Warning for gay sex (why this is bad and wrong and needs to be stopped)

[azurelunatic]

Reminder: specifically warning for male/male sex, even if you also warn for male/female sex, sends a bit the wrong message when happened across in isolation.

Warning for sex (especially explicit sex vs. some foreplay and fade-to-black) is appreciated and appropriate.

Description of the sex involved, with as many descriptive bits as the people around seem to be in need of, including who is having the sex, what kind of sex they are having, and the gender, sex, or both, of all involved, is also appreciated and appropriate.

An adult (adult-by-behavior, specifically) can look at a description and summary and decide whether or not, by the description, this particular thing is for them.

Basically, when you warn for same-sex sexyfuntimes, and state that it's a warning, you're not just providing a neutral description of the contents. You are explicitly saying, "I am buying into the meme that same-sex sexyfuntimes is alarming and bad!" even though you are writing it and you know that people will read it. You are catering to the concept that people who are squicked by it are totally right to be squicked by it and a lot of people are squicked by it and we don't blame you for being squicked by it, it's nasty gay sex.

Some people are squicked by it, and if they don't want to read it, that's their business; as long as they don't dispute my right to have sex in any way I choose to with any other consenting adult or adults, nor the right of my virtual brother and his partner to have sex (though really, I could do without the details there; virtual family doesn't make them less family -- this is one instance of same-sex smut that I really really don't need to read), nor the right of any other adults to have delightful vanilla, kinky, smutty, consensual sexy funtimes -- then that's their business whether they seek it out or avoid it.

But, for fuck's sake, I will not cater to people who declare that gay sex needs more warnings than straight sex, nor do I even want to appear to cater to them by allowing a warning about sex (that happens to be gay) to read as if it were a warning for OMG GAY sex.

If you happen to do this, I will probably not speak to you personally about it, because most practically, I will either forget to do it, forget who I've already reminded and entirely not remind some people at all, and remind others ten times, or (alas) only remember when something else annoys me, like when I just don't like somebody's icon or something. And that would be wankier than I want to actually be. And goodness knows that there are probably some warnings like that in my back catalog. But going forward, I don't want to keep perpetuating this meme. And if you do see me do it, poke me.

Comments

[senmut]

I hated seeing that, though I know when I first started on LJ, because it seemed to be a convention to do it, I did in some early stories. My current header works MUCH better for me, where I give Rating / Genre. That way I'm telling you content without making it a warning, because it should not be one.

Love is love, and stories are stories, in my opinion. Warning for something that is not (should not be perceived as) harmful is damaging and contributes to the pain.

[attie]

This has been said so often, but people still do it. There's a long tradition of shame and hiding and frantic apologizing for our sexuality in fandom, that was only just starting to lift when I got into fandom 10 years ago. Though I'm mostly on slash-only communities, so I more often see warnings for secondary het. Which amuses me because it is subversive of the OMG GAY warning, even though EW HET often carries undertones of misogyny...

Listing the pairing(s) is often a good way to indicate whether a story is slash or het without passing any judgement.

[summerskin]

I don't recall exactly when, but I think there was a period around 2004 maybe when there was this distinct vide of EW HET in the circles I frequented at the time. I was mostly just reading slash and basically nothing else, and it was Harry Potter fandom, but I remember it felt like a slap in the face after the knee in the groin that was OMG GAY. I like my het just fine. Just about as much as I like my femmeslash and my slash, thank you very much. But it still felt as if liking both or all three was some kind of warning sign that I needed to be taken back to the fandom workshop and have my springs repaired or something.

[attie]

The urge to segregate was strong at the time. There were also the epic shipwars... in that context I can definitely see how it can exclude. I do read het as well, and I don't feel that it negates my right to a place in slash fandom, but then I am very much used to finding one of my interests met with a resounding 'EW' in spaces reserved for another interest (try introducing a roomful of engineering students to RPS, it's fun!)

[summerskin]

I stayed clear of shipwars, even though I'm prone to OTPs. I tend to just read whatever is well-written and be convinced of the most unlikely pairings--always have been this way about fandom. Overall, I managed not to be an arsehole about this. So yay.

I remember when I used to find something like "rated R, no language, no sex, rated for gay romance" or similar in fic headings. Made my brain explode back then, too. Urg.

[attie]

That's... actually consistent with how the MPAA uses these ratings, last I heard (a few years ago)? Which doesn't make it less headdesk-worthy, but yeah.

[sporky_rat]

I just wish people would warn for other things, like 'O HAI SURPRISE FISTING! SURPRISE SCAT PLAY!' I didn't click on that link to read about that! I wanted what you warned for - Penetrative Sex! YOU DIDN'T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT FISTING OR SCAT PLAY!

I'm weird, I guess.

[azurelunatic]

I agree with you. Neither fisting nor scat should be a surprise.

[triadruid]

At some point though you'll lose the element of narrative surprise, won't you? I mean, I'm NOT a fandom writer or general consumer, just a drive-by person, so I may be totally out of bounds. It just seems like warning for the specific content diminishes the (possibly intended) effect of that content when it arrives.

And who decides what content is warnable? Pretty soon you're posting your outline/kink bingo outside the cut, if you go by the least common denominator of squickiness.

[attie]

A relatively good solution that I've seen around is putting the spoilery warnings in a font tag with same text and background color, plus a note "highlight to read spoilery warnings". That way people can choose whether they care more about the poignancy of the fic or about avoiding things that make them uncomfortable.

[azurelunatic]

There are actually pitched battles going on in fannish communities over that very thing -- what needs warning, what level of summary to give, artistic effect vs. triggers. It varies by fannish subgroup and forum -- obviously one goes with whatever one is personally comfortable with on one's own website and own journal, but there may be different standards in any given fic community.

The AO3 is designed to be about as flexible as possible in terms of warning options, since it's intended as a fanworks archive, so the author can share what they feel needs sharing, and the reader can decide what level of warning they want.

[summerskin]

This is something that has always bothered me in the warnings attached to stories for exactly the reasons you have outlined.

I always felt self-conscious and wondered if maybe I was the one who had a skewed definition of what "gay sex" was sikrit code for exactly, because why would anyone warn for it specifically before it dawned on me (after skimming such stories with such warnings) that nothing out of the ordinary was going on and that the sex is mostly as vanilla as you can write it without writing gen.

It's always bothered me, but it's not the sort of thing that I ever felt I could bring up, especially when it's put on stories where the author never gives any indication that sex of any sort is a Bad Thing (in fact, most seem as if they are having a grand ol' time with it).

So it always left me wondering even if only in the back of my mind. Heck, I still wonder whether even those writing it and enjoying it and reading it weren't actually a tiny bit unsure whether they were allowed to write it and enjoy it and read it as they did.

Maybe I'm over-thinking it, but usually when my logic and other people's logic conflict my brain wonders why exactly that occurs.

[azurelunatic]

As I understand it, the warn-for-gay-sex thing is descended from email lists and the like, which originally were not always slash-friendly zones, sometimes not even fic-friendly zones. So given that the choices at the time were label fic and warn for slash, or get off the list (sometimes without anywhere else to go), slash was warned for. Then it became part of the culture. And now it's ceased to be useful and protective, and started to be backdragging.

[summerskin]

I remember it being 2003/2004 and looking up old forum/mailing lists from 1997/1999 for certain fandoms. There were discussions about "the perversion of slash" and "putting two male characters together like that". It would have been offensive back in 2003/2004, but I can't even imagine the War it would provoke these days.

Maybe I should just think of this as a relic from a type of fandom that used to be, but the fact that people were still using these sorts of warnings when LJ was having its first waves of fandom life and even now is kind of disheartening. It just shows that people need to think a little bit more about what they type and hit Enter after online.

[shiv5468.livejournal.com]

A 'warning' for pairings should be enough to get across the message that there is slash without warning for slash. I don't see an issue with that because most people like to know who will be shagging who in a story - and is thus value neutral - and if you're not bright enough to work out that H/D is a slash pairing then you're too stupid to be allowed out on the internet.

[lisaheron.livejournal.com]

Oh god, don't even say that - the corners of stupid on this lovely land we inhabit are terrifying >.<
Totally agree Azz, and I know it's a bad habit I've done before in fandom. The system I've worked out now is WARNING: blahblahblah - Sex (pairing here). And then I add a rating as well to make it absolutely clear that yes there are sexytimes going on in this story, and sex is sex no matter what the pairing. I warn for het and slash sex equally, because god, I remember being ridiculously young and choosing to read that stuff anyway, because it was part of the story and I was obsessed with character development xD

[shiv5468.livejournal.com]

Yeah, but I think that it's best not to encourage stupid people to continue to be stupid by bending over backwards to pander to them.

Or I'm lazy, one of the two. ;-)

[azurelunatic]

Indeed -- mentioning the pairings should be sufficient. The only place I might expand on that would be if there is genderbending, sexswapping, or other such entertaining items in the story, or if there's a character with a certain amount of fandom ... confusion. Such as (canon, male) Blaise, or (my god, do these people know nothing about names?, female) Blaise.

[shiv5468.livejournal.com]

I might expand in the case of threesome because I'm amazed at the number of people who think that HGSSLM will not include LMSS touching because zomg that's just not the way it's done in porn films.

I don't like suprise pairings myself. I have sympathy with that.

Conversely I get fed up with warnings for het, but that's just personal aggravation rather than a moral principle. It's not the same, not the same thing at all.

[corruptflame.livejournal.com]

Yes, I agree...pretty much "Warning: Sex (m/f) [or] (f/f) [or] (m/m)" really should be all that's necessary. I didn't know people made any bigger a deal about it than that...it seems pretty clear what's going on there.

Question though. How would you tag sex that involves at least one hermaphrodite? (Not an attempt at sarcasm, I honestly haven't seen a tag for it.)

[azurelunatic]

I actually don't like the m/f, f/f, m/m bit being in the warning at all. In the description, sure. Warning, no.

I would likely tag it with the character's name (Bel Thorne springs to mind, though I don't think I've seen smut featuring Bel, actually); if I were tagging it on AO3, I'd use their "other" tag.

[corruptflame.livejournal.com]

I don't really see a line between warning and description, I suppose because so far as I'm concerned it's the only warning you're getting...after all, how many people can say they've picked up a book and not read the back cover in hopes of getting a little crumb of truth? :)

I see. Something for DJ to ponder.

[azurelunatic]

I see a line. I view the following things very differently:

"Contains explicit male/male sex. If this isn't what you came here for, hit the back button now." I'm OK with that one. I'm less OK with a one-line thing that has the same content, but with "warning" attached, but if the only description you have is that, it's not quite so glaring.


I'm most specifically talking about when there's a heading like this, where warnings are explicitly called a warning, and there's a separate description.

OK:

Title:
Author:
Fandom:
Wordcount:
Rating: NC-17
Characters: A, B, C
Pairing(s): A/B
Genre: slash, hurt/comfort
Warning(s): explicit sex, violence
Notes:
Disclaimer: I don't own 'em!
Summary: C smacks A around a bit, then B shares his magical healing cock with A.


Not OK:

Title:
Author:
Fandom:
Wordcount:
Rating: NC-17
Characters: A, B, C
Pairing(s): A/B
Genre: slash, hurt/comfort
Warning(s): explicit m/m sex, violence
Notes:
Disclaimer: I don't own 'em!
Summary: C smacks A around a bit, then B shares his magical healing cock with A.

[mlady-rebecca.livejournal.com]

By the comments, it sounds like you're talking mostly about fanfic. But I've seen it pointed out and warned for in published books. In that case, you don't have the foreknowledge of knowing the established characters so mentioning specific pairings may not be meaningful.

Here's an example, that was included after the blurb by the publisher, in this case Loose ID:

Publisher's Note: This book is an m/m/f menage and contains sexual content that may be offensive to some readers: m/m sexual contact, menage scenes

Do you think it's inappropriate in this context, as well?

The other side of the coin seems equally frustrating - people buying books with gay content without realizing it, then reviewing those books down simply because they didn't read the description of the book more clearly.

[azurelunatic]

It still raises my hackles, because it's about placating the people who will be offended by gay sex and group sex rather than describing the content. To have it describe the content, I would rephrase it thus:

Publisher's Note: This book is an m/m/f menage and contains explicit sexual content including: m/f sexual contact, m/m sexual contact, menage scenes