fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #2207 ]

⌈ Secret Post #2207 ⌋

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

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

__________________________________________________

11.

__________________________________________________

12.

__________________________________________________

13.

__________________________________________________

14.

__________________________________________________

15.

__________________________________________________

16.

__________________________________________________

17.

__________________________________________________

18.

__________________________________________________

19.

__________________________________________________

20.

__________________________________________________

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 023 secrets from Secret Submission Post #315.
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

I'm on your side, here, but I do kind of have to disagree with the core sentiment/analogy you've got here.

Nuts are a common allergy, and they should be labelled in food. By that token, things like, say, non-con are also very common triggers and should be warned for. Those large things, I think most people can agree on.

It's the smaller things that get people. On food, it's easy to break it down to things like "macademia nuts" vs "peanuts" because all the ingredients typically have to be listed on there, anyway...but that's not feasible for fanfic. That's when things become complicated. Does "implied homophobia" mean there's blatant homophobia that's just never called that, hence why it's implied? Or is it because in an otherwise fluffy fic there's a single line that could be theoretically interpreted as homophobic by some people if they actively choose to see it that way? Because I've seen both those situations get the exact same warning. Is that warning warranted? Some people will say yes. But at the same time, it becomes a slippery slope to overwarning and warning for things which aren't there, at which point they completely and utterly lose their purpose and we might we well not bother warning for things at all, and/or people who have multiple triggers get "locked out" of fandom because everything has so many warnings on them, and there's almost no way to know if that warning is for a single line or the entire fic.

And all of that is before we get into the semantics thing. As I've said so many, many times - sexism =/= misogyny. But if there's even the slightest hint of sexism in your fic, you'll get slammed for not mentioning the misogyny, even if there isn't any.

I guess I kind of failed in my analogy because I was trying to equate bake sales with unmoderated fic communities or people's personal journals, things like that. On a community or site where warnings are required? Yes, labels should absolutely be used, the way ingredients are labeled on things from the grocery store. You should be able to go to a site like AO3 and expect that stuff like non-con will be warned for, just like I should be able to go to a grocery store and be able to buy food safely.

Outside of that though, it's really the author's choice. Some choose to label, others don't, and that's their personal decision. It doesn't make them terrible people, nor does it make them obligated to use warnings if they don't want to. Reading fic in places where warnings aren't required is like me buying something from a bake sale - you're taking a risk. It may be safe, it may not be. But that isn't the fault of the author. It's your decision to take that risk, knowing that the results might not be pleasant.

Ah, that's understandable. Different issue entirely, then. Apart from FFN (several years ago, I don't know what they do now), I have yet to participate in any kind of fic-based forum, community, or website that didn't require at least some form of warnings (with the grand total of one exception, a minor kinkmeme that was created explicitly to counter the fandom's main kinkmeme and actively requested users to NOT use warnings of any kind).

Most warnings wank I've seen is not over whether or not to use warnings at all (pretty much everyone agrees we should), but what kind of warnings to use, what to warn for, and how far/how extensive those warnings should go, and what words you should use depending on what you are warning for.

But yeah, if I'm going to a bakesale or something where most things are non-commercial and/or home-baked, and thus may have potentially dangerous ingredients for me with no labels, I'll stop and ask about it. If I'm going somewhere with no warnings, I'll either go into every fic knowing that at any moment I'll have to spontaneously back out because it has one of my trigger warnings or I'll just not read something without asking someone about it first. :)

FFN is one of the places I was thinking of - they require ratings but not specific content warnings. It's the author's choice if they want to give any sort of warning beyond the rating and the fic genre. Some authors do take the extra step and give warnings, some don't. Authors who don't should be demonized because it's not one of the requirements for posting on FFN. Likewise, anyone who reads fic there needs to do so with the knowledge that there might be upsetting or triggery content that isn't warned for.

But I've seen people rage at and bash authors for choosing not to use warnings even though they're fully within their rights not to do so. That's when it crosses the line over into being entitled.

[ SECRET POST #2207 ]

When nuts = noncon...

Re: When nuts = noncon...

Re: When nuts = noncon...

Re: When nuts = noncon...