Read on Twitter
these are some interesting reads; collected meta from 1997 onwards on fic warnings https://fanlore.org/wiki/Timeline_of_Warnings_Meta">https://fanlore.org/wiki/Time...
of particular interest:
some of the earliest meta is about warning for slash, so no one has to read it (“some are best friends are gay!”)
2008/09 saw the beginnings of content and trigger warnings meta and when that relates to community responsibility
some of the earliest meta is about warning for slash, so no one has to read it (“some are best friends are gay!”)
2008/09 saw the beginnings of content and trigger warnings meta and when that relates to community responsibility
(i remember the warning debate of 08/09 fondly. though is was stressful, of course, many of those posts linked and many more that aren’t helped me form my own position on what it means to be a part of a fandom community.)
but then in 2010, we’re back to wank about whether we should tag for slash and—in this case—interracial marriages is (poorly) used as a comparable example.
(nb: do NOT go find any of these writers and wank at them, it’s 2020, if you wanna troll someone find a n*zi)
(nb: do NOT go find any of these writers and wank at them, it’s 2020, if you wanna troll someone find a n*zi)
i would be remiss if i didn’t acknowledge the huge part that racefail ‘09 played in the warnings debate, though racefail itself was a much larger discussion
https://fanlore.org/wiki/RaceFail_%2709">https://fanlore.org/wiki/Race...
https://fanlore.org/wiki/RaceFail_%2709">https://fanlore.org/wiki/Race...
and then the discussion moves toward a more tumblr-centric orientation, and ease of access for antis. the fanlore timeline drops off here—the unfortunate nature of tumblr’s whole platform means that discussions like this were disseminated in wildly different ways
which is neither here nor there. fanlore isn’t an expert, but it is a particular sort of archive. and i found it valuable (and mentally assuring) to visit the ways the debate on warnings has swung back and forth, and thought others might too.
warning meta has always walked the line of “we warn to protect the vulnerable among us” but with differing opinions on what constitutes as vulnerable. survivors? pro-trigger warning. children? purity wank.
(i could add poc but fandom is really only beginning that heavy lifting.)
(i could add poc but fandom is really only beginning that heavy lifting.)
warnings used to be nearly non-existent, because being able to write queer stories secretly and sell zines surreptitiously used to be considered safe precautions in a differently hostile world.
anyway, neither of this is here nor there. i’m not a fandom archivist, though i joke about it.
the point is: warning meta is always draining and always exhausting and always has been. but in perspective, we collectively are taking steps forward to create an inclusive community.
the point is: warning meta is always draining and always exhausting and always has been. but in perspective, we collectively are taking steps forward to create an inclusive community.
i have no reason to doubt that we will continue to do so—especially with the brilliant people i read and interact with every day.
this might be exhausting, but maybe ten years in the future a disillusioned grad student who is late for work will read YOUR meta and find comfort.
this might be exhausting, but maybe ten years in the future a disillusioned grad student who is late for work will read YOUR meta and find comfort.
and my last thought on this: who is the vulnerable population? what is the triggering content? we warn to protect someone in our community from seeing harmful material.
we label for ease of access, search and archiving purposes. but labels are always, always optional.
we label for ease of access, search and archiving purposes. but labels are always, always optional.
