Read on Twitter
I'm just gonna vent because twitter is annoying me today, but like, even though the purity brigade is being disingenuous when they say they want warnings/tags/labels for books and printed media, I dont think the response should be complete mockery of that idea???
Books and other printed media are some of the only major media that don't have ratings/warnings and I dont think normalizing access to that is bad. I'm not thinking of labeling covers of books, Im thinking how it might be nice if books had a content warning/tag list -
- in the appendix or something. Websites like does the dog die are massively useful for people like myself who have pretty intense triggers, I like to at least KNOW what Im about to watch or read IF there is a chance of setting myself into a panic attack
Universal ratings etc arent the answer at all and I dont think what these teens are suggesting is practical in any way, but I think if authors were to make an index of warnings you could skim through if you wanted isnt a bad idea
In these conversations theres this tight rope walk of reinforcing the idea that "problematic" or otherwise challenging stories and media are important and then disregarding the concept of trigger warnings and mental wellness of ppl who NEED that
There are conventions in the romance novel world where they actually do signal a happily ever after because of the nature of the books and their readership, its well known that romance readers want a satisfying ending and will have their exp ruined if its not there
So authors are up front about whether or not the book delivers, so that those who just want something fluffy can make an informed choice. Obviously not every genre can or should work like that, I just dont like this broad disgust at the idea
Idk, wanting some sort of content warning system =/= happy endings only.
Also again, I know most people arguing for it are being disingenuous. I know. I just don't like the responses to it.
