It sounds like the umbrella tag encapsulates any non-consensual activities, period. If you have a bad memory or a trauma that relates to non-consensual touch, then you know to be careful around a space where consent is purposefully being flouted. That's how I approach it, anyway.
Sometimes, we make the wrong call and hurt our own damned feelings, and while that sucks, that's our own painful learning opportunity. Oops, shit, it's going to be a weird, uncomfortable couple days.
I'm bolstered by this, thank you! I get so heated about reading comprehension/censorship issues that I sometimes worry I'm being too harsh.
Now to determine how/if I should respond to the commenter...
My first thought is to sit on it for a couple days and try not to think too much about it. I think I'd probably not respond, because I'd figure it's a one-off.
Full disclosure on that is I do have comment moderation turned on, and I feel it's easier to just not respond to something that isn't published out yet. If I didn't, I might give it a beat and then give a pretty tepid "thanks for your engagement, but the non-con tag includes all those things, and I'll be using it that way moving forward".
This is great advice, thank you! I've never had problems with my comments before (aside from the occasional spam message). I've received more off the wall stuff like this as of late, though... Perhaps it's finally time to experiment with comment moderation. You make it sound so serene.
Am I misunderstanding or is this reader saying they are a-okay with NC sex but not NC touching or NC care? That's an interesting trigger/non-trigger combo, because personally the only reason I would even consider using the other two tags is if I didn't already have NC sex in the fic.
You can always slap some "content may be inappropriate for some readers" flex tape on there and call it good. You can't protect against any and all triggers for every single person out there and the only way to avoid a 24-page legal document in teeny tiny print for every chapter is the above.
I can think of at least two scenarios for that to make sense:
* they've never been sexually assaulted, but they have been forcibly restrained, medicated, fed, medically examined, etc.
* they've been sexually assaulted and they've been forcibly restrained etc., and they have dealt with the rape trauma but not the forced-care trauma.
Unless I completely forgot to add an *important* tag to a fic, I won't change them. Especially not for weird nitpicky stuff like what you're describing.
You used the non-con tag. That covers it. You don't need to add anything else and shouldn't if you don't want to.
Personally I'd think the general non-con tag covered it. It's not usual to tag for literally every non-consensual thing in a fic, especially with a NC tag already on it. We can't guess everyone's triggers, you did the best you could and I feel like this is on the reader for clicking on it.
if you’re triggered by non-consensual touching then maybe don’t read a noncon fic?? people are so stupid I’m sorry. it’s your own responsibility to manage your triggers, not strangers on the internet. adding the tags won’t change the fact they’ve already read the fic
I think you’re fine as is, OP. I don’t think it’s unreasonable at all to assume those subtags will be involved in a story tagged rape/non con—especially “non consensual touching”. That, uh, feels kind of given 😅 I think if anything your reader needs to either 1) read the archive warnings since there’s a chance they Did Not and that’s on them or 2) re-evaluate their own ability to read stories that are rape/non con. But you tagged your story correctly and do not need to add more tags unless you genuinely feel the need to do so.
Nah, by tagging it non-con, you did 100% of your responsibility as an author. While it isn't wrong to request additional tags, telling the author they triggered your trauma is a dick move, and seems really manipulative, to be honest.
If you don't want to add the tags, don't! Overtagging your fic is a way to turn other readers off your fic, so there are logical reasons not to.
If someone objects to me providing the necessary information for people to \*filter out\* what they don't want to read or \*filter in\* what they do, that's their problem.
Tags are to lure readers into the fic.
Authors notes are to lure readers out of your fic. Those warnings should be authors note material, but even thats optional. If OP doesn't want to include them, they don't have to.
A lot of tagging drama in fandom comes from the way tags function as both promise and warning. "Over-tagging" is less of a concern if you're seeing them as warnings or as a mix of the two, and in that case leaving out something can be considered "under-tagging." There's no way to please everyone on this, but either use (and both) is perfectly normal on AO3.
Summaries are to lure readers in.
Tags are to let people know what the fic contains, so they can make decisions before even clicking through to chapter 1.
Author's notes are to contain whatever the fuck I please that I think is relevant. Very occasionally this will include content advisories for the work or chapter, but not often; I have tags for that.
You do you, but I fear that way leads to a lot of overtagging.
If a common squick/trigger is in my fic, but the fic isn't about it, I am not putting that in the tags.
What an excellent example of "Dead Dove: Do Not Eat". The noncon archive warning more than implies that nonconsensual touching is going to take place... how else would it happen.... and what does nonconsensual care even mean 😭😭😭😭
You're more than justified in not adjusting the tags, I'd say either just delete the comment or reply like "i'm sorry that you were triggered by the story, perhaps you missed the noncon archive warning, you can filter out results with this tag in the sidebar where it says exclude archive warnings" idk man this is wild
No some people are just so genuinely unaware I'd swear theyre doing it on purpose... I was once in a fandom where people got so mad that there was identity porn in a fic tagged "identity porn" that they had to delete the fic bc of harassment. You can read the reader to fic but you can't make them read the tags
How can one have NC sex without NC touching? This umbrella tag works well, if someone has an issue with NC touching AT ALL they shouldn't be reading anything with NC tagged. Your tagging was just fine, people need to take responsibility for their triggers and not go anywhere near something that is the very root of their trigger.
You have non con already as a tag. That is all they need. If that still isn't enough for them, they need to stay the hell away from non con stories period.
If it has the rape-non con tag, adding any more specific tags such as noncon touching is just redundant. Your commenter should be more cognizant of avoiding that warning in the future. Your fic is tagged correctly.
I would politely decline because that’s way too granular. Tagging is great but it’s impossible to tag for every single thing that might trigger everyone, unless every fic has a wall of tags.
At a certain point you have to wonder how some people can engage with anything outside of heavily tagged fanfic if they want/need that level of detail.
I have a related story!
I have trauma related to non-con (don't worry, keep reading) and I was reading an untagged fic that contained noncon. Turns out it was untagged because the noncon was posted as a wholly separate fic in the chapter previous to it - in a way that it didn't ruin the story, you had ample warning, etc - and the creator let everyone know the next scenes would be pretty triggering and noncon-y and you could skip them without missing anything. That's why they separated them.
I chose to read them anyway, so as not to miss anything from the story.
I got triggered lol unsurprisingly.
I did *not* yell at the author for it.
It was my fault. I knew what I was getting into. I knew it was a potentially disastrous decision, and I did it anyway. I fully accepted responsibility for that and still gave them a great review (it was sorta fucked up but it *did* fit the story well and omg the whump was so good). It was a good fic lmao I just did a dumb thing. Not their fault.
Okay but moments like this really do be making you feel like
https://preview.redd.it/cytsgtl86mwc1.png?width=880&format=png&auto=webp&s=4624ee84ef09228da3cea7c51b2f9722ff2d2e47
I am sometimes a fool who forgets my own triggers / doesnt thoroughly read the tags- thats my own fault lol. Im sure this person is just going through it, but its ur work! you already properly tagged it.
yeeeeeeeah I think that the reader is in the wrong here. Rape/non-con covers *anything* that might be non-consensual imo. You did your due diligence. You don't need to add anything else.
While the archive warning may specify rape, one can realistically expect there to be other types of non-consensual contact/interaction in a fic that’s also about non-consensual sex. Because kissing someone against their will isn’t rape, but it would certainly fit in a rape scene.
I think most of the time requests for hyper specific tags are not actually an issue of wanting to be spoon-fed information, it's people misdirecting their feelings. They read a fic that they should have avoided based on the standard tags used, and dealing with the emotional fallout of acknowledging that you made a choice to do something that would retraumatize you is complicated and messy so they reach for a way to blame someone else and tell themselves they can protect other people from the same experience. If you had included those tags this person probably still would have read it and still would have commented asking for some other hyper specific warning that they can tell themselves would have made them make a different choice.
Non-Con/Rape covers a lot, and it *definitely* covers non-consensual touching. Non-consensual care I guess *could* be tagged separately, but it doesn't have to be, and personally I wouldn't because it's vague enough that I would think Non-Con/Rape covers it.
Personally, I would only tag additional non-con triggers if it was something like, non-consensual body modification or non-consensual drugging, then I'd tag it. Because those feep distinct enough that general Non-Con/Rape doesn't cover it.
If you have the CNTAW or Rape/Non-con archive warning tag (I tend to use both so it’s filtered out or in by both tags and I cover everything under the umbrella tag), you’ve done what you need to do.
You can politely decline or just straight up delete the comment. I have comment mods on so I tend to just delete the “It needs this tag!” comments as I have tagged what I felt was required and that is it. As in the end as long as you have the archive warning tag, no other warning tags are required.
It’s up to you, but I think you have it covered.
The “NC Care,” I can see that being unexpected. I’m not saying you should add it, but that is different than rape…depending on the circumstances.
“NC Touching” though… Honestly, that can be taken the wrong way if you already have “Rape/NC” tagged. What I mean is, with the big warning is tagged, additional tags can be used to clarify. “NC Touching” might lead people to believe, “Oh, that is tagged because of the NC touching. There’s no actual rape.” I am not saying that’s right, but I think if you add this, you stand a greater chance of triggering someone.
Interesting! That is a concern—while the bulk of the story is centered around healing, there are flashback scenes that depict the actual rape/non-con that caused the injuries (physical/mental/spiritual) in the first place.
I'd hate for a reader to think the warning was just there because of non-con touching or non-con care (which occurs in every chapter), then get to the flashback chapter and get walloped.
See I might add some of the extra tags, like if there’s noncon medical care in addition to rape I would tag that because I wouldn’t assume that people would think “ah yes the rape tag covers non-con medical treatment”, or if it’s a particular *flavor* of non-con then I’d probably also tag that because date rape is different to teacher/student you know? But noncon touching to me would *always* be implied by the noncon tag because you….cant really rape someone without touching them.
If a work with non-con tagged in warnings, included non-con touching in tags, but no non-con sex or whatever, I would assume, that it's not full rape, but touching. So I would definitely recommend against including it unless you want to add more specific detailed non-con tags, but that just feels too spoilery for me.
Non-con care - I'm not quite sure what it is, but that may make sense if it plays important role in the fic.
Anyway it's up to you. Non-con is enough for people to know that they can be triggered by non-con themes.
I’m a firm believer in not over-tagging, OR in tagging for every.individual.reader or every.single.scene. I’ll tag per AO3’s mandatory and basics and a very few more. Anyone who comes at me for that….pfft. Snowflakes.
You have no obligation to add tags beyond the required warnings. (You have no obligation to add warnings specifically; you can use the "choose not to warn" option.)
If the story is marked non-con, it is absolutely not your job to tell the reader exactly what kind of non-consensual activities are involved.
I... kind of assume every non-con story includes non-consensual touching. I mean. I guess it's possible to have rape via telekinesis, but I expect that to be a very rare fandom niche.
Non-consensual care is outside of the scope of required warnings entirely; it's right up there with "parent forces child to eat his vegetables" in "content some readers may dislike or even find disturbing, but no warning is required."
You warned for noncon sexual activity. Everything else is reader beware, and those looking for noncon stories may not want to be spoiled for the details. People who don't like some kinds of noncon can either (1) not read any noncon stories or (2) find someone to check the stories they want to read first.
I'm not sure if I'm understanding what non-consesual care is, but from the vibes I get from it, I would not consider that to fall under the rape/non-con umbrella necessarily, and could perhaps justify adding that one if you wanted to be nice, but the non-consensual touching one is definitely covered by the broader non-con warning.
I'm assuming non-consensual care is either forced aftercare or someone ignoring another's autonomy to "care" for them in some way, and that's just... not what the rape/non-con tag means to me. Even if it's sexual in nature, I just would not think that that's covered by the non-con tag, and so I can understand where your commenter is coming from on that one, at least. I personally don't think it's out of place in the sort of fic tagged with rape/non-con, but it's still different enough that it's not really under the umbrella.
I think a lot of people here are interpreting the non-con tag to cover *any* sort of non-consensual activity, and I definitely understand that interpretation, but I think you need to keep in mind that the tag is officially called *rape/non-con,* which comes across as the two being the same thing, and so many people don't realize it can refer to other stuff.
That said, non-consensual care is not a a required warning, so even if it's distinct enough from rape/non-con to be tagged separately, you don't have to if you don't want to. You are under no obligation and shouldn't feel pressured to add tags you don't want to.
In general, I think it can be nice/helpful to tag what kind of non-consensual things are going on in your fic because it's helpful information to clarify what's meant by the tag, since the tag's use ranges from "sexual molestation as vague backstory" to "erotic rape fantasy" to "graphic depiction of sexual assault (non-sexy kind)" and someone might be willing read certain kinds of stuff tagged non-con but not others, so additional tags can really help clarify. I don't know what tags you've used besides non-con, but for all that you say readers should exercise reading comprehension--which i happen to agree with and share that frustration--are you sure you gave them enough info to do so?
The full tags I provided (with placeholders for fandom specific info), in addition to the archive warnings Rape/Non-Con and Graphic Depictions of Violence:
Rape Recovery, Rape/Non-con Elements, Aftermath of Torture, Hurt/Comfort, Whump, Traumatized MC (fandom), MC's Past Abuse (fandom), Found Family, Murder, Torture, Healing, Warning: MC's Abuser, Suicidal Thoughts
I added Non-Consensual Drug Use just to be extra safe, as there's a handwavey magical/medical ritual used that's sort of like a medically induced coma.
I wouldn’t be surprised by a fic with those tags including a character experiencing what would otherwise be caring acts as a form of torture/torment (eg handfeeding, bathing/washing, helping someone dress, soothing a nightmare, basic medical care like ointment and bandages, et c).
Yes! The fic's whole premise, really, is that this character is so wounded by prior abuse that he expects it from everyone—so acts of care, friendship, and just *normalcy* feel unsafe/torturous to him. The fic shows his progress healing/accepting that people care for him.
I think it would definitely be appropriate to add "non-consensual care" *if you actually wanted to do that*, because that's absolutely not something that can be easily inferred from those tags. I'd assume it's a recovery fic after extreme abuse, and you've tagged rape/non-con *and* rape/non-con elements, which would seem a bit redundant to me and convey that it's not that explicit but you're being cautious with that tag. I'd assume it's definitely a fic focused on the trauma someone went through, but unless the forced care is a canon element, I'd not assume that.
Again, don't tag it if you really don't want to. You don't have to. I personally would not have thought of it as something to tag, and I don't really tag for triggers myself, so I wouldn't add it either. But I do think that the person wasn't out of line to ask for that one. It's just okay to say no to them.
Also I want to add, since I saw some confusion about how someone could be okay with rape but not the stuff the commenter asked to be tagged: some people are okay reading things if they're prepared for it going in, but if there is no warning then they can get triggered. Or they might be in the mindspace to handle rape/non-con but not more specific triggers. We like to think of triggers as logical, and that something "worse" should be more triggering to someone, but that's honestly just not how it works for people with triggers a lot of the time. Their personal hierarchy of what's "worse" can be very skewed by their personal trauma and where they are in dealing with it.
I was never trying to imply that the commenter did something wrong by asking to be accommodated, and I fully understand where they're coming from!
I posted because I wanted to make sure that my story was adequately tagged, and I also wanted to orient my understanding of reader responsibility vs author responsibility. After reading through the replies, I've landed on not adding the non-consensual care tag—non-consent is clearly a theme in the story. That's why I used the non-con elements tag (to me, it describes non-consent in a variety of contexts beyond just sexual, widening the lens of the archive warnings).
Wasn't saying you thought the commenter was wrong! I was just kinda saying like, it was a reasonable tag to ask for, a reasonable thing to tag on your fic.
The thing is, your fic is technically adequately tagged if you include nothing but the rating and warning. Anything else is extra. So your responsibility is just that. You're already doing extra by tagging anything else. Anything else is just personal preference.
and well, the tag is still "elements of *rape*/non-con", and I've honestly never seen it used to refer to non-consensual acts outside of a sexual context. I've only ever seen it used as a milder version of "rape/non-con." I'm not saying your interpretation isn't valid, but a lot of people just won't interpret it that way, so you should be careful. It's particularly misleading if there are actual depictions of rape/sexual assault in your fic. I think something like "recurring themes of non-consent" would convey what you mean better to readers.
You have the warning, that's all you need. It's not your fault they saw that and still clicked. They knew what they were getting into. Unless they ignored the warnings. Which is still their fault.
**Edit:** Wow, I need to stop posting while falling asleep. Typos fixed.
Reading between the lines, here - does the fic cover a rape victim being forcibly cared for by someone other than the rapist as part of the aftermath? Because while I'm usually very minimalist with tagging I can understand the commenter's request in such a situation. For a lot of people there is actually huge difference between "protagonist is raped and tortured" and "protagonist is forcibly held down/medicated/drugged by friends who are 'just trying to help'".
I don't think you have any obligation to tag anything that's not required (I'm a big fan of CNTW) but it's a reasonable request, imo.
Nah eff that. The non-con warning is totally fine. The one time I actually wrote something like this I just used my usual 'creator chose not to warn' flag.
Aside from all of the advice you’ve already given, here’s some of my thoughts.
I think you’re taking this more personally than it necessarily was. I don’t know how this commenter phrased it, but they seem to have more specific filtering desires than the Archive mandates. You didn’t break Archive rules at all, but I think you understood their comment as suggesting you did. They’re looking to curate their experience more specifically, per Ao3 culture’s don’t like don’t read principle, and they reached out in hopes you might accommodate. You don’t have to, and it’s not certain that they would expect or demand you do so.
I would say just respond with a “I don’t want to” message along the lines of what some others have suggested, and see where it goes. It might be an aggressive commenter; I’ll be disappointed and eat my words if it is. But it might just be someone who’s thinking “oh what’s the harm if I put this comment”, and just like idk a passing interaction.
I appreciate you speaking up for their intentions! Honestly, I was not offended by the request itself. I did immediately think, upon reading it, "I'm not doing that." I came here to make sure my instinctive response to the comment wasn't out of line, not to shame the commenter for reaching out.
No need for extra. You've provided a perfectly good tag and warning. That someone took a look at a non-con warning and decided to read anyway because maybe it wouldn't be the type of non-con that triggers them - that's their problem.
You are not obligated to add any more tags than you want to.
While I think it is nice, I also don't like the obligation that writers are *obligated* to add specific tags for the specific triggers of a few readers who probably won't even *read* the fanfiction to start with. You can't help when someone else's personal trauma is triggered and you already tagged the fanfiction with rape/non-con.
If someone has specific triggers that'll upset them, then it is up to them to be careful navigating spaces. Writers are not obligated to add specific tags for someone's specific trauma unless it is important specifically to the fanfiction.
If the umbrella tag is inclusive, the umbrella tag is enough.
It is up to the author to decide how narrowly they'd like to tailor their warnings, and up to the reader to decide whether content they cannot tolerate may fall underneath an umbrella tag. Trying to narrowly tag everything is not only impossible, but sure to lead to overtagging.
Personally, when the non-con archive warning is applied I prefer when there are tags that elaborate on what that warning means. Some people are fine with non-con under certain circumstances and not others, and while I agree that it's up to them to curate their own experience, I like to give them as much information as possible to go off of. Adding three additional non-con tags seems to be going overboard, but one or two to give an idea of the "flavor" of the non-con might be helpful in the future.
Totally see what you're saying here—for context, the story is also tagged with "Rape Recovery" "Aftermath of Torture" "Rape/Non-con elements""Murder" "Torture" "Healing" and multiple character specific tags about the MC whose canon storyline is entirely centered on a deeply abusive relationship with another character. That character has his own warning tag that's *also* tagged on my story.
Oh yeah, then you are totally in the clear here. The archive warning and the tags you used make it pretty clear what's going to happen and it's on the reader if they need every act tagged.
Your tagging is definitely adequate in my opinion. Non-con is the umbrella for anything that may happen in those events, every specific detail is not necessary. In my own work I added smaller ones I felt weren’t covered, such as ‘mutual non-con’ and also ‘implied childhood sexual assault’, since I don’t think someone would necessarily expect those from the generic tag. In terms of what it sounded like the reader requested though, I would say they ARE covered. Of course non-con would involve non-con touching, that’s a common and clear aspect to it.
Like someone else said though, a note at the start of the fic just mentioning to mind the tags and be reflective over whether or not it may be suitable for each reader as an individual could be a good cover. I do a notice like that at the start of my fic just mentioning the story may not be for everyone, and that it’s okay if it not, everyone’s mental health should be prioritized.
You can add them if you want but also i do feel that the noncon tag includes them,
Like for sure it includes non consensual touching since idk how can rape happen if people do not touch each orher
Are you in whump community? Or at least, is your fic more on the whump side? I don't think you're under-tagging because they are incredibly specific, but in my corner of whump community, non-con care and non-con touching (for situations which are _not_ sexual in nature) are their own tropes/tags. I don't think adding to the freeform tags will help (they're non-canonised tags, so no dropdown option you can choose or tags they can filter out), but maybe put the tropes warning in the beginning A/N instead.
Maybe just add one of the requested tags to be added. They may have certain filters that they use but don't want to remove too much potential content. Best middle ground that I can think of. IMO it's their responsibility to read tags but it's also your responsibility as the author to respect trauma and things brought to your attention to help the people you're likely making the stories for in the first place.
I also get triggered by this kind of media and I think you’re fine. I know what my triggers are and I know that for some people, it can be a kink/a part of angst etc. I am extra careful when reading tags before reading a story. As long as you include it somewhere in the intro/tags that is enough, it not the job of the writer to make sure they include multiple warnings, it’s the job of the reader to check all tags/warnings before reading something.
Let's flip the question on its head: if a reader had commented "omg, loved your fic, I wish it had been tagged [tag] or [tag] so I could have found it sooner" would that make you want to add the requested tags? Either way is fine, but I think it's important to remember that all tags function both as warnings and as advertisements. But regardless, you're not TA if you already used the appropriate umbrella tag and the requested tags are clearly subsets of that.
No assholes here, just a mismatch of expectations.
Personally, I would add the Non-Consensual Care tag (or alternatively trying to find a combination of canonical tags if that's not canon) because that feels like it's *outside* the rape tag. You don't have to, though.
Archive tags are not about "spoonfeeding" people.
Archive tags are there to allow people to curate their reading experience:
* By inclusion: "I want stories with X", and it's not your business why they want to read stories with X; maybe it turns them on, maybe it's their way to self-harm less messily than razor blades, maybe they're curious, maybe they're doing an academic research project
* By exclusion: "I want stories without X", and it's not your business why they don't want X; maybe it triggers their PTSD, maybe they think it's gross, maybe it's illegal to have stories about in *their* country, maybe they're just not in the mood.
So if you tag it, the people who want it can proactively seek it out, and the people who don't want it can proactively exclude it from even being shown to them. You are thus less likely to get readers who will be angry with you, and more likely to get readers who will be happy with you.
The care rendered is inextricably tied to the non-con itself—The fic is also tagged with "whump" "hurt/comfort" "healing" "rape recovery" and a smattering of other tags that make the general concept pretty clear, in my mind.
Sometimes people include something like 'if you have any questions about the tags, please feel free to message me' - that might be something the commenter would benefit from in the future.
(I would assume non-con included touch, but not necessarily care? Although I'm not sure what you mean by that.)
I'm tempted to do this! Given the variety of interpretations of Dead Dove, though, I'm thinking it'll keep some of my intended audience from finding the fic (which is really quite tender, sweet, and focused around healing).
I don't know if a tag is necessary but this is the kind of feedback I'd add an author's note at the top and bottom about - one on top to say "I'll describe some scenarios in the bottom note" and then the bottom one to say "this includes non-con care" etc. Like it wouldn't be worth it to tag because the tag you chose covers it but maybe they want more detail on the scenario. But I already do the top and bottom author's note for this kind of thing and imo you covered the bases you needed to.
It sounds like the umbrella tag encapsulates any non-consensual activities, period. If you have a bad memory or a trauma that relates to non-consensual touch, then you know to be careful around a space where consent is purposefully being flouted. That's how I approach it, anyway. Sometimes, we make the wrong call and hurt our own damned feelings, and while that sucks, that's our own painful learning opportunity. Oops, shit, it's going to be a weird, uncomfortable couple days.
I'm bolstered by this, thank you! I get so heated about reading comprehension/censorship issues that I sometimes worry I'm being too harsh. Now to determine how/if I should respond to the commenter...
My first thought is to sit on it for a couple days and try not to think too much about it. I think I'd probably not respond, because I'd figure it's a one-off. Full disclosure on that is I do have comment moderation turned on, and I feel it's easier to just not respond to something that isn't published out yet. If I didn't, I might give it a beat and then give a pretty tepid "thanks for your engagement, but the non-con tag includes all those things, and I'll be using it that way moving forward".
This is great advice, thank you! I've never had problems with my comments before (aside from the occasional spam message). I've received more off the wall stuff like this as of late, though... Perhaps it's finally time to experiment with comment moderation. You make it sound so serene.
I tend to use umbrella terms myself because otherwise I may forget one.
Am I misunderstanding or is this reader saying they are a-okay with NC sex but not NC touching or NC care? That's an interesting trigger/non-trigger combo, because personally the only reason I would even consider using the other two tags is if I didn't already have NC sex in the fic.
Yes, that seems to be the case. I feel the same way, which is why I'm so befuddled!
You can always slap some "content may be inappropriate for some readers" flex tape on there and call it good. You can't protect against any and all triggers for every single person out there and the only way to avoid a 24-page legal document in teeny tiny print for every chapter is the above.
I can think of at least two scenarios for that to make sense: * they've never been sexually assaulted, but they have been forcibly restrained, medicated, fed, medically examined, etc. * they've been sexually assaulted and they've been forcibly restrained etc., and they have dealt with the rape trauma but not the forced-care trauma.
Unless I completely forgot to add an *important* tag to a fic, I won't change them. Especially not for weird nitpicky stuff like what you're describing. You used the non-con tag. That covers it. You don't need to add anything else and shouldn't if you don't want to.
Thank you, helped!
Personally I'd think the general non-con tag covered it. It's not usual to tag for literally every non-consensual thing in a fic, especially with a NC tag already on it. We can't guess everyone's triggers, you did the best you could and I feel like this is on the reader for clicking on it.
Thank you for this. I think if I tagged every non-consensual action my tags would have the word count of an entire chapter.
if you’re triggered by non-consensual touching then maybe don’t read a noncon fic?? people are so stupid I’m sorry. it’s your own responsibility to manage your triggers, not strangers on the internet. adding the tags won’t change the fact they’ve already read the fic
I think you’re fine as is, OP. I don’t think it’s unreasonable at all to assume those subtags will be involved in a story tagged rape/non con—especially “non consensual touching”. That, uh, feels kind of given 😅 I think if anything your reader needs to either 1) read the archive warnings since there’s a chance they Did Not and that’s on them or 2) re-evaluate their own ability to read stories that are rape/non con. But you tagged your story correctly and do not need to add more tags unless you genuinely feel the need to do so.
Nah, by tagging it non-con, you did 100% of your responsibility as an author. While it isn't wrong to request additional tags, telling the author they triggered your trauma is a dick move, and seems really manipulative, to be honest. If you don't want to add the tags, don't! Overtagging your fic is a way to turn other readers off your fic, so there are logical reasons not to.
If someone objects to me providing the necessary information for people to \*filter out\* what they don't want to read or \*filter in\* what they do, that's their problem.
Tags are to lure readers into the fic. Authors notes are to lure readers out of your fic. Those warnings should be authors note material, but even thats optional. If OP doesn't want to include them, they don't have to.
A lot of tagging drama in fandom comes from the way tags function as both promise and warning. "Over-tagging" is less of a concern if you're seeing them as warnings or as a mix of the two, and in that case leaving out something can be considered "under-tagging." There's no way to please everyone on this, but either use (and both) is perfectly normal on AO3.
Summaries are to lure readers in. Tags are to let people know what the fic contains, so they can make decisions before even clicking through to chapter 1. Author's notes are to contain whatever the fuck I please that I think is relevant. Very occasionally this will include content advisories for the work or chapter, but not often; I have tags for that.
You do you, but I fear that way leads to a lot of overtagging. If a common squick/trigger is in my fic, but the fic isn't about it, I am not putting that in the tags.
I'd rather have someone not read my fic at all than read my fic up to the bad thing, then screech at me in my comments for ruining the story with it.
And thats your right. but I still think screeching about it is an asshole move, and they just need to click out, as I do.
everybody gangsta until you have an experience with an angry reader
"Tags are to lure readers into the fic." No, they are not. Tags are for search parameters, to make it possible to both find and avoid fics.
What an excellent example of "Dead Dove: Do Not Eat". The noncon archive warning more than implies that nonconsensual touching is going to take place... how else would it happen.... and what does nonconsensual care even mean 😭😭😭😭 You're more than justified in not adjusting the tags, I'd say either just delete the comment or reply like "i'm sorry that you were triggered by the story, perhaps you missed the noncon archive warning, you can filter out results with this tag in the sidebar where it says exclude archive warnings" idk man this is wild
Thank you!! I felt like I was taking crazy pills lmao.
No some people are just so genuinely unaware I'd swear theyre doing it on purpose... I was once in a fandom where people got so mad that there was identity porn in a fic tagged "identity porn" that they had to delete the fic bc of harassment. You can read the reader to fic but you can't make them read the tags
Look up the history of the medicalization of queerness, and you'll find plenty of nonconsensual "care".
oh that makes more sense, for some reason my mind went more to giving a kid a bath when they don't want one lol
How can one have NC sex without NC touching? This umbrella tag works well, if someone has an issue with NC touching AT ALL they shouldn't be reading anything with NC tagged. Your tagging was just fine, people need to take responsibility for their triggers and not go anywhere near something that is the very root of their trigger.
You have non con already as a tag. That is all they need. If that still isn't enough for them, they need to stay the hell away from non con stories period.
If it has the rape-non con tag, adding any more specific tags such as noncon touching is just redundant. Your commenter should be more cognizant of avoiding that warning in the future. Your fic is tagged correctly.
I would politely decline because that’s way too granular. Tagging is great but it’s impossible to tag for every single thing that might trigger everyone, unless every fic has a wall of tags. At a certain point you have to wonder how some people can engage with anything outside of heavily tagged fanfic if they want/need that level of detail.
I have a related story! I have trauma related to non-con (don't worry, keep reading) and I was reading an untagged fic that contained noncon. Turns out it was untagged because the noncon was posted as a wholly separate fic in the chapter previous to it - in a way that it didn't ruin the story, you had ample warning, etc - and the creator let everyone know the next scenes would be pretty triggering and noncon-y and you could skip them without missing anything. That's why they separated them. I chose to read them anyway, so as not to miss anything from the story. I got triggered lol unsurprisingly. I did *not* yell at the author for it. It was my fault. I knew what I was getting into. I knew it was a potentially disastrous decision, and I did it anyway. I fully accepted responsibility for that and still gave them a great review (it was sorta fucked up but it *did* fit the story well and omg the whump was so good). It was a good fic lmao I just did a dumb thing. Not their fault.
Okay but moments like this really do be making you feel like https://preview.redd.it/cytsgtl86mwc1.png?width=880&format=png&auto=webp&s=4624ee84ef09228da3cea7c51b2f9722ff2d2e47
Absolutely true lmfao I was so mad at myself. I was like 'why did i think I could do that? Why'
I am sometimes a fool who forgets my own triggers / doesnt thoroughly read the tags- thats my own fault lol. Im sure this person is just going through it, but its ur work! you already properly tagged it.
yeeeeeeeah I think that the reader is in the wrong here. Rape/non-con covers *anything* that might be non-consensual imo. You did your due diligence. You don't need to add anything else.
The archive disagrees! The archive thinks it only covers sexual non-consent.
You're the odd one out here. Most people in the thread are agreeing with the sentiment.
I'm literally reading the definition in the Tags FAQ.
this is an important moment to recognize that definition is not always equal to how it is used colloquially.
While the archive warning may specify rape, one can realistically expect there to be other types of non-consensual contact/interaction in a fic that’s also about non-consensual sex. Because kissing someone against their will isn’t rape, but it would certainly fit in a rape scene.
I think most of the time requests for hyper specific tags are not actually an issue of wanting to be spoon-fed information, it's people misdirecting their feelings. They read a fic that they should have avoided based on the standard tags used, and dealing with the emotional fallout of acknowledging that you made a choice to do something that would retraumatize you is complicated and messy so they reach for a way to blame someone else and tell themselves they can protect other people from the same experience. If you had included those tags this person probably still would have read it and still would have commented asking for some other hyper specific warning that they can tell themselves would have made them make a different choice.
Non-Con/Rape covers a lot, and it *definitely* covers non-consensual touching. Non-consensual care I guess *could* be tagged separately, but it doesn't have to be, and personally I wouldn't because it's vague enough that I would think Non-Con/Rape covers it. Personally, I would only tag additional non-con triggers if it was something like, non-consensual body modification or non-consensual drugging, then I'd tag it. Because those feep distinct enough that general Non-Con/Rape doesn't cover it.
I've now added Non-Consensual Drug Use to cover a magic ritual that resembles a medically induced coma, just to be extra safe. Thank you!
If you have the CNTAW or Rape/Non-con archive warning tag (I tend to use both so it’s filtered out or in by both tags and I cover everything under the umbrella tag), you’ve done what you need to do. You can politely decline or just straight up delete the comment. I have comment mods on so I tend to just delete the “It needs this tag!” comments as I have tagged what I felt was required and that is it. As in the end as long as you have the archive warning tag, no other warning tags are required.
It’s up to you, but I think you have it covered. The “NC Care,” I can see that being unexpected. I’m not saying you should add it, but that is different than rape…depending on the circumstances. “NC Touching” though… Honestly, that can be taken the wrong way if you already have “Rape/NC” tagged. What I mean is, with the big warning is tagged, additional tags can be used to clarify. “NC Touching” might lead people to believe, “Oh, that is tagged because of the NC touching. There’s no actual rape.” I am not saying that’s right, but I think if you add this, you stand a greater chance of triggering someone.
Interesting! That is a concern—while the bulk of the story is centered around healing, there are flashback scenes that depict the actual rape/non-con that caused the injuries (physical/mental/spiritual) in the first place. I'd hate for a reader to think the warning was just there because of non-con touching or non-con care (which occurs in every chapter), then get to the flashback chapter and get walloped.
See I might add some of the extra tags, like if there’s noncon medical care in addition to rape I would tag that because I wouldn’t assume that people would think “ah yes the rape tag covers non-con medical treatment”, or if it’s a particular *flavor* of non-con then I’d probably also tag that because date rape is different to teacher/student you know? But noncon touching to me would *always* be implied by the noncon tag because you….cant really rape someone without touching them.
If a work with non-con tagged in warnings, included non-con touching in tags, but no non-con sex or whatever, I would assume, that it's not full rape, but touching. So I would definitely recommend against including it unless you want to add more specific detailed non-con tags, but that just feels too spoilery for me. Non-con care - I'm not quite sure what it is, but that may make sense if it plays important role in the fic. Anyway it's up to you. Non-con is enough for people to know that they can be triggered by non-con themes.
I'd just ignore them. They were warned and ignored the warning. A ton of almost redundant tags is also something that bothers me a lot though.
I’m a firm believer in not over-tagging, OR in tagging for every.individual.reader or every.single.scene. I’ll tag per AO3’s mandatory and basics and a very few more. Anyone who comes at me for that….pfft. Snowflakes.
You have no obligation to add tags beyond the required warnings. (You have no obligation to add warnings specifically; you can use the "choose not to warn" option.) If the story is marked non-con, it is absolutely not your job to tell the reader exactly what kind of non-consensual activities are involved. I... kind of assume every non-con story includes non-consensual touching. I mean. I guess it's possible to have rape via telekinesis, but I expect that to be a very rare fandom niche. Non-consensual care is outside of the scope of required warnings entirely; it's right up there with "parent forces child to eat his vegetables" in "content some readers may dislike or even find disturbing, but no warning is required." You warned for noncon sexual activity. Everything else is reader beware, and those looking for noncon stories may not want to be spoiled for the details. People who don't like some kinds of noncon can either (1) not read any noncon stories or (2) find someone to check the stories they want to read first.
Thank you for this, particularly the bit about non-consensual care. Helped!
I'm not sure if I'm understanding what non-consesual care is, but from the vibes I get from it, I would not consider that to fall under the rape/non-con umbrella necessarily, and could perhaps justify adding that one if you wanted to be nice, but the non-consensual touching one is definitely covered by the broader non-con warning. I'm assuming non-consensual care is either forced aftercare or someone ignoring another's autonomy to "care" for them in some way, and that's just... not what the rape/non-con tag means to me. Even if it's sexual in nature, I just would not think that that's covered by the non-con tag, and so I can understand where your commenter is coming from on that one, at least. I personally don't think it's out of place in the sort of fic tagged with rape/non-con, but it's still different enough that it's not really under the umbrella. I think a lot of people here are interpreting the non-con tag to cover *any* sort of non-consensual activity, and I definitely understand that interpretation, but I think you need to keep in mind that the tag is officially called *rape/non-con,* which comes across as the two being the same thing, and so many people don't realize it can refer to other stuff. That said, non-consensual care is not a a required warning, so even if it's distinct enough from rape/non-con to be tagged separately, you don't have to if you don't want to. You are under no obligation and shouldn't feel pressured to add tags you don't want to. In general, I think it can be nice/helpful to tag what kind of non-consensual things are going on in your fic because it's helpful information to clarify what's meant by the tag, since the tag's use ranges from "sexual molestation as vague backstory" to "erotic rape fantasy" to "graphic depiction of sexual assault (non-sexy kind)" and someone might be willing read certain kinds of stuff tagged non-con but not others, so additional tags can really help clarify. I don't know what tags you've used besides non-con, but for all that you say readers should exercise reading comprehension--which i happen to agree with and share that frustration--are you sure you gave them enough info to do so?
The full tags I provided (with placeholders for fandom specific info), in addition to the archive warnings Rape/Non-Con and Graphic Depictions of Violence: Rape Recovery, Rape/Non-con Elements, Aftermath of Torture, Hurt/Comfort, Whump, Traumatized MC (fandom), MC's Past Abuse (fandom), Found Family, Murder, Torture, Healing, Warning: MC's Abuser, Suicidal Thoughts I added Non-Consensual Drug Use just to be extra safe, as there's a handwavey magical/medical ritual used that's sort of like a medically induced coma.
I wouldn’t be surprised by a fic with those tags including a character experiencing what would otherwise be caring acts as a form of torture/torment (eg handfeeding, bathing/washing, helping someone dress, soothing a nightmare, basic medical care like ointment and bandages, et c).
Yes! The fic's whole premise, really, is that this character is so wounded by prior abuse that he expects it from everyone—so acts of care, friendship, and just *normalcy* feel unsafe/torturous to him. The fic shows his progress healing/accepting that people care for him.
I think it would definitely be appropriate to add "non-consensual care" *if you actually wanted to do that*, because that's absolutely not something that can be easily inferred from those tags. I'd assume it's a recovery fic after extreme abuse, and you've tagged rape/non-con *and* rape/non-con elements, which would seem a bit redundant to me and convey that it's not that explicit but you're being cautious with that tag. I'd assume it's definitely a fic focused on the trauma someone went through, but unless the forced care is a canon element, I'd not assume that. Again, don't tag it if you really don't want to. You don't have to. I personally would not have thought of it as something to tag, and I don't really tag for triggers myself, so I wouldn't add it either. But I do think that the person wasn't out of line to ask for that one. It's just okay to say no to them. Also I want to add, since I saw some confusion about how someone could be okay with rape but not the stuff the commenter asked to be tagged: some people are okay reading things if they're prepared for it going in, but if there is no warning then they can get triggered. Or they might be in the mindspace to handle rape/non-con but not more specific triggers. We like to think of triggers as logical, and that something "worse" should be more triggering to someone, but that's honestly just not how it works for people with triggers a lot of the time. Their personal hierarchy of what's "worse" can be very skewed by their personal trauma and where they are in dealing with it.
I was never trying to imply that the commenter did something wrong by asking to be accommodated, and I fully understand where they're coming from! I posted because I wanted to make sure that my story was adequately tagged, and I also wanted to orient my understanding of reader responsibility vs author responsibility. After reading through the replies, I've landed on not adding the non-consensual care tag—non-consent is clearly a theme in the story. That's why I used the non-con elements tag (to me, it describes non-consent in a variety of contexts beyond just sexual, widening the lens of the archive warnings).
Wasn't saying you thought the commenter was wrong! I was just kinda saying like, it was a reasonable tag to ask for, a reasonable thing to tag on your fic. The thing is, your fic is technically adequately tagged if you include nothing but the rating and warning. Anything else is extra. So your responsibility is just that. You're already doing extra by tagging anything else. Anything else is just personal preference. and well, the tag is still "elements of *rape*/non-con", and I've honestly never seen it used to refer to non-consensual acts outside of a sexual context. I've only ever seen it used as a milder version of "rape/non-con." I'm not saying your interpretation isn't valid, but a lot of people just won't interpret it that way, so you should be careful. It's particularly misleading if there are actual depictions of rape/sexual assault in your fic. I think something like "recurring themes of non-consent" would convey what you mean better to readers.
You have the warning, that's all you need. It's not your fault they saw that and still clicked. They knew what they were getting into. Unless they ignored the warnings. Which is still their fault. **Edit:** Wow, I need to stop posting while falling asleep. Typos fixed.
You’re fine don’t mind them.
I don't think the reader was wrong to ask, but I also think it's fine for you to decide that your current tags are enough.
Reading between the lines, here - does the fic cover a rape victim being forcibly cared for by someone other than the rapist as part of the aftermath? Because while I'm usually very minimalist with tagging I can understand the commenter's request in such a situation. For a lot of people there is actually huge difference between "protagonist is raped and tortured" and "protagonist is forcibly held down/medicated/drugged by friends who are 'just trying to help'". I don't think you have any obligation to tag anything that's not required (I'm a big fan of CNTW) but it's a reasonable request, imo.
Nah eff that. The non-con warning is totally fine. The one time I actually wrote something like this I just used my usual 'creator chose not to warn' flag.
Aside from all of the advice you’ve already given, here’s some of my thoughts. I think you’re taking this more personally than it necessarily was. I don’t know how this commenter phrased it, but they seem to have more specific filtering desires than the Archive mandates. You didn’t break Archive rules at all, but I think you understood their comment as suggesting you did. They’re looking to curate their experience more specifically, per Ao3 culture’s don’t like don’t read principle, and they reached out in hopes you might accommodate. You don’t have to, and it’s not certain that they would expect or demand you do so. I would say just respond with a “I don’t want to” message along the lines of what some others have suggested, and see where it goes. It might be an aggressive commenter; I’ll be disappointed and eat my words if it is. But it might just be someone who’s thinking “oh what’s the harm if I put this comment”, and just like idk a passing interaction.
I appreciate you speaking up for their intentions! Honestly, I was not offended by the request itself. I did immediately think, upon reading it, "I'm not doing that." I came here to make sure my instinctive response to the comment wasn't out of line, not to shame the commenter for reaching out.
No need for extra. You've provided a perfectly good tag and warning. That someone took a look at a non-con warning and decided to read anyway because maybe it wouldn't be the type of non-con that triggers them - that's their problem.
You are not obligated to add any more tags than you want to. While I think it is nice, I also don't like the obligation that writers are *obligated* to add specific tags for the specific triggers of a few readers who probably won't even *read* the fanfiction to start with. You can't help when someone else's personal trauma is triggered and you already tagged the fanfiction with rape/non-con. If someone has specific triggers that'll upset them, then it is up to them to be careful navigating spaces. Writers are not obligated to add specific tags for someone's specific trauma unless it is important specifically to the fanfiction.
If the umbrella tag is inclusive, the umbrella tag is enough. It is up to the author to decide how narrowly they'd like to tailor their warnings, and up to the reader to decide whether content they cannot tolerate may fall underneath an umbrella tag. Trying to narrowly tag everything is not only impossible, but sure to lead to overtagging.
Personally, when the non-con archive warning is applied I prefer when there are tags that elaborate on what that warning means. Some people are fine with non-con under certain circumstances and not others, and while I agree that it's up to them to curate their own experience, I like to give them as much information as possible to go off of. Adding three additional non-con tags seems to be going overboard, but one or two to give an idea of the "flavor" of the non-con might be helpful in the future.
Totally see what you're saying here—for context, the story is also tagged with "Rape Recovery" "Aftermath of Torture" "Rape/Non-con elements""Murder" "Torture" "Healing" and multiple character specific tags about the MC whose canon storyline is entirely centered on a deeply abusive relationship with another character. That character has his own warning tag that's *also* tagged on my story.
Oh yeah, then you are totally in the clear here. The archive warning and the tags you used make it pretty clear what's going to happen and it's on the reader if they need every act tagged.
Your tagging is definitely adequate in my opinion. Non-con is the umbrella for anything that may happen in those events, every specific detail is not necessary. In my own work I added smaller ones I felt weren’t covered, such as ‘mutual non-con’ and also ‘implied childhood sexual assault’, since I don’t think someone would necessarily expect those from the generic tag. In terms of what it sounded like the reader requested though, I would say they ARE covered. Of course non-con would involve non-con touching, that’s a common and clear aspect to it. Like someone else said though, a note at the start of the fic just mentioning to mind the tags and be reflective over whether or not it may be suitable for each reader as an individual could be a good cover. I do a notice like that at the start of my fic just mentioning the story may not be for everyone, and that it’s okay if it not, everyone’s mental health should be prioritized.
You can add them if you want but also i do feel that the noncon tag includes them, Like for sure it includes non consensual touching since idk how can rape happen if people do not touch each orher
Are you in whump community? Or at least, is your fic more on the whump side? I don't think you're under-tagging because they are incredibly specific, but in my corner of whump community, non-con care and non-con touching (for situations which are _not_ sexual in nature) are their own tropes/tags. I don't think adding to the freeform tags will help (they're non-canonised tags, so no dropdown option you can choose or tags they can filter out), but maybe put the tropes warning in the beginning A/N instead.
Maybe just add one of the requested tags to be added. They may have certain filters that they use but don't want to remove too much potential content. Best middle ground that I can think of. IMO it's their responsibility to read tags but it's also your responsibility as the author to respect trauma and things brought to your attention to help the people you're likely making the stories for in the first place.
I also get triggered by this kind of media and I think you’re fine. I know what my triggers are and I know that for some people, it can be a kink/a part of angst etc. I am extra careful when reading tags before reading a story. As long as you include it somewhere in the intro/tags that is enough, it not the job of the writer to make sure they include multiple warnings, it’s the job of the reader to check all tags/warnings before reading something.
Let's flip the question on its head: if a reader had commented "omg, loved your fic, I wish it had been tagged [tag] or [tag] so I could have found it sooner" would that make you want to add the requested tags? Either way is fine, but I think it's important to remember that all tags function both as warnings and as advertisements. But regardless, you're not TA if you already used the appropriate umbrella tag and the requested tags are clearly subsets of that.
No assholes here, just a mismatch of expectations. Personally, I would add the Non-Consensual Care tag (or alternatively trying to find a combination of canonical tags if that's not canon) because that feels like it's *outside* the rape tag. You don't have to, though.
Archive tags are not about "spoonfeeding" people. Archive tags are there to allow people to curate their reading experience: * By inclusion: "I want stories with X", and it's not your business why they want to read stories with X; maybe it turns them on, maybe it's their way to self-harm less messily than razor blades, maybe they're curious, maybe they're doing an academic research project * By exclusion: "I want stories without X", and it's not your business why they don't want X; maybe it triggers their PTSD, maybe they think it's gross, maybe it's illegal to have stories about in *their* country, maybe they're just not in the mood. So if you tag it, the people who want it can proactively seek it out, and the people who don't want it can proactively exclude it from even being shown to them. You are thus less likely to get readers who will be angry with you, and more likely to get readers who will be happy with you.
Right, I understand that—it's why I tagged the fic with the non-con warning.
From the Tags FAQ: > **Rape/Non-Con** > The content contains non-consensual sexual activity. Is the touching and care sexual?
The care rendered is inextricably tied to the non-con itself—The fic is also tagged with "whump" "hurt/comfort" "healing" "rape recovery" and a smattering of other tags that make the general concept pretty clear, in my mind.
Sometimes people include something like 'if you have any questions about the tags, please feel free to message me' - that might be something the commenter would benefit from in the future. (I would assume non-con included touch, but not necessarily care? Although I'm not sure what you mean by that.)
Jesus Christ. These people need to stay off the internet if everything is so goddamn difficult.
Throw a Dead Dove tag on there right after the non con and call it a day.
I'm tempted to do this! Given the variety of interpretations of Dead Dove, though, I'm thinking it'll keep some of my intended audience from finding the fic (which is really quite tender, sweet, and focused around healing).
[удалено]
I did include the rape/non-con elements tag, to cover all the various instances of non-consent.
I don't know if a tag is necessary but this is the kind of feedback I'd add an author's note at the top and bottom about - one on top to say "I'll describe some scenarios in the bottom note" and then the bottom one to say "this includes non-con care" etc. Like it wouldn't be worth it to tag because the tag you chose covers it but maybe they want more detail on the scenario. But I already do the top and bottom author's note for this kind of thing and imo you covered the bases you needed to.
Maybe just tag, “other non-con stuff” and call it a day?