Changes

Among my kind, "watch from the hall" is what we call the embarrassment squick, because it's so bothersome you can't even watch it through your fingers and have to leave the room when it's happening.}} Although squick in its original use conveys an ''intensely'' adverse reaction, through [[Fannish Drift|fannish drift]] its meaning has been diluted so that today it may also be used to mean "stuff I don't want to write, read, or receive in a [[Gift Exchange|gift exchange]]."

Among my kind, "watch from the hall" is what we call the embarrassment squick, because it's so bothersome you can't even watch it through your fingers and have to leave the room when it's happening.}} Although squick in its original use conveys an ''intensely'' adverse reaction, through [[Fannish Drift|fannish drift]] its meaning has been diluted so that today it may also be used to mean "stuff I don't want to write, read, or receive in a [[Gift Exchange|gift exchange]]."

In the 2010s, the term seems to be less popular, to the point where a 2016 Tumblr post lamented the loss of the "old fandom term".<ref>[http://desert-neon.tumblr.com/post/138955387188/whats-a-squick What's a squick?] ask answered by desert-neon on 8 February 2016. (Accessed 14 June 2016.)</ref> On the other hand, the post generated over 25,000 notes, so maybe rumors of ''squick'''s death are greatly exaggerated.  

In the 2010s, the term seems to be less popular, to the point where a 2016 Tumblr post lamented the loss of the "old fandom term".<ref name="desertneon1"/> On the other hand, the post generated over 25,000 notes, so maybe rumors of ''squick'''s death are greatly exaggerated.  

==Some Definitions==

==Some Definitions==

{{Quotation|

{{Quotation|

So what, you ask, is a squick?

So what, you ask, is a squick?

Now, neither of these things are dangerous to my mental or emotional state. I have never experienced either in my life, and they do not bring about any sort of PTSD, dissociation, or spiral of depression, anxiety, etc. They are simply things I prefer not to think about in my daily life, or read about in my escapist hobbies. Therefore, they are not [[triggers]]. Triggers are very real, very bad things for some people, and to [[label]] things we choose not to read because we find it disturbing or gross or weird is to diminish the very real danger of actual triggers.

Now, neither of these things are dangerous to my mental or emotional state. I have never experienced either in my life, and they do not bring about any sort of PTSD, dissociation, or spiral of depression, anxiety, etc. They are simply things I prefer not to think about in my daily life, or read about in my escapist hobbies. Therefore, they are not [[triggers]]. Triggers are very real, very bad things for some people, and to [[label]] things we choose not to read because we find it disturbing or gross or weird is to diminish the very real danger of actual triggers.

I love the term squick. It perfectly describes the concept without assigning any negativity to the thing you dislike, or to people who do like the thing you dislike. It is something you personally do not care for and wish to avoid, simple as that. <ref>{{source| url = http://desert-neon.tumblr.com/post/138955387188/whats-a-squick | title = The madness of me (What's a squick?) | archiveurl = http://www.webcitation.org/6floMtZKd | archivedate = 2016-03-05 }} (February 2016) </ref>}}

I love the term squick. It perfectly describes the concept without assigning any negativity to the thing you dislike, or to people who do like the thing you dislike. It is something you personally do not care for and wish to avoid, simple as that.<ref name="desertneon1">{{source| url = http://desert-neon.tumblr.com/post/138955387188/whats-a-squick | title = What's a squick? | archiveurl = http://www.webcitation.org/6floMtZKd | archivedate = 2016-03-05 }} ask answered by desert-neon on 8 February 2016. (Accessed 14 June 2016.)</ref>}}

==The Differences Between [[Triggers]] and Squicks==

==The Differences Between [[Triggers]] and Squicks==

{{Quotation| 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. <ref> {{source| url = http://desert-neon.tumblr.com/post/139526793518/how-was-squick-used-like-would-you-tag-something | title = The madness of me (How was squick used? Like would you tag something...) | archiveurl = http://www.webcitation.org/6flod27ZR | archivedate = 2016-03-05 }} (2016) </ref>}}

{{Quotation|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.<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>}}

==Meta/Further Reading==

==Meta/Further Reading==