The Warnings Debate – and Virtuality

[erastes]

Apparently fandom, which is always combusting over something or other, is having a meltdown about warnings on fanfics.  I have to be honest, and say that I really don’t – and never have – seen the point of warnings.  I suppose the same sort of people who MUST HAVE THEM are the same sort of people who either 1. read the ending of a novel first to make sure it ends ok for them or 2. only read romance because they have to know the ending will be the way they expect.

See, I don't get it. If you buy another other book than Romance, you don't know how it's going to be. You take a risk on what's happening. You might identify with the characters and then the author will kill them off or pair them off with people you didn't think they should be paired off with, and you know? That's the author's right to do so. I assume that fandom started with the warnings for squicks - because we don't all want to read about golden showers or rape, but the whole thing has got entirely out of hand. Can you imagine the warnings thing leaking to books? I'm very surprised actually that it hasn't, particularly in America, although some epubs do it, warning us that the book contains objectionable practices such as gay sex. How horrible!! I'm mind to do a post about well-know classic books and add fandom warnings. For god's sake peeps, grow up. Age ratings and illegal practices - MAYBE (and that wouldn't include murder, I guess "CSI: THIS PROGRAM CONTAINS PEOPLE BEING KILLED.")but some warnings are just daft. Yes, I know people aren't going to agree with me, but as I've said before, over and over, I read fiction to be entertained, surprised, horrified, educated, taken out of my comfort zone, swept away. I don't buy a book with expectations - and I don't want to be told what happens before it happens. Shutting up now as I have no real reason to rant about fandom, not being there any more. Come the day I have to put warnings on my books I'll give up: "Transgressions: contains male sex, stockholm syndrome, torture, character death, crying women, unmilked cows, laziness, men with long hair, feathers, Civil War, hanging innocent women, underage drinking, swearing, sexual activity, big hats, cruelty to horses, battle scenes which some people might find disturbing, mild to frightening peril, adultery, disability, antique speech, snow and Cromwell." oh what? NOW you want to read it???

Virtuality - Hmmm – I’m watching it right now, and with a Western Feel to it, and twanging chords – the tone shouts FIREFLY at me so far. However the shot i saw of the ship looked a lot cleaner (Don’t tell Mal I said that)

Ok – so this is the American Civil War.  Am I watching the right show? This version I’m watching is cutting everyone’s heads off, this is annoying. *switches to Fox* Was it Fox that cancelled Firefly?  Was it too grubby and edgy for them, and they had to make a nice white ship with a good mix of black white asian, disabled and gay people?

Anyhoo, this DOES look promising. *watches on*

Awww – the married gay couple are so SWEET!!!!!!!!! I mean – come ON guys. Married gay men in space?  Could you have seen that last year?

And it has the lovely James D’Arcy (Nicholas Nickleby) in it.. *faint and thud *

Interesting concept…and something I can actually see happening. In fact I don’t know why it isn’t already happening in the Space Station already.

However – WHY are all the Brits the baddies? Three Brits, three problems.

and….Fox is getting a thumbs up email from me!! MAKE THIS A SERIES YOU BAR STEWARDS!

Comments

[semioticwarrior.livejournal.com]

>CSI: THIS PROGRAM CONTAINS PEOPLE BEING KILLED

No, no, no. Violence is perfectly all right. In fact, rape is all right, too, because she probably asked for it.

What's NOT OK is the idea that a child might see a breast, or two people of the same gender exchanging a loving kiss. THAT will warp a person. In fact, I suggest we ban breast feeding right away, for the sake of the children...innocent babies do NOT need to be exposed to tits in their face every time they turn around!

(kidding! kidding! kidding!)

::shakes head::

[lyras.livejournal.com]

some warnings are just daft

Yes, but nobody's asking for "daft" warnings. They're just asking for the major common triggers to be warned for.

*shrugs* To me, it seems like a very little thing to do, considering the amount of misery it could help people avoid.

[lamardeuse.livejournal.com]

I suppose the same sort of people who MUST HAVE THEM are the same sort of people who either 1. read the ending of a novel first to make sure it ends ok for them or 2. only read romance because they have to know the ending will be the way they expect.

Well, not in this particular case. The people asking for warnings for certain select things are survivors of sexual assault and abuse, who would like not to have panic attacks and depressive episodes when they are triggered by a fic without warnings for common triggers (there are only about five or six of these being discussed, most of them involving sexual violence). Since you're not in fandom any more, as you say, you may not be aware of this.

[rbm00.livejournal.com]

"I suppose the same sort of people who MUST HAVE THEM are the same sort of people who either 1. read the ending of a novel first to make sure it ends ok for them or 2. only read romance because they have to know the ending will be the way they expect."

Hmm... I don't quite agree there. I'm not much into fan-fiction anymore, but when I was, the warnings seemed appropriate enough. I mean, if the story has gay sex and the author wants to put a warning saying some people might find the contents objectionable, that's totally fine with me. Just because you're supportive of and tolerant of gay rights and what not, doesn't mean you want to read about gay sex. I know because my sister won't even touch my books XP And if it has menage in it, especially as part of the main plot, I'd certainly love a warning so I can stay the hell away.

"although some epubs do it, warning us that the book contains objectionable practices such as gay sex. How horrible!!"

I only shop from certain publishers, but I think Loose Id and Samhain does it. I think Loose Id's warnings are pretty much in the spirit of what I just explained above. Samhain's warnings are meant to be humorous; they don't have spoilers and most of what it is is just poking fun at some romance tropes you might find in the book. I actually think they're funny.

I guess I don't feel one way or the other about warnings, but I don't think they're as bad as you make them out to be.

[spindriftdancer.livejournal.com]

I prefer to stay away from hardcore S&M, but you can usually pick up hints about that from the blurbs. Again, personal choice.

[sleveen.livejournal.com]

I think the unmilked cows is what distressed me the most in Transgressions. You bastard. *sniff*

[spindriftdancer.livejournal.com]

Dunno, that thing about unmilked cows... That's a show-stopper for me, too ;p

Ok, as a wimpy romance reader, I do have to put a hand up and say that I really like the happy endings. My own personal life is pretty crappy, and I get it thrown in my face often enough that life is nasty, brutish and short. I don't mind different sorts of endings, too, but when I'm reading romance getting a curve-ball in the face is a bit too shocking. Out in 'Literature Land' I'm expecting it. Bittersweet is okay, but brutal... meh.

[smurasaki.livejournal.com]

Fanfic is a little separated from the usual cues people use to find fiction they enjoy, so I can see why people want warnings. In published fiction, there are reviews, the back of the book, and even the genre to give people some idea what they're getting into. Movies and TV shows have ratings, reviews, episode descriptions, and so forth. Fandom doesn't generally have any of those things. Sometimes fanfics don't even have descriptions beyond their list of warnings.

There's also the fact that I've heard of things in fanfic that would not show up in anything anywhere close to mainstream fiction. Some good things and some very, um, not generally considered good things.

Then again, I enjoy fiction for escapism, so I'm a bit more sympathetic to other people wanting to do that without having to worry about tripping over triggers or being distressed.

(And yes, I know reading purely for escapism means I miss a lot of very good books.)

[norton-gale.livejournal.com]

I agree that warnings are a "fandom" thing that wouldn't cross over into mainstream media. Yes, taken to the extreme, warnings can be silly, but after reading posts by people who've suffered through rape and childhood abuse, I want to do my part not to re-traumatize those in our relatively small online community. But if I ever publish mainstream, all bets are off. No one expects books to come with warnings, and that's something I would oppose.

[angelabenedetti.livejournal.com]

I'm with you -- I don't want spoilers as a reader and I won't include them as a writer. Warnings are too often spoilery, so there you go. In my fannish writing, I've posted warnings three times that I recall, and twice the subject being "warned" for was inherent in the challenge prompt and therefore wasn't any kind of secret, so it didn't bother me. The third time was for an extremely minor incident which happened off-screen and wasn't a huge deal in the larger context of the story; the mod of a community I value highly as a place to link asked me to add a warning, and while I wasn't happy it was preferable (in that case) to taking the link down.

In general, though, I don't warn. If that means some people don't read my fics, then that's what it means and I'm okay with that. As you pointed out, the rest of the world doesn't post warnings all over its fictional content (and seeing so many e-presses posting fannish-style warnings with their books bothers me greatly) and people manage to get along. If a person is triggered by this or that mention, then that's what reviews are for, or thematic lists, or even a friend. "Hey, Mary, did you read 'New Story?' Does it have any you-know in it?" There you go.

And regarding all these icky fannish themes which don't appear in mainstream media, I've purchased erotica books in national chain bookstores which contained graphic rape; nonconsensual bondage, flogging, and other violence; and characters forced to eat shit. None of these books had "warnings" for any of those things, and no one was picketing outside the bookstore. The idea is that if you're old enough to be buying erotica in the first place, then you're old enough to take personal responsibility for what you choose to read.

I have no issue with writers who choose to post warnings with their fiction. I don't like it, as a reader, but it's their choice and I'm not going to tell them not to. What I have an issue with is the people in this debate who are flinging cussing insults at writers who choose not to warn. Back atcha, babe. [eyeroll]

If a person feel strongly about warnings, then the proper response is to vote with your eyeballs and not read the fiction of writers who choose not to warn. There you go -- problem solved. Whether you wait for a review or a friend to perform the warning function for you (as I assume you do with commercial books and movies and TV shows and whatever all else) before reading, or whether you choose to boycott all together out of protest, whichever. But cussing the writer out for choosing not to spoil her story with warnings, knowing that it'll likely cut down her audience but choosing to accept that, is way over the line.

Angie

[alex-beecroft.livejournal.com]

I think warning for Cromwell is completely justified.

[essayel.livejournal.com]

There are people who genuinely get psychologically distressed by certain subjects and there are hot house flowers who demand that people take notice of their preferences.

I have vast sympathy for the first group and none at all for the second. But the argument gave rise to this lovely set of warnings from the introduction to Disippation and Despair by A. J. Hall :


Warnings
Vegetarians may be offended by the black pudding incident.
Teetotallers are reminded that this fanfic contains numerous scenes set in the local pub.
The fic contains references to illegal drug taking for recreational purposes.
Atheists are warned that the local vicar is presented in a favourable light.
Catholics may be disturbed to learn that he is contemplating committing monogamy.
Mary-Sue haters are advised that he is an OC.
Those who are anxious that respect for authority be reinforced in fiction are warned that he is in conflict with his Bishop.
Presbyterians are advised that there is a Bishop.
Other religious groups are asked to note that this fic does not contain equal airtime for their own theological standpoints.
Bogomils may be distressed by the Bogomil/bugger pun in the fifth chapter.
Eco-warriors may find the gratuitous deployment of a Porsche 996 distressing...also the metaphor which refers to harpooning whales.
Dog haters; the spaniels are back.
Cat haters; Crookshanks appears for the first time.
Epidemiologists should note that the incubation time of Pasteurella pestis in the human body has been deliberately played about with for plot purposes.
There is an unfavourable reference to Mussolini, which Fascists may find offensive.
This book may contain traces of nuts.
There are references to rolls and Jammie dodgers, which those following the Atkins diet may prefer to avoid.
Oh, and the boys are still at it like rabbits.

[liriaen.livejournal.com]

FANTASTIC!!! ♥

[erastes.livejournal.com]

*dies laughing *

I

[beckyblack]

I'm already deeply intrigued by "the black pudding incident".

[essayel.livejournal.com]

A J Hall wrote Harry Potter fan fics as parodies of Dorothy Sayers, Terry Pratchett etc. and is the only person I know of to have written HP/Vorkosigan Saga crossovers. They are my absolute favourites for many reasons but mainly for the humour. Lust Over Pendle is the first one in the series but you can dip in anywhere for a giggle. They may be found on shoesforindustry.com.

[leatherdykeuk.livejournal.com]

You make a good point about censoring. I can't show a loving, golden shower scene but I can show the same character having his eyes gouged out with an egg cup. And no, that dog doesn't have a scrotum.

[erastes.livejournal.com]

VERY good point.

[spindriftdancer.livejournal.com]

My husband's friend's dad, who is very, very Baptist (sorry about the grammar, I'm tired)... thinks Rambo is fun, and sex on tv is bad.

I believe it's the same sort of syndrome.

[leatherdykeuk.livejournal.com]

gah! What is so bad about sex? There's a book I want banned that glorifies rape, sodomy, genocide, torture, incest and murder. They won't ban it though. It's the Bible.

[mylodon.livejournal.com]

Don't get me started on Brits as baddies.

How does one watch this virtuality - is it on mainstream channels here or is it on the webbie?

[erastes.livejournal.com]

I watched it on Fox On Demand - it's also on Hulu - but you'll need to hide behind an IP hider - as it's only available in the US - I use hotspotshield.

Very enjoyable, great concept and lots of room to make a series

I like big hats and I can not lie

[vinnie-tesla.livejournal.com]

Back in the days of the ASSTR flash-stroke festival, I was amused to notice that some of the boiler-plate disclaimers were literally as long as the stories they warned about. I responded with a disclaimer of my own.