Norms have a prescriptive value to them that common circumstances don’t. It was common that women worked during WWII in the US, that was not the norm as those women swiftly found out at the end of the war.

Now that you know what norms are, maybe you can understand when I am saying that AO3 deciding to both force content archive warnings and allow for one of them being “no archive warning” meant that they understood there was a norm of tagging so much that they forced it, but wanted to counter that norm by allowing a “read at your own risk” tag.

[(Anonymous)]

I have to say as a queer person who grew up in the bible belt? Norms are kind of awful. If someone says "this is a norm," I always NEED to question it and challenge it. I don't like norms. Norms have never worked in my favor, and all the oppressive norms I was raised with were paranoid and sex-negative and queerphobic, so I associate that with all sexual censorship, and that gives me hives.

Fandom is great, because there are really no universally-agreed-upon norms. I hope there never will be. But AO3's tagging system is honestly pretty good for helping people filter out stuff. Way better than fanfiction.net or Wattpad. And that's really all we can ask.

[(Anonymous)]

*DA, not the same person you were replying to

[meadowphoenix]

I've said nothing about norms being reasonable, because their reasonableness isn't really the point here. Norms can be useful or not useful depending on your perspective, purpose, social space, and habits (and frankly there are likely P L E N T Y of norms in the spaces you like to be in, that you like. Some norms in a lot of queer spaces? "Don't out people" and "You use the name/pronouns people give you." I'm willing to bet that you're fine with those, as am I). Bible belt norms are made from shitty perspectives so no surprise that they have shitty norms, but a ton of norms are just about different perspectives and have both pros and cons like indirect v. direct ask culture or conversational v. non-conversational stranger interactions or generational v. small family structures.

because there are really no universally-agreed-upon norms
I mean, "agree-upon" as a sign of deliberateness isn't necessary for a norm to appear (norms can form from habit and tend to in fandom spaces), and otherwise this statement is false. There are plenty of norms in fandom-spaces, that's just how social spaces operate. Agree that tagging on AO3 is from my perspective really nice. It's just that that sentiment is entirely irrelevant to this conversation.

[(Anonymous)]

Ratings and warnings are two different things.

If you rate your story M (Mature) or E (Explicit) that will alert your readers' expectations. Based on the rating, they should know to expect mature content of SOME kind. Rating is the most important thing, way more than tags. An E rated story with CNTW carries different connotations than a G rated story with the same tag.

The debate is settled on AO3. It might be not yet settled on other sites, but AO3's TOS and FAQ is pretty clear. Tagging IS normative on AO3. Only four tags are required: Underage Sex, Rape/Noncon, Graphic Violence, and Major Character Death.

[meadowphoenix]

I mean, no imo? ratings have habitually in all respects in life and in fandom operated as warnings. But "what do ratings mean" could be a completely different convo lololol.

But agree "tagging" is normative on AO3 and the required tags indicate this. My point is that if you don't want to tag those, that a required "did not use archival warning" is a counter-reaction to the norm of tagging, in that it is a deliberate choice to remove certain expectations. I just think it doesn't perform that.