-poing-(It's minor because it's one sentence, but it's major because the sentence in question appears on every single fanficrecs page without exception.) A livejournal comment took issue with that sentence, and while livejournal (or at least the few comms i lurk) is known for taking PC a bit too seriously, the person kind of has a point. (i kinda hope they have a troper handle, because i am not willing to be a go-between on this if the discussion turns into a debate) What do?
Yeah can we please change this, it's kind of insulting. At least reword it.
Something like, "Please remember to warn for any important relationships in the fic, as Shipping is Serious Business" would probably serve the same function without being as offensive.
132 is the rudest number.
Also, the pothole of "non-canon" to "Better Than Canon" comes across as arrogant, even for a page about recommendations. After all, most of the time it isn't. I can kind of see where the other part was coming from, though. In my book, making canonically straight characters gay is as much Canon Defilement as making canonically gay characters straight. Still had the ring of Unfortunate Implications, though, so I support getting rid of it, although I'm not sure the new proposal is quite what we want.
Well technically the warning could apply to canonically gay characters being gay, too. Yeah, this definitely has to go.
edited 18th Mar '11 5:44:15 PM by joeyjojojuniorshabadoo
edited 18th Mar '11 5:44:04 PM by troacctid
Rhymes with "Protracted."
-poing-Well, the definition of Better Than Canon doesn't actually require that it's actually better, only that the author intended it as such. (which means the name doesn't really fit, does it? to TRS with it?)
Which is cool and all, except that a) there's nothing that specifies that it's about making straight characters gay. b) there's no other specific warnings about screwing with canon in other ways, such as making a character OOC, or a gay character straight. I like "List non-canon ships, because Shipping is Serious Business." Shipping shouldn't be a warning anyways. Speaking of warnings, can we make a note about the importance of warning for triggers? Most fics would have it in the summary/notes when you link to them, but then again they would usually also have the ships.
edited 18th Mar '11 5:59:17 PM by sxizzor
and : I wasn't really defending it, merely noting why it might not necessarily have been meant in the homophobic fashion it came out as. I'm a little dubious about the new proposal as, while less common, there are other ways to drastically shake up canon with a fic then shipping - for instance, making the protagonist evil for reasons besides Die for Our Ship. Er, I have to ask: what are triggers?
edited 18th Mar '11 6:34:39 PM by nrjxll
-poing-We have a page on triggers.
Don't 99.9% of these stories already have warnings once you click the link? We're already asking for the genre. We've already said that if its a shipping fic you should say who's being shipped and I haven't seen any abuse of that. The thing about fanfiction is that the things that have potential to offend are usually the entire point. We could insist that there be warnings for dark, deconstructive alternate character interpretations, for example, but tropers nearly always volunteer that stuff in the summary field anyway, because it's nearly always the premise and selling point of the piece... and so do authors, usually, once you follow the link. No other form of fiction is so touchy about what may or may not offend somebody somewhere. Real authors feel comfortable revealing that a characters was gay all along seven seasons, or killing off people unpredicably if it makes a better story, or even adjusting the tone without warning as they go. Fan fiction languishes in the fan fiction ghetto partly because of the idea that it always has to be porn and can't ever do anything other than pander to a pinpoint demographic in a way that promises not to challenge or inconvience the reader in the least. So, yes, we could say "redundant warnings for X, Y, and Z are manditory" just like everyone else. But I say we buck the trend, let authors decide for themselves what they want to warn about and readers decide what they want to risk, and be the Big Damn Heroes the internet needs. Who's with me?
edited 18th Mar '11 7:44:17 PM by Bailey
Diva of Virtual DeathGuess I'm the only one who doesn't see what was so insulting about it in the slightest. Slash stories and non-canon stories are extremely prominent in fandoms, and, believe it or not, not everyone who isn't into or is neutral about slash is a homophobic bigot, so those of us who are not into or neutral really appreciate the notices so we can focus on the canon-based gen or het stuff first. Nor did I read it as being "homosexual and thus non-canon stories" but "homosexual stories and non-canon stories". As in, something predominately non-canon but with no slash in sight should still receive a mention. Having said all that, I do think a more neutral and comprehensive wording would be best just for being thorough about information. Why not just say "Be sure to list all major ships", and "warn for any non-canon content" as a separate, general warning thing? Even if the ships involved are all official, it's useful to know the fic focuses on them for the opposite reason of pointing out to fans of the couple that they'll particularly find the work interesting.
adopting kittehThis is Fanfic. I'm not sure what would "warn for any *non-canon* content" be taken as. Other than that, yeah, some more genericity in the warnings would help. awesomesmiley.jpeg. In my case it was mostly for exactness. I've seen some times that when some community or mod starts pushing for "everything that you can in a summary" readers are left to face with such things as "character death".
edited 18th Mar '11 8:35:29 PM by SilentReverence
Diva of Virtual DeathWhy do I always attract smartass responses? Seriously? Pretty sure what I meant was obvious (AUs or other elements that directly contradict established canon in some way), just phrased in a way that separates it from the question of slash content which may or may not be non-canon-based in and of itself (since some works have official homosexual ships). Edit: Sorry. Just had a lot of frustration on other forums where something I say gets taken super-literally when I felt the more typical colloquial meaning should have been obvious. But, yeah, I mainly meant I agreed with the part of the original warning regards a fanfic which deliberately goes against canon for whichever reason. Doesn't necessarily have to be a detailed note, just a note.
edited 18th Mar '11 8:41:43 PM by Jeysie
PiffyI don't think we need to be too specific about what kinds of trigger warnings are required; just make them required, with a pothole to the article we have for triggers. This stuff should hopefully be relatively common-sense, although it also kinda requires empathy for other people, which I know is ~hard~ to do on the internet. And before anyone says that people who have triggers should just deal with it/read at their own risk or not read fanfic at all. . . anyone who says that obviously has no idea what it's like to feel true terror, to have a traumatic event burned into your mind that you will never, ever forget it in all its horrible, photographic detail, to have your hands shake and your throat tighten just thinking about something that happened to you nearly a decade ago. . . .I was going to write more here, to try and address how othering it is to demand "warnings" for slash, but someone else can do that. I need to go fix some hot cocoa and wait for my hands to stop shaking.
Because underscores break everything: Working link to my Troper page
Diva of Virtual DeathIt's a simple majority thing. Most possible triggers aren't common to lots of stories. But slash is very common, so those folks not into it or who aren't into reading it all the time, really do appreciate being told about the minority of stories that don't include/focus on it, so we actually know what fics they are. Because you don't get to assume a fic is gen or het (since most of them aren't). I mean, you're talking to a bisexual in a same-sex RL relationship, for pity's sake, so it gets really tiresome having a preference for non-slash fanworks treated like it always means you're a bigot or close-minded or whatever.
edited 18th Mar '11 8:58:34 PM by Jeysie
^ The rules already say that if there's shipping, you list the ships. Gay, straight, canon, or non-canon. The only way a person's going to accidentally run into slash is if they don't know the genders of the characters in the original material. And again, 99.9% of the fics we're linking to already contain warnings at the top of the page. Couldn't we just say to add warnings only if they're not covered in the actual fic headers?
Diva of Virtual DeathI guess, although it is nice to know ahead of time that you're not going to want to waste one's time clicking on a fic. Or, if the converse is true and you really like whatever the element being "warned" about is, you'll want to click on that one first. But then, I'm the "information is useful" sort of person. Other than trying to not spoil major twists/surprises, what's wrong with providing info in general?
I suppose I'm just in favor of letting the author decide about the degree of specificity required in content warnings. Some authors may prefer to preserve twists by making very broad statements about content (e.g. "may contain triggering content for some people" without saying what) and I think it's fair enough to respect that, as long as there's some warning. * Also, please note that there's still a summary and genre field, and fanfic genres are fetishistically specific. So a person looking for, say, hurt/comfort fic, still won't incovenienced, and a person looking to avoid that won't either.
edited 18th Mar '11 10:14:20 PM by Bailey
PiffyThat's kinda what I meant by "use common sense". Obviously not every trigger under the sun can be warned for — some people are triggered by some very esoteric things — but there's things that are common enough as triggers (e.g. rape, abuse, torture, suicide) that are very obviously sensitive subjects and it ought to be common courtesy to warn for. Character death and other spoilery warnings can be provided in highlight-to-read—>[[Spoiler:format, which is easy enough to do with a bit of HTML]], or, on non-HTML-friendly places like FF.net, listing them in an A/N at the bottom of the chapter, and putting an A/N at the top of the chapter saying that there's warnings at the bottom of the chapter that might count as spoilers, so skip down to the bottom if you really want to find out. In regards to "warning that [the author] doesn't warn", as long as the author actually DOES warn that they don't warn (and/or give a link to their "warning policy", if they have one), does in fact count as a warning, as people can then make an informed choice as to whether or not they want to risk it. That's a lot different than having something triggery suddenly sprung on you in the middle of a fic that you thought was going to be a safe and pleasant read due to the distinct lack of any warnings or indication of a no-warnings policy. Also, in regards to the "authors should be allowed to choose how their fics are represented": Have you ever seen a situation where an author writes a clearly Rape Is Love / Abuse Is Love fic. . . and then adamantly refuses to acknowledge that the situation they've depicted is, in fact, rape/abuse, much less label it as such?
Because underscores break everything: Working link to my Troper page
Also, in regards to the "authors should be allowed to choose how their fics are represented": Have you ever seen a situation where an author writes a clearly Rape Is Love / Abuse Is Love fic. . . and then adamantly refuses to acknowledge that the situation they've depicted is, in fact, rape/abuse, much less label it as such? All the time on ffrants. I blame Twilight. * Agreed that we should have some warning for triggers, and also agreed that "I choose not to warn" should be enough. We could spoiler warnings, too, even if the author doesn't on the fic's actual page. That way people that don't have triggers could get an extra layer of mystery if they so choose, and people who do can be warned.
edited 19th Mar '11 9:48:38 AM by sxizzor
A thought that just occured to me: We're a wiki. Anyone can edit, and we have no formal process of review for fanfic recs. If we're really talking about doing what's best for people who will have flashbacks, hallucinations, and nervous breakdowns when confronted with triggering content, should we even be offering false reassurances that triggering content will be labelled? Are we going to be banning people for not labelling or taking some other effort to ensure that this information can be 100% trusted, even on a wiki? If we draw a line and say "these are the most common triggering things" what happens when someone comes along who has a severe problem with whatever the thing was that just didn't make the cut? I bring this point up in sincere confusion.
edited 19th Mar '11 10:09:10 AM by Bailey
Miniature Equine AficionadoPeople who find that offensive probably want to offended. I can't explain it otherwise. I see no reason for a rewrite. At all.
edited 19th Mar '11 11:08:23 AM by Nyarly
People aren't as awful as the internet makes them out to be.
I'm sorry, you're right, being offended is ~my fault~ and not the fault of the person who is actually being offensive. Do go on. I don't get enough of this from my family.
Pronounced YAK-you-lussReposted from the discussion page for the Firefly recs list:
That's the standard top-of-page warning for Fan Fic Recommendations. I don't really see what's so offensive about noting that some folks don't like slash, either - I mean, I'm fine with slashfics existing, but that doesn't stop them from being a niche interest that not everyone enjoys reading. Also, the issue with listing pairings and not whether there is slash is that it doesn't tell us which of the pairings is explored in particular detail. See, the difference between 'Pairings: Mal/River, Simon/Jayne, lemon' and 'Pairings: Mal/River, Simon/Jayne, lemon, slash' is that one implies that yes, we're going to get intimate detail of Jayne and Simon boinking, whilst the other leaves it more ambiguous. Meanwhile, a note of 'mild, occasional slash' tells us that the boys are probably going to be restricted to kissing and references to off-screen sex whilst Mal and River get inventively freaky all over the ship. Given that, let's face it, a majority of people read lemons to get their rocks off, and different people are going to be turned on by different pairings and orientations, it's useful for them to have as much detail as possible about whose sexytimes they're going to be reading about. You follow?I'd also add that I'd be similarly cool with 'mild and occasional het' warnings for that sort of fic. It's just that I see slash as more niche, and thus normally more likely to warrant mentioning.
edited 19th Mar '11 12:17:30 PM by Iaculus
Freedom of speech includes the freedom for other people to call you out on your bullshit.
TV Tropes by TV Tropes Foundation, LLC is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available from firstname.lastname@example.org.