Trigger warnings

[sterven]

Oh this thread is getting better and better

 

[Teasday]

Best to say this while we're still (mostly) in the clear:

Reminder that the suggestions forum has a strict rule about staying on topic and not dogpiling.

 

[Zephyrus]

Looks like @Teasday already beat me to it.

We're not opposed to considering new broad genre tags but we will not be implementing warnings or tags for individual chapters anytime soon.

 

[Teasday]

_{@AbyssalMonkey posted:}

If people want me to take their triggeredness seriously,

Just to be clear, this thread isn't about an argument for you or anyone else to take anyone's triggeredness seriously, so don't turn it into that. Even if you could give me solid evidence there's no such thing as being triggered, the fact remains that there is still content people would prefer to avoid seeing and our tag exclusion feature is made to serve exactly that purpose. As far as I'm concerned, this thread is about what new tags should be considered for the Content category.

 

[MadeOfMagicAndWires]

@Teasday

In regards to new tags I do think there is room for a tag concerning excessive abuse/violence that would not necessarily fall under gore. Themes like domestic abuse and violent bullying are fairly prominent within Japanese media without them being shown very graphically as, in my understanding, the definition of gore requires.
Considering we also have a differentiation between "ecchi" and "smut" being able to tag this sort of content without having to immediately rely on "gore" would be useful.

 

[MadeOfMagicAndWires]

@AbyssalMonkey

Conventions on when and how to use tags has yet to be an issue and is not really related to this suggestion. OP is merely asking about implementing more means to avoid certain content and is not talking about how that should be implemented or what standards to uphold. God knows half of us have isekai blacklisted.

These sort of things have been handled by community consensus just fine up until now and if anything the community is fairly conservative in its tagging, especially because not everyone can edit entries.

edit: additionally, it's not like any one tag will

 

[DANDAN_THE_DANDAN]

Yeah I can agree on two things:

-"Triggers warning" should only be implemented if it's the theme and not the plot point;
-Physical abuse needs some sort of tag

Where I personally draw the line is... Well let's just go with extremes for a clear example.

[Extreme yes] "Physical abuse" (placeholder name) should be tagged in a guro hentai where the protagonist goes around beating up innocent grandmas for sexual pleasure.

[Yes] A documentary manga surrounding victims of household violence and domestic abuse

[No] A shounen manga where the MC gotta beat up the villian

[Extreme no] A single panel about the backstory of a mob character - who will be forgotten about in the next chapter - only implying domestic abuse.

Personally why I think "physical violence" needs a tag is because it's not the same as gore. Gore is, most of the time, just edgy bloodfest that usually holds no prevalence in the story; just to either make a point that a character have no empathy or uselessly there for shock factor. Physical violence and gore need separate tags. There's also an obvious point where if gore appears anywhere then it's immadietely tagged meanwhile physical violence needs a line to be drawn thus the two have different rules.

 

[MadeOfMagicAndWires]

@DANDAN_THE_DANDAN

[No] A shounen manga where the MC gotta beat up the villian

This scenario did pass my mind when writing my post, but I don't think anyone here is seriously arguing we should be doing that. Obviously one should use some common sense in editing any entry, but this community has been very good in developing its tagging conventions without much of any coordination. I don't think that will suddenly change and I think any discussion about such conventions for future tags is a separate one from whether to facilitate more tags where they are needed.

 

[Teasday]

_{@MadeOfMagicAndWires posted:}

In regards to new tags I do think there is room for a tag concerning excessive abuse/violence that would not necessarily fall under gore. Themes like domestic abuse and violent bullying are fairly prominent within Japanese media without them being shown very graphically as, in my understanding, the definition of gore requires.

Yeah, it crossed my mind too but I couldn't think of a good fitting term for it. I could see something like this being useful and the suggestions @DANDAN_THE_DANDAN gave make sense to me.

_{@AbyssalMonkey posted:}

I am simply stating that I give no care or sympathy for anyone who can't definitively prove they actually have it. To that end, I am arguing against random tags that are one-offs that hold no bearing towards stories, which he seems to want. He is trying to gather sympathy points and I'm calling out the bullshit.

While I can kind of understand the point with not believing it without evidence (insofar as I'm a skeptic in general and prefer to avoid taking positions just on people's say-so), neither care, sympathy nor proof for their position is really required here as the content tags are useful regardless. Call out their bullshit in some other thread, please, it's not helpful in the suggestions forum.

I tend to agree about the one-offs thing though, but I find it hard to believe that a manga would just randomly have one or two chapters out of dozens that would warrant some kind of serious warnings when the series is otherwise completely mundane, so it doesn't seem like a serious point to worry about. Let me know if I'm wrong, I wouldn't be too surprised if there's a few manga like that out there.

 

[theilikepie]

@AbyssalMonkey
did a person who had ptsd kill your parents? If you don't like them then ignore them, and stop whining

 

[MadeOfMagicAndWires]

@theilikepie

You're helping exactly no-one with those comments and only derailing the discussion even further. If this is all you have to add to this thread you might consider taking your own advice.

 

[theilikepie]

@MadeOfMagicAndWires my comments were on topic. You're the one deraling by offering nothing important to the topic and just telling me to shut up. Real important. And now the thread is really getting derailed

Fine you want me to really to contribute. Trigger warning harm no one. And people who don't want them cause "hurrr damn safe space"are the ones who want the real safe space

 

[sterven]

@theilikepie
LMAO please read both of your comments real carefully and explain to me how you're not being a hypocrite.

 

[theilikepie]

@sterven my comments were about the discussion of trigger warning. And I said if you don't like them ignore them. Which relates to the topic at hand which is "Trigger warning". The comment that replied to me only commented to tell me my comments were off topic when they are nearly not

 

[sterven]

@theilikepie

did a person who had ptsd kill your parents? If you don't like them then ignore them, and stop whining

This in no way adds towards the discussion. If you were on topic you would a) be agreeing or disagreeing with the OP b) responding to someones stance on the topic. Your reply was simply telling the other person to cease his whining in essence telling them to shut up.

While I could ignore your comments I tend to be very outspoken so yeah I don't see that happening anytime soon, in turn let me ask you a question why didn't you take your own advice and ignore the other party if it was bothering you?

 

[theilikepie]

@stevren well obviously you can tell that I'm agreeing with the op, I also resounded to some else stance if thats what you wanted. Just because I told them to stop whining doesn't make it off topic. Dont know why the dude targeted me when there was literally someone who responded with "lol" in this thread.

I don't know what subjective criteria your using for deciding what's on topic or not btw

 

[sterven]

@theilikepie

did a person who had ptsd kill your parents?

You mean this? How on gods green earth is this supposed to be in agreement with the OP? Am I supposed to assume that by asking someone if their parents have been murdered
by someone with ptsd it constitutes as agreement with the implementation of trigger warnings/extra tags?

If you don't like them then ignore them, and stop whining

How about this one? You simply convey to the other party to ignore something if they disagree and to shut up about it.

Fine you want me to really to contribute. Trigger warning harm no one. And people who don't want them cause "hurrr damn safe space"are the ones who want the real safe space

This is considered on topic as you clearly state "Trigger warning harm no one" meaning you see no harm in implementing such a feature in essence giving your consent. Take in mind that you only
edited this into your post after you were called out by two people.

Lastly for the person who simply responded with an "lol" he in no shape or form engaged in a conversation with anyone on this thread he simply stated his feelings on the matter and left as such
it does not warrant a response.

 

[theilikepie]

@sterven again I don't not understand why you are the expert on what's on topic or not. If a mod told me I was derailing I would have deleted my comment if they asked. Yet a random person called me out because they disagree with what I wrote stating that I'm off topic when in no from or shape I was. Anyone can see in my original post that I agree with the op because I'm telling them to ignore them meaning I approve of the tags, And I only edited "trigger warming harms no one" on my second post. Not the original post. Since I had to have a thesis stating my opinion according to you

And" lol". In your won words that adds nothing to the conversation.

 

[sterven]

@theilikepie
I am far from an expert in any subject, but it does not take one to notice the fact that your original post was not on topic. Also I am not telling you to not present your opinion on this thread
simply that your original post was only an attack on an individual and that it did contribute to the thread. If you believe that your post did contribute hey that's your opinion but anyone with
some sense can tell you it didn't. I did not state when you edited your post only simply that you did after someone called you on it. As for the "lol" part i'll quote myself so you can read it again.

Lastly for the person who simply responded with an "lol" he in no shape or form engaged in a conversation with anyone on this thread he simply stated his feelings on the matter and left as such
it does not warrant a response.

Make sure you read the last six words.

Edit: Also if you think one sentence counts as a thesis then boy do we differ on that.

 

[theilikepie]

@sterven there was no attack on anyone. If a sarcastic question counts as a personal attack to you then I don't know why to tell you. And the original person who replied to me wasn't accusing me of personally attacking anyone They were accusing me of not being on topic. Which you backed up on. You too didn't mention anything about personal attacks and called me a hypocrite for not being on topic. The thing wasn't even about pobersal attacks on not. It was about being off topic. I don't know why you keep adding things on to tell me I was breaking fourm rules. Well sorry for hurting there feelings if thats what you want me to say. Bu the person I replied to was being rude to people in general and those who might have ptsd. So why didnt you call them out? IM not sure, you really seem to be pick and choosing the half of this thread is attack on other people

And how tf is "lol" more on topic then what I wrote. we don't even know what the person was saying lol at. They could have thought of something and just posted it. No context and no relation to the topic. Lol isn't a feeling.