extendedconfirmed
3,000
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 91:
Line 91: − + + − + − + − + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
→The Differences Between Triggers and Squicks
Particularly in the context of ongoing conversations about the responsibility to tag potentially sensitive or triggering content in fannish spaces (and whether such content should even have a place in fan communities and archives), "squick" is often lifted up as a necessary piece of fannish vocabulary by fans seeking to draw a distinction between a squick and a trigger.
Particularly in the context of ongoing conversations about the responsibility to tag potentially sensitive or triggering content in fannish spaces (and whether such content should even have a place in fan communities and archives), "squick" is often lifted up as a necessary piece of fannish vocabulary by fans seeking to draw a distinction between a squick and a trigger.
{{Quotation|[2015]:
{{NQuote|
<b>squick:</b> Something that makes you go “ewwww” and wish you had never seen/read it. Something that makes you deeply uncomfortable. Something you’re not interested in reading/seeing/thinking about, ever.
<b>squick:</b> Something that makes you go “ewwww” and wish you had never seen/read it. Something that makes you deeply uncomfortable. Something you’re not interested in reading/seeing/thinking about, ever.
<b>trigger:</b> Something that you associate with/reminds you of a past trauma (mental, emotional, or physical) and therefore triggers your personal reaction to trauma (be it flashbacks, panic/anxiety attacks, unhealthy behaviours, a crying jag, whatever).<ref>[http://jmathieson-fic.tumblr.com/post/107254756494/animatedamerican-buckyballbearing-no-for/ Tumblr post] by [[jmathieson-fic]]. Posted on January 5, 2015. Accessed on August 11, 2018. (Accessible only for logged-in users.) [https://web.archive.org/web/20150811200034/http://jmathieson-fic.tumblr.com/post/107254756494/animatedamerican-buckyballbearing-no-for/ Archived] on August 11, 2015.</ref>
<b>trigger:</b> Something that you associate with/reminds you of a past trauma (mental, emotional, or physical) and therefore triggers your personal reaction to trauma (be it flashbacks, panic/anxiety attacks, unhealthy behaviours, a crying jag, whatever).<ref>[http://jmathieson-fic.tumblr.com/post/107254756494/animatedamerican-buckyballbearing-no-for/ Tumblr post] by [[jmathieson-fic]]. Posted on January 5, 2015. Accessed on August 11, 2018. (Accessible only for logged-in users.) [https://web.archive.org/web/20150811200034/http://jmathieson-fic.tumblr.com/post/107254756494/animatedamerican-buckyballbearing-no-for/ Archived] on August 11, 2015.</ref>
|user =2015
}}
}}
{{Quotation2|[2016]:
{{NQuote2|
Squick is a fun term that was often used as both a noun and a verb. Either X was one of your squicks, or X squicked you, or squicked you out, or squicked you hard. It was often used in fic exchanges. They would ask for a list of your squicks so that the [[gifting]] author would know not to include any hint of them. It was also used in casual conversation with fandom friends, authors, artists, etc. It could be left in comments, or as a reason you just didn’t read your best fandom friend’s latest fic. “Sorry, [[bff]], you know I love your writing, but you have X tagged at the top, and that just squicks me out.” “Hey, no worries, best reader friend! I totally get it. Give this one a pass, but I’ll send you a note when I post my next one! I promise it will be totally X-free! ”Here’s the thing though. In your example, you explain why X is your squick with Y. But the beauty of squick was that (at least in my experience) no explanation was necessary. Not only was it not necessary, it was rarely asked for. A squick is a squick, and there doesn’t have to be any rhyme or reason. In fact, why would you have a rational, bullet-pointed, well-thought-out argument as to why something squicked you out? Very often it’s a visceral reaction, and if you don’t like the thing, you’re likely not going to sit and do deep meditation on why not. Squicks were respected by fandom. You don’t like the thing, okay, we will tag the thing appropriately, you do not have to read the thing, no judgments on either side. There was no fandom policing, only respect. And this, I think, is super important, because fandom policing is a problem, especially when it comes to triggers. “Trigger” has become so overused, so all-encompassing, that people feel they have to defend their legitimate triggers. If X triggers you, it triggers you, and you DO NOT need to provide an explanation. But because “trigger” is so often used in place of “squick,” some people feel they have the right to “call out” those who use the word. They want explanations, they want you to tell them what that triggering concept does to you, so they can call bullshit and feel superior. You don’t have to explain either your squicks or your [[triggers]], but '''using the correct word stops the fandom police from feeling as though they have the right to ask.''' Bring “squick” back, people. Don’t devalue triggers, which are horrible, nasty, dangerous things.
Squick is a fun term that was often used as both a noun and a verb. Either X was one of your squicks, or X squicked you, or squicked you out, or squicked you hard.
<nowiki>#the</nowiki> beauty of squick was that it offered no moral judgement#merely a statement of personal taste#and let you estate when something just wasn’t your cup of tea#without having to justify it#plenty of things squick me out in fic which are absolutely not triggers#but now there’s a real culture of having to justify not liking stuff on a moral basis (via clarias) <ref>{{source| url = http://desert-neon.tumblr.com/post/139526793518/how-was-squick-used-like-would-you-tag-something | title = How was squick used? | archiveurl = http://www.webcitation.org/6flod27ZR | archivedate = 2016-03-05 }}, ask answered by desert-neon, 18 February 2016.</ref>}}
It was often used in fic exchanges. They would ask for a list of your squicks so that the [[gifting]] author would know not to include any hint of them. It was also used in casual conversation with fandom friends, authors, artists, etc. It could be left in comments, or as a reason you just didn’t read your best fandom friend’s latest fic. “Sorry, [[bff]], you know I love your writing, but you have X tagged at the top, and that just squicks me out.” “Hey, no worries, best reader friend! I totally get it. Give this one a pass, but I’ll send you a note when I post my next one! I promise it will be totally X-free!”
Here’s the thing though. In your example, you explain why X is your squick with Y. But the beauty of squick was that (at least in my experience) no explanation was necessary. Not only was it not necessary, it was rarely asked for. A squick is a squick, and there doesn’t have to be any rhyme or reason. In fact, why would you have a rational, bullet-pointed, well-thought-out argument as to why something squicked you out? Very often it’s a visceral reaction, and if you don’t like the thing, you’re likely not going to sit and do deep meditation on why not.
Squicks were respected by fandom. You don’t like the thing, okay, we will tag the thing appropriately, you do not have to read the thing, no judgments on either side. There was no fandom policing, only respect.
And this, I think, is super important, because fandom policing is a problem, especially when it comes to triggers. “Trigger” has become so overused, so all-encompassing, that people feel they have to defend their legitimate triggers. If X triggers you, it triggers you, and you DO NOT need to provide an explanation. But because “trigger” is so often used in place of “squick,” some people feel they have the right to “call out” those who use the word. They want explanations, they want you to tell them what that triggering concept does to you, so they can call bullshit and feel superior. You don’t have to explain either your squicks or your [[triggers]], but '''using the correct word stops the fandom police from feeling as though they have the right to ask.''' Bring “squick” back, people. Don’t devalue triggers, which are horrible, nasty, dangerous things.<ref>{{source| url = http://desert-neon.tumblr.com/post/139526793518/how-was-squick-used-like-would-you-tag-something | title = How was squick used? | archiveurl = http://www.webcitation.org/6flod27ZR | archivedate = 2016-03-05 }}, ask answered by desert-neon, 18 February 2016.</ref>
|user =2016
|child ={{NQuote|
#the beauty of squick was that it offered no moral judgement #merely a statement of personal taste #and let you estate when something just wasn’t your cup of tea#without having to justify it #plenty of things squick me out in fic which are absolutely not triggers #but now there’s a real culture of having to justify not liking stuff on a moral basis (via clarias<ref>{{source| url = http://clarias.tumblr.com/post/148928375298/how-was-squick-used-like-would-you-tag-something | title = Reblog of "How was squick used?" | archiveurl = http://archive.is/JEZTg | archivedate = 2018-10-22 }}, tags by clarias, 14 August 2016.</ref>)
the culture of justifying dislike on an ideological/moral basis in part one: chapter one of my novel, ''Let Me Show You My Issues With Tumblr Fandom''. the requirement for ideological purity has become so impossibly strict, and is valued so highly, that tearing the thing you dislike from an ideological standpoint is the quickest way to shut it down. it’s a cheap, disingenuous shortcut that exploits social justice language for personal leverage. it’s not like we were free of wankery and ship wars back in ye olde lj days, god, far from it, but at least the insults we flung at each other were subjective: A is so bad for B and if you can’t see that you’re an idiot!!! B/C OTP!!! (i should also disclaim that we did have moral policing as well, it was just FAR less extensive.) leveraging social justice concepts is an attempt to gain a kind of objective superiority. “they’re a dark ship and i don’t like that” holds little power; “they’re abusive and you support abuse by shipping this” is a trump card to shut down the content you don’t like and the people who fan it. that kind of rhetoric is all over the damn place and it continues to be propagated because it works and it has created a culture from which a variety of problems like the trigger issue explained above consistently arise.
…i would go into further chapters on my novel but i am tired now<ref>{{source| url = http://ibroketuesday.tumblr.com/post/148928990515/how-was-squick-used-like-would-you-tag-something | title = Reblog of "How was squick used?" | archiveurl = http://archive.is/EcuHD | archivedate = 2018-10-22 }}, reblog by ibroketuesday, 14 August 2016.</ref>
|user=
}}
}}
==Meta/Further Reading==
==Meta/Further Reading==