Sensitivity readers are a topic I have somewhat mixed feelings about. I found the title of the article, below, by Kate Clanchy, to be over the top and meant to attract clicks. I think the article, as a whole, is well-written, however.
I don’t mind the use of sensitivity readers to draw an author’s attention to issues they may not have thought about whole writing. I disagree with the idea that once such issues are illuminated, the author has any moral obligation to adopt the recommendations of such sensitivity readers, however. I don’t agree with establishing a homogeneity of expression around certain topics simply because sensitivity readers may, on the whole, recommendation doing so. I think this is particularly true when it comes to writing for adults, which is one of the points Clanchy makes.
Use sensitivity readers as you might any other readers—as a source of feedback on your work. Feedback that you can and should feel free, in your own absolute discretion, to adopt or ignore.
How sensitivity readers corrupt literature
I don’t mind the use of sensitivity readers to draw an author’s attention to issues they may not have thought about whole writing. I disagree with the idea that once such issues are illuminated, the author has any moral obligation to adopt the recommendations of such sensitivity readers, however. I don’t agree with establishing a homogeneity of expression around certain topics simply because sensitivity readers may, on the whole, recommendation doing so. I think this is particularly true when it comes to writing for adults, which is one of the points Clanchy makes.
Use sensitivity readers as you might any other readers—as a source of feedback on your work. Feedback that you can and should feel free, in your own absolute discretion, to adopt or ignore.
How sensitivity readers corrupt literature