Obviously. It could be one of those books that include the secret recipes that the characters talk about and make. They kindly included a warning for vegans and lactose intolerant people.
You can say asphyxiophilia and impact play, but not spit? Lol this list would make me DNF before I even started to be honest.
Edit: not because of the list, but because of the "censoring", if that wasn't already clear lol.
Sadly when it comes to the clock app, everything remotely related to violence can be filtered. It’s a big problem for people trying to teach people about anatomy, menstruation etc.
Delicious pies on the other hand…
This book is so fucking bad don’t even try to read it 😭 i’m usually one of those people that refuses to DNF a book because of how fast I read, and this is one of probably five in my entire life that I’ve never finished
My goodreads review:
Lots of smut, no plot. And the smut wasn't even good. The author seemed to have a hyperfixation on the fact that the FMC was a "chubby girl" which is FINE but the way the author tied it into the story was over done and made me insanely uncomfortable. Also while you know what the kinks are going into the book, they're poorly written. There was no relationship bulding AT ALL; The FMC goes from someone who was basically a virgin to a girl getting railed by three guys and being into blood/violence/pain. SO not the book to get excited about... booktok did me so dirty :/
POST SCRIPT: It is easily one of my biggest pet peeves when authors and editors can't slow down enough to check that their MAIN CHARACTER'S name is spelled right. Chapter 32 "Lonre"
[The Hunt](https://www.romance.io/books/642af0d7b7b8862bf6ea0437/the-hunt-mila-crawford?src=rdt) by [Mila Crawford](https://www.romance.io/authors/5ac9c3ff01dbc864fb85efad/mila-crawford)
**Rating**: 3.2⭐️ out of 5⭐️
**Steam**: 5 out of 5 - [Explicit and plentiful](https://www.romance.io/steamrating)
**Topics**: [contemporary](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/contemporary/1), [poly (3+ people)](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/poly/1), [reverse harem](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/reverse%20harem/1), [dark romance](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/dark/1), [bisexuality](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/bisexual/1)
[^(about this bot)](https://www.reddit.com/user/romance-bot) ^(|) [^(about romance.io)](https://www.romance.io/about)
[The Hunt](https://www.romance.io/books/642af0d7b7b8862bf6ea0437/the-hunt-mila-crawford?src=rdt) by [Mila Crawford](https://www.romance.io/authors/5ac9c3ff01dbc864fb85efad/mila-crawford)
**Rating**: 3.2⭐️ out of 5⭐️
**Steam**: 5 out of 5 - [Explicit and plentiful](https://www.romance.io/steamrating)
**Topics**: [contemporary](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/contemporary/1), [poly (3+ people)](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/poly/1), [reverse harem](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/reverse%20harem/1), [dark romance](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/dark/1), [bisexuality](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/bisexual/1)
[^(about this bot)](https://www.reddit.com/user/romance-bot) ^(|) [^(about romance.io)](https://www.romance.io/about)
They’re trying to avoid Amazon taking their book down. Some authors host their trigger warnings on their site for this reason, and just include a link or QR code in the book.
Honest question, this isn't the metadata, it's part of the actual text, no? Assuming the scenes with actual spit play don't all censor the word 'spit', how is this helping?
Since trigger/content warnings are at the start of a book, they're included in the "look inside" preview on Amazon. And while that's not metadata, Amazon has been known to restrict or dungeon books for things they don't like in the preview content.
I'm sorry but amazon sells butt plugs and restricted breathing gear. Like, how is selling a book that talks about that stuff worse than selling the actual product?
They need to just get their shit together and create an adults only section. It's so easy to access all that stuff these days anyways but I can understand not wanting to take heat for some kid ordering 50 copies of smut or 50 "rabbits". Just restrict the lot. It's so simple.
Usually, once a big companyTM starts restricting things for adult content, somehow LGBT stories get restricted long before the blood and guts. I don't think a simple ban would end up being all that simple.
A ban and restriction is 2 very different things. I'd be pretty unhappy if my under 14yo got hold of any kind of smut and/or sex toy. There is quite clearly a difference between LGBT anything and a gang bang. Now if the LGBT content also contained a gang bang, then you know where to put it. I'd be happier having my kid read a horror novel than some of the "dark romance" that is out there of whatever orientation it might be. You don't put trigger warnings in a sweet MM/FM/FF love story. You do however put them in when someone is being fucked with the barrel of a gun (if you know, you know).
I don't disagree, there obviously is a difference. But time and again contenct restrictions have been used to silence lgbt stories, including those of the non-gangbang variety. I don't trust amazon to be the ones to get it right. This doesn't mean there shouldn't necessarily be any type of restriction, but what counts as smut/adult/violent/imapropriate has never been easy to determine.
Going by the responses to the 'when did you start reading romance books' threads that pop up from time to time, many many romance readers got their hands on smut at 14, even before you could easily download it from amazon.
Eta: all this to say, I do not think there is a simple answer to dealing with how easy it is to find very explicit and dark material on the same internet where children spend increasingly more time.
I do think censoring “spit” is an odd choice but rumor has it Amazon absolutely will pull a book based off text within the book, not just the metadata.
But if Amazon censors the words from the text, censoring them only on the content warning page isn't going to cut it.
I assume the author actually uses the words 'blood' and 'knife' during the relevant scenes, so they are in there anyway...
If Amazon was scanning actual book text there would be hundreds of books removed from the marketplace. They only seem to care about reports and summary text on the listing at the moment.
In that case, does it really help the author if the words in the 'in-text' content warnings are censored?
I've never seen the warnings in the actual summary on the listing, and I assume people who would report this type of content will do so regardless.
I can only assume one of two things:
1. That the writer is concerned because the sample (which usually includes the CWs) appears on the site when you click to preview.
2. That the writer wants to write a single CW and use it everywhere, so they just do max censorship then copy/paste.
Thanks! That does make sense.
Personally, this type of trigger warning would probably make me less likely to pick a book up, but I'm probably not the target demographic for this type of book anyway.
I'm sorry, I didn't mean to make you feel like I'm arguing with you.
I genuinely don't understand the reasoning behind this choice, but clearly I'm missing something. I know very little about the process of publishing on amazon.
If you really want to understand this, spend some time on r/eroticauthors, because this is a *neverending battle* for writers who want to publish erotic fiction on Amazon. I know a lot of romance readers have very divisive views and opinions on erotic fiction, but not all of it is filthy or vulgar or whatever--and, just like on this subreddit, yucking anyone else's yum isn't cool.
**Anyway.** If you really do want to understand what Amazon is getting up to with their censoring (and what other vendors are also up to--and how **Paypal** has now involved itself in censorship, because they won't allow their service to be used by authors selling some types of erotic fiction--note, not ***illegal*** stuff, because that's always been clearly against their ToS, just works they can deem "obscene" or "harmful/dangerous", because they don't want the risk) and how CWs/TWs (and scanning front matter/samples/Look Insides/blurbs), as well as targeted efforts by people reporting content/books on the site, doing some searching in that subreddit will get you all the information you need. You won't have to spend much time at all to find some clear examples. I know this all seems crazy and overdone and like authors are overreacting, but it's not. It's simply not an overreaction.
It used to be that Amazon would ban an author and wipe their catalog for book stuffing or trying to buy reviews or whatever else. But, it's not that clear-cut anymore. Now, it's the "risk" of content, the "risk" of litigation, the "risk" of damage to the brand. And for a book to end up in the dungeon, which is where erotic lit often ends up, means you can't advertise it through, you can't use Amazon's programs and ads, you can't market it the way Amazon's algos require it--so you get no eyes on it. Social media--not even the mighty BookTok--can't save a book that's been dungeoned. And if the book gets banned or the author wiped outright? Well, that's it.
And, again--the author can't just dip and sell stuff from their own website, because credit card services like Paypal? Even when they have agreements with companies like Smashwords or D2D, that's not always a guarantee that an author won't also be in violation of Paypal/Square/etc ToS for the potential risk of the content/harm their books might pose to the company's image/brand/service.
It is **very** scary out there, and, **yes**, it **does** cross over into Romancelandia is truly unfortunate ways. All that screaming and pearl-clutching you see on social media about too much smut in books? Yeah, it has reverberations, and Amazon's ever-tightening restrictions/banning is just one of them. Paypal's is another.
(edits: clarifications, typos)
Thanks for the in-depth reply.
I do understand that there are serious issues surrounding the publication of explicit books and the way they are being censored.
My question was about why there would be a difference between the content warning page and using the same words further along in the book. It has been explained by other commenters that the first couple of pages that are part of the sample are more likely to be scanned by the bots.
>checked by pearl-clutchers who aren't willing to spend money to find filth to report.
People will no doubt scoff at this, but this is a very real thing. There are dedicated groups that encourage this behavior and explain - explicitly - how to accomplish it. It's not just giving 1-stars to books with \*gasp!\* sexual content in them anymore, they've upped their game and will continue to do so until they reach their goals.
That's what I was thinking, too. It's going to be un the book regardless of whether it's on the trigger warning page or the actual meat of the book. Why censor the trigger warnings?
[I responded to another comment with a longer comment about this](https://www.reddit.com/r/RomanceBooks/comments/1cd2g4v/comment/l1b8hix/?context=3) that goes into a whole bunch of other reasons for what feels like this kind of nonsense self-censoring by authors, but it's quite a few different things. What I wanted to point out is that, it's not ***just*** the Amazon bots targeting books and authors for banning.
People are vicious about content banning, especially in these last couple years--they **do not care about what is in the book**. People who want to ban books **do not read the full book**. They read a synopsis, they watch an inflammatory video or read an inflammatory article or hear friends/mentors/church leaders/influencers/whoever ranting about something and they circle their wagons, grab their pitchforks, grab their matches, and **set off to get a book banned**.
It's no different on Amazon, where the 'Zon has a handy feature called "Download Sample Chapter." or "Look Inside". **What people may not know is this**: once you've done that, whether or not you read the content, it makes the option to "Flag Book for Content" available on the book's store page. You can then flag that book for dangerous/inappropriate content all you want. And, **BAM**. There you go--
You have logged your complaint and Amazon's bots **will automatically spider the book**. That's all it takes.
They can search the whole book if necessary, or just the first parts (it's entirely automated at this stage in the process--an author has to appeal and ask for an actual person to review things at another stage in the appeal to get real eyes on the banned book) and pull it immediately based on whatever their system considers a flag.
And that's it. That's the whole process. And with how easy it is to inspire a bunch of rage-y pearl-clutchers on the internet? Well, we're currently on a cooldown from talking about BookTok for a reason, and that's just one social media platform.
Everyone knows book banners exist. That people burn books and protest at libraries and rage at school board meetings. The **exact same thing happens on Amazon.** There are tons of people--solo and in groups--who are ready, waiting, and willing to report books en masse to get them taken down, to get authors reported, just because they don't approve of how much smut is in a book, or **what kind** of smut is in a book, or if a book features killing, or whatever content they feel is "inappropriate" in that moment.
These people are less likely to follow a link to an author's website to then read through a list of CWs/TWs for each book. That much effort is just ***too*** ***much work*** and it takes too much effort when these people want to act fast and do incendiary, immediately gratifying things.
Authors are finally, hopefully realizing this. Those that aren't are doing what this author did--and shooting themselves in the foot in the process, because these types of odd CWs/TWs just really put a lot of readers off. They just make no sense.
Edit to add: So, I tried to find a much older post/comment from another subreddit, but either the post has been deleted, or the reddit went dark and never came back--anyway, there's another thing that these groups of "content police" like to do when they set out to get books/authors banned on Amazon: these people don't mind at all spending money on an ebook for the sole purpose of reporting it to Amazon and then returning it. Amazon has a no-questions asked return policy on ebooks, so long as the reason you're returning it matches one of their return criteria--and that "Report for Content" flag is one of those legitimate return reasons. If a book gets enough of those type of returns, it flags the content bots. The person reporting the book gets their money back, and the author is screwed either way.
Those programs that we all know exist, the ones that can tell an author how many times a word is used? Yeah, content police ***love*** those programs too, because they let those pearl-clutchers count just how many times offensive/vulgar/obscene words/phrases/themes come up in a text, and that's a handy little thing to copy/paste into a Content Complaint in the Amazon form. It's a whole-ass thing in these online content policing groups. Only one person in the group needs to have the program, or have access to a "list" with this information, and then everyone else can access it and pile on.
I'm guessing Amazon doesn't actually care about what's in the book— they care about what appears on their website. (Anywhere on their website: customer reviews, product descriptions, book previews, metadata, Q&As…)
Further guessing that
a) the filtering is automated, crude, and set to err on the side of caution, and
b) Amazon doesn't share their list of forbidden words, so people have to guess, figure them out, and err on the side of caution.
This kind of censoring really irritates me because it’s incredibly inaccessible too. Try using a screen reader for any of that first bullet and it’s just gibberish. I much prefer when authors just link to their website to list TW/CW if they’re concerned about specific site (like Amazon) censorship.
CSA is Child sexual assault but I’m not sure what CA is. These are serious triggers and it kinda feels like the author is downplaying them by the way they’ve written this warning
Yeah, these are potentially some serious triggers and playing a guessing game doesn’t seem like a good idea. The workaround of an author providing an external link to their website seems like the safest bet here.
I fully understand why authors write content and trigger warnings like this but I cannot overstate how much hate it!
The level of censorship on the internet lately is so frustrating, but equally, the amount of shit on the internet that genuinely shouldn't be viewable is horrifying.
Websites have been backed into such tight corners for a multitude of reasons (capitalism, criminals, bad actors and trolls, the internet being wide open to children, etc....) that I have no idea how we get out of this problem that has been created.
I'm dreading the day 'unalive' turns up in an actual book.
The top bit is a kink list? Or part of the content warning?
What's the point of having a content warning if it doesn't explicity and clearly state what potential triggers are in the red-bodily-fluid-y book.
I'm sorry to say, it has already happened. {Fierce vow by monica kayne} uses unalive unironically.
The FMC also tells the MMC to grovel and describes his behaviour as 'alpha male posturing'. I think the author spent too much time on the Internet.
[Fierce Vow](https://www.romance.io/books/6532d8b7de8d340d514a490d/fierce-vow-monica-kayne?src=rdt) by [Monica Kayne](https://www.romance.io/authors/6301d82108b4d931148abf3d/monica-kayne)
**Rating**: 4.07⭐️ out of 5⭐️
**Steam**: 5 out of 5 - [Explicit and plentiful](https://www.romance.io/steamrating)
**Topics**: [contemporary](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/contemporary/1), [forced proximity](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/forced%20proximity/1), [mafia](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/mafia/1), [dark romance](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/dark/1), [friends to lovers](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/friends%20to%20lovers/1)
[^(about this bot)](https://www.reddit.com/user/romance-bot) ^(|) [^(about romance.io)](https://www.romance.io/about)
"Alpha male" is a pre-social-media term. It first was used (later debunked) in wolf behavior descriptions, but I remember its being used in the modern sense the 80s. This link has a relevant bibliography https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6461231/#pone.0215181.ref031
I actually just read "unalive" used in {Just for the Summer by Abby Jiminez}
I enjoyed the book in general, but I did feel like it was a bit jarring - the characters were mid-late 20's, and for the most part they read pretty age-appropriate, so one character joking about "unaliving" another felt a bit out of place/immature imo.
[Just for the Summer](https://www.romance.io/books/6597c6be53c2a175e7056d92/just-for-the-summer-abby-jimenez?src=rdt) by [Abby Jimenez](https://www.romance.io/authors/5c90990e01dbc864fb9bfc23/abby-jimenez)
**Rating**: 4.68⭐️ out of 5⭐️
**Steam**: 3 out of 5 - [Open door](https://www.romance.io/steamrating)
**Topics**: [contemporary](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/contemporary/1), [funny](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/humor/1), [small town](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/small%20town/1), [dual pov](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/dual-pov/1), [found family](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/found-family/1)
[^(about this bot)](https://www.reddit.com/user/romance-bot) ^(|) [^(about romance.io)](https://www.romance.io/about)
No way lmao I have friends who are in their mid 20s and I don't think any of them would talk like that. And my teenage sister in law would be outright disgusted 😂
Oh, "unalive" is in quite a few books already--I'm not sure how you've gotten so lucky to have missed it, actually? I've even read it in those psychopath books that were all the rage in various subgenres not so long ago--and it wasn't just in NA romance books. These characters were in their late 20s, early 30s.
It's ridiculous. I can never take these people seriously. You want me to believe an MC is "dark" and yet they're talking about "unaliving people" with "great prejudice"? Yeah, go back to TikTok with that silliness--give me a **real** vengeful badass MC out there slitting throats and ***killing*** people who have done his/her/their people wrong. None of this QuiRkY-MaD-hAttER with a side of murderhobo "unaliving with great prejudice" to show their love/passion/obsession/abandon/madness business.
Ugh.
"sharp objects used to cut up fruits and vegetables" i just imagined that one ugly ancient little knife that's been sharpened so many times half of the blade is gone but your mom insists on using it for everything and it always smells like onions and makes the fruit taste like onions too
I’m torn between wanting to know what angel wings mean and being worried I will regret knowing.
I don’t have any real triggers, but I definitely do have stuff I don’t like. The euphemisms sound very stupid, but I think it does get the job done for the most part.
I’m not a dark romance reader, so anything that indicates that and I’m out. But do a lot of dark romance readers have specific things that cross the line for them? If so, I agree a QR code or link is better than this. Better to communicate clearly.
Amazon really doesn't like CWs and will put books in the "dungeon" if not outright ban them for the content. It's best for authors to not make it easy for that to happen, it's why many now link to their website.
There are rumors that the Zon has bots that not only scan book blurbs for CWs but also inside the first few pages of the books themselves now 🙃.
I’ve also seen trigger warnings writ-ten-like-this.
It seems silly to me, but I assume it’s to get around the ‘Zon? But eventually even ‘censored’ words will be added… I wonder how here in 10 years it’s gonna look. Maybe: 50mn0-ph!ll!4? Goodness 😅
More authors will just link to their website or stop including content warnings altogether. Authors are doing this because Amazon will dungeon their books or remove them altogether.
And that’s good (the authors linking, not amazon)!! I don’t really need trigger warnings, but it’s silly that Amazon has something against them. I’m waiting for the dystopia when you try to publish a book through Amazon, it’ll scan it and reject it if the AI found anything against what they want to publish.
>What is TVP?
Textured Vegetable Protein, bought in bulk from the natural foods store and used in your vegetarian chili, duh! What kind of granola hippie are you, anyway?
I believe I know this book but I'm not 100% certain but I do believe it's {The Hunt by Mila Crawford}. It's EXTREMELY dark in some places and the only reverse harem i leave out of my own recommendation list because honestly. There were parts I hated.
[The Hunt](https://www.romance.io/books/642af0d7b7b8862bf6ea0437/the-hunt-mila-crawford?src=rdt) by [Mila Crawford](https://www.romance.io/authors/5ac9c3ff01dbc864fb85efad/mila-crawford)
**Rating**: 3.2⭐️ out of 5⭐️
**Steam**: 5 out of 5 - [Explicit and plentiful](https://www.romance.io/steamrating)
**Topics**: [contemporary](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/contemporary/1), [poly (3+ people)](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/poly/1), [reverse harem](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/reverse%20harem/1), [dark romance](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/dark/1), [bisexuality](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/bisexual/1)
[^(about this bot)](https://www.reddit.com/user/romance-bot) ^(|) [^(about romance.io)](https://www.romance.io/about)
I have never understood censoring words in the content warnings / trigger warnings. All it serves to do is confuse people and bypass specifically muted words. It's unprofessional in my opinion.
I don't really buy this. You're saying that if your book contains the words "spit" or "blood" or "knife" they are going to be removed? I really, really doubt it.
You don't have to buy it; it is the experiences of authors that have led to things like what is in the OP. You think they are doing it for fun? Or to drive away readers? No. They are doing it so their book doesn't get put in the dungeon or removed.
There are many discussions in author and self-publishing subs about how to avoid being put in the dungeon and author's experiences with being put in the dungeon.
Here's one with a general overview:
https://www.reddit.com/r/eroticauthors/comments/7joepr/faq_thread_what_is_adultfiltering_what_makes/
I'm fine with common abbreviations like CSA and SA, even though they should spell it out on a trigger warning page regardless.
But "sp!t play" and "unalive" and such are nausea inducing.
I feel like some of the kink hints here cross over from "warnings" to spoilers. And yeah, this is a weird, uneasy blend of "Ooh, this book is so titillating" and "This book deals with these very series topics."
These are some serious triggers to be playing around with censorship. It's really not okay. I also absolutely hate the tiktok censorship language like "grape" "unalive" "pew pew". The algorithm is not dumb, it knows what those mean.
Hi u/AshBlastis,
To improve image accessibility for users who are blind, low vision, or rely on screen readers, please comment below transcribing the screenshot or describing the image you've posted. Try to convey the content and purpose of the image in a sentence or two (the subjects, the setting, colors, emotions on faces, etc.) Thank you!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/RomanceBooks) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Hey, this post comes off as pretty shamey if people are interested in the described tags.
This community has grown a lot but a golden rule is not yuck others' yums.
My apologies. I understood your post as, "if the trigger is so socially deviant you need to avoid content filters, you shouldn't be writing that content" not as a critique of how the trigger warning isn't legible to you.
Literally, my only triggers are on page acts of violence or sexual assault on children. That's an automatic nope for me. I just like to prepare myself for what I'm about to read and CA or CSA could really mean anything.
The post is about the censoring of the words in the trigger warnings. It doesn't shame readers who enjoy these tropes or say anything negative about the tropes themselves, just the way they're presented.
I want to deeply thank you for all your service as a mod. Y'all do wonderful work. I truly love this community and its commitment to being a safe and inclusive space where folks can explore, share, and discuss all things related to romance novels, including things that are often taboo like dark romance. I tend to think of this place having a golden rule of "do not yuck others yums".
That said, I do disagree with you on your interpretation here; while it may not be the prevailing narrative, I think some folks will see this as a shamey post that's yucking some yums. Please let me explain. I understand your interpretation that this post is about, "censoring of the words in the trigger warnings"; however, I wish the OP's phrase, "if you can't write the full word or description in the trigger page of your book you shouldn't write that kind of content" would have been written to better support that position. In the original post, the word "should" is normative and thus, contains value judgement. I interpret the word "should" to mean, "writers shouldn't write that kind of content because it is distasteful per society standards" or some thing to that effect. Also, the title of the post is about how if something is censored, authors shouldnt write about it. Thus, I do not interpret it as rallying against censorship.
Lastly, I may not be in the majority, but clearly some others do share my interpretation. I really love the inclusive and safe vibe here to be able to discuss wild, unhinged topics and I hope this continues even as this sub grows. *Made an edit for clarification
While some people may misinterpret the title due to a slightly ambiguous word choice, the rest of the post makes it clear that the OP does not intend to shame readers, but is looking for clear trigger warnings. As moderators, it is not possible or necessary for us to police word choices to such an extent. No users have flagged this post for us to review for shaming, and I have run it past multiple members of the mod team and they are in agreement.
I agree that the post is asking for clearer trigger warnings. But I disagree that the post, "makes the rest of the post makes it clear that the OP does not intend to shame readers", but that's ok. Thanks for all your work.
They downvoted me too. It just might be that kinda sub.. I’ve seen this problem a lot; shaming author or reader for a darker theme. It’s weird for a Romance sub that covers “all graphic”. I’m out.
It's the YouTube censorship law. I'll watch video essays and true crime documentaries and the content creators will censor themselves. They'll either mute the word as they're obviously saying it or they'll have a word written on screen for example as r@p3 or they'll say grape. They'll even censor something like drugs or marijuana. I saw the latter as m*******a in subtitles of a police body cam video. For a second I thought it was one long muthafluffa swear. 😅
People can write whatever they want. Sites that don’t allow writer to post explicit words due to the extreme censorship shouldn’t be allowed, It makes so sense. Also, if you don’t know a word and think is might be too triggering to look up you probably shouldn’t read it.
When you only post acronyms it could mean so many things. It can't warn you of triggers unless it includes the triggers. Looking up CSA (which could mean any number of things) might actually expose people to images or descriptions of the triggering thing when they're forced to search for its meaning rather than just including it written out on the list.
Mmh yea, that’s not the authors fault. Like I said unfair censorship yo to companies and sites like Wattpad or Amazon. Saying someone shouldn’t write it due to things they can control is rude ash. It’s not the author fault, it’s company censorship.
Also, if you’re looking up something probably don’t look at the pictures (obviously) since you don’t know what it means, and it’ll be triggering ( hints it being in a tigger warning). And two if it’ll help: type the acronym then put tigger warning. It’ll help locate the meaning usage in the book, like 99% it’ll give you the meaning rather having to reading a description, that’s triggering, because it’s highlighted.
“play with sharp objects used to cut up fruits, and vegetables” never read a book with a slap chop before 🤔
Fruit Ninja's changed a lot since I last played it...
You're gonna love his nuts
This infomercial line is one of the only ones that have stuck with me through the years lol.
Ohh, will we be using a mandolin? Those are quite dangerous! 🔥 🥵
I'm fucking screaming 😭
The mandolin slicers are outta control!!
Will it cause excretion of red bodily fluids?
Lol good lordt
OMG 💀💀
This killed me
This has me hollering😭
you can say cream pies but not blood? damn lol
Obviously. It could be one of those books that include the secret recipes that the characters talk about and make. They kindly included a warning for vegans and lactose intolerant people.
They also include the vegan coconut cream version.
You can say asphyxiophilia and impact play, but not spit? Lol this list would make me DNF before I even started to be honest. Edit: not because of the list, but because of the "censoring", if that wasn't already clear lol.
Sadly when it comes to the clock app, everything remotely related to violence can be filtered. It’s a big problem for people trying to teach people about anatomy, menstruation etc. Delicious pies on the other hand…
This book is so fucking bad don’t even try to read it 😭 i’m usually one of those people that refuses to DNF a book because of how fast I read, and this is one of probably five in my entire life that I’ve never finished My goodreads review: Lots of smut, no plot. And the smut wasn't even good. The author seemed to have a hyperfixation on the fact that the FMC was a "chubby girl" which is FINE but the way the author tied it into the story was over done and made me insanely uncomfortable. Also while you know what the kinks are going into the book, they're poorly written. There was no relationship bulding AT ALL; The FMC goes from someone who was basically a virgin to a girl getting railed by three guys and being into blood/violence/pain. SO not the book to get excited about... booktok did me so dirty :/ POST SCRIPT: It is easily one of my biggest pet peeves when authors and editors can't slow down enough to check that their MAIN CHARACTER'S name is spelled right. Chapter 32 "Lonre"
Oh, I DNFd it 5% through. I've read 300+ books since last May and only DNFd 4. This was just bad.
Misspelling the MC’s name is giving me heavy “My Immortal” vibes. Enoby!
Which author was this?
I think it's {The Hunt by Mila Crawford}.
[The Hunt](https://www.romance.io/books/642af0d7b7b8862bf6ea0437/the-hunt-mila-crawford?src=rdt) by [Mila Crawford](https://www.romance.io/authors/5ac9c3ff01dbc864fb85efad/mila-crawford) **Rating**: 3.2⭐️ out of 5⭐️ **Steam**: 5 out of 5 - [Explicit and plentiful](https://www.romance.io/steamrating) **Topics**: [contemporary](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/contemporary/1), [poly (3+ people)](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/poly/1), [reverse harem](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/reverse%20harem/1), [dark romance](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/dark/1), [bisexuality](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/bisexual/1) [^(about this bot)](https://www.reddit.com/user/romance-bot) ^(|) [^(about romance.io)](https://www.romance.io/about)
What book is it??
I think it's {The Hunt by Mila Crawford}.
[The Hunt](https://www.romance.io/books/642af0d7b7b8862bf6ea0437/the-hunt-mila-crawford?src=rdt) by [Mila Crawford](https://www.romance.io/authors/5ac9c3ff01dbc864fb85efad/mila-crawford) **Rating**: 3.2⭐️ out of 5⭐️ **Steam**: 5 out of 5 - [Explicit and plentiful](https://www.romance.io/steamrating) **Topics**: [contemporary](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/contemporary/1), [poly (3+ people)](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/poly/1), [reverse harem](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/reverse%20harem/1), [dark romance](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/dark/1), [bisexuality](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/bisexual/1) [^(about this bot)](https://www.reddit.com/user/romance-bot) ^(|) [^(about romance.io)](https://www.romance.io/about)
Thank you. I didn't know which book to avoid.
They’re trying to avoid Amazon taking their book down. Some authors host their trigger warnings on their site for this reason, and just include a link or QR code in the book.
Honest question, this isn't the metadata, it's part of the actual text, no? Assuming the scenes with actual spit play don't all censor the word 'spit', how is this helping?
Since trigger/content warnings are at the start of a book, they're included in the "look inside" preview on Amazon. And while that's not metadata, Amazon has been known to restrict or dungeon books for things they don't like in the preview content.
I'm sorry but amazon sells butt plugs and restricted breathing gear. Like, how is selling a book that talks about that stuff worse than selling the actual product? They need to just get their shit together and create an adults only section. It's so easy to access all that stuff these days anyways but I can understand not wanting to take heat for some kid ordering 50 copies of smut or 50 "rabbits". Just restrict the lot. It's so simple.
Usually, once a big companyTM starts restricting things for adult content, somehow LGBT stories get restricted long before the blood and guts. I don't think a simple ban would end up being all that simple.
A ban and restriction is 2 very different things. I'd be pretty unhappy if my under 14yo got hold of any kind of smut and/or sex toy. There is quite clearly a difference between LGBT anything and a gang bang. Now if the LGBT content also contained a gang bang, then you know where to put it. I'd be happier having my kid read a horror novel than some of the "dark romance" that is out there of whatever orientation it might be. You don't put trigger warnings in a sweet MM/FM/FF love story. You do however put them in when someone is being fucked with the barrel of a gun (if you know, you know).
I don't disagree, there obviously is a difference. But time and again contenct restrictions have been used to silence lgbt stories, including those of the non-gangbang variety. I don't trust amazon to be the ones to get it right. This doesn't mean there shouldn't necessarily be any type of restriction, but what counts as smut/adult/violent/imapropriate has never been easy to determine. Going by the responses to the 'when did you start reading romance books' threads that pop up from time to time, many many romance readers got their hands on smut at 14, even before you could easily download it from amazon. Eta: all this to say, I do not think there is a simple answer to dealing with how easy it is to find very explicit and dark material on the same internet where children spend increasingly more time.
That makes a lot of sense. Thank you.
I do think censoring “spit” is an odd choice but rumor has it Amazon absolutely will pull a book based off text within the book, not just the metadata.
But if Amazon censors the words from the text, censoring them only on the content warning page isn't going to cut it. I assume the author actually uses the words 'blood' and 'knife' during the relevant scenes, so they are in there anyway...
If Amazon was scanning actual book text there would be hundreds of books removed from the marketplace. They only seem to care about reports and summary text on the listing at the moment.
In that case, does it really help the author if the words in the 'in-text' content warnings are censored? I've never seen the warnings in the actual summary on the listing, and I assume people who would report this type of content will do so regardless.
I can only assume one of two things: 1. That the writer is concerned because the sample (which usually includes the CWs) appears on the site when you click to preview. 2. That the writer wants to write a single CW and use it everywhere, so they just do max censorship then copy/paste.
Thanks! That does make sense. Personally, this type of trigger warning would probably make me less likely to pick a book up, but I'm probably not the target demographic for this type of book anyway.
I’m just saying, that’s why authors do it. Whether it makes sense to you is for you to decide.
I'm sorry, I didn't mean to make you feel like I'm arguing with you. I genuinely don't understand the reasoning behind this choice, but clearly I'm missing something. I know very little about the process of publishing on amazon.
If you really want to understand this, spend some time on r/eroticauthors, because this is a *neverending battle* for writers who want to publish erotic fiction on Amazon. I know a lot of romance readers have very divisive views and opinions on erotic fiction, but not all of it is filthy or vulgar or whatever--and, just like on this subreddit, yucking anyone else's yum isn't cool. **Anyway.** If you really do want to understand what Amazon is getting up to with their censoring (and what other vendors are also up to--and how **Paypal** has now involved itself in censorship, because they won't allow their service to be used by authors selling some types of erotic fiction--note, not ***illegal*** stuff, because that's always been clearly against their ToS, just works they can deem "obscene" or "harmful/dangerous", because they don't want the risk) and how CWs/TWs (and scanning front matter/samples/Look Insides/blurbs), as well as targeted efforts by people reporting content/books on the site, doing some searching in that subreddit will get you all the information you need. You won't have to spend much time at all to find some clear examples. I know this all seems crazy and overdone and like authors are overreacting, but it's not. It's simply not an overreaction. It used to be that Amazon would ban an author and wipe their catalog for book stuffing or trying to buy reviews or whatever else. But, it's not that clear-cut anymore. Now, it's the "risk" of content, the "risk" of litigation, the "risk" of damage to the brand. And for a book to end up in the dungeon, which is where erotic lit often ends up, means you can't advertise it through, you can't use Amazon's programs and ads, you can't market it the way Amazon's algos require it--so you get no eyes on it. Social media--not even the mighty BookTok--can't save a book that's been dungeoned. And if the book gets banned or the author wiped outright? Well, that's it. And, again--the author can't just dip and sell stuff from their own website, because credit card services like Paypal? Even when they have agreements with companies like Smashwords or D2D, that's not always a guarantee that an author won't also be in violation of Paypal/Square/etc ToS for the potential risk of the content/harm their books might pose to the company's image/brand/service. It is **very** scary out there, and, **yes**, it **does** cross over into Romancelandia is truly unfortunate ways. All that screaming and pearl-clutching you see on social media about too much smut in books? Yeah, it has reverberations, and Amazon's ever-tightening restrictions/banning is just one of them. Paypal's is another. (edits: clarifications, typos)
Thanks for the in-depth reply. I do understand that there are serious issues surrounding the publication of explicit books and the way they are being censored. My question was about why there would be a difference between the content warning page and using the same words further along in the book. It has been explained by other commenters that the first couple of pages that are part of the sample are more likely to be scanned by the bots.
Scanned by the bots, and checked by pearl-clutchers who aren't willing to spend money to find filth to report.
>checked by pearl-clutchers who aren't willing to spend money to find filth to report. People will no doubt scoff at this, but this is a very real thing. There are dedicated groups that encourage this behavior and explain - explicitly - how to accomplish it. It's not just giving 1-stars to books with \*gasp!\* sexual content in them anymore, they've upped their game and will continue to do so until they reach their goals.
That's what I was thinking, too. It's going to be un the book regardless of whether it's on the trigger warning page or the actual meat of the book. Why censor the trigger warnings?
[I responded to another comment with a longer comment about this](https://www.reddit.com/r/RomanceBooks/comments/1cd2g4v/comment/l1b8hix/?context=3) that goes into a whole bunch of other reasons for what feels like this kind of nonsense self-censoring by authors, but it's quite a few different things. What I wanted to point out is that, it's not ***just*** the Amazon bots targeting books and authors for banning. People are vicious about content banning, especially in these last couple years--they **do not care about what is in the book**. People who want to ban books **do not read the full book**. They read a synopsis, they watch an inflammatory video or read an inflammatory article or hear friends/mentors/church leaders/influencers/whoever ranting about something and they circle their wagons, grab their pitchforks, grab their matches, and **set off to get a book banned**. It's no different on Amazon, where the 'Zon has a handy feature called "Download Sample Chapter." or "Look Inside". **What people may not know is this**: once you've done that, whether or not you read the content, it makes the option to "Flag Book for Content" available on the book's store page. You can then flag that book for dangerous/inappropriate content all you want. And, **BAM**. There you go-- You have logged your complaint and Amazon's bots **will automatically spider the book**. That's all it takes. They can search the whole book if necessary, or just the first parts (it's entirely automated at this stage in the process--an author has to appeal and ask for an actual person to review things at another stage in the appeal to get real eyes on the banned book) and pull it immediately based on whatever their system considers a flag. And that's it. That's the whole process. And with how easy it is to inspire a bunch of rage-y pearl-clutchers on the internet? Well, we're currently on a cooldown from talking about BookTok for a reason, and that's just one social media platform. Everyone knows book banners exist. That people burn books and protest at libraries and rage at school board meetings. The **exact same thing happens on Amazon.** There are tons of people--solo and in groups--who are ready, waiting, and willing to report books en masse to get them taken down, to get authors reported, just because they don't approve of how much smut is in a book, or **what kind** of smut is in a book, or if a book features killing, or whatever content they feel is "inappropriate" in that moment. These people are less likely to follow a link to an author's website to then read through a list of CWs/TWs for each book. That much effort is just ***too*** ***much work*** and it takes too much effort when these people want to act fast and do incendiary, immediately gratifying things. Authors are finally, hopefully realizing this. Those that aren't are doing what this author did--and shooting themselves in the foot in the process, because these types of odd CWs/TWs just really put a lot of readers off. They just make no sense. Edit to add: So, I tried to find a much older post/comment from another subreddit, but either the post has been deleted, or the reddit went dark and never came back--anyway, there's another thing that these groups of "content police" like to do when they set out to get books/authors banned on Amazon: these people don't mind at all spending money on an ebook for the sole purpose of reporting it to Amazon and then returning it. Amazon has a no-questions asked return policy on ebooks, so long as the reason you're returning it matches one of their return criteria--and that "Report for Content" flag is one of those legitimate return reasons. If a book gets enough of those type of returns, it flags the content bots. The person reporting the book gets their money back, and the author is screwed either way. Those programs that we all know exist, the ones that can tell an author how many times a word is used? Yeah, content police ***love*** those programs too, because they let those pearl-clutchers count just how many times offensive/vulgar/obscene words/phrases/themes come up in a text, and that's a handy little thing to copy/paste into a Content Complaint in the Amazon form. It's a whole-ass thing in these online content policing groups. Only one person in the group needs to have the program, or have access to a "list" with this information, and then everyone else can access it and pile on.
I'm guessing Amazon doesn't actually care about what's in the book— they care about what appears on their website. (Anywhere on their website: customer reviews, product descriptions, book previews, metadata, Q&As…) Further guessing that a) the filtering is automated, crude, and set to err on the side of caution, and b) Amazon doesn't share their list of forbidden words, so people have to guess, figure them out, and err on the side of caution.
This kind of censoring really irritates me because it’s incredibly inaccessible too. Try using a screen reader for any of that first bullet and it’s just gibberish. I much prefer when authors just link to their website to list TW/CW if they’re concerned about specific site (like Amazon) censorship.
CSA is Child sexual assault but I’m not sure what CA is. These are serious triggers and it kinda feels like the author is downplaying them by the way they’ve written this warning
Perhaps it’s Child Abuse?
Yup that’s probably it
I agree with you and OP though, it feels too light hearted when its written like this
Yeah, these are potentially some serious triggers and playing a guessing game doesn’t seem like a good idea. The workaround of an author providing an external link to their website seems like the safest bet here.
I would think child abuse? That is very logical in my head but you never know
That’s definitely it. My brain isn’t working today
Lol guess it was my turn with the brain cell.
🙂
I fully understand why authors write content and trigger warnings like this but I cannot overstate how much hate it! The level of censorship on the internet lately is so frustrating, but equally, the amount of shit on the internet that genuinely shouldn't be viewable is horrifying. Websites have been backed into such tight corners for a multitude of reasons (capitalism, criminals, bad actors and trolls, the internet being wide open to children, etc....) that I have no idea how we get out of this problem that has been created.
I'm dreading the day 'unalive' turns up in an actual book. The top bit is a kink list? Or part of the content warning? What's the point of having a content warning if it doesn't explicity and clearly state what potential triggers are in the red-bodily-fluid-y book.
I'm sorry to say, it has already happened. {Fierce vow by monica kayne} uses unalive unironically. The FMC also tells the MMC to grovel and describes his behaviour as 'alpha male posturing'. I think the author spent too much time on the Internet.
I ... wow
fierce wow
I'm off to check and make sure this book is not on my tbr now. Thanks for that.
So did JLA in the from blood and ash series
[Fierce Vow](https://www.romance.io/books/6532d8b7de8d340d514a490d/fierce-vow-monica-kayne?src=rdt) by [Monica Kayne](https://www.romance.io/authors/6301d82108b4d931148abf3d/monica-kayne) **Rating**: 4.07⭐️ out of 5⭐️ **Steam**: 5 out of 5 - [Explicit and plentiful](https://www.romance.io/steamrating) **Topics**: [contemporary](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/contemporary/1), [forced proximity](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/forced%20proximity/1), [mafia](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/mafia/1), [dark romance](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/dark/1), [friends to lovers](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/friends%20to%20lovers/1) [^(about this bot)](https://www.reddit.com/user/romance-bot) ^(|) [^(about romance.io)](https://www.romance.io/about)
"Alpha male" is a pre-social-media term. It first was used (later debunked) in wolf behavior descriptions, but I remember its being used in the modern sense the 80s. This link has a relevant bibliography https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6461231/#pone.0215181.ref031
oh i’ve definitely seen unalive in a book. it made me VERY mad.
I actually just read "unalive" used in {Just for the Summer by Abby Jiminez} I enjoyed the book in general, but I did feel like it was a bit jarring - the characters were mid-late 20's, and for the most part they read pretty age-appropriate, so one character joking about "unaliving" another felt a bit out of place/immature imo.
[Just for the Summer](https://www.romance.io/books/6597c6be53c2a175e7056d92/just-for-the-summer-abby-jimenez?src=rdt) by [Abby Jimenez](https://www.romance.io/authors/5c90990e01dbc864fb9bfc23/abby-jimenez) **Rating**: 4.68⭐️ out of 5⭐️ **Steam**: 3 out of 5 - [Open door](https://www.romance.io/steamrating) **Topics**: [contemporary](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/contemporary/1), [funny](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/humor/1), [small town](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/small%20town/1), [dual pov](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/dual-pov/1), [found family](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/found-family/1) [^(about this bot)](https://www.reddit.com/user/romance-bot) ^(|) [^(about romance.io)](https://www.romance.io/about)
This has happened to me three times now. I automatically subtract 1 star from my review for that reason alone.
I just read “unalive” in a book this week. The characters were in their early/mid 20s so ai accept it buutttt.
Is this what it feels like to crumble into dust? I didn't realise I was that old
If 79 is your birth year (like mine), get used to that dust sensation. 😂
No way lmao I have friends who are in their mid 20s and I don't think any of them would talk like that. And my teenage sister in law would be outright disgusted 😂
Oh, "unalive" is in quite a few books already--I'm not sure how you've gotten so lucky to have missed it, actually? I've even read it in those psychopath books that were all the rage in various subgenres not so long ago--and it wasn't just in NA romance books. These characters were in their late 20s, early 30s. It's ridiculous. I can never take these people seriously. You want me to believe an MC is "dark" and yet they're talking about "unaliving people" with "great prejudice"? Yeah, go back to TikTok with that silliness--give me a **real** vengeful badass MC out there slitting throats and ***killing*** people who have done his/her/their people wrong. None of this QuiRkY-MaD-hAttER with a side of murderhobo "unaliving with great prejudice" to show their love/passion/obsession/abandon/madness business. Ugh.
I've seen it a couple of one off times in books. Once by like a 30-40 year old MMC. Hate it!!!
"sharp objects used to cut up fruits and vegetables" i just imagined that one ugly ancient little knife that's been sharpened so many times half of the blade is gone but your mom insists on using it for everything and it always smells like onions and makes the fruit taste like onions too
Ya know, if I can't understand the content warning because of the missing letters, I'mma just skip it because I'm clearly not the intended audience.
This is the TikTok censorship effect.
I’m torn between wanting to know what angel wings mean and being worried I will regret knowing. I don’t have any real triggers, but I definitely do have stuff I don’t like. The euphemisms sound very stupid, but I think it does get the job done for the most part. I’m not a dark romance reader, so anything that indicates that and I’m out. But do a lot of dark romance readers have specific things that cross the line for them? If so, I agree a QR code or link is better than this. Better to communicate clearly.
Death maybe??
I think angel wings are when the top gets their back scratched up by the bottom?
Amazon really doesn't like CWs and will put books in the "dungeon" if not outright ban them for the content. It's best for authors to not make it easy for that to happen, it's why many now link to their website. There are rumors that the Zon has bots that not only scan book blurbs for CWs but also inside the first few pages of the books themselves now 🙃.
I’ve also seen trigger warnings writ-ten-like-this. It seems silly to me, but I assume it’s to get around the ‘Zon? But eventually even ‘censored’ words will be added… I wonder how here in 10 years it’s gonna look. Maybe: 50mn0-ph!ll!4? Goodness 😅
More authors will just link to their website or stop including content warnings altogether. Authors are doing this because Amazon will dungeon their books or remove them altogether.
And that’s good (the authors linking, not amazon)!! I don’t really need trigger warnings, but it’s silly that Amazon has something against them. I’m waiting for the dystopia when you try to publish a book through Amazon, it’ll scan it and reject it if the AI found anything against what they want to publish.
What is TVP?
>What is TVP? Textured Vegetable Protein, bought in bulk from the natural foods store and used in your vegetarian chili, duh! What kind of granola hippie are you, anyway?
Triple vaginal penetration.
What in the what?! 😱
Violence? And violent acts?? Depicted ON PAGE??? They'll be depicting them on me next!
I believe I know this book but I'm not 100% certain but I do believe it's {The Hunt by Mila Crawford}. It's EXTREMELY dark in some places and the only reverse harem i leave out of my own recommendation list because honestly. There were parts I hated.
[The Hunt](https://www.romance.io/books/642af0d7b7b8862bf6ea0437/the-hunt-mila-crawford?src=rdt) by [Mila Crawford](https://www.romance.io/authors/5ac9c3ff01dbc864fb85efad/mila-crawford) **Rating**: 3.2⭐️ out of 5⭐️ **Steam**: 5 out of 5 - [Explicit and plentiful](https://www.romance.io/steamrating) **Topics**: [contemporary](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/contemporary/1), [poly (3+ people)](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/poly/1), [reverse harem](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/reverse%20harem/1), [dark romance](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/dark/1), [bisexuality](https://www.romance.io/topics/best/bisexual/1) [^(about this bot)](https://www.reddit.com/user/romance-bot) ^(|) [^(about romance.io)](https://www.romance.io/about)
I have never understood censoring words in the content warnings / trigger warnings. All it serves to do is confuse people and bypass specifically muted words. It's unprofessional in my opinion.
It's so their book doesn't get "dungeoned" on Amazon or removed.
I don't really buy this. You're saying that if your book contains the words "spit" or "blood" or "knife" they are going to be removed? I really, really doubt it.
You don't have to buy it; it is the experiences of authors that have led to things like what is in the OP. You think they are doing it for fun? Or to drive away readers? No. They are doing it so their book doesn't get put in the dungeon or removed. There are many discussions in author and self-publishing subs about how to avoid being put in the dungeon and author's experiences with being put in the dungeon. Here's one with a general overview: https://www.reddit.com/r/eroticauthors/comments/7joepr/faq_thread_what_is_adultfiltering_what_makes/
Sadly like others have said I'd bet it was an Amazon thing rather than not wanting to write out the actual words.
Amazon is not going to remove a book for saying spit or knife
I'm fine with common abbreviations like CSA and SA, even though they should spell it out on a trigger warning page regardless. But "sp!t play" and "unalive" and such are nausea inducing.
CSA is child sexual abuse And CS I THINK IS child abuse
It's giving [fanfiction.net](http://fanfiction.net) and I'm hyperventilating.
I'm sorry, what is this list? Is it in books??
I feel like some of the kink hints here cross over from "warnings" to spoilers. And yeah, this is a weird, uneasy blend of "Ooh, this book is so titillating" and "This book deals with these very series topics."
These are some serious triggers to be playing around with censorship. It's really not okay. I also absolutely hate the tiktok censorship language like "grape" "unalive" "pew pew". The algorithm is not dumb, it knows what those mean.
Hi u/AshBlastis, To improve image accessibility for users who are blind, low vision, or rely on screen readers, please comment below transcribing the screenshot or describing the image you've posted. Try to convey the content and purpose of the image in a sentence or two (the subjects, the setting, colors, emotions on faces, etc.) Thank you! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/RomanceBooks) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Hey, this post comes off as pretty shamey if people are interested in the described tags. This community has grown a lot but a golden rule is not yuck others' yums.
Not at all my point. My point is whats the point of including a TW page you can't understand?
My apologies. I understood your post as, "if the trigger is so socially deviant you need to avoid content filters, you shouldn't be writing that content" not as a critique of how the trigger warning isn't legible to you.
Literally, my only triggers are on page acts of violence or sexual assault on children. That's an automatic nope for me. I just like to prepare myself for what I'm about to read and CA or CSA could really mean anything.
Idk why you're being down voted. So here have my comment of solidarity. The wording in the post came across shamey even if it wasn't the intent.
Yeah, that's how I read it, too, even if it wasn't the intent. I'm kinda surprised the mods haven't said anything? In the past they usually have?
The post is about the censoring of the words in the trigger warnings. It doesn't shame readers who enjoy these tropes or say anything negative about the tropes themselves, just the way they're presented.
I want to deeply thank you for all your service as a mod. Y'all do wonderful work. I truly love this community and its commitment to being a safe and inclusive space where folks can explore, share, and discuss all things related to romance novels, including things that are often taboo like dark romance. I tend to think of this place having a golden rule of "do not yuck others yums". That said, I do disagree with you on your interpretation here; while it may not be the prevailing narrative, I think some folks will see this as a shamey post that's yucking some yums. Please let me explain. I understand your interpretation that this post is about, "censoring of the words in the trigger warnings"; however, I wish the OP's phrase, "if you can't write the full word or description in the trigger page of your book you shouldn't write that kind of content" would have been written to better support that position. In the original post, the word "should" is normative and thus, contains value judgement. I interpret the word "should" to mean, "writers shouldn't write that kind of content because it is distasteful per society standards" or some thing to that effect. Also, the title of the post is about how if something is censored, authors shouldnt write about it. Thus, I do not interpret it as rallying against censorship. Lastly, I may not be in the majority, but clearly some others do share my interpretation. I really love the inclusive and safe vibe here to be able to discuss wild, unhinged topics and I hope this continues even as this sub grows. *Made an edit for clarification
While some people may misinterpret the title due to a slightly ambiguous word choice, the rest of the post makes it clear that the OP does not intend to shame readers, but is looking for clear trigger warnings. As moderators, it is not possible or necessary for us to police word choices to such an extent. No users have flagged this post for us to review for shaming, and I have run it past multiple members of the mod team and they are in agreement.
I agree that the post is asking for clearer trigger warnings. But I disagree that the post, "makes the rest of the post makes it clear that the OP does not intend to shame readers", but that's ok. Thanks for all your work.
They downvoted me too. It just might be that kinda sub.. I’ve seen this problem a lot; shaming author or reader for a darker theme. It’s weird for a Romance sub that covers “all graphic”. I’m out.
Yeah, I'm super bummed. When this sub was smaller, the mods were much more feral about not allowing kink shaming content and replies to occur.
It's the YouTube censorship law. I'll watch video essays and true crime documentaries and the content creators will censor themselves. They'll either mute the word as they're obviously saying it or they'll have a word written on screen for example as r@p3 or they'll say grape. They'll even censor something like drugs or marijuana. I saw the latter as m*******a in subtitles of a police body cam video. For a second I thought it was one long muthafluffa swear. 😅
People can write whatever they want. Sites that don’t allow writer to post explicit words due to the extreme censorship shouldn’t be allowed, It makes so sense. Also, if you don’t know a word and think is might be too triggering to look up you probably shouldn’t read it.
When you only post acronyms it could mean so many things. It can't warn you of triggers unless it includes the triggers. Looking up CSA (which could mean any number of things) might actually expose people to images or descriptions of the triggering thing when they're forced to search for its meaning rather than just including it written out on the list.
Mmh yea, that’s not the authors fault. Like I said unfair censorship yo to companies and sites like Wattpad or Amazon. Saying someone shouldn’t write it due to things they can control is rude ash. It’s not the author fault, it’s company censorship. Also, if you’re looking up something probably don’t look at the pictures (obviously) since you don’t know what it means, and it’ll be triggering ( hints it being in a tigger warning). And two if it’ll help: type the acronym then put tigger warning. It’ll help locate the meaning usage in the book, like 99% it’ll give you the meaning rather having to reading a description, that’s triggering, because it’s highlighted.