seasonal fests and boundary policing

[such_heights]

Sign-ups are open for rs_small_gifts until October 30th! The one fest that keeps dragging me back to HP.

But folks, can we quickly chat about exchange requests and boundary policing? I know, because I used to do it myself, that it's frequently standard fandom practice to put in a list of kinks that you don't like - 'the usual squicks like scat, bloodplay, watersports', 'none of that icky body fluid stuff' - etc etc.

Let's talk about a couple of the reasons why that's a problem:

1. It relies on a ridiculous premise, namely that there are all these kinky types waiting in the wings to spring on your request and write you watersports fic unless you specifically state otherwise. People want to write things that you'll like! Therefore, they are likely to work based on the things you've listed that you like, rather than assuming that anything you haven't specifically listed in your request is fair game.

Trying to make a complete list of things you dislike would be absurd, we'd be here all week. Keep it simple, specific, and mostly based on things that people genuinely might think to write for you unless you mention it, and it's all be fine. For instance, I've mentioned 'drunkenness' as a thing in my sign-up because it's a common story device in Remus/Sirius fic and one I don't personally like. Giving a long list of kinks you don't like, using derogatory language, being vague (what do you mean by 'the usual squicks' or 'kink' anyway?) or naming rare-in-fandom kinks is unnecessary and unhelpful.

2. And the reason that the above is a particular problem is because the continuous reinforcement of certain kinks as 'gross', 'icky', 'weird' etc is a method of boundary policing and holding up some pretty crappy fandom norms. It shames people who might otherwise want to request and write those things, and it shames people for whom whatever kink in question isn't just a fictional like but a real life practice or interest. By participating in that kind of behaviour you contribute to a culture in which some things are acceptable and others are not, and really we could all do without that.

Comments

[liseuse]

Thank you for the reminder! I need to go and sign-up today. Yay! for Small Gifts!

that there are all these kinky types waiting in the wings to spring on your request and write you watersports fic unless you specifically state otherwise
I love this image! Just people lurking waiting to spring scatfic on people.

Re:

[such_heights]

Hahaha, stealth scatfic writers, it could happen! Except, not really. *g*

And yay Small Gifts!

[torachan]

So much this. It bugs me every time I see signups for stuff.

[such_heights]

It is seriously old by this point!

[gloss]

there are all these kinky types waiting in the wings to spring on your request and write you watersports fic
Dude, I WISH.

This is a great post.

[anatsuno]

hahahaha, yes, I wish too. Surprise!WatersportsFic! :D

[netgirl_y2k]

I used to be very guilty of this, I probably still am sometimes, tbh. Mostly because I feel I should put something under dislikes if everyone else is. But you're right, it's daft, because it's not like there's some imaginary fandom person following me from fest to fest just waiting to write me, I dunno, kinky non-con the one time I don't specifically say I don't want it.

[such_heights]

Right - it seems just like the thing to do if you don't think about it! Whereas in reality people are going to write kinky non-con for the people who actually request it.

I mostly try to remember if there are any common things in fannish circles that irk/displease me, and then I focus on things I like, which I figure is easier on my assignment person anyway!

[anatsuno]

Yeah. Exactly. Thank you.

Yet I talked about it with someone once who was shocked to see me characterizing those notes as anti-kink or policing, and they made me pause when they explained their view which was something like this:

"I was previously unaware that these kinks or stories existed at all, and I never thought of them, so to include them mentally in the list of things that might end up written for me if I don't rule them out is imo a good thing. I thought of it as a broadening of my horizons."

I was gobsmacked for a moment, and then I chalked it up as one of these "I'm doing my privilege-processing in public and I don't care who sees it" blind spots (god knows I have mine too /o\). In the end we came to an understanding and it was cool... but I mention it here because that incident also made me see something I had never imagined before, namely the possibility that the person writing 'no scat, please' is genuinely under the impression that their noting it down is a sign of their tolerance and kink-awareness. That they might be trying to signal hard that they take YKIOK, JNMK to heart, and just fail to realize this is SO NOT THE WAY.

(of course that does not apply to the downright nasty remarks; I'm merely referencing the 'simple' "no X or Y, please" requests.)

Anyway. Great post, yes. <3

[such_heights]

Huh. That is not something I had imagined either! I wonder how many people think that way, that is interesting if confusing.

[cypher]

Thank you so much for this post. Reading people's Yuletide letters depressed the hell out of me last year, there was so much kink-negativity.

[such_heights]

You're welcome! I'm crossing my fingers for a little less of that in this year's yuletide, but who knows.

[thingswithwings]

*squishes you*

[such_heights]

<3 I learned from the best!

[emei]

Yes, thank you for making this post. Fest sign-ups is one of the times where fandom norms become the most clear - maybe where people new to the fandom meet them for the first time - and since fandom can be the first place you find a language to even talk or think about kink... Yeah, less of the boundary policing, please.

The idea of kinky types waiting in the wings to spring surprise kink fic on people, hilarious as it is, probably relies on that sad old view of sexual "deviants" as personal threats to normal people, eagerly plotting to corrupt them. Not like we'd would prefer to interact with people who already share our interests, oh no!

[such_heights]

and since fandom can be the first place you find a language to even talk or think about kink

Absolutely! I think I picked up a lot of stuff from my first few years in fandom exchanges - these kinks were okay, those ones were not. Sad!

And yes, that's a good point about how it reinforces the idea of kink as a threat of some kind.

[eruthros]

For me, part of it is also that I can't even figure out what I can write for people if the letter has that kind of language.

If someone says "I like porn! I especially enjoy bondage and orgasm denial, but I'm not a fan of humiliation or bloodplay, and I can take or leave other kinks, as long as they're consensual" then I feel like there's a fairly clear set of instructions and I know what I can write for them. When I just see "I like porn. But no scat or bloodplay, eww" then I don't know whether other kinks are okay, or whether they're not okay and it's just that scat is the worst, whether it's just boundary policing, or what. And I know that ideas about what is more kinky and what is less kinky can vary a lot, so if someone says "no hardcore kinks" I have no idea what that means to that particular person. The end result is that I can't write kink -- and sometimes can't even write sex -- for a lot of the letters that I see.

(There's actually a story like this from last year's yuletide, where someone wrote a letter that specified no scat or hardcore kinks or something like that, their writer wrote a story with non-sexual D/s dynamics, and the recipient was angry and felt like the author had intentionally ignored the letter.)

cereta also came up with a really clever way to ask last year, I think, when she asked for Sesame Street and said something like "I'd like something in the same spirit and tone as the show." Or I've seen lots of people say "I'm interested in low-key first-time vanilla sex," or "I like gen fic a lot." And all of those are ways of asking that are about things that a person prefers and wants to get, which I'm likely to find a lot more helpful that a long list of what a person doesn't like, because it's so easy to accidentally leave things out of that list.

I think about this sometimes in terms of RL kink and sex and hard limits. I imagine what would happen if I picked someone up at a bar or a club, and when I asked "what do you like" they just said "no watersports." It's the hard-limit only kind of sex negotiation, and it would be just impossible! I mean, the list of what is potentially kinky is giant and encompasses so much and can include acts and practices that are also "vanilla," so how could I figure out what that person wanted from just their hard limits? And I know there's no way I could define what I want and like entirely by negation. If I'm the person in that bed, I can say what my hard limits are, but I'm not actually going to get what I want by leaving the field wide open except for three or four things.

/ramble

[woldy]

I think you make a great point about stating the same information in a more positive way. However, IMHO saying "I'm interested in low-key first-time vanilla sex," raises the same problems around vagueness and normativity as saying 'no hard core kinks'. If I got a request for vanilla sex then I wouldn't know what the recipient regarded as vanilla (does it exclude anal sex unless it's a slash ship? fisting in femslash? rimming?) & would either take a guess and risk making them angry, or not write sex for them at all.

[snegurochka_lee]

Word. As someone who does like to read and write stuff like non-con, incest, and watersports to name a few, I appreciate not having to see sign-ups casting those things as "the things everyone knows are sicko." Saying, "Not for me, thanks!" is one thing, but yeah, the value judging can stop any time. :)

Still debating doing small-gifts this year...

[magnetic_pole]

Do it! Do it! Gah, L, you can write 1000 words while waiting for LJ to load. *wry smile*

Seriously, it's short and sweet and fun. Join us! M.

[woldy]

Thanks for this. I remember scanning through a list of prompts for a fest once & seeing a femslash great prompt with fisting listed on the 'absolutely do not want' list, & I was sufficiently cross about the completely unnecessary boundary policing (it wasn't a prompt that in any way called to mind fisting, & wasn't even an exchange!) that I didn't claim the prompt & hence didn't participate in the fest. So, yes, the boundary policing is unnecessary and stigmatizing, & I wish it wasn't so prevalent in fandom.

However, I'm pretty reluctant to stop saying that I don't want noncon, dubcon, or extreme violence. Maybe people wouldn't write those things for me unless I requested them (although I'm not sure, because I can think of at least a couple of authors who I think might) but I feel as though it's legitimate for anyone to list things on their do not want list that are either triggers, or common fannish tropes that they particularly dislike. I fear that it's still boundary policing even with those caveats, but at that point I think it's serving a legitimate purpose in communicating what sort of gift you'd like.

[such_heights]

That is sad! Most of the time I find that the kink being strung up is one that I am interested in but not particularly attached to, but it is one I particularly like reading/writing, then, yeah. :/

I had that same dilemma earlier! On the one hand, people are v unlikely to write me dubcon in Small Gifts. But then, it is a trigger of mine and it is something that has a place in fandom so I feel less as though I'm policing people who write it. Mileage varies, I guess.

[pocketmouse]

I agree with all of this, 100%.

That said, I was reading on friendsfriends the other day and someone was talking about their experience with Yuletide, where in their first year the recipient really hated their story and thought that the author had been explicitly picking things out of the list of squicks, even though the author had been trying to do the opposite. This wasn't a case of maliciousness, it was a small fandom and a case of trying to do x, not X, that sort of thing, and I don't even know how it all ties in here, but it's what pops into my head these days when I see this discussion. I guess it probably ties in with one's ability to clearly state what your squicks are and why, but it also makes me think that sometimes there's no satisfying people. I dunno.

[such_heights]

I find those kinds of stories a little baffling - I mean, I believe that they happen! It's just hard for me to imagine how, exactly.

Clear, specific, value-neutral communication. This is the key, I think!

Also, hi Fran hi. :D

[vangirl]

This post is good and you should feel good. ♥

[such_heights]

Thank you!

[magnetic_pole]

*sigh* Yes, I do know what you mean. If you can think of anything we can do as mods to keep the (often inadvertent) boundary policing to a minimum, let us know. I've thought about eliminating the "dislikes" altogether (and I'm deeply ashamed to admit we'd actually listed "Tonks" as a dislike in the examples in years past; I just noticed it, am not sure how that happened, and really regret that that happened). There's a fine line between using it to say something about who you are and what you can handle and enjoy (saying you want no derogatory comments about women, even in jest, for example, or no infidelity, because those are two things that will ruin a story for you) and using it to define who you're not and what you don't like or approve of, which is tricky.

I wish folks felt comfortable saying that they enjoy vanilla sex most, which is often what folks mean when they say they don't want X or Y. Perhaps that's something small gifts could work on next year. M.

[such_heights]

There's a fine line between using it to say something about who you are and what you can handle and enjoy (saying you want no derogatory comments about women, even in jest, for example, or no infidelity, because those are two things that will ruin a story for you) and using it to define who you're not and what you don't like or approve of, which is tricky.

This, exactly. I wish for more thoughtfulness on the subject, though!

And from a modding standpoint, yes, it's hard. When we were setting kinkelot up I wrote this kink-inclusive guidelines post, I don't know if any of the wording there might be of use to you.

But yay, small gifts! I am very excited.

[magnetic_pole]

But on a more positive note, YAY! M.

[lls_mutant]

Sadly, there are a few people who make what should seem like unnecessary boundary policing feel necessary. I asked for a D/s Sirius/Remus fic one year. Got it, but it also contained bestiality. Not "complete" bestiality, but sure as hell enough that it crossed a line for me. I didn't even think to state that one, and there it was in an exchange fic. ::sigh:: (It was not a small gifts fic, though.)

I've actually just come to the point now where I say "I'm fine with explicit material, but I'm a pretty vanilla sort of girl" in anonymous exchanges. If it's a small exchange or I know the group (like on gaeta_squee), I might be a little more specific, but usually, I'd rather people shoot for under my limits than over them. The other thing I generally add is "canon pairings only" or list the pairings I do like, because there ARE popular pairings that I can't handle in fandoms I like (Simon/River, for example), and it's a nice way to say I'm uncomfortable there.

I really don't have a problem with people listing their dislikes, though. I mean, there are a lot of people that really, really dislike very common tropes. (I like consensual violence in sex, for example. Lots of people don't, and understandably so. I can't stand infidelity. Doesn't bug tons of people.) I think where the problem comes in is the commentary. I don't find "no non-con, violence, or anal, please" offensive in the least, personally, but if someone adds the "because that's ICKY!" part, then it becomes offensive.

[miramira]

Yeah, agreed. When I say "no X or Y," I'm not trying to pass judgment on people who do like that stuff. I'm just saying it's not my kink, and I don't want to assume that's obvious to everyone, if only because I know the range that other requests can encompass.

That said, I've never considered just saying "vanilla, please," and I agree that's a more positive way to do it. I'll try using that phrasing more often from now on.

[magic_at_mungos]

On one hand I can see where you're coming from but I've seen a few people get really hurt in fic exchanges by the author putting stuff that really squicked the receipant out.

It's more understandable if it's for a fest that is really centred around sex and therefore is more likely to throw up stuff that some people love and others hate.

[such_heights]

I think my point may not have quite come across - I think people should list their dislikes! I just think we should try a bit more to do so in a way that's context relevant and value-neutral in terms of phrasing. Absolutely, in a smut exchange it'll be really useful for your writer if you're specific, but it would be great if people could do that in a more neutral way than 'ew, and none of the usual squicks please', for instance. (What does that mean anyway?)

[fizzyblogic]

I can't remember my previous sign-ups from years ago, when I did fic challenges (and could actually hit some of the deadlines omg), but I'm fairly sure I was guilty of this a few times. Mostly I would put 'light bondage is good but no heavy kink [sometimes I'd put BDSM instead of kink, depending on whether the fandom was full of various kinks in fic or not], please', and looking back I realise that could very easily be read as judgemental of kinks, in that it was in amongst all of the "ew, this is gross" type of requests. It was the nicest way of saying "There is a 95% chance of any kink more than light bondage being done so badly I want to hide forever, so I'd prefer avoiding it altogether in an exchange" that I could think of, heh.

[such_heights]

"There is a 95% chance of any kink more than light bondage being done so badly I want to hide forever, so I'd prefer avoiding it altogether in an exchange"

Haha, well, that is also sometimes true. *g* I sometimes still ask for R and below in big exchanges for similar reasons.

And yes, I absolutely used to do that as well! I'm glad that I think about it more now, though, as it helps me be clearer about what it is that I do like, and in turn increase my chances of getting awesome fic. :D

[krabapple]

While I definitely agree with most of this post, especially the negative tone that comes up in some commentary about dislikes, I also agree with lls_mutant and magic_at_mungos. Unfortunately or not, I remember when the "dislikes" section became not only in vogue, or the norm in exchanges, but necessary because of some unfortunate fics that were given and/or exchanged. The dislike section started, in my opinion, as a way to be upfront and/or polite about what you would or would not like to see in a fic. And while it is inappropriate that perhaps that part of a fest sign-up has spiraled from there, at one time it served a useful function, or at least addressed a phenomenon within fandom itself. Whether the phenomenon still exists may or may not be up for grabs -- in my experience, fandom changes both rapidly and not at all at the same time. :) While it may seem unfathomable that someone is just waiting in the woodwork to write a watersports fic unless you request they not do so, similar events have happened, and sometimes the etiquette of exchange fic can be touchy as it is.

Anyway. The need for a dislike section may have run its course, in which case we may all be better off, for a multitude of reasons. And in any case, there may be a more productive way to get the same information across -- I just think at one time (and perhaps still) the intention of the thing was in the right place. Execution is, of course, always another matter. :)

[such_heights]

Oh, I think I have not been clear! I am not advocating for the removal of dislikes sections in exchange sign-ups. I think they are useful and there are definitely things I would want to put in them! But I do wish people could be more thoughtful in their phrasing.

[midnitemarauder]

I totally get what you're saying, but I also think it depends on the type of fest. RS small gifts tends to produce a lot of PG-13 fic and art, and not a lot of R or NC-17. But Merry_Smutmas, HP_Springsmut, and other fests... It's a bit different. Those are fests where smut and kink are mandatory, so specifying your limits is kind of important. But there's a world of difference between me specifying, "No heavy BDSM (though light bondage and mild D/s is okay!)" and saying "No BDSM because it's icky!"

In 2005 or 6 - I can't remember which year - in the Harry_Holidays exchange, there was all that wank over one fic that was written which contained all of the squicks the person listed, and the author's notes of the fic even said something to the effect of "Because [my recip] should get over it." I'm sure a lot of HP fen from that time remember that.

The thing is, no, I don't think something like that incident is going to happen again, but people in fests don't always or even usually know everyone else who is participating. And I've seen instances where someone, for example, listed non-con as a squick, but never specified about dub-con anywhere, and received it, and weren't particularly happy. Or a case where they said no non-con, but dub-con is okay, and received a story that they felt was clearly non-con though the author claimed it was only dub-con.

I notice that people tend to err on the side of caution. And it's not about kink shaming, not that I've seen. How do people define "vanilla"? How do people define "chan"? I've seen chan defined as anywhere from under 12/prepubescent to "anyone under 18". Some people love cross-gen - take Snarry for instance - but are squicked by it if Harry is under a certain age.

I personally would never request bestiality in an exchange fest. But I've read a couple of snegurochka's and maeglin yedi's bestiality fics and loved them. When I'm filling out the list of things I like-want/don't like-want in an exchange fest form, I'm thinking about me. Because it is about me, and I'm not thinking about the person who loves sounding and is maybe despairing because hardly anyone is requesting it. I'm certainly not thinking about shaming them for enjoying something I personally don't. I have several friends who love it, and I love certain kinks, genres, fandoms, that my friends despise or are squicked or triggered by.

(In fact, when I first came to fandom, I was ridiculously vanilla, kink-wise. I'm still on the vanilla side of things, but I love things like rimming and felching and incest in fic, whereas I used to be squicked by them. I never thought in a million years I'd ever write non-con, since I don't particularly enjoy reading it, and then came Smutmas '06 when I wrote Stan/Lucius for Fluffyllama. I've also read and enjoyed a lot more dark fic than I ever thought I would because friends of mine wrote it.)

In an exchange fest, from a mod perspective, I want to know, and sometimes need to know what people's limits are, so that I can match a writer/artist who is willing to write/draw sounding or bestiality with a person who requests it. I also wish people would take advantage of asking questions via the mod, or through the person listed in some signups if there are questions about kink or genre or whatnot that aren't stated in the signup or can't be found on the person's journal (if, say, their journal is friendslocked.)

In the end, it all comes down to how it's phrased, because if (general you) your kink is okay, my not particularly caring for said kink for whatever reason is also okay. I totally agree with you when it comes to the "because it's icky" or "ewwww" phrasing. And now I will stop because hello, I wrote an essay here. *headdesk*

[rian]

OK, I can see that you didn't mean what your original post implies, so that's fine, I agree that people should be respectful when wording these things. Respect goes both ways though, so I actually don't think that it's silly to name all your dislikes regardless of what sort of fest it is. It's when people assume things that a kerfuffle happens. Even when you are explicit in your likes and dislikes, things can be ignored, as has been pointed out with that case of the fic with all the person's squicks in it. I also have a friend who explicitly requested no bestiality in an exchange and yet got a fic with bestiality in it. It's best to be clear about everything, in as diplomatic a way as possible, so there can be no misunderstanding.

[harbringer]

Waaaandered over here through various signal boosting, and I have to say;

I went through that post, and out of 34 requests I only found two that had any mention of 'usual, gross, weird, icky' etc when talking about kinks. All the others were, well, just listing that they didn't want those kinks in their fic! Which I don't see the problem with! As somebody said above, respect goes both ways. There's a lot more shaming on the 'kinky' side of these things, sure, but that doesn't mean you should hold it over people who just don't like certain kinks. Because a lot of the time, people aren't disliking the liking kink by disliking kink. Basically different strokes for different folks, yeah? Someone personally doesn't get/is grossed out by a certain kink, but that doesn't mean they automatically dislike/feel grossed out by anyone who does enjoy that kink. We don't all have to like the same things! And we can all still get along!

go back to middle school bake cake full of smiles and rainbows all eat it and be happy etc etc

[lorax]

I did my sign up there the other day, and then went through reading the prompts and such, to try to find which ones I'd like to claim, and was sort of. . . dismayed at the time, and I couldn't actively identify why, and now that I read this, I think I figured it out.

Exchanges ARE gifts, and everyone usually wants to write things that their recipient will like, so the dislikes can be helpful, but the kink-shaming phrasing of some is kind of uncomfortable-making. It's fine to not have a kink be your cup of tea, it's not to assume that it not being your cup of tea means no one should want to drink it, ever.

I'm sure I've been guilty of saying similar things in past sign ups, but thanks for this post, since it made me realize what was bugging me, and now I can be more aware of it in the future!

[nixe]

I strongly disagree.

Though let me say that this is a very interesting post addressing important ideas, and it certainly made me think. I mulled it over for quite a long time.

I just cannot see how 'boundary policing' should be discouraged. Do we really want to be telling people that they should be less aggressive about setting boundaries? Don't say anything unless you're sure it's necessary? If you really must, be sure you're nice about it? Do we really want to imply that hurting someone's feelings here is tantamount to an act of discrimination?

I question the idea that comments like, 'nothing icky' are necessarily coming from privilege. In my experience, these types of comments seem to come mostly from younger, newer members of fandom. My experience certainly is very small compared to all of fandom, but I think that it's worth examining, before casting the situation as privilege-vs.-minority, how well that assessment really fits. Maybe it is very fitting, but I admit that I have doubts.

I agree that fandom should be inclusive, and no one should ever have to feel shamed for their kinks. That's not the kind of fandom of which I want to be a part, even if I didn't have my own favorite (longish list of) kinks.

I don't know what the solution is, but I'm very uncomfortable with this one. Would that we did have a culture where each person got a chance to define what they, personally, find acceptable, and what is not okay with them, even if other people think they're overdoing it or that they're not being 'nice'. Are we really all so sure we'd rather do without?