Removal of the Same-Sex Pairing category.

[padfoot_returns]

So? There are still people who are uncomfortable reading about mixed-race pairings. Should we warn for that?

Is a large number of people? If yes, then they should try speaking to the Mods.

The reason why same-sex pairings is different then mixed-race pairing is that same-sex is still an extremely controversial issue. A lot of people still haven't warmed up the idea of it. In the US, only 4 states have legalized gay marriage. With mixed-race pairing, it has been around for years. We were all born and raised while seeing it, so it has become a norm in our life. If a large number of people are still uncomfortable, then like I said, they should talk to the Mods about, yet I doubt that the number is large enough. Perhaps in the future, if homosexuality become widely accepted in society, the slash warning can be removed.

xxRiham

[Inverarity]

Is a large number of people? If yes, then they should try speaking to the Mods.

Seriously? If enough people complained to the mods that they wanted a "warning" for mixed race pairings, you think the mods should acquiesce?

Sorry, I'm not impressed by the argument that we should cater to bigots if there are enough of them or if they make enough noise.

[padfoot_returns]

Seriously? If enough people complained to the mods that they wanted a "warning" for mixed race pairings, you think the mods should acquiesce?

Sorry, I'm not impressed by the argument that we should cater to bigots if there are enough of them or if they make enough noise.

But my point was that they wouldn't make enough noise. Like I said. Mixed-races = been along for years. We all grew up with it. Same-sex = not the same. You can't compare them.

xxRiham

[Karaley Dargen]

Seriously? If enough people complained to the mods that they wanted a "warning" for mixed race pairings, you think the mods should acquiesce?

Sorry, I'm not impressed by the argument that we should cater to bigots if there are enough of them or if they make enough noise.

I don't think that this has much to do with what Riham is trying to say.

What is the important point here is that many of the readers on this site might still be supervised by their parents in what they read, or might have different values than we have ourselves. And in the same way that some people don't want to read about "Sexual Situations" (even though, you'll agree, sexual situations are a very everyday thing for most people, if you consider that sometimes authors put that warning up for a kiss), others might not want to read about same-sex-pairings.
I agree that those are not the values I have, but then I usually ignore all the warnings, because I don't mind slash, sexual situations, profanity, substance abuse, self injury, or any of the others while reading.

However, I completely agree with Riham - acceptance of homosexuality is a rather recent development... and I think we can't accuse the people who are somewhat uncomfortable with reading slash pairings off being intolerant fascist homophobes. They probably accept them and might even know homosexual people in real life, but just don't want to read about them all the time...

Or, a less extreme example: I'm a huge James/Lily fan. I find the perfect story, the first chapters are great... and then suddenly there's a Remus/Sirius side arc. It's not that I don't like slash or am intolerant or whatnot. It's just that a) I'm a huge lover of canon, and the author might not have considered an affair between the two AU (which I would), and b) I didn't expect this to happen since the story had no slash-tag, and it confuses me massively, because it doesn't fit the picture that I have of the story by this time.


I think it is important to have the "Same-Sex"-tag there (and I actually think of them as tags rather than warnings), especially for stories submitted in entirely different categories. Even if you don't accept it as a warning for the slightly conservative - then maybe see it as an additional method for people who like slash to find good stories...

[Inverarity]

However, I completely agree with Riham - acceptance of homosexuality is a rather recent development... and I think we can't accuse the people who are somewhat uncomfortable with reading slash pairings off being intolerant fascist homophobes.

I never used any of those words. I do maintain that if you believe that homosexuality should be accepted, then you shouldn't be arguing that it's okay to continue treating it as something deviant for the sake of those who haven't yet caught up.

They probably accept them and might even know homosexual people in real life, but just don't want to read about them all the time...

Then avoid the same-sex category. I admit the topic has drifted a bit, but I've seen it claimed before that if any character in your story is gay (even if there is no romance per se, let alone sex) then it requires a "slash" warning. That's offensive.

Or, a less extreme example: I'm a huge James/Lily fan. I find the perfect story, the first chapters are great... and then suddenly there's a Remus/Sirius side arc. It's not that I don't like slash or am intolerant or whatnot. It's just that a) I'm a huge lover of canon, and the author might not have considered an affair between the two AU (which I would), and b) I didn't expect this to happen since the story had no slash-tag, and it confuses me massively, because it doesn't fit the picture that I have of the story by this time.

I can't say I'm terribly sympathetic. I mean, I get that people have legitimate reasons for wanting to be warned about some things (like sex, drug abuse, suicide, etc.), but when you're making a laundry list of plot twists that will "ruin the story" for you, I think it's a little silly to expect the author to telegraph every possible thing that some readers might not like.

[Karaley Dargen]

I never used any of those words. I do maintain that if you believe that homosexuality should be accepted, then you shouldn't be arguing that it's okay to continue treating it as something deviant for the sake of those who haven't yet caught up.

First of all, I never implied that you used those words. I did.
Second, I would appreciate it if you didn't make this personal. The point I argue has nothing to do with whether I am open to homosexuality or not. I don't care whether romance is homosexual or heterosexual. However, while I accept people's different sexual preferences and orientations, I also accept that there are some people who either by their own or by their parents' preferences aren't comfortable with it (yet, maybe). I don't believe that everyone has to have the same views as me. If someone is against homosexuality, that outrages me; but if someone maybe has one day in their life that they don't want to read about it and are grateful for the slash-tag, then I think they should be allowed to not read it.

Then avoid the same-sex category.

As I said in my post above, people might submit stories with a same-sex pairing to a completely different category. There are romance subplots in Mystery, D/A, Historical, and any of the other categories really. I think stories with same-sex pairings shouldn't be restricted to that one category, even if they fit better in other categories...because then THAT would be really unfair.

I can't say I'm terribly sympathetic. I mean, I get that people have legitimate reasons for wanting to be warned about some things (like sex, drug abuse, suicide, etc.), but when you're making a laundry list of plot twists that will "ruin the story" for you, I think it's a little silly to expect the author to telegraph every possible thing that some readers might not like.

Please do excuse that I didn't find the perfect example. I didn't mean that a plot twist ruins the story for me. What I tried to point out in this example is that in some situations, a same-sex-affair might be considered AU for one person, but canonically very possible for the other. That's one of the non-politically-incorrect uses of the slash-tag I can come up with. It's all that I wanted to point out.

[fg_weasley]

The reason why same-sex pairings is different then mixed-race pairing is that same-sex is still an extremely controversial issue. A lot of people still haven't warmed up the idea of it. In the US, only 4 states have legalized gay marriage. With mixed-race pairing, it has been around for years.

... We grew up with the gay issue, too. I mean, just look at the recent movie, Milk. It was set in the 70s, forty years ago, and it's not as if gay people just suddenly popped up then. You said, 'With mixed-race pairings, it has been around for years'. Well, so have same-sex pairings, for just as long, if not longer, as mixed-race pairings. I also have to say that, while I'm not arguing that we have not come a long way on the issue of race, it's not a buried topic either and it's still somewhat controversial. Look at the 2008 US election - what should have been a purely political election [well, in an ideal world] was dominated by the issue of Obama's race and that being the driving force behind who voted for him and who didn't.

In any case, I really don't think the two issues should be compared here. It does nothing but another other offense to this already delicate issue, which should be focused on the topic brought up - same-sex pairings.

Now, ON the topic of same-sex pairings, my view is that the category should stay, the warning should not, and I think this is a pretty good middle ground.

The category stays both for the purpose of those who are seeking out slash pairings, and those who aren't. The warning should get taken down because, really, do we need TWO ways to identify a same-sex pairing? I think the fact that there is both a category and a warning is what is most offensive to me. Like some have said, a warning against slash alongside legitimate warnings like substance abuse, violence, etc makes me rather uncomfortable. But I respect that some people, whatever their views on the issue, might not want to read it, while some do. This is why I think keeping the category, but getting rid of the warning is the best idea. In my opinion, it appeases both parties to some degree.

EDIT: Just saw Kara's post.

As I said in my post above, people might submit stories with a same-sex pairing to a completely different category. There are romance subplots in Mystery, D/A, Historical, and any of the other categories really.

But then, why not warn for romance in general, if you're going to argue that other such stories will be put in other categories? I mean, people reading mystery, D/A, or historical may not be looking for a ROMANCE, so should we warn for that? I have an example - Poppy Seeds, the story that won a QSQ for Best Dark/Angst, is also largely a romance [in a sense]. I did just what you referred to - put a romance into another category, except that my romance happened to heterosexual. Should I have warned against this, for those looking to read D/A but not romance?

xox
nikki

[Equinox Chick]

Hmm,

I have this issue about the same-sex 'warning'. On the one hand I agree it's offensive to class this as a warning like violence and abuse, but on the otherhand, I do appreciate that to certain sections of the MNFF community it is an issue. (way to sit on the fence, Carole)

But my point was that they wouldn't make enough noise. Like I said. Mixed-races = been along for years. We all grew up with it. Same-sex = not the same. You can't compare them.

Well, homosexuality was decriminalised in 1954 in the UK. (I don't know about USA or anywhere else) Whilst gay marriage and civil partnerships have been around for only a few years, I think fifty-five years is a long enough time for it to become mainstream.

On a similar theme, I actually find it amusing that I'm supposed to add 'Substance Abuse' to a story if my eighteen year old Marauders have a glass of Firewhisky. In the UK it's perfectly legal to drink alcohol at the age of eighteen. In fact you can drink it in a restaurant at the age of five if you're with an adult who will buy it for you. (and the Trio drink Firewhisky after Moody's death - Harry isn't quite seventeen at that point - should JK have issued a warning?)

And should I be attaching a warning to a story involving a seventeen year old Hermione and a twenty-five year old Charlie? Well, not in the UK because that relationship would be perfectly legal, but I think in the USA that would be classed as statutory rape. Is that non-con, dubious consent or can I leave it with no warning except Sexual Situations?

I think it is important to have the "Same-Sex"-tag there (and I actually think of them as tags rather than warnings), especially for stories submitted in entirely different categories. Even if you don't accept it as a warning for the slightly conservative - then maybe see it as an additional method for people who like slash to find good stories...

Yes, that's my viewpoint really - in a nutshell. Tags, not warnings is a better term.

Carole

[fg_weasley]

Tags, not warnings is a better term.

Well, I agree, but that would be easier for the general population if it didn't blatantly say 'Warnings'. Perhaps, then, the mods should consider changing that, if it's possible. But again, the issue isn't really 'warnings' in general, it's the topic of the same-sex category.

Personally, I don't think we should continue to appease those who are uncomfortable. This is not the first time the issue has come up; last time, it was that the warning was offensive, but it wasn't taken down to give comfort to those who don't like/don't want to read same-sex pairings. Now that there is a category to separate such stories, I think the warning could be taken down. That way, the majority of the stories in question - those centered around a same-sex romance - are separated both for those who wish to read them and find them easily, and those who don't. This is a topic that will continue to come up, and I don't think it's necessarily fair to continue to make those who don't like it comfortable rather than give those offended a little something to be happy about as well. No one is ever going to be completely happy, and not everyone will be pleased, but, again, I think we should shoot for some sort of middle ground. Keep the category, ditch the warning. [shrugs] Best option, in my opinion.

xox
nikki

[Karaley Dargen]

Perhaps there should be an anonymous vote for a couple of weeks with the five options...


No Same-Sex-Category
No Same-Sex-Warning
Neither of them
Keep both



I still say that we should be tolerant toward those that are just as uncomfortable about reading same-sex stories as others are about reading sexual situations or substance abuse, but I see that this is a matter of opinion where no one is really going to move their stance... So maybe it should be a majority vote where people can state their opinion without outing themselves as "conservatives" or whatever would be an appropriate word.