The Specifier only focuses on a couple of whumpy tropes. They often won’t even care who it’s for, as long as it has those tropes. The tropes can vary in specificity. So your friendly neighborhood Specifier might like electrocution in general, or maybe they just like elbow bruises caused by a flail wielded by a 2nd century Tibetan monk. Although I would like to know where they found that one.
You can read The Six Types of Whumpees You’ll Meet here! Thank you to @the-whumpy-fangirl for allowing us to use this post!
The “One of Us” Okay, listen. One instance of “sword under the chin, manhandled, tied up, knocked over the head, face bloody upon slow awakening” was nice! It was lovely! Two instances? Stellar! Three? You’re seriously considering typing up a Chick-style tract entitled, “The Whump Community – are YOU part of it?” and mailing it to the writer’s P.O. box.
The Snippet Whumperflies galore, but the whump lasts 1.2 seconds. (You know this because you giffed it. You rewatch that gif over and over, wishing it was twenty times longer.)
The Textbook Example The most perfectly constructed canon whump, handed to you on a platter. You can hardly believe you’ve been offered something so perfect. Shows the “hurt”, doesn’t skimp on the “comfort”, with a perfect peppering of “plot” and “characterization”. It’s long, it’s detailed, it gets the whumperflies going and they just. won’t. stop. It’s a whole episode, or a whole third act of a movie, or the whole first half of a book. Makes the rounds within the community fast enough that the sound of reblogs breaks the sound barrier.
The “Once in a Lifetime” A trope so rare, so beautiful, so sweet, that you’d never even considered it and you’ve only seen it this once. Like a full solar eclipse, you’ll see it once if you’re lucky and then think about it for the rest of your life.
The “Missed Opportunity” The jump cut, the discretion shot, the “two weeks later”, this is the lacuna where the whump should have been. And it would have been so good! A wonderful hospital reunion, or three days in the mountains with a broken leg, or a nuanced and sensitive and aching depiction of PTSD. But that’s not what the writers were interested in, so they did us dirty and just skipped it.
The “Concerningly Enthusiastic” Similar to the the “one of us”, but you’re just not sure what they’re into. Are they into this? Are they into it? Is it sadism? Are they just super committed to their craft? You’re happy they’re happy, but you’re not sure you’re on the same page and you’ve got some questions you probably don’t want answers to.
The “So Unrealistic It’s Terrible” “That’s not how that works!” you yell, knocking over the popcorn and sending the cat scurrying for cover. “That’s not how anyof this works!!” Either it’s inaccurate in a way that gets your goat professionally, because you know this stuff, or you’ve done your research and know the writer intentionally chose the less-whumpy of various options.
The “So Unrealistic It’s Good” Okay, so you know that nobody’s going to be digging a bullet out of their friend’s gut with a kitchen knife in an industrial kitchen while surrounded by zombies, using a blow torch to cauterize the wound. But the detail! The commitment! The incredible whimpering! You’re willing to forgive many medical sins when the result is this juicy.
The “So Realistic It’s Good” They did their research and it shows, in the best way possible. A little-known, painful complication, or consequences for shoddy field medicine, or the natural consequences of forgetting to restock your medkit. This writer definitely has their medical friends concerned from the amount of very specific questions they ask via text at two in the morning. You would like to buy them a coffee. You would never, ever cross them.
The “So Realistic It’s Bad” What do you mean, you have painkillers on hand? What do you mean, it’s the future and nano-machines can heal you in twenty minutes flat? You’re telling me the team leader intervened and insisted on a medical exam and they caught that injury beforeyour favorite character got to say “I don’t feel so good” and pass out, blood on their fingertips? This isn’t fun. Couldn’t they do a little less research, or at least make their characters a little less perfect?
The “I Have Complicated Feelings” Maybe it was a cartoon that gave you whumperflies when you were a kid and still kinda does, even though you wish it didn’t. Maybe it’s the painting you wrote your dissertation on. Maybe it’s the stain glass Jesus at the church where you used to attend 4-H meetings. Look, I’m not judging. As long as you’re not sending that tract about whump to the priest, you’re in the clear. What? no, no, you’re not blushing. Sweetheart, we’re all weird here. You’re fine.
The “I Wasn’t Uncomfortable Until You Were Uncomfortable” The actor’s not committing, the cuts are too quick, there are discretion shots three scenes in a row and not nearly enough blood. You were into this, until you got the feeling that the creators are uncomfortable, which is making you uncomfortable, and you’re considering writing a fix-it fic about what would happen if everyone just committed to the gosh danged premise they set up for themselves, already.
Create a whump scene. Imagine them in pain, imagine them screaming and crying and shuddering. Blood stains a dark shirt, a razor-sharp knife gleams in the light, electricity crackles, eyes slowly slide shut.
So I have read several people complaining that they can’t be expected to know the “unwritten rules” of fandom. So here’s what I wish people knew:
Fanfiction is fiction.
Fictional people are not real.
Fictional people do not have rights.
Fictional people cannot be abused.
Reading or writing about something does not mean the desire to do or support it in the real world.
If I find art upsetting/triggering/disgusting/outraging/unpleasant/squicky/distressing/offensive, it is on me not to read it, not the creators and hosts to remove it.
Curate your own experience. The back buttons exist for a reason.
If you don’t trust yourself to do that, get someone you trust to do it for you.
Fandom is an adult space. Adults create and own and host fandom spaces. If minors want to participate, then the onus is on them and their parents/guardians/trusted adults to ensure they participate appropriately, not on strange adults to stop being adults.
You often don’t know the assault status or mental health status or neurotype or race or nationality or religion or gender or sexuality or age of a creator or consumer, and they do not have to disclose to you to justify their fantasy.
AO3 is not a safe space. It is not intended to be a safe space. Proceed accordingly.
Just because you don’t like something or find it offensive doesn’t mean it is a “problem” that “has to be dealt with”.
Most characters in anime are not white.
There is no onus on you to reblog or share anything.
Everyone makes mistakes in fandom and is less than their best self sometimes.
Persistent pseudonyms encourage long term relationships.
Ship wars are stupid.
Someone else enjoying things does not impact on your own enjoyment of other things.
Tagging and warning is a courtesy, not a requirement. Assume any fic might contain untagged content.
Rating is an imprecise art, not a science.
Don’t hassle IP creators.
Most people who are in fandom are hoping to make connections based on a shared passion.
Trying to profit from transformative fanworks puts us all at risk.
No one is obligated to share your head canon or fanon.
Being kind rarely fails to pay off.
It is okay to block and remove people who make your experience unpleasant. You don’t have to placate them. (Learn from my mistakes).
Britpicking is a good thing.
You don’t have to justify why you like a canon/pairing/trope/kink. Sometimes navel gazing is fun, but you don’t have an obligation to explain yourself, especially to strangers. I share the overwhelming desire to refute an unfair accusation, but the people accusing you are rarely doing so in good faith, so you’re batting a losing wicket.
I’m not your Mum. (Well, okay, a very few of you can call me Mum or Mom, but if you are one of them you already know who you are ❤️)
If you aren’t mature enough to take responsibility for your online experiences, you aren’t mature enough to be in fandom spaces.
If you aren’t mature enough to take responsibility for your online experiences, you aren’t mature enough to be in fandom spaces.
I’ve seen a lot of posts about purity culture and anti purity culture and while some of them are well-written, several boil down to insults, name-calling, or strawman attacks.
I wanted to investigate a more nuanced version of the argument to try and understand the heart of the issue. In doing so, I present the steelman argument of purity culture.
Violent media is not consequence-free.
Now, it’s certainly true that the media you consume affects how you think. Our perceptions, our beliefs, our biases are all constructions of the world around us, and these perceptions do not care if the world is fictional or real. We empathize with characters in media, we cry with them, we laugh with them. As anyone in any fandom can attest, we develop strong feelings about fictional characters, as though they are real people. In empathizing with fictional characters, their pain is our pain. An attack on them feels like an attack on us.
Argument 1: In hurting fictional characters, you can hurt real people.
Defense: Humans have an extraordinary ability to empathize with just about anything, from space-faring robots to household plants to rocks with googly eyes glued on. If an act is judged by its effects on bystanders, we are beholden to the whims of everyone around us. In practicality, this means nothing would ever get accomplished–everything in the world could be labelled wrong by someone. An act is judged by its effect on its human stakeholders, and in the case of fictional characters, both the perpetrator and the stakeholder is the author themself.
Secondly, another argument can be made for violent media biasing its consumers to more violence. This argument has been made numerous times with finger-pointing at things like violent video games. Being fed a steady stream of any biased media can warp your perception of the world, and a steady stream of violent media would then follow to make your perception of the world a more violent place. It can also cause desensitization and biases in how you treat real people.
Argument 2: Violent media causes people to be more violent.
Defense: This is a difficult one to either refute or prove because how do you quantify more violent? If the argument is that first person shooter games make users more likely to shoot people, how many people, in the vast, vast audience that these games have, have ever fired a real weapon? Would those people have fired a weapon without playing the games? Media has become more and more ubiquitous these days, from the advent of easily available books and an increase in literacy, to the invention of movies and TV shows, to the popularization of video games. And yet, I would argue, the world as a whole has learned more kindness.
Do I claim that the increase in violent media is the cause of increased kindness? No. Is it true that some people who have committed violent crimes have also consumed violent media? Yes. But I would argue that violent media gives users a safe place to vent out and cathart through negative emotions without hurting anyone.
And finally, the last argument is about the creators of violent media itself. That to create such stories–to write and think and characterize such awful people, to create tragedies and failures and horrible things happening to good people–they must be, in some way, shape, or form, morally bankrupt themselves. To imagine an act of violence is something no moral, good person would do.
Argument 3: Creating violent media means you are more predisposed to violence.
Defense: This is an accusation of every creator of dark themes that they are a person to be suspicious of. That their morals and their agenda are in some way questionable. That they’re not good. That it is okay to vilify them for daring to create a scenario in which bad things happen.
For argument’s sake, let’s say that this is right. Then what? How many creators out there can you accuse of being pro-rape or pro-child abuse or pro-murder or pro-violence? How many creators would be left? How many of those creators have actually committed crimes? How many of the stories and shows and games you love bring up dark themes?
Nature is, in and of itself, a violent place. Violence cannot be eradicated from this planet. What we can do is learn to think critically, to be aware of ‘dark’ and ‘problematic’ themes, even if they make us uncomfortable, to shine a light on the darkest parts of ourselves to better understand who we are, what we are capable of, and the consequences of those actions.
I believe that it’s in the confrontation of violence that we learn kindness.
I explained this to my seven-year-old cousin once when she expressed distaste over anyone possibly enjoying horror movies, and she understood perfectly, so adults have no excuse:
People read dark fiction for the same reason they ride roller coasters.
It’s a simulation of danger without anyone actually being under threat. It gets the brain worked up, releases a bunch of adrenaline into your system, you experience a whole rush of emotions and excitement and fear; but a safe kind of fear, where you know the danger isn’t real and there are dozens of measures in place to protect you. And then it’s over and you can get off the ride.
That doesn’t mean everyone is obligated to ride roller coasters. I, for example, am scared of heights, and most coasters are scary for me in a way that isn’tfun. The fear isn’t that I’ll die, the fear is of experiencing more of the ride and thus it’s not a safe fear, because it’s real and I have no control over it. As such, I don’t ride large roller coasters. But the fact that large coasters are not mentally or emotionally safe for me to ride doesn’t mean they should be illegal, or that there’s “something wrong” with anyone who enjoys them.
Similarly,sometimes accidents happen. Sometimes people have conditions they don’t know about until a coaster aggravates them in the worst possible way because they didn’t know to avoid it…and that’s no one’s fault. People have died or been injured in coaster accidents, and those accidents are pretty much always the result of human error, carelessness, laziness, or poor communication. It’s the responsibility of the amusement park to make sure that basic safety features are built-in and maintained–or at the very least (mangling the metaphor somewhat because this would obviously be illegal in real life) to make it clear that those features don’t exist! I feel like most people would avoid a ride clearly labelled “HAS NEVER HAD A SAFETY INSPECTION! NO RESTRAINT BARS! RIDE STAFF HAVE NOT BEEN TRAINED AND THERE ARE NO EMERGENCY SERVICES ON-SITE! OPEN FLAMES!” but if you click on a fic clearly labelled “author chose not to use warnings” you know the risks and they’ve met their obligation to warn you of them. And sometimes the people providing this content don’tperform that basic due diligence, and people get hurt as a result–but that’s on those specific bad actors, and doesn’t mean we ban all roller coasters. It also doesn’t mean every single ride operator on earth should be tarred with that brush, especially when they’ve openly spoken out against such practices! Furthermore, if you KNOW you have a heart condition and willingly get on a ride that says it is not safe for people with heart conditions, you cannot then blame the amusement park!
What makes roller coasters safe for me? Well, for one, the fact that I’m an adult now so my family has finally stopped trying to force me onto them. Pressure was a constant part of interacting with coasters for me for YEARS, and THAT fucked me up. There was “mild” teasing, frustration when I refused, anger if I changed my mind, and a lot of guilt-tripping about how it was my fault that they couldn’t go on the rides they wanted to because of me. That shit was not okay, and anyone trying to force someone to engage with content they don’t want to is obviously in the wrong.
The OTHER thing that helps me is content warnings the heroes who upload on-ride video of coasters I’m interested in trying. Knowing exactly what to expect–being able to see for myself all the drops so I can judge if they’ll be too much for me, and know in advance where they are so I can brace myself–can turn a ride that otherwise would have been a miserable and stressful experience that I chose not to subject myself to into a really good time. These are especially valuable, because what’s safe for ME is not automatically safe for everyone else. The only thing that makes a ride too much for me–my only hard limit–is extremely tall drops. I love inversions, fast twists and turns, I don’t mind rough coasters, it’s just drop height. But I’ve known people with medical conditions that made rough jolts dangerous, and plenty of people like tall drops but find tight turns and high speed overwhelming. Do I wish more coasters were designed to have the elements I enjoy without the ones I don’t? Yes, and not being able to find many frustrates me. But that doesn’t mean I expect everyone to have the same limits, or that I think people who design tall coasters with big drops and lots of airtime are malicious.
By this logic, actually, darkfic is muchsafer than roller coasters–once you’ve committed to a coaster you have to ride it out even if you change your mind. But the moment a dark fic or horror movie takes a turn you don’t like or becomes suddenly too real, you can turn it off and walk away.
And if you think enjoying roller coasters means someone will conclude that it’s okay to fling people off cliffs without their consent, then, well, in that case you’re just ungodly fucking stupid. Sorry you had to find out this way.
Have fun on those hypercoasters, you crazy bastards. Keep uploading ride videos for me.
Like, there are definitely no universal rules for editing one’s writing, but at some point you’ve gotta step back, examine your reaction, and ask yourself: is this particular piece of editing advice bad in the abstract, or is it more that no piece of editing advice would ever be acceptable to you because you resent the fact you can’t just write it once and have it be perfect on the very first try?
I love the sort of posts that usually suggest an alternative whump trope /method because they always begin like :
“nothing against physical torture” (my personal fave) or like “Stabbing is fine but..”, “Yeah we all love to chain people to the wall, but have you considered…”
And I just can’t with that, it always cracks me up
There’s lots of talk out there about working through trauma via dark fanfiction. I’m not saying anything against that - there’s nothing wrong with it. But I do think there’s an unfortunate implication being made in a lot of those posts. Accidentally or not, the implication being made is that trauma is the reason people enjoy dark content. That there needs to be a justification at all.
Guys, trauma is not the only reason to enjoy dead dove do not eat content. You don’t need trauma to justify liking it. You don’t need anything to justify liking it. You can just…like it. I get the point of those posts is to stop people from harping on others when they might be digging into said trauma, or harassing others for their coping methods, which is definitely wrong - but let’s be clear in our intent and not alienate people that are just here for the fun of it. Let’s not make people think they need a reason to enjoy what they do.
You don’t need trauma to justify liking dark things. You can just like it and if that’s all there is to it, that’s perfectly okay.
horror movies, serial killer documentaries, splatterhouse-type games, etc - these are billion-dollar industries
there is a real, valid, profitable part of the human psyche that loves dark shit when it’s in a situation we can control
what do you think is the appeal of roller coasters? danger, controlled
i don’t give one single solitary shit what your particular dark fic itch is. seriously, i don’t care. it doesn’t matter. yes, even whatever super gross objectionable thing you just thought of - it literally doesn’t matter. unless real, live, non-hypothetical people are hurt in the making of a thing, that’s just how humans be. sometimes we gaze into the abyss, to see if we can handle it when the abyss gazes back.
We don’t talk about this but environment in whump can be soooo evocative. There’s a huge difference between a character getting a bag stuck over their head and abducted to a shack in the woods versus being put in handcuffs and dragged to the top of a 50-story steel tower versus being thrown into a dark, soggy medieval castle dungeon crawling with rats.
Genuinely don’t mean this as any sort of callout post but it’s interesting to me how there’s been a trend in newer (?) whump blogs putting really long disclaimers in their bios and pinned posts, saying that they don’t condone violence, that they aren’t responsible for other people’s actions, that they know it’s bad and it’s just fiction.
It’s honestly making me wonder how much purity culture has seeped into the fabric of even the Whump community, that people feel the need to explicitly state what I would have accepted as an easily presumed given. When did we get to a point where we have to preface any conversation by stating that we don’t condone irl violence, lest someone accuse us of immorality?
i condone maiming and biting and gnawing and
(Serious Answer): there’s been a couple moments of DiscourseTM, and aside from that, I think everyone in the whump community has been exposed to the purity culture shit going on on other parts of the internet. I mean I mostly live in a whump bubble but I’m still aware of it. Like being a little crab in my little crab burrow occasionally peaking my eyestalks out and seeing the shadows of Drama Leviathans doing battle out in the open sea. And I’m sure plenty of people here are refugees from war-torn fandoms.
And kind of the epicenter of “is it okay to depict dark topics in fiction” discourse has in recent years been “romanticization” of abusive and toxic relationships, from mainstream romance novels like 50 Shades of Grey (which is fairness is also getting slammed because its depiction of BDSM is apparently practically defamatory to the real community and those kinds of stereotypes can get real people hurt) to people arguing over whether Enemies To Lovers fics or just shipping two characters who have fought each other in canon is promoting abuse. Whump ismostly non-sexual but the dynamics and scenarios are very often abusive or codependent in some way and/or have significant overlap with the kinds of thingsthat kink-related fiction has gotten flack for depicting.
So I think it’s not unreasonable to put a disclaimer on whump content, not for the whump community necessarily but for other people who might see it and start shit, because the internet is public and, like, if I search the Whump Art tag there are lots of pictures of naked or mostly-naked blood-covered people tied or chained up that someone unfamiliar with it could easily mistake for BDSM stuff. Some sections of the community are probably at greater risk than others, e.g the NSFWhump side or the Intimate Whump and BBU fans probably have more cause for caution whereas me sitting here writing about small wild animals being tortured by rich British kid sociopaths and Thomas the Tank Engine characters getting traumatized by running someone over is relatively safe because who the fuck other than Cruella DeVille condones that shit :-/
I’ve gotta confess I’m slightly worried that if anyone ever actually reads Athanasia I’ll get shit from people for promoting outdoor cats or keeping wild animals as pets though despite Tansy being a fictional species
the best example for whump being exposed to purity culture is the lady whump dilemma.
I’ve seen people imply/outright state that because "women get abused more” means that lady whump is shady and “immoral” to write.
like, not only does that completely invalidate men going through abuse but it’s also a complete and utter bullshit reason to discourage freedom of creativity.
it’s like we’re taking steps BACK in equality via censorship and it’s absolutely ridiculous.
like the fact people genuinely go after writers for not putting a warning about pronounsand for not promoting the “male only” whump stereotype is kinda weird.
It also grosses me out that people genuinely think that women only belong in a caretaker/supportive role instead of the main character.
Like I’m sorry my character that goes through a rough example just so happens to be female or uses she/her pronouns. Go touch grass.
Another thing that irks me is the promotion of people saying that they like male whump because they’re attracted to men, but when it’s the other way around somehow it’s disgusting.
It’s kind of homophobic to go after a saphic writer and preach that them writing lady whump isn’t ok while also accepting someone writing male whump because they’re attracted to men.
People here celebrate men being beaten up, bloodied and bruised. Yet somehow, when the tables are turned, everyone clutches their pearls as if a sin against nature has been committed– claiming that men deserve to be objectified.
Not only is that a horrifically toxic response but it also puts lady whump writers in an extremely difficult spot when defending their work.
Honestly, the entire concept of lady whump being a separate community is disturbing in and of itself.
The quality of whump should not be determined by the character’s gender.
I love how sometimes when getting into something new you have no idea which character you’re going to want to see whumped until they get whumped and it’s an “oh” moment
But then sometimes it’s on sight, like a character walks into view and you go “Yes! That’s the one! I need to see that character bleeding and on the cusp of unconsciousness immediately.”
this is relatable and i wanna hear people’s examples
To all of my fellow whump enjoyers I have a question.
When reading, writing, thinking, drawing (etc.) whump, who do you picture yourself as?
Whumper, Whumpee, both?
I’m curious.
Usually a whumper but sometimes a caretaker
I always find people’s responses to this question SO interesting. It’s wild the different perspectives we have on the same topic. I always thought everyone pictured themselves as the whumpee until I started seeing these conversations lol
There’s definitely some psychoanalyzing to be done here.
Neither or either, I am not involved, I am reading.
For me that’d be like asking, “Who are you in the movie you’re watching?” I’m not there, I’m watching the movie.
I *identify* or empathize more with the whumpee much of the time but not necessarily. Some kinds of whumpee turn my attention right off and there’s nothing but me noping out.
I highly appreciate the “happy ending” tag on angst fics, dark fics, etc. Its existence increases the probability of me reading by a significant amount
but some people are like “why even read those fics if you already know how they’re gonna end?”
Well, it’s kinda like going on a roller-coaster. I wanna experience the ride. The ups and the downs, the twists and turns. But I also wanna know that at the end, it’ll come to a safe stop and I’ll be able to get off of it completely unharmed
I mean yes I loathe rollercoasters for trauma and sensory reasons but
Something I love about whump is that I can read stories of people going through the same thing I am so I don’t feel so alone.
I have asthma and fibromyalgia. Asthma is never done right in shows or movies, but it is in stories written by this community. No character has fibromyalgia or chronic pain in shows and movies - sometimes it may pop up in books but only as a passing thing never focused on. I love reading stories of people who are going through the same thing I am, but they are dealing with it in the future in space and I’m dealing with in a not so cool location. This community supplies me with those stories.
Having a community that accepts and enjoys my writing fueled by my personal experiences (by anyone’s experiences), makes it easier to see my illnesses in a different light, that I can create stories and enjoyment with it and not just wallow in pain by myself.
Genuinely don’t mean this as any sort of callout post but it’s interesting to me how there’s been a trend in newer (?) whump blogs putting really long disclaimers in their bios and pinned posts, saying that they don’t condone violence, that they aren’t responsible for other people’s actions, that they know it’s bad and it’s just fiction.
It’s honestly making me wonder how much purity culture has seeped into the fabric of even the Whump community, that people feel the need to explicitly state what I would have accepted as an easily presumed given. When did we get to a point where we have to preface any conversation by stating that we don’t condone irl violence, lest someone accuse us of immorality?
the best example for whump being exposed to purity culture is the lady whump dilemma, and it’s upsetting that people are afraid to address it or just don’t see it happening.
I’ve seen people imply/outright state that because “women get abused more” means that lady whump is shady and “immoral” to write.
like, not only does that completely invalidate men going through abuse but it’s also a complete and utter bullshit reason to discourage freedom of creativity.
it’s like we’re taking steps BACK in equality via censorship and it’s absolutely ridiculous.
like the fact people genuinely go after writers for not putting a warning about pronounsand for not promoting the “male only” whump stereotype is kinda weird.
It also grosses me out that people genuinely think that women only belong in a caretaker/supportive role instead of the main character.
Like I’m sorry my character that goes through a rough experience just so happens to be female or uses she/her pronouns. Go touch grass.
Another thing that irks me is the promotion of people saying that they like male whump because they’re attracted to men, but when it’s the other way around somehow it’s disgusting.
It’s kind of homophobic to go after a saphic writer and preach that them writing lady whump isn’t ok while also accepting someone writing male whump because they’re attracted to men.
To quote an unnamed anon, “They clearly have a ‘normalize misogyny and everyone should get off to the pain of women’ agenda.”
As if that isn’t the case with male whumpees.
People here celebrate men being beaten up, bloodied and bruised. Yet somehow, when the tables are turned, everyone clutches their pearls as if a sin against nature has been committed– claiming that men deserve to be objectified.
Not only is that a horrifically toxic response but it also puts lady whump writers in an extremely difficult spot when defending their work.
Honestly, the entire concept of lady whump being a separate community is disturbing in and of itself.
This community is definitely not as welcoming towards people with female characters, no matter what anyone here says about how “kind” and “friendly” this part of tumblr is. People areafraid to introduce their female characters at risk of harassment.
That’s not okay.
The quality of whump should not be determined by the character’s gender.
The fact that this is even a debate or source of drama is honestly sad.
Also, the taboo around minor whump.
I’m not talking about people having squicks/triggers around child abuse. I also recognize that some websites - including Tumblr - can be overzealous in enforcing rules around content involving minors, including overall good rules. It does grate on me, though, that in a community where things like slavery, sexual abuse, and mutilation are very common themes, writing about childhood trauma is talked about it ways that make it seem uniquely creepy and wrong.
Most of my characters - whumpees, caretakers, and whumpers alike - have childhood trauma because it informs their actions and motivations going forward. Just as importantly, my characters have childhood trauma because I do. Whump is how I’ve processed that since long before I even understood what trauma was.
I’m not getting off on child abuse or whatever by writing about it, any more than I’m promoting eating disorders by writing about food trauma. Writing about something isn’t automatically glorifying, excusing, or fetishizing it. In revisiting traumatic experiences through whump, I’m in fact trying to do the opposite of those things.
^^^ this.
In the real (offline) world, many authors write books with violence against women, children, all kinds of people. It’s not all well written, but very few people are denying its right to exist. The idea that we should be holding random whump writers to a higher standard than like, published authors is frankly ridiculous. I can’t imagine reading James Patterson’s books and thinking he obviously condones murder and violence against women.
Writing about something isn’t automatically glorifying, excusing, or fetishizing it.
