drbennedict-writingadvice
robotslenderman

The difference between a story being problematic and fucked up is how seriously it treats the subject matter. fucked up good, problematic bad.

Like, Twilight is problematic. Flowers in the Attic is fucked up. one has shallow characters who respond like they're in a story because there's no sense of fear because they know they're not real and can't die, and the other has characters written like people. your story can have all the same stuff as a problematic story but if it treats its characters as people about it it's not problematic, it's fucked up.

problem is that a lot of people can't tell the difference and they treat a fucked up story as problematic, or a problematic story as perfectly fine. it's not the same thing. Lolita isn't problematic, it's fucked up, but everyone who hasn't read it thinks it's problematic. A Song of Ice and Fire CAN be problematic but a lot of the stuff people criticise as being problematic is actually just fucked up, but also some of his fans treat the problematic stuff as fucked up when it's actually problematic.

if you want to write problematic stuff you gotta make it fucked up, but if you fucked up it's just problematic. you know what I'm saying?

problematic means the author never actually sat down and thought the implications through. fucked up means the author knows perfectly well and is just having family unfriendly fun about it

robotslenderman

it's like creepy vs wet but with literature

elumish
elumish

I realize that this is my soapbox but here I am again!

It is absolutely worth interrogating the behavior you defend or rationalize in fiction.

If you find yourself arguing things like "this character is justified in hurting people because the character was bullied as a child" or "a benevolent emperor is perferable to representative democracy because we can see the benevolent emperor making the right decisions" or "imperialism is good when the people being taken over have bad morals" it's important to learn how to take a step back and figure out if you actually believe those things.

Do you actually think having been victimized justifies hurting other people? Do you actually think dictatorships are preferable to representative democracies? Do you actually think imperialism is good if the people being taken over have bad morals?

(etc.)

When you are defending the behavior, are you defending it using the same language people use to defend that behavior in real life?

Do you think the story or character is cool or engaging or interesting or exciting, or do you think they are right?

seananmcguire
sandersstudies

“Kids shouldn’t have to know about that.”

Okay so actually letting a serious topic be vague and confusing is much more scary for a child than explaining it in calm language they can understand.

sandersstudies

When you are in a safe place, explain the serious topic in a way the child can understand.

  • The fire alarm went off at school today because of a mistake, but your teachers did the right thing to take you outside to be sure it was safe.
  • Some people use wheelchairs because their legs don’t walk very well. It can happen because they are old and tired, or because they got hurt, or because they were born that way.
  • Your Uncle Jerod talked to mom and dad, and wants you to call her Aunt Kari now. We will call her Kari too, and we can all practice together if it takes some getting used to.

Anticipate age-appropriate fears the child might have so you can assuage those that are not a threat.

  • Yes, Kitty died at the vet, but that doesn’t mean that it’s not safe for Puppy to go to the vet.
  • Yes, Peyton and Jo are getting a divorce, but they are both still part of our family and love you very much.
  • Yes, Grandma has cancer, but cancer is not contagious, so you are not going to get cancer by visiting her.

Anticipate fears that are realistic, and give the child clear direction about what to do, and what happens next.

  • If someone asks you to get in their car without permission, find Mom, Mama, or a teacher and tell them right away. We will make sure you are safe.
  • If Sparky’s sickness makes him hurt very badly, we are going to take him to the vet and she will give him some medicine, and he will die, but then he won’t hurt any more. Because Sparky is very sick, we are going to spend some special time with him over the next few days.
  • If the fire alarm goes off at school again, follow the teacher’s directions. If the fire alarm goes off and you are somewhere alone, go outside, and ask a grownup to call 911.

Reassure the child that they’re safe and loved, validate their feelings, and see if they have follow-up questions. Give them the option to take space to process, or to stay near you to feel safe.

  • I’m sad about Sparky too. Do you think we could make his favorite peanut-butter treats, while we are spending special time with him?
  • I understand why Grandma’s cancer makes you feel angry. It doesn’t seem fair that people we love get sick. Would you like a hug?
  • You were worried about calling 911 if there’s not a grownup around. I wrote down some important things, like our address, and we can go over these together so you are ready if anything like that ever happens.
sandersstudies

These things are principally the job of the child’s parent or guardian, but in some cases directing the child to that caregiver is difficult or impossible (parent refuses/confuses the child, parent is absent, child’s questions are specific and relevant to a situation their parent was not present for, etc.) so I think all adults should be prepared to have these conversations with kids.

albatris
equalseleventhirds

i find myself wishing for more mental illness depictions in fiction that are like. the in between state. imperfectly treated.

it feels like we have the 'you're medicated and it fixes you completely as long as you're on meds', or we have the. totally untreated likely undiagnosed and everything falls apart about it.

when in reality you have ppl on meds that dont fully work, or have side effects that also make life difficult. ppl who cant afford or acquire meds but have developed coping mechanisms (fucked up bad ones or helpful therapy ones or some combo of both) to deal with it. ppl who have control over one aspect of their mental illness but not all of it, and they just. live like that. u kno.

a lot of fiction is very, like, well you're either treated and perfectly functional or you're totally nonfunctional. and that's not, like, my experience, and not the experience of many other ppl either.

the960writers
Anonymous asked

Anonymous asked:

Like "I got raped!! I didn't/did get justice! Now let me go ahead and read haunting adeline where the Zade rapes Adeline with a gun and then later himself, woowwww, I'm coping with my rape trauma😍🥰😍🥰😍😍🥰😍🥰😍" get how fucked up it sounds?

allthingswhumpyandangsty answered

allthingswhumpyandangsty answered:

you do realize what’s fucked is telling victims and survivors they’re “fucked up” for the way they choose to cope and heal from their trauma, right?

you do realize licensed therapists actually encourage creative writing, including dark fiction, in a safe and controlled environments as a way for victim and survivors to heal, right?

you do realize there are victims and survivors who actually coped and healed through dark fiction and creative writing, right?

just because it doesn’t work for you doesn’t mean you have the right to tell victims and survivors how they can cope and heal from their trauma.

the fact you think you’re the good guy here is just as fucked as the fact you call victims and survivors fucked up because you don’t personally approve of the way they choose to heal from their trauma. theirs.

victims and survivors who cope and heal via dark fiction do not harm anybody in real life. whereas you are harassing them with your purity bullshit.

that said, thank you for proving my point, people like you are nothing more than a pathetic bully who wants to feel morally superior and hides behind anon like a coward.

elumish
elumish

I've been seeing people talk about the "if you like a Bad Character/Ship you are a Bad Person" concept, and obviously that is an unhelpful framing, but it got me thinking about how I personally tend to end up viewing these sorts of things:

If you talk certain ways about certain characters, I am not going to trust your politics. That doesn't mean I think you're a Bad Person or Evil or whatever, but it means that I am going to assume that you likely have some ideological viewpoints (consciously or unconsciously) that I disagree with.

For example, I don't think anyone is Bad or Evil for liking Draco Malfoy. But when people write Draco Malfoy-friendly fics that lean on/positively portray wizarding versions of white nationalist rhetoric, I'm going to assume those people have some sympathy towards white nationalist ideas, whether they are conscious of them or not.

In the same vein, I don't think anyone is Bad or Evil for disliking a specific Black or female character. But when people talk about Black or female characters certain ways, I'm going to assume that they have some biases (conscious or not) against Black people or women.

To some degree, it doesn't matter if I'm right. I'm not calling specific people out based on perceived ideology; I'm not going out and finding people who I think are Bad or making lists. But when people talk about how they just coincidentally aren't interested in any female character, or all of their favorite characters are white male villains, or they find that Black character just a little too angry, or they think that male character's violent behavior was justified because of something someone else did to them once, I'm going to assume that that reflects their viewpoints about real people, because it's the only thing I have to go off of.

I realize this is probably kicking a hornet's nest that I don't need to kick, but here we are.

heywriters
chaumas-deactivated20240115

I think one of the worst things a story can be is unproblematic.

Nothing makes a story more unreadable than being able to see the author squirm apologetically for the story they actually want to write—wringing their hands and imploring the reader please, please don’t be mad, I know it’s ideologically questionable but I need you to not be mad at me!

For example: a Good King™️. It’s one thing for a story to present a fictional monarchy and ask me to root for it. It’s another thing for a story to say, hey, I know what you’re thinking—but don’t worry! I can justify this premise! I have introduced a lot of convoluted self-aware political justifications for why my king is good and likable without actually asking any risky ideological questions! These characters aren’t actually problematic! Don’t be mad at me!

Commit to the bit. Apologetic, defensive writing designed to bypass obvious criticisms often winds up offending me far more than stories that are just kind of surface-level problematic. If I’m gonna be a hater you cannot stop me; the more you insist that a character is actually a good oil tycoon because of all these exceptional situations and beyond my reproach, the more I resent you and hate your stupid book.

heywriters

I read a mystery novel where the author built up a lot of suspense around a rich man (I think he was the murder victim, idr) who spent a lot of unattended time with orphan boys. The children wouldn't explain why they avoided this man or why the thought of him frightened them into silence, or why being among his "favorites" caused their health to decline. The man's esteemed financier was surprisingly tight-lipped as well and not truly mourning him. It was heavily implied the victim was killed as a righteous act for molesting these boys and to protect his connections' reputations.

Then at the last second the author backed off. She obliterated that storyline by having the boys confess the guy was just strict and overbearing. He was guilty of no worse crime than embezzlement, and then it turned out the killer got him by accident anyway while trying to kill someone else. Stupidest way to write a book.

the960writers
deontoillogical

The problem with -ism "free" world building

This is not an indictment of escapist literature as a whole, nor do I seek to assert that one cannot or should not mitigate these issues in their world building if they so choose. However, I have noticed that a lot of literature that sets out to erase the “-isms” of our modern world (e.g. sexism, racism, classism, abilism, homophobia, transphobia) actually serve to reinforce them. Or, in other instances, create a similarly flawed system unintentionally and, in ignorance of what these authors created, ignore those flaws within the narrative.

For example, often I will read a book that exists in a world “without sexism.” However, because the author’s notions of what sexism entails are surface level, sexism seeps in. Soldiers are still revered. Textiles are undervalued. Relationships still suffer from inequity, despite the male lead and female lead’s insistence this is not the case. Women are still expected to be thin and pretty. Or, if the author wants to make a point against fatphobia, she’s expected to be curvy and pretty. Sometimes she’s ugly, but not to the male lead. His lens is the exception to her otherwise plain or ugly appearance.

In other cases, homophobia and transphobia are done away with but gender norms are still intact. That could be interesting to explore if the author is actually willing to explore it.

Worlds without abilism will often forget disabilities are still… disabling.

I’ve read a book that tries to get rid of capitalism. The system they set up gives every act of labor a set of points that can be exchanged. These points can be traded. Everyone’s points are listed in the town center. When asked if this might cause problems where people become competitive about their points or are ashamed when they are in the negatives, the person explaining the system basically said “no,” and then moved on without ever addressing this again.

Well, they also explained that the whole town rallies around those that are in the negatives to help them. This, at the very least, is a privacy concern. It doesn’t matter how collectivist and caring your town is. People are going to want help at their own pace and on their own terms. Broadcasting someone’s depressive episode for all to see is mortifying. (Mind you, the main character went through a depressive episode in the first book and felt shame for not feeling like they contributed to their community enough or correctly. That was their whole arc in book one. Why are we not addressing how this system might have contributed to that in book two???)

Or, what if someone is chronically disabled and can never get into the positives? What if there is no rallying the town can do that will allow them to contribute the same amount or more as their abled peers? Is it not dehumanizing to constantly broadcast someone’s inability to an entire town? The main character would say no, and move on. It will not be addressed again.

The point is, when you take away an “ism,” you canNOT only focus on the surface level. Sexism and racism and abilism and more are not simply issues of blatant, unapologetic bias. They are systemic problems that need to be solved systemically.

Now, what if you do not want to address that at all in your world building.? You want something that doesn’t disrupt the status quo of our world today too much, but you also don’t want to dive heavily into all these systemic issues. You want your escapism set in this familiar, flawed world, but you don’t want to address all those pesky flaws. You can do that! As long as you ensure your fluffy story isn’t accidentally reinforcing oppressive systems, you can still set fluff in our oppressive systems. You must write with intention, or you will end up writing those very biases you hoped to avoid. 

HOWEVER, if you want to genuinely get rid of those oppressive systems for your fantasy world, you HAVE TO do the work. How does getting rid of the rotten roots of our modern society fundamentally change every aspect of the society you are creating? EXPLORE THAT! Then, if you accidentally embed new issues into your world, you can work to get rid of them, or embrace them or explore them. But creating a new world with rotten roots and having the narrative itself–not only the characters who may be unreliable in their biases–ignore all the issues inherent here just recreates the very monsters you sought to destroy.

As a reader, I don’t feel like I am escaping. This isn’t escapism. It’s bias in a pretty bow, and I don’t like it.

the960writers
fforsythiaaa

Once when I was in undergrad, someone described something as “problematic” in class and our professor was like, “That’s cool, but ‘problematic’ doesn’t really mean anything. It means that the thing you’re describing has a problem, and in and of itself that’s not bad. Art, especially, should always have problems, or else it’s not interesting and not art, either. It sounds like you’re trying to say that this is bad, but you don’t want to say ‘bad.’ Is that right?”

So from then on whenever one of us called something problematic, he would make us talk it out until we could name the “bad” thing we were hinting at. In this particular class, 7/10 it was some type of oppression, and the remainder was like, “I’m uncomfortable because this is very new/confusing/pushing boundaries that made me feel safe.”

Once we stopped calling things “problematic” and stopping at that, class got way more interesting and... we all had to say, like, “that’s racist” or “that’s misogynistic” or “ew capitalism gross” out loud, which a lot of us had never done in a classroom before. Or we had to be like, “Uhhh... I’m not sure what’s so bad?” and confront our own beliefs and that was maybe even more useful.

Anyway. Whenever I see the word problematic, I can’t help but think of this professor being like, “Good starting point, now let’s get specific.” I think when we have to commit to saying “that’s ___” it requires a lot more careful thought about the truth and impact and complexities of whatever we’re claiming. Sometimes there really is some bullshit afoot, and also sometimes it’s art, and it should be full of problems, because that’s what art is.

hypokeimena

#'this is present in the text' is often a good first step #but those second and third ones (naming it; describing its function) are vital (via @elucubrare)

the960writers
Anonymous asked

Anonymous asked:

What are your thoughts on fics that are written in a way that almost paints the bad actions in a good light. I’ve been told that writing such is “romanticization” or “glorification” of acts such as SH or cannibalism when I write this way, even if that’s not the point. Should I go about this more carefully? Or does the fact I don’t think these actions are good irl stand for itself? I don’t think censorship is good but sometimes I worry…

allthingswhumpyandangsty answered

allthingswhumpyandangsty answered:

I think it’s hot. Hannibal literally turns cannibalism into a work of art in their show while making sure Mads Mikkelsen looks hot cannibalizing people.

(especially if you write in the pov of a villain who thinks their wrongdoings are “the right things”, you will almost absolutely romanticize their crimes in your fic, because it’s written in their perspective and how they see the world.)

listen, even if someone glorifies or romanticizes bad things in fiction, I still don’t see anything wrong with that. as I’ve mentioned before in my other post, glorify / romanticize whatever you want when it comes to fiction.

you are not your readers’ babysitter. it’s your readers’ job to know that these things are bad and that they are only glorified / romanticized in this fanfic because fanfics are entirely fiction, and fanfics are NEVER supposed to reflect real-life moral value. fanfics are NEVER supposed to teach people what’s right and what’s wrong.

if someone sees something bad being glorified/romanticized in fiction and thinks “it’s okay in real life too because this fanfic says so”, then the problem is them exposing themself to what they shouldn’t have exposed themself to. maybe they’re young. but it’s their parents’ / guardians’ job to teach them right from wrong. it’s their parent’s / guardians’ job to teach them the huge difference between fiction and reality.

fanfic writers are not responsible for what life lesson someone takes from their fics. fanfic writers are not their readers’ babysitters.

and again, fanfics are not supposed to teach audiences about real-life moral value, the same way smut is not supposed to teach audiences about sex education and how to engage in a safe and healthy sexual intercourse in real life. it’s the audiences’ job to understand fiction is not reality and fiction is just there for the sake of entertainment, not a life lesson.

heywriters
rimonoroni2

my general opinion on what people should be "allowed" to portray and what topics they should be "allowed" to explore in fiction is that you can make whatever art with whatever themes you want but i'm also allowed to think the way you handled it was tasteless and should've been done differently. my negative opinion on your handling of sensitive topics is the price of admission for publicly showcasing your work. this is not a pro-censorship stance because i am not The Government

rimonoroni2

this is getting really popular so i’d like to add the important caveat that your criticism of a work is no more unassailable than the work itself. just as one is entitled to be critical of something someone else is entitled to disagree with that criticism. i add this because some of you pretend to give a fuck about thoughtful analysis and then when someone points out flaws in your argument you declare that all criticisms are valid. this is untrue. the status of a hater is no more sacred than that of a liker. get off your high horse and engage in the thoughtful discussion you pretend to believe in or perish by my blade

heywriters
prisonerpenis asked

prisonerpenis asked:

(Content warning: SA)




one of the characters in my story gets sexually assualted at some point, so i want to know if it's possible to add a rape scene in a book/film/tv show without making it absolutely terrible (by terrible i don't mean 'disturbing', i mean 'gratuitous, misogynistic and tasteless'). if it's possible, then what are some ways to do it? or is it better to just not show anything at all, and have the narrative/characters just imply it?

heywriters answered

heywriters answered:

Portraying Sexual Assault: Important to Know and Understand

Simple answer is, yes, rape/assault can be included in a story without being “bad.” Cringing at any reference to it is a reaction people are allowed to have, but a hundred hamfisted and heartless portrayals do not make the subject itself impossible or taboo to include.

The purpose of the scene in your story should influence how you portray it. Some portrayals are clearly meant to arouse, others to horrify. An article I read a decade ago (yikes, I’ve been here a while) criticized television writers for using backstory rape to make female characters seem “strong” or “empowered” for having endured it. So how you write it should reflect your reasons for including it. SA can be plot relevant, it can be used to explain the characters, and it can be a crucial aspect of your worldbuilding as well.

Even when a portrayal is unintentionally misogynistic or tasteless, it’s often because the writer made up what they imagined it to be like or did not have empathy for their characters. The best written examples I can think of both described the victim’s perspective as a sudden, jarring experience that left them in a daze. In research I’ve read this is often what it is like for real life victims. Doing adequate research can help you bring both authenticity and empathy to your portrayal.

From a personal viewpoint as a reader/viewer, the skipped/abbreviated rape scenes are much more impactful than the detailed ones. Graphic depictions bring up disgust and revolt at both the scene and the author, but the shock of not seeing what happened leaves the audience in a state of alarm and confusion, a moment where life reflects art as both reader and character are left wondering “Wait, did that really just happen?”

For the group seeing this post and thinking “SA is too awful to portray, writers shouldn’t even bother,” ignoring it in fiction is no safer than ignoring it in real life. For some people, reading about fictionalized evil helps them recognize it in the real world. For victims or family of victims, seeing it respectfully acknowledged in the personal realm of fiction can be a breath of relief. We use all kinds of fiction to heal hidden wounds, and SA can be one of the loneliest to bear.

+ If you enjoy my blog and appreciate my advice, consider visiting my ko-fi and Buy Me A Coffee 🤗

+ Check out my AO3 , Pinterest , and Unsplash for my fanfiction and photo inspiration.

the960writers
bananonbinary

weird take about fiction: sometimes, actions that would be abusive in real life, hit different in a story. and sometimes i see people react very very strongly to those actions, and i totally get it, because like, that can be extremely triggering and ymmv on whether its handled well or not, but it always makes me a bit. hm.

like, i think the most obvious one is slapping/hitting. in real life, there is basically no situation where that is acceptable, unless you're actively defending yourself/someone else. but fiction is inherently larger than life, its about how it feels, subjectively, over what actually happens, literally. sometimes a character who has never before been violent will hit someone, and it's intended as like, an indicator of how fucked up everything is. that shit is going down. or, a character will trash a room, throwing things and destroying everything in their path. and then its never mentioned again, everything just continues as if they HADNT destroyed their own and other people's property in a frankly terrifying display, because it was just a cathartic moment to represent the storm of emotions the person was feeling. and when i see people like 'this character is an abuser, the story needs to address this,' i think maybe its actually okay for fictional characters to do shitty things and not have it framed as shitty, by the story itself or even on any sort of meta level, with the intended audience reaction. sometimes the point is just to resonate with your emotions, not to dissect the literal sequence of events.

bananonbinary

like obviously ive been on the 'you can portray whatever you want in fiction, its all a pretend game' train forever. but i think the important thing to me here is that, you can also defend bad things in fiction. not just 'they did everything wrong and i love that,' but even 'they were 100% justified when they did [thing that would be extremely bad irl].' cause its like, ok, they did do that, but like it was the only way to tell the story well. dont worry about it.

mikkeneko

related but tangential, about villains.

by now i've been through a lot of fandoms, seen a lot of different kinds of villains, and met a lot of fans of villain characters. and one theme that seems to surface over and over again, is that the stories and arcs of villain characters provide a very specific fantasy of... hm...

Of your pain matters. Yes, it does. Even if it was overlooked at the time, even if the cops didn't care or your friends excused it, what you felt in that painful moment matters. The villain's big plan is a way of reflecting that pain back on the world. Making everybody look at it and share in it and say yes, this was awful, this should never have happened to you, in a way that nobody can overlook and dismiss.

and in real life, obviously, someone deciding to blow up the moon because their relationship melted down or wife died and now they'll never look at the moon with her again would be Bad. Duh. But it's a story and it's fucking fine because it's not the real moon, so for a moment you can go yes, that's right, I want everyone in the world to feel this grief with me tonight.