On Warnings; or, Getting Readers Who Actually Like Your Stuff

[puella_nerdii]

I've been avoiding the current warnings debacle not out of fear of reprisal, but because the whole thing makes me nauseous. Quite literally. And until recently, I have not trusted myself to make a post that doesn't consist of the words "FUCK YOU" repeated over and over again

Comments

[puella_nerdii]

I know, right?

But apparently not being a dick violates ~artistic freedom~ or some bullshit like that.

[twistedsheets10]

DON'T BE A DICK.

THIS.

*hands you the Internets*

[puella_nerdii]

*hugs*

Also, Sarah Haskins! ♥ Sarah Haskins restores my faith in humanity.

I usually try to be as clear as I can with my warnings -- some of them might've been a little vague in the past, I've realized as I've gone back through my fic tag. But yeah. I'd really like not to harm people with what I write. I'm pretty sure that would ruin the rest of my day. Or week.

[twistedsheets10]

I came into fanfiction/fandom being part of a fairly young, somewhat "conservative" forum/board, so warnings for sensitive stuff was something we do fairly regularly. We knew our audience, so we warned appropriately. With the Hetalia fandom, I usually warn for the possible history fail in my part and for possibly sensitive material, because I know from experience how things could get wanky.

Like I said over at Mith's post, I think certain fics do need warnings: Those that have consent issues, graphic violence, disturbing themes. I don't like warning for character death (I'm a bit iffy on that). Most readers read fanfics for enjoyment, and I do think readers do have a right to know beforehand what they're getting into. (within reason, of course).

[puella_nerdii]

I had similar fannish beginnings -- well, not with the "young" part, as most of the people I spent time with were at least twice my age or older, but it was definitely a more conservative climate than the one I'm in now, and warnings were pretty strictly enforced

[alliterations]

Warnings are good, in general. Especially for graphic violence/rape/abuse, etc. I also warn people if I might fail in certain areas (language, historical...OMG, this is just for Hetalia XD) just so people aren't like "OMG, you suck you idiot!"

This really has nothing to do with "artistic freedom" as you mentioned in a comment earlier. As a writer, I am mindful of my readers because HEY GUESS WHAT? They read. Also, as a mindful READER, if I get into a fic and there's something that makes me go "Whoa, not cool!" I stop reading and go on with my life.

Yet another example of people not realizing most things in the world are two-way streets and both sides have to be mindful of the other. Readers deserved to be warned, of course, but they also have the ability to stop and go somewhere else, instead of sitting there bashing the author.

[puella_nerdii]

In fic where warnings are both accurate and in place -- or for fic where the author has said "no warnings here; read at your own risk" -- then yes, I'd agree. The issue I have with the idea that people can stop reading if they stumble across triggering content that isn't warned for is that by the time they hit it, the trigger's already gone off, so to speak. (Impertinence's post, which I linked to, explains it far better than I can. In short: triggers are very different from squicks, and triggers are what's being discussed in the ongoing kerfluffle.) If someone chooses to ignore warnings, then yeah, that's on their head, but the warnings should be there so they can choose in the first place.

[alliterations]

Wholeheartedly agree. I was speaking for myself, and I don't think I have a trigger.

[puella_nerdii]

I have some, but -- they're weird, and they're generally not things that are warned for, nor would I expect them to be. I have one trigger that generally is warned for, that I don't think I've ever seen not warned for in some regard, and the times I've ignored those warnings have been entirely on my head, because I had an extra-textual warning about what was coming.

[blossommorphine]

This, so much. You've said it with far more calrity and less cursing than I have. It takes five secons to warn for the basics, like noncon or possible under-age (always varying where you are) or what-have-you, and then you've avoided people reading something they are uncomfortable or possibly hurt by. It feels like common courtesy, empathy for people who aren't you and won't react to the same things the way you do, and it's not like they are telling you not to write it (and if they are, then it is a case of "don't like, don't read").

The whole thing really suprised me, because it seemed like such a basic thing, like putting in the disclaimer, or hell, title. It never really occured to me that someone wouldn't warn for something.

Somtimes, people kind of suck.

[puella_nerdii]

*nods* I can't always guess what's going to trigger readers, nor is it really my job to, but there are a few basics. No, there's nothing forcing you to adhere to standards of common courtesy -- nor should there be, necessarily -- but I really do try not to be a douche on the Internet, and I think most people have some capacity to empathize. Or so I'd hope.