To Warn, or Not to Warn?
Warnings are tricky things, aren't they?
Well, depends on the person. I have a somewhat convoluted opinion on warnings, myself. I usually like them to be as specific as possible (e.g., warning for sexual abuse rather than just abuse). That way, I can decide whether or not I'm in the mood to read a fic dealing with "issue x." However, there are times when the warnings might give away too much of the plot. For instance, animal abuse is one of my major squicks. If I saw a warning for "animal abuse," and still decided to read the fic, I'd spend most of the time worrying about when it would happen. I'd prefer a simple, "caveat lector" here; of course, I would still be disturbed by the animal abuse, but I wouldn't spend so much time anticipating it. Also, the caveat lector warning lets me know that something disturbing is going to occur, so I won't be offended when it finally happens.
I believe that including some kind of warning is better than not including any at all. I read a fic featuring an attempted rape, and there was no warning for it. I wasn't triggered, but I can see how others could have been. I understand that the sexual assault was a key plot point, and that warning specifically for it could have potentially spoiled the plot, but like I've said before, caveat lector is pretty handy in these situations.
So, there are a few ways that I like warnings. One can be specific about them, listing any content that might be triggering. One can employ the useful caveat lector. And there's also the "highlight to view" code thing:
[span style="background-color:black"][font color="black"]spoiler or warning here[/span][/font]
With "<" and ">" instead of "[" and "]". So it should turn out like this:
spoiler or warning here
See? Pretty simple. I'd say this highlighting thing is the best of both worlds. Authors can be as specific as they want; readers can choose to read the warnings, or, of they don't, they can still know without having the plot spoiled that there might be offensive content.
Peace, y'all.
Well, depends on the person. I have a somewhat convoluted opinion on warnings, myself. I usually like them to be as specific as possible (e.g., warning for sexual abuse rather than just abuse). That way, I can decide whether or not I'm in the mood to read a fic dealing with "issue x." However, there are times when the warnings might give away too much of the plot. For instance, animal abuse is one of my major squicks. If I saw a warning for "animal abuse," and still decided to read the fic, I'd spend most of the time worrying about when it would happen. I'd prefer a simple, "caveat lector" here; of course, I would still be disturbed by the animal abuse, but I wouldn't spend so much time anticipating it. Also, the caveat lector warning lets me know that something disturbing is going to occur, so I won't be offended when it finally happens.
I believe that including some kind of warning is better than not including any at all. I read a fic featuring an attempted rape, and there was no warning for it. I wasn't triggered, but I can see how others could have been. I understand that the sexual assault was a key plot point, and that warning specifically for it could have potentially spoiled the plot, but like I've said before, caveat lector is pretty handy in these situations.
So, there are a few ways that I like warnings. One can be specific about them, listing any content that might be triggering. One can employ the useful caveat lector. And there's also the "highlight to view" code thing:
[span style="background-color:black"][font color="black"]spoiler or warning here[/span][/font]
With "<" and ">" instead of "[" and "]". So it should turn out like this:
spoiler or warning here
See? Pretty simple. I'd say this highlighting thing is the best of both worlds. Authors can be as specific as they want; readers can choose to read the warnings, or, of they don't, they can still know without having the plot spoiled that there might be offensive content.
Peace, y'all.