Actual trigger warnings, in the original sense, aren't about what offends people, they're about what hurts people. And I just don't believe that the majority of the people in the world have stopped caring about hurting other people. I certainly haven't stopped caring, and I don't think I'm any less busy than other people. "I lived and you will too" and "we have all been through it and survived" isn't what true trigger warnings are about, unless you are someone with PTSD or another trauma-related psychological issue. If someone has a food allergy, they need accurate warnings about what's in the food they consume because they are more vulnerable than the larger community. Do we honestly tell them "Oh, I eat peanuts all the time. I'm not going to coddle you by telling you when your food has peanuts." I mean, in my example about the vet with PTSD, do you really believe that the majority of people wouldn't care? I'm sure some assholes wouldn't, but I absolutely can't believe that the world is so ugly that most people wouldn't. I agree with someone up-thread who said that we can't warn for everything that could trigger someone. My vet example is kind of the reverse of what we're doing when we publish something... the vet is the one initiating the conversation in my example. And I'd say that people like my vet have to take some responsibility for themselves... knowing that explosions trigger him, he should stay away from public celebrations of Victoria Day or whatever your local fireworks holidays are. But trigger warnings, in the classic sense, are generally for surprise elements that are likely to trigger someone. So if I were organizing Victoria Day celebrations for my town I wouldn't warn about fireworks because they wouldn't surprise anyone, but if I were organizing Labour Day celebrations, how would it hurt me or anyone else if I put a note in the program warning that there would be fireworks? And we know of some things that are likely to be triggers to a significant group of readers. Rape, violence, etc. We don't use trigger warnings because some people are offended by those things... we may or may not have content warnings, depending on our marketting strategies, but those are based around offense. Trigger warnings are based around actual trauma. So, again, I think the idea behind trigger warnings has been bastardized to some degree, but I think at least some of that bastardization has been at the hands of people who are looking for strawmen to argue against. If you guys are all going to use the strawman version of trigger warnings in your discussions, I'll bow out because I don't want to get bogged down in imprecise terms. But if anyone here actually feels that it's somehow an imposition on art or artists to take a tiny step to help the recovery of people who are struggling with deep psychological illness... well, I'll probably bow out of that, too, because I respect most of the people posting in this discussion and don't want to lose that.
... being new to the craft of writing, and not having come across the term, 'trigger warning', I found this article: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/university-of-chicago-trigger-warning_us_57bf16d9e4b085c1ff28176d Upon the reading, I found I had changed my mind on such things that potentially distress folks. No harm in giving people a heads-up on material that could cause them pain.
Did you catch the part where that was an affirmation of the idea of giving a 'heads up' as per quoted in the post I was replying to rather than censorship as part of the debate? Don't spoil for a fight where there isn't one.
In general, write what you want. The people that want to read what you write, will. It never ceases to amaze me how much some worry about how/what others will feel/think. 1. Alt. History? Those that read that genre, will. Almost all has been said before. 2. A girl on her period? People who deny that women have periods and people who feel you did not portray whatever correctly will be upset. 3. Soooo many massacres in churches have been written. I would guess that 1 out of every 12 horror books published by a major in the 1970s had something 'bad' happen in a church. So what? Show them- Save them up and publish a new edition with all the hate mail in the back. Make a buck off them a second time.
No matter how powerful the art may be, offence is subjective. what may offend one person can be completely passable for another. that said, i personally believe that censorship of the written word will do a lot more harm for the art then good. "offensive" writing is necessary for artistic freedom. putting obstruction in the way of peoples ability to convey they're opinion is only going to hurt the writing community.
People can vote with their wallets, upvotes, and likes. Unless I'm doing this strictly for money, I will not pander to any demographic just because my writing doesn't match their ideal world/morals.
Trigger warnings are a strange thing that undermines real sufferers of a condition known as PTSD (but the triggers come without warning). I think it is better to put a warning of the type of content inside that may disturb or upset people with weak constitutions (Freaking pansies should know what to expect by what is on the blurb.). Digressing a bit, my apologies. Offensive writing like what? Colorism (To be a true racist you have to be of a different species IMHO. Otherwise you are simply a self hating human.). People killing other people in mass for whatever reasons that people do such things. Well it is a pastime we haven't given up on just yet so how can that be offensive. Stereotyping could be considered offensive. Going out your way to be a belligerent ass, just to push your personal/political agenda, I think counts (Looking at you Soccacio). I am not really sure other than all the bad writing that gets high praises for being trash. That I find that to be a slap in the bloody face. Spend sometime doing the thing few really care to do: The Research on parts your not sure of! The Research on the parts you don't know! As much fun as I find looking up the real facts that I use in my fictional universes, I have less chance of coming off as offensive, or outright made up just because I was being blatantly lazy. So if you don't know there is this world wide network of information to help you figure it the f**k out! I do my best to be helpful in the research thread and I do it happily to the best of my abilities, but I am not always sure that the info that I can provide as help is genuinely helpful. On that note, now for something offensive (or just loud and aggressive). Because why not.
Thanks so much for this recommendation, I just finished it and it was fascinating. I keep meaning to learn more about the beat generation and I'm really inspired to do so now. The world could really benefit from exposure to these messages
Here's my advice: so long as you're not trying to incite hatred and violence, you're free to write whatever you want. Generally speaking, we can't help what our creative muse wants to write about. Apparently one of my villains that I dub 'The Villain without a Story' practices an extreme version of vigilante justice going as far as executing bullies (school-aged bullies, mind you) by injecting them with a lethal dosage of anathesia. Does that mean I, personally, want this to be a reality? That we should take everyone who had ever wronged us, children included, and murder them? Of course not. Point is, unless we're living in a country like North Korea...we should exercise our freedom to do what we please by writing what we want. Yes, they can get offended all they want, but so long as we're not trying to champion hatred and violence ala Mein Kampf then we're good.
Ratings and censorship are arbitrary, both limit access to, and curb artistic expression. A trigger warning, unless I've got them wrong, is like posting a sign on the door... "Enter At Your Own Risk".
All a rating does is inform the customer of the content so they can make the choice of exposing themselves or not. As I've said, it's no different to food warning labels so you know what's in the product. I see 'trigger warnings' as very similar in function.
I don't agree with that. Free expression, artistic or otherwise, shouldn't have a proviso attached to it 'unless you champion hate and violence'.
Who determines the ratings? There's been hundreds of movies that had originally received a 'R' rating, and the director had to scrap or reshoot scenes to get under the rating with a 'PG' so the movie would be more marketable. Ratings are censorship.
Well, the rating itself is irrelevant really, because it's so vague. Today it tends to be less important than the content advisory warning beneath it. In the past you'd only get the rating, but now they usually add the content advisory, and that's pretty self-explanatory: nudity, graphic nudity, actual sex, graphic violence, sexual references, drug use etc. That's more effective and now more used in film than a simple R+ or M and gives the potential customer the chance to evaluate the content for their tastes. It's also not as subjective as ratings used to be.
It's just empty rhetoric. You could champion hatred of sexism and aggression towards oppressive male dominated societies in order to assert your native rights, and be regarded as morally right.
You wishing to write what you want has nothing to do with the offensive writing of the book I mentioned. So I was a little confused. That book I mentioned was written by a woman targeted at women from memory. But then again, it might be a man disguised, who knows. I agree there is an audience of men out there wishing for straight erotica. But turning down the steam a few notches, I also believe there is a strong audience of straight men who wish to read romance. Recently had a gentleman approach me privately asking me about my projects. He was initially acting weird with his questions to me in a public thread, but it turns out he was desperate to read romance. He said he just wasn't going to admit it in the publicly. I should note that I was on a channel where the genre's readership is predominantly men. I suspect that many would be receptive to romance in the group. Most just need to be assured they are going on an 'adventure'. Use the word 'romance' too loudly and they start thinking candle light dinners and gratuitous sex scenes. Personally, I would love to read a male writer's version of a romance or erotica that has been targeted to men. Anyway, this just caught my interest because I was pondering on the matter that last few days. Good luck on your writing projects! Hopefully I catch a peek of your work at some point.
I'll put the beginning of an erotica story in Workshop. What I am going for in my erotica is what you mentioned; more real life, a nice build up, no anger, no vulgarity (my opinion), people talking (not being talked at), etc. A huge thing I am aiming for is to leave the 'fantasy' behind, I want reality. (I put down 50 Shades on first or second page when the MC's morning was unfolding. I can't suspend my disbelief that much) It may not, but it struck a chord in me.