Editing Without Erasure: How to Support Marginalized Authors Without Diluting Their Voice
Editing is an act of care. But when it’s done without cultural awareness or intentional listening, it can easily become an act of erasure.
For editors working with marginalized authors—especially queer, BIPOC, neurodivergent, disabled writers—it’s not enough to “do no harm.” We have to recognize the systems we’re working inside, and how even well-meaning feedback can uphold publishing norms that silence or dilute authentic voices.
This post is a call to edit in a way that makes more space, not less. To become a collaborator who sharpens a writer’s clarity without sanding down their identity. This is a call to edit with awareness, humility, and trust, so that authors can take up their full creative space without apology.
Where Erasure Shows Up in Editing (And Why It’s Not Always Intentional)
Even those committed to amplifying marginalized voices can unconsciously slip into editorial patterns that flatten, sanitize, or reshape those voices to align with dominant cultural norms. Some examples include:
“Toning down” emotion, dialect, or cultural references because they feel “too intense” or “won’t be relatable”
Over-correcting AAVE, multilingual dialogue, or non-standard sentence construction
Questioning content that centers harm, trauma, or rage in ways that feel “unlikeable” or “too dark”
Suggesting “universality” by removing identity markers
Highlighting “confusing” elements that are only unclear to someone outside the writer’s culture or lived experience
These patterns are part of a larger conversation about how publishing upholds white, Western, and masculine norms in storytelling craft.
This industry rewards proximity to whiteness, straightness, neurotypicality, and class privilege. Every editorial choice happens in that context, whether you acknowledge it or not.
Microaggressions in the Margin: When “Helpful” Notes Harm
Editing often happens in the margins. So does harm. Comments that seem small or objective can reinforce bias or erase a writer’s identity.
Common examples:
“This feels too angry — can you soften it?”
“Do you need this detail? It might alienate readers.”
“I don’t think this is believable.”
“This might be confusing for readers unfamiliar with [X].”
These notes signal an imagined “default reader,” often white, straight, cis, able-bodied. Editing without erasure requires interrogating that imagined reader. Who are we assuming needs to feel comfortable?
Ask: Who is this moment written for? Is my note making space? Or shrinking it?
Questions to Ask Before You Suggest a Change
Not every edit is neutral, and not every “clarity” note is helpful. Before suggesting a revision, ask yourself:
Am I trying to make this more accessible, or more comfortable for people like me?
Would I still flag this if the author were part of the dominant group?
Is this line unclear? Or am I unfamiliar with the cultural context?
Am I editing for grammar, or for legibility within a dominant system?
What might this moment mean to a reader who shares the author’s background?
Asking these questions doesn’t require withholding feedback. It calls for offering it with context, care, and the humility to be wrong.
Resources like Writing the Other, The Conscious Style Guide, and Writing an Identity Not Your Own offer essential frameworks for ethical engagement.
How to Support Without Controlling
When you support a marginalized writer, you don’t retreat. You engage in a different way. Try this:
Affirm the writer’s choices, not just their potential. Tell them what’s working because of their voice, not despite it.
Name the industry lens. “A traditional publisher might push back here. Do you want to keep it as-is?”
Offer options, not ultimatums. “Here is a way to keep your voice intact while clarifying this moment.”
Ask what kind of feedback they want. Let them set the terms: trauma? flow? line-level? structure?
Power in the Room: Owning Your Editorial Authority
Editors hold power. When we make a suggestion, writers often feel pressure to comply, especially those from communities who’ve been told to shrink their voice to be “more marketable.”
A few ways to be transparent about power:
“You never have to take a note that erases your intention.”
“This is a suggestion, not a correction.”
“I’ll flag what’s not landing for me and why, but your voice leads.”
Language That Affirms Instead of Undermines
Here’s how to shift tone without softening your feedback:
Instead of “Too emotional,” try “This hits hard. Is that your intention here?”
Instead of “Unrelatable,” try “This may stretch some readers’ understanding. Do you want to add context or keep it?”
Instead of “I don’t get this,” try “I may be outside the experience here. Can you tell me more about your intent?”
Instead of “Too dark/violent,” try “This section carries a lot of weight. How can we protect the reader’s emotional experience without erasing the truth?”
Make Room for Anger, Grief, and Joy
Editors often embrace stories of quiet pain but resist characters who rage, rebel, or revel in joy on their own terms.
Ask yourself:
Am I reacting to this character’s anger because of tone-policing I’ve internalized?
Am I assuming joy must look a certain way?
Am I reinforcing the idea that marginalized characters must be soft, broken, or palatable?
Let the story hold contradiction. Let the characters burn, laugh, numb out, reconnect. That’s voice too.
Keep Learning, Without Putting the Burden on the Writer
Editing without erasure requires you to do the work outside the manuscript. Follow authors and editors of color. Take courses on anti-racism, disability justice, and queer storytelling. Read blogs and books from marginalized writers and editors and pay them for their labor.
Don’t expect your clients to educate you about your blind spots. They’ve trusted you to already be doing the work.
Resources & Recommended Reading (Note: This is Not an Exhaustive List):
Craft in the Real World by Matthew Salesses
Elements of Indigenous Style by Gregory Younging
The Conscious Style Guide by Karen Yin
Writing the Other (website + workshops)
Writing an Identity Not Your Own by Alex Temblador
Editing as Expansion, Not Control
Your job as an editor isn’t to make a manuscript more palatable. It’s to help the writer say what they actually mean—more clearly, more confidently, and with more power. Especially when their story pushes against dominant norms.
When you edit without erasure, you’re not just preserving a voice. You’re protecting the story that voice belongs to. And that’s the kind of editing that changes everything.
Tiffany Grimes (she/they) is the founder of Burgeon Design and Editorial, a queer-founded editing and design studio that supports editors and authors working at the intersections of craft, care, and creative disruption. With a background in book editing, coaching, and brand strategy, Tiffany helps editors carve out values-driven businesses that reflect who they are and who they serve.
