my idiotic little warning-label rant

[hth]

Warning labels aren't one of the things I get all exercised about, every six months when they become an Issue again in fandom. There are certain subjects I'm totally willing to revisit over and over again for the rest of my life, but that isn't really one of them, basically because it's become blindingly obvious to me that no solution will ever make everyone happy, and such is life.

However, just this one time, I want to say this.

As much as you, gentle reader, may hate accidentally reading a story that upsets or disturbs you in some way -- and I get that you hate it, I hear that -- that is exactly how much I hate being told before I even start the damn story that everything turns out all right in the end. I fucking *hate* that, because if the story is even remotely well-crafted, there was a perfectly good chance that I would undergo some amount of suspense and excitement while reading it, but not anymore. I hate it when people do it in the notes to their own stories, I hate it when people do it in recs, and I *really* hate it when people do it to my stories. I also don't want to be told that everything *doesn't* turn out all right in the end -- if I get warned for character death, I goddamn well want it to happen in the first three paragraphs, otherwise I consider it a spoiler.

Isn't it weird how fandom gets so freaky intense about protecting people from spoilers in canon (don't say it was a funny one! Don't say Ladon's going to be in it! Warn people if your story gives away the color of Rodney's cat as revealed last week!), and yet is totally blase about giving away the ending of fanfic before anyone has a chance to read it and think, even for a moment, Wow, I wonder how this is going to work out?

You see what I'm saying about the no-win situation? If you don't warn for unpleasantness, you'll piss off all those other people. If you do warn by giving away the ending, you'll piss me off. Warning labels are a fandom dead-end. Everything you do is wrong, so you just have to pick your poison.

I think of labeling and recs and that kind of thing as serving a function similar to movie trailers. I know what kind of stuff I like, and if someone's written that kind of thing, I want to know about it, and I also want to know what I'm probably not going to be into enough to spend my time on it. This is a sketchy proposition at best -- how many movies have you wasted your time on because the trailer looked really awesome, and yet, no? But, for example, take The Departed, which I saw not too long ago. I knew it was a Scorcese flick, and I know not only that I love him, but what kind of stories he's generally drawn to, so that helped. I also saw a bunch of commercials, which told me it was some kind of a gangster movie, which I took to mean it would probably be violent. I read a couple of reviews, wherein I was told that it was kind of a psychological thriller about the parallel lives of a gangster undercover with the cops and a cop undercover with gangster, and that the reviewers in question liked it. This is the kind of thing I want to know. I do not, under any circumstances, want to know the body count. I don't want to know that. I want to be aware that, given the setting, the plot, and the people involved, there could well be one, and then I want to watch the freaking movie. Equivalently, I don't mind vague warnings for "darkness" or "adult content" or whatever; that's fine to know, that helps me know the mood and milieu to expect. But then let me *read the story* to find out if it's the everybody-dies kind of darkness or the wow-close-call! kind.

Anyway. Like I said, I think it's just a decision that everyone who writes or recs has to make, knowing that they're helping some of their potential readers enjoy the story more and causing some of their potential readers to enjoy it less. You just make the call and then get on with your life.

Comments

[fantasyenabler.livejournal.com]

Here via metafandom. Also, here to dissent.

While I agree that warnings can act as spoilers, I also think they are a necessary evil. Yes, most fiction books and/or movies don't come with a warning label on them. However, they do come with opportunities to research them beforehand, in the way of reviews, author interviews, and word of mouth, that most fic does not offer. With most fic, all you've got before you is a link to a story written by someone you most likely do not know. Thus, you need some sort of information to gain an indication of what you're getting yourself into.

Ratings are helpful, but typically too vague to provide much information, and the same goes for many adult sites' classification policies. Hence, like it or not, warnings are usually a fic reader's best selection tool when it comes to choosing to read a fic. Nothing else is specific enough to let you know what might be ahead of you.

Also, while some warnings may seem like they're about silly things, others are not. Again, like it or not, there are child abuse survivors out there who don't appreciate either underage or incest fic. There are rape survivors who don't appreciate non-con, BDSM, or slave fic. There are even people who've fought in wars who don't want to read torture fic or other things that risk triggering attacks of PTSD. I know people who fall under all of these categories, and I myself qualify for at least one.

Speaking for myself, I don't care if you don't warn me that you're going to kill Character A three-quarters of the way through the fic. However, if you're going to have a child raped at that same point and there's no warning, you can expect to receive an email from me, and I can assure you I will *not* be happy. Also, you can be assured that I won't care if what I say pisses you off. I have too much perspective as what's really frightening in the world to care about that thing. I just don't want you causing pain to others like me who aren't as apt to speak up about it happens.

Thus to me, warnings are a system of mutual protection. They allow readers to skip things they have an aversion to, and they allow writers to write what they want without having to worry about the Censorship Cavalry, such as the people who were ranting against incest a little while back, riding in and trying to paint these fic writers as perversion spreading freaks. My response to them was that I am an SN fan and yet I have never been fooled into reading anything I don't want to read, because most Wincest is very clearly marked. In this way, specific warnings make it possible for writers to do what they want, because they put the burden on readers to take personal responsibility for what they click and read.

In other words, it's thanks to warnings that I have no right to cry "My eyes!" after I've waltzed past a sign I should have stopped and read. I also have no right to throw rocks at you, even if you're doing something I don't like.

I just ask that you don't lead me down a dark path and then drop something heavy and unpleasant on me. Because then, I'll have no choice but to ride with the Censorship Cavalry to keep myself safe, and believe me, that's the last thing in the world I want to do.

[fantasyenabler.livejournal.com]

I just don't want you causing pain to others like me who aren't as apt to speak up about it happens.

Should be "when it happens."

I hate LJ sometimes. *sigh*

[liviapenn.livejournal.com]

With most fic, all you've got before you is a link to a story written by someone you most likely do not know. Thus, you need some sort of information to gain an indication of what you're getting yourself into.

There are many, many ways to research a fic before getting into it. Asking around for other people's opinions, reading the comments on the story first, first, looking for recs of the author's other stories to get a sense of what kind of stories she usually writes, etc.

If the reader has concerns, it is the reader's responsibility to do these things first, *before* reading an unlabeled story from a stranger. Why would someone with serious psychological triggers risk reading an unlabeled story from a complete stranger? I like fanfic as much as anyone else, but after reading two or three stories that caused me serious psychological damage, *I would not read fics unless I knew they were safe*. And I would *not* assume that a fic with no warnings is "safe."

As a child, I had some food sensitivities. If someone handed me something-- say, an unwrapped piece of candy, without a food label, there are two ways I could react.

1) "Well, there's no label on this candy that says 'artificial flavors.' Therefore it must not contain artificial flavors! It must be safe to eat!" *Wee!Livia eats the candy and becomes ridiculously hyperactive for hours*

2) "Well, there's no label on this candy that says 'artificial flavors.' It might not contain artificial flavors... but I can't be sure. I'd better not eat it." *doesn't eat it, remains non-hyperactive*

I don't see why people don't approach fic the same way. (Especially since a psychologically triggering story about rape is likely to affect them much more seriously than a piece of candy affected me when I was younger.)

People seem to be proceeding on the assumption that an unlabeled fic is safe. Instead, they should proceed on the assumption that an unlabeled fic is dangerous, and skip it, unless they can confirm *for themselves* that it is actually safe. *That's* taking personal responsibility for protecting yourself-- not expecting the author to do it for you.

In other words, it's thanks to warnings that I have no right to cry "My eyes!" after I've waltzed past a sign I should have stopped and read.

No-- it's not thanks to warnings. It's thanks to *your choice to read*. Whether there are warnings or not doesn't change the fact that if you had an unpleasant experience reading a story, you *chose* to read it. This is not the author's fault unless she intentionally misled you about the contents. (Failing to include plot spoilers in the header of the fic is *not* the same thing as misleading readers about the contents. )

Suppose I hand you a videotape. The label is blank. And I tell you, "This is a movie. I'm not telling you anything else about it. It might be G-rated or R-rated. It might be the Princess Diaries or it might be hardcore porn. Would you like to watch it?"

You have a choice: watch it, or not watch it. If you *choose to watch it*, I am not responsible if you are offended or shocked or triggered by anything in it. Even though I didn't put any warnings on the tape, I am still *not* responsible for your choice. You were aware that it was unlabeled and unrated, and could have contained anything, and *you* made the choice to watch it anyway. How is this my fault? It's not. It's yours, for not saying "No, I think I'll go watch some movies over here that *do* have labels, thanks."

Nobody is "leading you down a dark path." It is *always* your choice to read or not read, whether there are warnings or not.

[fantasyenabler.livejournal.com]

Nobody is "leading you down a dark path." It is *always* your choice to read or not read, whether there are warnings or not.

That's very true, and I don't mean to dispute that. Believe me, when it comes to my own reading, I'm very cautious in where I go and what I read, and I don't approach anything recklessly.

The problem we run into though is that not everyone approaches life this way, and that includes people who should be more cautious than most. Myself, I would love it if people took more responsibility for their own immediate environment, but unfortunately, I've learned that this is just not the case. There are far too many people out there who expect everything to come pre-processed for their use and comfort--and it's these same people who raise a stink when they stumble across something that obviously isn't.

Look at the recent furor over incest fic. My first response to anyone is always going to be, "Well, just don't click on it. It's what I do." But how well does that excuse work when not all incest fic is appropriately marked? Suddenly, these crusaders have a "prime example" of someone trying to lead innocents down a garden path. It's in this way that a lack of warnings weakens fandom's ability to stand by and for what it does--providing a place for any and all to play and interact--and makes it possible for the people leading the Safety Brigade to paint us all with the same broad deviant brush.

Now, you can say, "Well, these people have no place being out here if they can't handle some things." You can say that because God knows I've said it myself, to some specific individuals, in fact. Statements like, "Well, you know slave fic and BDSM are things you're going to run into here and here and here, so you might want to stay away." Again though, my case is helped because in those instances, the referenced sites make it very clear what they're about, so when these individuals come back to me and say, "Oh, you won't believe what I found there," I can point to the warnings and say, "Well, whose fault was that?"

Like I said before, it's a system that protects writers and site owners every bit as much as the reader, especially when the Internet being what it is, so many readers are first-timers and relative newbies. These people aren't going to know how to go out and research a fic or a fic author. They're going to be a lot like I was when I first got on the Web nine years ago, not knowing what "fandom" is and being amazed that there's "free fiction" up here. They're not going to know to go to this community and ask around. All they're know is, "Click or not click. That is the question."

Now hopefully, they would also realize just as quickly as I did that a certain amount of caution needs to be utilized, but sadly, I'm finding that's not the case and these people walk away from the Net with a very diseased picture of what's out there in their minds. It sort of cements it for me that not everyone takes their own safety into their own hands the way I do, and when they feel that their safety has been breached, the last person they're going to blame is the person they see in the mirror. Hence, my feeling that it's better not to offer them an obvous scapegoat. Because they'll gladly wring its neck with both hands.

[hth-the-first.livejournal.com]

It sort of cements it for me that not everyone takes their own safety into their own hands the way I do, and when they feel that their safety has been breached, the last person they're going to blame is the person they see in the mirror. Hence, my feeling that it's better not to offer them an obvous scapegoat.

I think I see what you're saying, but honestly, I don't feel like I need any kind of protection from people saying or thinking mean things about me. Part of being a writer, I think, is taking your lumps from people who, justifiably or unjustifiably, dislike what you're saying. If I couldn't cope with that, I wouldn't be showing my work to strangers on the internet.

With things like movies or books, we have some ability to research -- but most of us don't, in any great detail. With television, at least if you watch first-run television, you usually have even less control. And yeah, what that means is that you get shocked sometimes, and the deeper your issues run, the more at risk you are. That's a hard truth, but I'm not sure it's one that writers are under some kind of responsibility to fix. In the case of death stories, for example, I wasn't warned, nor did I get a letter of apology, when Law & Order suddenly killed off Claire Kincaid, or when Due South killed Louis Gardino, or when Buffy the Vampire Slayer killed Jenny Calendar -- all shows that, up to that point, had never killed a significant character and that I had no particular reason to expect it from. I wouldn't expect that kind of warning, and if those fictional stories touched off something in viewers' own lives that needed to be addressed, I would assume those viewers addressed it without asking Dick Wolf, Paul Haggis, or Joss Whedon to help out. Hopefully, they also did it without shifting the blame to those writers, but if they do choose to scapegoat in that manner, honestly, so be it, you know? I wouldn't expect TPTB on those shows to change their decisions about how to proceed narratively because someone, somewhere was unhappy about it.

I personally am more likely to warn for sexual violence, because in most stories with that theme, the dramatic heft isn't in *whether* the violence will occur, but in how the characters respond to it. Likewise, if I write a story where the death is the precipitating action and the story is about the fallout, I don't mind "warning" -- I wouldn't consider it a warning, per se, but essentially a summary of the premise. My objection is specifically to warning lables that reveal the end of the story, not all warning labels everywhere. I think you're right, in many circumstances they're helpful all the way around the board. In others, not so much.

Look, personally, I myself have a serious rape squick, and from time to time, that's something I've had to cope with in my entertainment life. I vividly remember seeing Rob Roy in the theater, and having to go outside and sit in the hall to freak out quietly until I could pull myself together for the rest of the movie. I did the same thing with Pulp Fiction, and I damn near had the same freak-out over the "Pegasus" episode of Battlestar Galactica. Such is life, you know? My issues are my issues, and I deal with them, and not everything I encounter in this world makes me feel good; some things make me feel awful, in fact. Other people deal with their issues in their own ways, and if the only way they can deal is to write me an angry e-mail because I wrote something that made them feel awful, then I hope that helps. But I'm not going to be the first or the last person to piss them off in that way -- hell, maybe they saw Rob Roy in the theater, too -- and nobody can expect that every movie producer, novelist, screenwriter, and fangirl is working full-time to protect them from things that make them feel awful. It's just an unfair expectation to put on other people, and I'm not going to let myself be bothered by a small handful of people who would like to put that expectation on me.

[fantasyenabler.livejournal.com]

As long as you're aware that you're opening yourself up that way, that's your right. Personally, I'm not that worried about things like character deaths. I figure they're a part of the dramatic form and anyone who says they're not prepared for that possibility is being far too naive to live in this day and age. I also think that people who want character death warnings are more worried about wasting their time on a story that's going to ultimately disappoint them than actually offend them. Yes, that's annoying, but not actually potentially damaging.

It's things like sexual abuse and violence that causes the problems to my mind, and the fact that the Net is open to so many people who don't fully comprehend its vastness or what they might encounter as much as they do with other more familiar forms of media. They're the ones who hurt themselves and often in retaliation, try to blame it on other people. Thus, I think it's worth keeping in mind that when it comes down to it, fanfic writers don't have a union or a corporation with any sort of stake in their product that can act as intermediary or protective agency. In general, they're just a loosely grouped band of individuals, so any way that one can cover one's own back, I think, isn't necessarily a bad idea.

[duskpeterson.livejournal.com]

I'll read stories without warnings - heck, I'm still getting used to the idea of warnings after five years in fandom - and if another author doesn't want to use warnings, no prob. But I do think warnings are helpful to some readers, not only so that they can avoid their squicks, but also, as I pointed out above, so that they can find what they like.

Another way to do this is through subgenre labels. If I say, "This is a darkfic story," then the reader who knows fandom terminology is going to be very naive indeed if they're surprised that one my characters gets hauled off into captivity at some point. It's like saying, "This is a horror film," or "This is a thriller." People have a general idea of what to expect.

I agree with you that warning labels encourage freedom of speech. In five years of writing gen & slash darkfic, I've never once received a letter from an annoyed reader. I'm sure this is partly because I carefully label my story announcements and my Websites - but do so in such a way that readers who don't like warnings can skip them.

[alias_sqbr]

I'm not so much arguing against you as trying to better understand the situation, since I'm a gen reader and new to fanfic at that.

Anyway.

I can understand complaining if fic isn't labelled at all(*), but if there's a generic "Rated NC17(**) for disturbing content" warning then how can people get up in arms that the content is disturbing in some particular way? I can see the point of generic warnings, since presumably you really could have kids after G rated gen stumbling across it by accident, at least in some settings.

(*)Though books don't get such ratings. For example, when I was 12 asked my mum for "something long to read while I'm sick" and got possibly the most pornographic book I've ever read (though that may be a trick of memory).
(**)Or whatever. The equivalent rating here is called "R" which is probably why I never hit anything remotely disturbing. I get the feeling the american PG is much stricter than the australian.