fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #6982 ]

[ SECRET POST #6982 ]

⌈ Secret Post #6982 ⌋

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

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 25 secrets from Secret Submission Post #997.
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.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Vaginal anything. It's very disconcerting that I run into it A LOT these days in the M/M section. I'm there specifically because I don't want that.

And people think I'm trolling when I say a 'cis' tag would genuinely help people like you who area looking ONLY for that. :(

The people who would tag cis already tag trans, which makes that easily avoided. The people who wouldn't use it are the ones making their omega intersexed or only have vaginas or have a male character "not be trans but he has a vagina just because."

I meant you could block trans and search for cis, and know for 100% sure that what you find is cis.

Whereas only blocking trans means you still have to guess.

It's just not a useful suggestion. No one would use the tag other than the people who already tag things correctly. People would absolutely push back that it's not a mandated tag so they don't have to and you're an asshole for even asking.

I mean no one HAS to tag anything and that's been true since forever. Tags are supposed to be both for avoiding things you don't want AND finding things you do want.

I dunno why you're so opposed to it, but okay.

I'm neck deep in tagging discourse around other things, and the pushback when you suggest someone tag something that actually is a major trigger (such as graphic child abuse, spousal abuse, etc etc) is insane. Tagging "cis" for canonically cis characters is so mild as to be worthless when you can't even get someone to tag for suicide.

Someone who isn't going to tag for suicide isn't going to tag for anything though. Those are lost causes whether it's mild or extreme. But someone who writes both trans fic and cis fic who does tag properly can direct you only to those fics, so you don't have to guess and gamble on untagged ones.

I understand you're against the idea though, so I'm going to shrug and drop it here.

DA

It's not correct because this is fanfiction, fic based on established characters, people, and stories. If a character is cis in canon you don't need to tag that /because/ it is already canon. Like I'm the OP for the poc character tag, and it is wrong, imo, to tag a canon character based on the canon colour of their skin. Tagging their canon gender would be similarly strange.

Hell, if I'm reading GTA V fic, I don't expect them to tag for minor violence either. But that's another whole can of worms altogether.

Not really with the cis tag, even though I'm in the exact same boat.
If something is canon then tagging it is not necessary, people should be tagging trans character accurately, regardless of if it's their headcanon/popular. They should also specify which way the character is trans as well, which honestly people have been a lot better at than since Trans Characters became everyones new fav kink. At least they are where I lurk.

Like people tag differently for different fandoms, and tags are a mess as they are, but when you literally change the gender/body of a character then that should definitely be one of the top tags on the list. Cis wouldn't be on the radars of fandoms with little gender tags, and unless you're going by the rule 63, "has always be a girl/guy", trans fem shepard, transmasc shepard, etc, ect. There are too many variations already that adding another tag into the mix would just be even more annoying to sort through. Especially because you already know people are going to do it wrong.

This. I don't use a "trans" tag when I write about my canon's canon trans character because we all KNOW she's trans, that's canon. Anyone who is searching for fic about her knows what they want and what they're going to be getting.

I would, however, use a "cis" tag if I were writing her as being a cis girl for whatever reason because that's NOT canon and so no one would be expecting to find that in a fic.

ayrt

Exactly! It's weird to me to tag for something that is canonly a part of who a character is. There's no need to add a citation unless you are changing the script/character themself! Just like you mentioned.

I honestly don't get it!

DA I tag my m/m with m/m even if it's from a canon BL series, because people do search for the "m/m" tag and want to find m/m.

It doesn't matter if it's canon or not? It's purely for sorting purposes.

If we're talking AO3, then the m/m is a separate category so it wouldn't need an extra tag.

Yeah vaginal anything is def a squick for me. Amd I too have run into it in the M/M tag! Surprise vagunal sex is very much not what I'm looking for in my slashfic.

I don't mind vaginal stuff...in my femslash or het!

What makes people think we'd want that in slash?

DA As someone who respects your desire to not read that, people probably think people want that in slash because a lot of other people do want that lol

This is like watching someone ask why anyone would think people want dicks in their F/F?? and like. Have you seen the enormous amount of people who absolutely do want this.....

The tagging is so shit with these people, I'm so damn tired of having to manually block every seperate vaginal sex act just in case when searching for M/M fic these days.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

[ SECRET POST #6982 ]

Re: Do you have any squicks?

Re: Do you have any squicks?

Re: Do you have any squicks?

Re: Do you have any squicks?

Re: Do you have any squicks?

Re: Do you have any squicks?

Re: Do you have any squicks?

Re: Do you have any squicks?

Re: Do you have any squicks?

Re: Do you have any squicks?

Re: Do you have any squicks?

Re: Do you have any squicks?

Re: Do you have any squicks?

Re: Do you have any squicks?

Re: Do you have any squicks?

Re: Do you have any squicks?

Re: Do you have any squicks?

Re: Do you have any squicks?