so the history of warnings 101, i could go for this

Picking up a thought from about three different conversations:

I wonder if it would be worthwhile to have a panel on warnings, not just common triggers, but the historical perspective on them as vehicles of exclusion in fandom and how they've changed in meaning and reason for existence. A lot of perspective on them during the debates the last time and now is still shaped by when they were used against slash or against certain types of fic, vids, etc. And I didn't know until some discussion enlightened me on this that VVC was at least partially founded on a period of time when warnings themselves were used to exclude, not to facilitate inclusion.

Now, we use warnings to make things more inclusive to other fans, but there was a time they were a form of social control, and it could be institutionalized in ways that marginalized.

In all the debates, I really didn't know that as more than an abstract thing, and when I was in Smallville, there were still slash websites under password and some authors requiring direct contact via email for their fic because that was the only way they felt safe. I mean, I feel as if I should have guessed that one.

Anyone have more information on that? I get the impression this was also an issue before regular 'net access as well and that it might have come from cons originally, but a complete perspective would be interesting to know about and read. A lot of discussion during these two debates makes a lot more sense if the original purpose of warnings was to restrict access and exclude certain groups of fans entirely.

And when I say, "I wonder if it would be worthwhile", I mean, "Please yes one day let's do that?" Any con; just someone take good notes and post them so I can read about it.

Comments

[legionseagle]

The Tonks/Lupin piece was meta and not fic; someone wanted to analyse the text of a metamorphamagus (someone who can change their bodily attributes at will) being in a relationship with a lycanthrope (someone who is compelled to change their bodily attributes on a regular schedule and vilified for the condition) in terms of gender constructs and identities.

Until the response to the comment happened it was literally not known that people on the list (which, again, was a discussion list not a fic list) thought discussion of relationships needed to be constrained heteronomatively.

Also, while I respect your choice not to hang out "in places that are het and gen only", sometimes the only comm for discussing a particular fandom has a mod who imposes such rules and there isn't the critical mass to create a new comm; also, (and very relevant to the current discussion) people have a genuine fear that the imposition of warnings policies in places which did not previously have them will create the position as stated above; it may be unlikely but it has, after all, happened before now.

[elspethdixon]

sometimes the only comm for discussing a particular fandom has a mod who imposes such rules and there isn't the critical mass to create a new comm

*nods* I used to be in a relatively small tv-show fandom that was like that - probably only a few dozen active members, and only one mailing list, which was firmly gen-and-het-only. It made me feel weird, like I was there under false pretenses. I was writing and posting gen, and didn't really even have any slash pairings for the fandom, but the policy also meant I had to stay in the closet to the rest of the list, because I knew I'd be unwelcome otherwise. Eventually, I got tired of feeling weird and left, but I pretty much had to leave the fandom in the process, because the fandom = that one list.

So I can understand someone being willing to out up with it for the sake of being able to be in a fandom for the thing they're fannish about at all.