Help me out here guys. I know things get people upset, including politics... but at what point do I need to put anything that can get anyone upset behind a content warning? NSFW stuff, things that can cause epilepsy, sure... but conversation about politics? Feels extreme to me. Let's talk about this. Why should people use a CW for it? Why shouldn't they?
@shivian I really enjoy the no-assholes-policies, and I would enjoy it further if toots about e.g. the minority president would be CWed, because it's an asshole, and I don't want to see its face or read its name.
@lieselotte @mothman but anyone can be upset with anything... am I supposed to CW anything anyone ever asks me to, or I know *might* offend someone, otherwise I'm being a jerk? At what point is it the reader's responsibility to move past upsetting - but generally discussed - content that they don't like (be it politics, climate change, forest fires, or other upsetting topics)?
@shivian @mothman It's a hard question that I think cannot be answered in generalized way. It also depends if you want people to read your posts or mute you.
From what I read from you so far I would say that you will set CWs responsible, and that the rest is up to taste.
Right now I find it a little bit unsettling tbqf that people use "war" as a CW...
@lieselotte @mothman :heart: thank you - and yeah, it's a touchy subject for sure (including the new "war" CW flag) but I also don't want to be a part of an experience where I have to walk on eggshells the whole time, worrying about whether something should be tagged or not - and potentially being seen as a total jerk if I don't tag something that someone feels I should have. Seems extreme to ask for anything offensive ever to always be tagged.
@shivian I mean, you use a flashy gif as an avatar, what is as far as I can take from multiple posts regarded as very impolite if not even unacceptable around here. So we are way past egg shells.
Idk, if you want to let it rip, go to unsafe.space or maly.io?
Nach bestem Wissen und Gewissen, nech?
@shivian There is a lot of pressure already on the person to 'move past' it. I'll cw anything anyone who follows me asks me to, I have that policy on all my social media. But not everyone is going to do that, and I've had conflicts before, even recently, where friends haven't wanted to cw things. Some people even cw harmless stuff that happens to be long. It's just personal preference I suppose.
@mothman it's not personal preference if a lot of SJWs on Mastodon instances are telling everyone else that they HAVE to tag stuff with the CW flag if it's "political" :disappointed_relieved:
@shivian I dont know, I agree with the other person saying it's a complicated issue. It's really easy to get caught up in tagging everything, I have ocd and the thought of hurting someone unintentionally is really upsetting to me! It's difficult because on masto it's a public timeline, instead of a personally curated one like on most sites. I find that most people with very severe 'oddball' triggers (I use that word gently, you know what I mean) use blacklist widgets already.
@shivian @mothman @lieselotte I think you're mixing up content warnings (which is like saying 'hey, you might not feel like reading this') with the idea of being offended. Sometimes I'm not in the mood to watch a comedy show so I watch a drama instead. Sometimes I don't want to read depressing political toots so I skim them and look at dog pics and shitposting.
@shivian @mothman @lieselotte It's not about censoring yourself, just about being mindful that people don't have to be always-on about depressing political stuff on a website that's supposed to be a fun place to hang out and chill, you know?
@shivian I'm inclined to tell someone to go fuck themselves on that one, no? I mean, you see it's /pol/ then move the fuck on. Or engage, as you see fit. Urging use of CW based on just a topic is pretty lame.
@shivian I put my politic rant behind CW just because I was sharing fully public. In the stream of Local/Federated I figured it would be considerate.
@themizarkshow why is that rant considered considerate / necessary and other content that might upset someone treated differently? or do you treat all content that might upset someone with the same CW tag?
@shivian I would use the CW if I thought what I was saying could offend someone. Perhaps more importantly, it keeps any direct responses as CW too, which is where the hope of being considerate mostly stems from. If someone wants to argue or be inflammatory, then it's at least behind the blur.
@shivian I just checked again and although it defaults to CW when responding to that content you can turn it off (which kinda sucks maybe?) ...but that was my thought at the time.
@shivian Some people simply wish to be mentally prepared for news. As well, some people may wish to go to Mastodon so they can escape from the news.
@shivian putting anything political behind a content warning sounds ridiculous. thats as bad as that pomegranate gore meme
@shivian I think a lot of people are just enjoying a reprieve from 'too much' political talk cf. twitter. IMO political talk on social media is natural and valid and in the long run shouldn't need to be hidden behind CW; perhaps it's good to keep things light and friendly on here initially though.
@shivian Why not just join an instance with a different CW policy/culture?
@shivian sounds completely asinine.
@shivian Honestly, hell if I know. I just watched a whoooole thing go down on Tumblr about how people were posting stuff with content warnings, apparently even posting them with warning is bad, so no one should post anything problematic. I'm at a loss, and I'm an advocate for safe spaces at work..
@shivian I look at it the same way that I look at all PC culture. Sure, you have the right to say anything that you want, but if you say something shitty, people have the right to decide they don't like you. You can certainly post whatever you want, for the most part, without a CW. Just know that more people will probably block or mute you. If you don't want more people to block/mute, use CWs for the things people are requesting stay hidden.
@shivian Also, I try to take note when I think the words "At what point does this end?" When I start making slippery slope arguments in reaction to someone's request, that's usually my clue that my privilege is showing, and I'm being resistant to someone asking me to give way when I'm not used to being asked that. I'm not saying that's what's happening w/ you, but since you pretty much said my exact mental cue, I thought I'd share it. Big love, and thanks for asking a tough question
@shivian it depends on community norms. A lot of people on some instances want a space to get away from politics. There is no universal answer.
@shivian it's not something that gets me personally, but I have a kid struggling with pretty severe PTSD that certain info about queer bashing I'm politics, graphic war stuff, etc is triggering in a non satirical way.
We seem to be in an odd place where daily routine politics of managing budgets and various management bills can have a sense of dire life or death consequence because of extremist in the government.
@shivian granted I also think you have the right to say no, and it's up to them to decide if interacting with content you post (or is boosted) is worth it from the risk/benefit analysis.
@shivian Weird!! I just got into a conversation about this because someone got uptight because i said the word "weed" with no content warning!
@dragonluvr89 every word CAN be triggering and / or make someone demand a content warning. Don't let it phase you, if you can help it. Some things deserve a CW, sure... but we also need to be intelligent about this stuff too.
@shivian THANK YOU!! It had ruined my day but now I feel so much better.
@dragonluvr89 I mean, we have (via mastodon) a site where it's now SUPER EASY to create CWs. As a result, people who are personally triggered by whatever triggers them will place the responsibility on other users to protect them from those triggers. Some, like "rape" or "current events" I can mildly understand. But I am not going to put all of my content behind warnings, since any part of any post COULD be offensive? No.
@shivian Oh Yeah I totally agree. I get wanting to create a positive community but that shouldn't mean we can never say anything negative or offensive to people.
@shivian cyberescapism
.@shivian The key for me is a sense of empathy. Before posting, consider if there exists a person this could hurt.
Somebody putting up screen caps from Call of Duty may think they're just games, unless they consider how a PTSDed veteran would react to that kind of imagery. The same is true for example for thinking about the feelings of vegans before posting that steak you had for lunch.
(To be continued)
.@shivian If you can imagine someone who may be hurt by it, put a CW on it. Someone may be happy you did.
About politics, remember how many people there are, who's lives are hanging on the word of some callous politician. We appreciate being distanced from the casual and cavalier way in which our families' futures are being discussed.
CWs give us the power over our inputs. We have so little control over what comes into our eyes to torment us in our heads. Be generous with them.
@shivian I think the CWs for politics are less trigger-warnings (though it's perfectly possible for that to be a trigger) and more just courtesy that some people are looking for more of an escape from such things than to see it here too