Well, I am truly F***** if I’m not supposed to write about what I don’t know. I write gay furry porn and I’m a straight guy who has been married for 30 years. I mean you don’t have to be an astronaut to write about science fiction. Nevertheless, my original concern wasn’t that I wanted to remove what could be offensive as much as a means to present what I feel society should find offensive while trying to avoid the misunderstanding that I’m illustrating an injustice and not stating how things should be.
Sensitivity readers are not there “to be offended.” If this is what you believe sensitivity readers to be, then you have seriously misjudged their purpose.
Sensitivity readers are not there to tell you what to do.
You do your research to learn about cultures you’re not familiar with and wrote a story you think is free of stereotypes and fairly represents the group you’re including in your story. Good job! But while research clues you in, it’s not the same as becoming an expert. The purpose of a sensitivity reader to to check the author’s work, see if they missed anything, and give them advice about how to make the work better. Because everyone has blind spots.
“Yeah, they are. That’s their whole business, to tell you what offends them. There’s no other point to it.”
I mean… that’s just not correct. And now I’m curious: are you just making assumptions based on the name ‘sensitivity reader’, or have you actually had bad experiences with them in the past?
“When you start allowing other people to censor your works because you’re afraid of ‘hurt’ feelings, you are giving up your most powerful tool as a writer. Seriously, I can not figure out why none of you understand this.”
I admit I don’t understand where you’re getting this censorship idea from. I mean, evidently we’re living in separate realities when it comes to this topic, because in my experience it’s censorship in the same way that editing your novel to correct some facts about airplanes is censorship. And if you want to do that, maybe you hand your manuscript over to someone who knows a lot about airplanes.
Certainly you are allowed to get all those airplane facts wrong, so if you’re okay with that level of sloppiness then fair enough. One primary difference, as I insinuated farther up in this thread, is that airplanes don’t have to live in a society where widespread of misinformation about airplanes can potentially* lower their quality of life. So since there’s a lot more of a moral imperative to get things right about people than there is to get things right about airplanes, it behooves you to be more careful when writing about people you don’t share life experiences with. Ergo: sensitivity readers.
*And yes, I’m using the word ‘potentially’ here to make the point that even if you don’t think any theoretical misinformation in your specific novel/story/whatever will cause people harm, unless you legitimately don’t care about the real life people you’re writing about it’s still worth acting as though it might cause them harm. With great power &c., blah blah blah.
Exactly this. If I’ve gotten something wrong, I want to know about it so I don’t look like a fool.
I have published a few books, and I was tempted not to get an editor’s feedback first, but I held back until I found someone willing to take a look, and I am so glad I didn’t rush in and release the books without a second look.
My editor was nice enough to tell me when I had gotten a woman’s perspective wrong, and when a male character came across as leering when stealing glances at a woman when I meant it to be humorous (as he knows this woman).
I am so glad she pointed out these things (and more) because leaving them in the books would have raised some eyebrows and distracted from the narrative.
There’s a difference between people who are “offended” and people who are reacting to an author who got something wrong. It never hurts to seek advice and gain a new perspective.
why you necropostin’ homie
3 Likes
Editors edit. Beta readers and sensitivity readers render opinions. Sorry, I don’t make the rules.
I can’t speak for anyone else, but I’d personally say that someone who is black, or Jewish, or gay, or a woman, or transgender, or Canadian, or a furry, etc (just a few examples), has “extensive personal experience” with regard to those things, objectively speaking. Certainly more than I have (with maybe a couple of exceptions, perhaps).
I can research those things, but ultimately, I need to check with someone who has experience I don’t have, because I make mistakes. And I want to avoid making those mistakes.
In general, when I look around publishers’ policies on sensitivity readers, they’re pretty well-accepted. Authors also seem generally receptive to the idea, including some of the bestselling authors I follow. This thread led me to research (ha!) the topic a bit. Did you know that Scholastic was using sensitivity experts for The Baby-Sitters Club some 30 years ago? I’ll admit, that did actually surprise me.
You’ve got quite an impressive resumé! What bestsellers have you had? I’m always on the lookout for highly-acclaimed fiction.
Can they not be the same person? Good editors can tell a writer when they’ve made a mistake regarding topics they themselves have experience with, or at least have a different POV regarding. What is the harm in seeking feedback in general prior to publishing to find out if one has screwed up?
Correct. And a sensitivity reader is part of the editing process. Just the same that you have editing process for line edits and structural edits. Just like you have a beta reader process.
I mean. Everything else that needs to be said has been said. But I think you are seriously missing the point of what a sensitivity reader does.
‘ey yo, where you come from, homie. like, how you find us? you got all them fans and them, how you comin’ down from yo’ perch to fart around with us furries
You do realize that both Homer and Shakespeare were commissioned to write wartime propaganda, right?
Their use of stereotypes was both intentional and malicious. Homer didn’t have any Trojans in his audiences, Shakespeare legally couldn’t have any Jews or “Moors” view his plays.
You, on the other hand, have no idea who could be reading your books, sensitivity readers help prevent you accidentally publishing something that alienates your audience.
all this debate about sensitivity readers is fine and dandy, but I don’t want to remove the sensitive material. I have characters that are racist and use stereotypes. That is part of the story. I have one character who find the lack of fur of humans disgusting and he must learn to get over it. Meanwhile, the Furry characters can’t understand human’s concern about color of other humans. They think its laughable in contrast with the major differences that they must learn to overcome.
There’s nothing fundamentally wrong with examining society through the lens of fiction. It’s a time honored tradition. That said, it’s reasonable to be careful and consider exactly how to present things in order to make the most of your statement, and that’s where knowledgeable beta readers can be very handy, because it can be easy to touch an audience nerve without intending to. Sensitivity reading isn’t about removing sensitive content, it’s about making sure its sensibilities lie in the direction you intended.
1 Like
Apparently your years in the Fandom and time spent with the guild have done you no good if these are your opinions.
You probably shouldn’t bother the folks here. 
JS!!
1 Like
Aw shucks, guess playtime is over.
One final thought: if one has an audience of millions, one should be EXTRA careful of the kind of content one is putting out, for the reasons stated above.
“That is part of the story. I have one character who find the lack of fur of humans disgusting and he must learn to get over it. Meanwhile, the Furry characters can’t understand human’s concern about color of other humans. They think its laughable in contrast with the major differences that they must learn to overcome.”
It reminds me, thematically, of that episode of Star Trek, about the people with the half black and half white faces. I think this is one of the great utilities of aliens/fantasy creatures; you can [mostly] sidestep specific politics in order to make more general points (unless your substitutes are a clear analogy for a specific group, of course, like, I dunno’, Maus).
Yes, I do recall that episode and yes that is kind of what I’m after. They would look at humans as one race where we seem to fail miserably.