Exactly. I see absolutely zero reasons why should I censor myself EXCEPT when it comes to following the rules of specific platform. If you don't want to see something uncomfortable, then just don't read/watch it.
I think the core of the issue is that the conversation is dealing with enormously different types of self-censorship. Don't get me wrong, I'm in the side of darthmongoose and everyone else in that media can affect beliefs etc., but it was dealing with something a lot bigger than what you were looking for : p
Bringing the question back to on topic??? maybe it was still on topic?? But reducing the scale - the best way to self-censor in practice is to research. Do you have enough confidence in writing about this minority, this disability, this IRL heated subject? If not and you're short on time, it's best to enact that self-censorship and deal with it elsewhere.
But, that's no excuse to not try research anyway! Some people will put indie works on a pedestal, for example, and expect primo perfect writing or they get even more scrutinized than the cis white guy writing popular show #13021. However, that is on them - if you know you're not overstepping, if you did your research, if you're sure that you can have a bit of a say in the matter even if to make more readers aware of a subject to begin with, don't let those people stop you then.
(JK Rowling is a TERF and we should move past her works though)
I don't censor anything I do because it's just frustrating keeping track of things you can and can't do.
Of course, if it is a topic that can be controversial, I still have the option not to talk about it. Avoiding certain things can save so much brain cells.
About censorship itself, that's how I interpret it:
Censorship is when someone slams a big heavy bag of coins into your nutsack.
Now, self-censorship would be if you slammed a big heavy bag of coins into your nutsack.
You wouldn't want to do that. Right?
(If you still say yes: Aren't you a little kinky fellow.)
I am very anti-censorship, but I have done some self-censorship within certain parameters. The parameter being that it must be available uncensored somewhere. So for my comic if a character is nude for example, on sites where it's free-to-read, I will censor it and then make the uncensored version available on Patreon. So this helps keep inline with the host platform's rules and allows the uncensored version to be rewards for my patrons.
I have also done a very little of toning things down a bit in my comic. But I consider it very minor stuff.
Was this really needed? You could have said "the new popular series on tv." Instead you come off as very bias. Everyone gets scrutinized in movies/TV. It's not a identity thing so don't make it one.
But see, how much research is enough? How do you know you're not overstepping until you've already posted the work and someone tells you that you were? What qualifies as 'having a bit of a say in the matter'? Is an agender person more qualified to write in-depth trans representation than cis people? (As an agender person, I feel like I understand trans people even less than your average cis person, because cis people at least have a gender identity and know what it's like to be misgendered, for example.)
Some people are always going to be paranoid about whether its 'enough', and saying "oh don't worry, you're doing better than 'cis white guy writing popular show #13021'" doesn't help. That's why I'm so keen on proposing we don't draw a line at all between what should be said and what should not. People like me are always going to worry if we're on the wrong side of that line.
And I just don't think it's necessary, when the harms of saying something bad can be mitigated by a simple content warning (e.g. 'this work may contain misinformation on [this minority/this disability/this IRL heated subject]. Read it with a grain of salt).
Imagine if works of propaganda have to be prefaced with (warning: this is a propaganda piece). I can't imagine it would make for very effective propaganda after that.
I wouldn't call choosing not to write something you don't know enough about censorship. I'd call that being self aware.
I think censorship is saying you can't, or you aren't allowed to write something because you think other people don't want you to.
I think choosing not to write something when you could (not because someone or something says you shouldn't or cant but because you yourself are simply deciding you feel its best not to ) is just thoughtful conscious tactful writing.
Every instance in which a person chooses not to write something isn't censorship.
Well or you can just ask other people for help. If you don't know if something is appropriate or not, then take the effort to reach out to other people. You don't really want to end up like Disney's Song of the South where Walt Disney thought he was making a positive film for black people. Or Music who didn't even take the effort to talk to autistic people for their film about autism. Part of it is ego and willing to get off the high horse and listen to other people.
Another famous example is the Simpsons was almost going to have Homer call a gay man the f-slur but removed it after a gay man read over their script. The writers didn't know that word was seen as being really offensive and honestly I think removing it was a good choice.
I don´t agree on that the best way to self-censor is to research but that depends on what kind of story you
are writing. When you write about science you have to do research.
For all other stories I want to hear the creators point of view without the creator doing research before
he writes it to find out if he they have to self censor what they wrote.
I don´t know what the cis-white guy thing has to do in this topic
I've been watching this thread from afar just but with regards to this point specifically i think it can tie in when you take into account the amount of self censorship an individual puts into a work especially with regards to representations or inclusion of certain things
people from marginalized backgrounds and especially those with intesectional identities i think tend to be more inclined towards self censorship given the way they're likely used to seeing themselves negatively represented in a body of work in one form or another whether it's blatant misinformation, negative stereotyping, harmful bigoted opinions and so on. So in that regard theirs much more inclination to take care in what's put out and how things are phrased, formatted, etc
meanwhile there are those outside those labels (cishet white men as was mentioned) who at least from an outsider point of view but still through observation of the way things are handled in the things they produce tend to reflect a lot less of this kind of care. I WANT TO POINT OUT THIS DOESN'T MEAN EVERY CISHET WHITE MALE DOES THIS or that such generalization is fair but you can absolutely spot those who didn't bother to do their research or simply didn't care to and interviews sometimes are really good for exposing these mindsets; hence i imagine the mention of ego as those kinds of folks may see themselves as being above a need to do any kind of research because it's their "grand creative imagination" and doing so would "hinder them" or something of the like
also going back there's a different kind of standards that marginalized folks are held to as opposed to non marginalized folks where there's an expectation (or it's unsurprising) for cis white dudes to bastardize cultures or misrepresent identities and so on but there's a much higher expectation and trust for the rest because obviously they should care being one who falls within xyz demographic. which isn't to say folks from marginalized identities don't make fuck ups of their own but the bar is set much higher i think hence why there's a stronger sense of this self imposed need for self censorship otherwise you're "failing" these people
personally i think everyone should be held to a certain standard when it comes to what they put in their work and if they insist on a certain thing then warn folks ahead of time so they can avoid whatever material or content that they would find distasteful. like on the barest most basic level it's common decency to not be a piece of shit but that doesn't mean people wont go out and be one anyways. so when you're someone looking to have a large platform (or if you have one already) there's also a level of responsibility there when it comes to what you put out because you've got a reputation and you have influence so dragging back the trans topic one more time when jkr says things that can get trans people killed it's a problem hence the backlash and a need for self censorship. (is she gonna do it probably not but the point still stands per that example)
i think what someone else said about things like self awareness and self censorship being a layered issue is why there's this VAST array of replies covering a broad range of topics because there's the very bare minimum of choosing whether or not to say something versus a more long term of putting something in a piece of media that will continue to live on in whatever place, be consumed by others and have some form of impact based on the content and what decisions the creator behind it made
like even the mention of propaganda technically applies because yeah it had/has intents but that's the thing. self censorship is also tied to intent "what do you intend to say, whats your point, what do you mean by xyz" because intent, research and internal though is what drives decision making alongside like 50billion other things but you get my point)
[this also dragged on way longer than i intended and i only care so much for discussion on this platform because the way some folks here react or respond to things but that's as best as i can phrase my thoughts for right now :/]
[[also this is in no way some targeted response but just addressing points i feel are relevant to the topic and the whole "what do cis white dudes or race/sexuality/gender have to do with anything" replies because imo it does tie in it's just one of those fuzzy points in the broader topic that this happens to be]]
"personally i think everyone should be held to a certain standard when it comes to what they put in their work and if they insist on a certain thing then warn folks ahead of time so they can avoid whatever material or content that they would find distasteful"
can you please give an example (beside the obvious ones which are "may contain violence, swear words, erotic content) so I can understand?
Just a reminder, this is the topic´s question:
"do YOU self censor your own work and then not write it even if you would want to?"
for this i'd say maybe certain more polarized views/opinions/beliefs and the like so if someone with more right extremist opinions happened to have a body of work that either directly included those things or even vaguely alluded to them i'd prefer if there were forwewarning to them being in there
if we're to tie it to the original topic of "do you self censor" my example would be how i'd wanted to work on a story with a more modern/urban setting which would include folks from a variety of cultural/racial backgrounds and gender identities/sexualities (living in a US like setting) but i'd put the project aside [which i guess in a way counts as self censoring] as i didn't feel i'd had enough information or insight into how to go about properly portraying these characters. sure i've got the context of my own identity and i live in a very big city so i'm exposed to a lot of diversity both in a racial context as well as in terms of gender identity or sexuality as well as having net access but because at that time i didn't know what felt like the best starting point for research for that project and how to approach it i shelved it for when i'm more confident in my ability to do these characters and their story justice rather than just relying on known stereotypes that could lead to bad rep not based on other standards or potential response but as a self conscious decision to idk...do the right thing?
that's like even with projects i'm working on now: i have plus sized characters i wish to include but intend to do as much work as possible to make sure that i'm not falling on any of the overly regurgitated fatphobic stereotypes or redundant cliches often seen in different bodies of work, I'm creating fictional cultures which may take some inspiration from existing cultures but i want to ensure that i do so in a way that doesn't use harmful rhetoric or misinformation that's spread about them.
that's like i'm aware that there's no such thing as a perfect body of work there's no guarantee that i wont screw something up but if i can acknowledge my intent (which is proper rep in stories i'm creating so that it's not only genuine for my story but doesn't disrespect or misrepresent folks who very well could end up in my pool of readers) then i can make progress in doing that research that everyone seems so intimidated or offended by because no you'll never really know how much is enough but that's the point of doing as much as you can and getting feedback from relevant parties and not just your fellow writing buddies who're more likely to tell you to "write whatever you want" instead of practicing a bit of mindful self education
that and like in a general i don't think anyone is necessarily obligated to self-censor but i think depending on specific context it may be the better thing to do (because sure for years we heard about sticks and stones but words do hurt and have impact regardless of how little they might seem in a given moment)
Sure, but people aren't obligated to help you, especially if you're not paying them. I do think that in an ideal world, just asking should never be a problem as long as you're not pushy or entitled. But a lot of people are tired of constantly educating others about their identity, so it could be easily seen as 'expecting marginalized people to educate you' or 'being entitled to a marginalized person's labour'.
If you happen to get the all clear from one person, that doesn't necessarily mean you're completely off the hook either. No group is a monolith, and just because one person doesn't see anything problematic, doesn't mean others won't. And asking a second person to check over your work can honestly feel like asking too much.
Sometimes it's not about ego; it's about being afraid to burden others (and not have the money to pay so that it's not a burden).
I do feel like sometimes if your from Marginalized Group A, you're expected to accurately represent the completely unrelated Marginalized Group B even though there's no reason you'd be any more informed about them than the white cis guy. Maybe it's a 'do unto others' kind of thing? As in, 'if you don't represent our group well, don't complain if someone don't represent your group well'?
Basically, I think this is all we need. People should be allowed to insist. But they should also warn folks ahead of time if they do.
(Just for the record, I'm not intimidated or offended by research; I do in fact try to do it myself. But the only reason why I can put aside my fears of 'is it enough' and just publish the darn thing is because I believe it's okay to put out work that may hurt others, as long as you put out a warning so people can avoid it. I can never confirm for certain that it's 'enough'; I have to just be okay with it not being 'enough'.)
Thanks for sharing how you do it with your work, this is information I´m interested in.
I would like it when people just leave the part out of the discussion what other creators should or shouldn´t do
or if they should censor their work and discussions about other creators
Yes, it is 
Anything tumblr and twitter currently has their fangs on that's not triple A production might still be deserving of some criticism, but the amount of vitriol when they realize they can @ the creator to throw all their frustrations that it's not made for them, directly at said user, is absolutely a phenomenon.
That's usually where I'd recommend bringing a sensitivity reader in;; the truth is, you really can't draw a line like you mentioned, and a CW is always better to cover your bases. But you've gotta try, it's what I wanted to emphasize the most. You gotta make some mistakes to become a better writer, so it's better to trip on small pitfalls that come from doing research but naturally get missed, than write something that causes actual harm because no attempt was made.
On bringing up the cis white guy thing, yeah, it's what @VibrantFox said. A rich straight dude with friends in the industry can say "yeah I wanna make a story where a gay guy suffers then dies" can get paid and compliments for it(and get a couple posts criticizing the decision that never reach them), while a minority creator can do tons of research and do something really thoughtful, but use "queer" in an audience that would rather adopt another general term, and get grilled and harassed off of social media for it. One actually did something really boneheaded and probably had tons of other problems in the work, the other did a genuine misread and mistake, but the latter catches far more flak for it because they're acessible.
I guess I don't have any personal examples other than, "oh I switched out species because this fantastical creature comes from a marginalized group and they're frequently misrepresented" because they get left at the cutting room floor wayyyy early and I move on to other stories.
Basically this scene but it all happens in my mind and I've forgotten the concept by next week
13
If you don't thing a "rich straight dude" can't be cancelled for writing the wrong story or saying the wrong thing from the outrage group on twitter and social media, you live in a fantasy world.
it's far less to do with being socially ostracized and far more that the level of consequence or impact it has on the respective individual.
the accessible marginalized individual in most cases gets pushed off a platform (i've watched this happen via mass false reports getting accounts deleted or permanently banned) or put into physical danger (i.e. doxxing which a very large number of marginalized folks can vouch for and enough research thru reputable sources can show these statistics) meanwhile the "rich white guy" can easily shut things down or is for the most part untouchable coz negative critique (or "cancellation") doesn't really extend past social media platforms. Those guys aren't losing their jobs or having their well-being compromised and very rarely do those guys show remorse and if anything tend to double down on their stances
i get you've got an angle but facts show otherwise, so the "fantasy world" seems to be one of your own making
also since i imagine you're the kind of person who wants proof:
- the validate visual novel game
- (pretty easy to google but check your sources) stats on twitch streamers and what parties are getting doxxed and swatted
- there was an instance where someone who worked on infinity train happened to draw a poc character from the show much lighter than they do in any other official art and it was to be featured at gallery nucleus. fans of the show and character point this out and no one really did much of anything save for giving out half-assed apologies and the creator of the show blocked black creators specifically in regards to the criticism given he defended the artist (it's possible these folks were listed in a block chain but the point stands that folks were barred from debating)
- nessa pokemon fanart and skintone debates
- cookie run fanart and skintone/"dough color" debates
i can probably add more but that's the most that come to mind
specifically with regards to minorities and marginalized folks taking more flack than their white counterparts you can even look into the youtube debate that rose up after cory, markiplier and jack (as well as a number of other youtube creators) talked about some things they observed with regards to visibility of their videos and channel overall versus how the youtube staff responded
and i wanna be clear this isn't me attempting to make some kind of targeted attack but when voices of people are shut out or silenced it becomes incredibly painful when people deny that it's happened or is happening but please tell us that we're making up false realities
[also i'm very sorry to op in the way this is likely derailing but i just wanted to quickly give a rebuttal and if requested will quickly move to delete this]
Just stop. I don't deny it's happening. I deny its a marginalized person problem. If a rich white person makes the "wrong" opinion, they can lose their career just as easy as a non-white person. You tube is known for banning people for their opinion and that is their livelihood. The outrage crowd knows no skin color. They destroy anyone they don't like. And by saying people should use sensitivity readers and do research on stuff to keep them from being attacked makes you fall right into their hands. That is censorship. It's a threat to say "speak right or we will destroy you." Everyone needs to tell people that get outraged at stories to go fuck themselves and not read it. If you have a story to tell, write it. Those that say it's problematic, ignore them. If you really are writing a bad story, the audience won't be there, that will be your proof. We need to start acting like adults and not taking everything as an attack.
Finally people like you need to understand the "rich white guy" doesn't get away with as much as you think. But it's very easy to demonize them as the "other" to blame problems on. And very few writers are rich anyway, and almost no comic artists are. The outrage to skin color of a fan artwork isn't coming from "white" people, 99% of the time it's from minorities. The asian writer that wrote a story about slavery in a fantasy world was drive to cancel her book by non-whites complaining she couldn't write about it because its a black issue. This is just making everyone miserable. No good is coming from this but censorship.
