(Thread IKs:
OwlFancier)
|
As an example, what benefit would there be by not warning a rape survivor in advance that there will be graphic scenes of rape? I'm struggling to see why anyone wouldn't want to warn them. Of course we didn't have trigger warnings when Fiennes was young, but we also called gay people the F word and black people the N word. I like to think we've progressed just a little bit as a society over the past few decades. e: 233, the number of page snipes I've had in this thread over the past week fuctifino fucked around with this message at 23:57 on Feb 11, 2024 |
#
?
Feb 11, 2024 23:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 19:33 |
|
|
NotJustANumber99 posted:Art isn't food you plank. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_art .
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2024 23:56
|
|
|
Mega Comrade posted:I think some content warnings are a little eye rolling. Ian Mckellin was moaning about some for his new play "there is reference to smoking’, ‘there is reference to bereavement’ People who might not want to be ambushed by their own grief erupting in the middle of a show?
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 00:07
|
|
|
Michael Caine seems to be enjoying himself 
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 00:16
|
|
|
Mebh, for what little it's worth, I'm sorry about your mum. And TQIRL, condolences on the death of your daughter. Trigger warnings world arouse less ire if they were called something different. Thematic tags? Content classification?
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 00:17
|
|
|
I'm not sure they would given that the fundamental complaint is people being pathologically averse to even trying to consider the needs of others.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 00:22
|
|
|
Who gives a poo poo about trigger warnings? I mean really. Have I rolled my eyes at some that seemed silly to me? Yeah, for sure. But they aren't for me, it's fine. Also not listening to some oval office called Ralph who insists it's pronounced his own special snowflake way. gently caress off
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 00:34
|
|
|
As someone with a dietary condition I can appreciate good labeling on any product intended for human consumption. Why not media?
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 00:44
|
|
|
Jakabite posted:I couldn’t disagree more. No other animal that’s ever existed has had the capacity for kindness, selflessness and community that humans do. Some of us are bad and all of us do bad things sometimes but I can’t imagine going through life believing myself and everyone around me to be intrinsically awful. Awful wasn't the best choice of word there on reflection, implying as it does that people are less 'good' than they should be. They evolutionary process that got us here simply didn't equip us to make non-awful choices in the environment we have created for ourselves. Yes, we are capable of kindness and selflessness. But self interest and short term thinking are deeply rooted in our nature, along with a whole host of behaviors that leave us wide open to the manipulative social/economic/religious systems that have resulted in hundreds of millions dead from wars and democide in the last century alone.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 00:45
|
|
|
crispix posted:he's just another silly old out of touch oval office 
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 01:12
|
|
|
Strong "I'd be masturbating right now if I could get away with it" vibes, right there
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 01:31
|
|
|
Good points:
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 03:09
|
|
|
Also when you see a film either at the cinema or on video/DVD in the UK there is actually (or used to be? dunno if there still is?) a BBFC certificate which also contains a warning of the kinds of content in the movie, right? And for as long as I can remember there have been warnings on TV about stuff. I'm talking like 30 years ago. "The following program contains blah blah blah". Not for everything, but that is definitely a kind of message I've seen on stuff going back to when I was a kid.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 07:07
|
|
|
WhatEvil posted:Also when you see a film either at the cinema or on video/DVD in the UK there is actually (or used to be? dunno if there still is?) a BBFC certificate which also contains a warning of the kinds of content in the movie, right? That's relatively recent, it postdates the 1982 rating changes. The AA rating that was in use when Fiennes was young served as a generic warning that you might not want to take your kids to this one, but it didn't get more specific unless the marketing campaign wanted it to. Thing is, though, in those days it didn’t have to. There was much less available content and no instant access, you'd plan a trip to the cinema rather than just go on spec and so you'd learn what you could about a film before putting it on your schedule. Nobody went into Kramer vs Kramer not knowing it was about a messy divorce, nobody needed warning about the suicidal ideation in The Deer Hunter because it was watercooler talk. Nowadays there's just too much media to do that and it's much more readily available, which is why rating boxes have become more specific and theatre productions have had to take on a task that previously would have been done by word of mouth.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 08:01
|
|
|
Darth Walrus posted:I can see the smoking/alcohol trigger warnings being handy for addicts who are trying to quit, at least. As an ex smoker the idea that seeing someone smoking should be considered a trigger warning is kind of insulting. It is not some trauma I'm getting over. What about ones for people dieting? Or ones where animals are eaten for vegans? What about blasphemy? Some people find that upsetting, there are hundreds of examples of these types of things you could put down, doesn't mean you should. I think my point is there seems to be 2 categories of warnings. You have the big ones like domestic/sexual abuse which I do think are needed, actual traumatic events. And then your have all these other minor ones which I think are somewhat defeat the point of content warnings, lessen them and are a bit silly. The Question IRL posted:and you care so much about not being spoiled , you just don't have to read the brief content warning. Apparently some productions read them out to the audience at the start. If it was standardised like film as other people have mentioned the issue would probably become mute. The BBC have cliffnotes on the rating, then have far more details on their website. Mega Comrade fucked around with this message at 08:45 on Feb 12, 2024 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 08:19
|
|
|
The recent phenomenon of people clutching their pearls over spoilers is infinitely more pathetic than people wanting trigger warnings tbh. Oh boo-loving-boo, you saw a trailer that gave away that your favourite Marvel character visits his home planet at some point the movie and now the whole thing is RUINED! Genuine emotional harm has been done! Tbh if the only thing that matters about a piece of media is the plot being a surprise when you go in, it's totally disposable anyway, so who gives a poo poo?
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 08:28
|
|
|
He was a ghost all along
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 08:36
|
|
|
On a more serious note. How many dead bodies are in the Thames if the police just accidentally find 2 after 1 day of looking? Maybe it's something we should be regularly dredging? The Perfect Element posted:The recent phenomenon of people clutching their pearls over spoilers is infinitely more pathetic than people wanting trigger warnings tbh. Oh boo-loving-boo, you saw a trailer that gave away that your favourite Marvel character visits his home planet at some point the movie and now the whole thing is RUINED! Genuine emotional harm has been done! Oh no this hill I will die on. I hate spoilers and do think they lessen a piece of media's impact and wish it was just the comic book films doing it. Gotten to the point that I just don't watch trailers anymore. Mega Comrade fucked around with this message at 08:50 on Feb 12, 2024 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 08:40
|
|
|
Jedit posted:Nobody went into Kramer vs Kramer not knowing it was about a messy divorce I thought it was a Mr and Mrs Smith type of deal
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 09:03
|
|
|
Jedit posted:Nobody went into Kramer vs Kramer not knowing it was about a messy divorce
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 09:07
|
|
|
TACD posted:TIL what Kramer vs. Kramer is about Yeah, but the point is that you didn’t go into it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 09:12
|
|
|
I gave Seinfeld a go, but I never got as far as any spin-offs
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 09:20
|
|
|
Not to needle you on this but I think this post makes some very good points in its own odd wayMega Comrade posted:I think my point is there seems to be 2 categories of warnings. I think a lot of people who take issue with some warnings, but still think there is a use for others, would see things in a similar way. There seems to be some threshold by which things 'matter' or not (as you've put actual traumatic events) and the challenges are 1) identifying where that threshold lies and 2) classifying accordingly so that things aren't hopping back and forth over the threshold. Given there's no standard yet, this is quite subjective bound by context, experience, and empathy. Mega Comrade posted:As an ex smoker the idea that seeing someone smoking should be considered a trigger warning is kind of insulting. It is not some trauma I'm getting over. This is a good indicator of how we use our experience to make a judgement on whether the issue matters or not (to ourselves). In your earlier post, you used bereavement as a parallel example to smoking as a silly content warning but have stopped using it here. It's not a stretch to say that some bereavement can be an actual traumatic event and some example of a trauma that people, including people currently posting in this thread, are getting over. I'm taking a punt here but I'm guessing it's been dropped for either: bereavement now counts as something worth warning about (reflective, empathetic, admirable) or it still doesn't but that requires maintaining that bereavement is a silly thing towards people who are experiencing it (context rendering this obviously a dick move). And that sets out the big issue of challenge 2 above - the 'silly list' contains things evaluated as not being worth a warning (and arguably diminishing the whole value of the system) but also things that haven't been meaningfully evaluated. I would hope that bereavement now counts on the 'reasonable list' for you, having given it some thought. So, do things belong on the silly list or have those things just not been evaluated properly? To use your examples and my judgement: What about ones for people dieting? - given its close relation to eating disorders, which I would say depictions of would definitely be an issue, probably 'yes' based on how intensively the depiction is made. Or ones where animals are eaten for vegans? - no in our current culture, but if we shift to a more vegan society & i can no longer safely ignore my own role as a meat-eater in the industrial slaughter of animals, probably should be. What about blasphemy? - at present no as it's silly, but would make sense to have historically been used (and has been used informally by religious groups in our own time in attempts to ban, rather than inform as a content warning). I'd never thought about these before but taking some time to evaluate them, I see contexts for each of these where there may be a yes for these outside of my own experience and opinions on the topics. Mega Comrade posted:If it was standardised like film as other people have mentioned the issue would probably become mute. The BBC have cliffnotes on the rating, then have far more details on their website. What you are seeing is unfortunately the process preceding standardisation. Standards set out without a backing body of knowledge aren't especially useful. I imagine it will come and it will be embedded in our 'common sense' as much as the age ratings system is.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 09:51
|
|
|
The problem is old fashioned one size fits all media. Its no longer necessary, as we have the technology now to edit and shape every piece of art to the bespoke individual tastes of each viewer. Using a combination of data scraped psychometric profiling of social media, ai audio/video generation and possibly even real time user iris/body language/fitbit monitoring its possible to ensure no one ever experiences anything they needn't have or want to, and not just when they sit down for an hour or two to expressly consume art. I think theres been black mirrors about this.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 10:03
|
|
|
trigger warning
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 10:18
|
|
|
the bar's open, del!
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 10:30
|
|
|
Yes folks! It’s that time again! It’s time for Pisspoor Dogshit Cartoon about Northern Ireland of the week!
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 10:34
|
|
|
We have to cross fingers for Charles because it's clearly something he is unable to do.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 10:44
|
|
|
Is she "miss referendum" to Sunak's ...whatever the hell wearing a union jack kilt is supposed to be? Or is it a beach towel, who the gently caress knows? Also why does he have such a huge nose? If they wanted to take the piss surely it'd be better to just draw him always holding bags of money or some poo poo rather than going after his fairly banal features? God political comics are poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 10:45
|
|
|
smellmycheese posted:Yes folks! It’s that time again! It’s time for Pisspoor Dogshit Cartoon about Northern Ireland of the week! Whats the joke here? Norn Irish FM is a milf baddie, and British PM is small and weak. They'd as well have used a virgin/chad meme.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 10:50
|
|
|
keep punching joe posted:They'd as well have used a virgin/chad meme. Turns out we were the British Virgin Islands all along
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 10:56
|
|
|
Microplastics posted:He was a ghost all along We're talking film, not Starmer here.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 10:57
|
|
|
Microplastics posted:He was a ghost all along I pretty much guessed this immediately in that film. It sucked, film for babies.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 10:58
|
|
|
sebzilla posted:Turns out we were the British Virgin Islands all along Well, we're not Chad.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 11:15
|
|
|
I have not used it myself but seen it recommended elsewhere: https://www.doesthedogdie.com/ Has a list of potential triggers and crowdsourced info of which ones might be in the film you’re about to watch. Probably infinitely more useful than a content warning from a studio!
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 11:15
|
|
|
Nick Thomas-Symonds has been on Radio 4 saying that the party will stand by Azhar Ali and continue to campaign in Rochdale because he's not an antisemite, he just "fell for an online conspiracy theory" but respected colleagues have known him for decades and point to his record of standing against antisemitism. So that's all fine, then.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 11:19
|
|
|
pitch a fitness posted:Not to needle you on this but I think this post makes some very good points in its own odd way I dropped bereavement for 2 reasons 1) because it wasn't my example in the first place but Ian Mckellens and I have less experience to draw from to judge it and 2) it's actually quite a hard thing to pin down, do we have to know the character who has died? Does it have to show the death to count? It has lots of variations I thought would bog down the discussion. Smoking though I think is more clear cut. It's an everyday sight if you walk anywhere and isn't something you can avoid unless you decide to be a shut in for the 6+ months it takes to quite. Its a hard habit to give up but I don't think comes close to other types of warnings. Alcohol is a slightly more interesting one, its also everywhere and impossible to avoid but depictions of alcohol abuse aren't, however I'd think addicts find the former more of an issue than the latter but I don't know any to ask. I think dieting is another interesting example, movies with characters complaining about their weight are everywhere and such a common occurrence it seems unnecessary, but then you have films and plays like The Whale where it is a central theme and show a severe eating disorder that might well benefit from a warning. For the record I'm not dead set against all of this stuff, I think even the minor warnings can have a place, just I think the off hand "silly old man" comments were dismissive of something that is worth discussing. I get bored of nothing but discussions of how much Starmer sucks. Mega Comrade fucked around with this message at 11:39 on Feb 12, 2024 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 11:23
|
|
|
smellmycheese posted:Yes folks! It’s that time again! It’s time for Pisspoor Dogshit Cartoon about Northern Ireland of the week! Good fodder for the GBS "I need to jerk off immediately!" Photoshop thread. Possibly with Gerry Adams as the cartoonist.  because I'm not doing that poo poo on the work laptop
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 11:25
|
|
|
sebzilla posted:Nick Thomas-Symonds has been on Radio 4 saying that the party will stand by Azhar Ali and continue to campaign in Rochdale because he's not an antisemite, he just "fell for an online conspiracy theory" but respected colleagues have known him for decades and point to his record of standing against antisemitism. Well it's clearly not as bad as calling what's happening in Gaza a genocide, 'cos a Labour MP got suspended for doing that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 11:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 19:33 |
|
|
sebzilla posted:Nick Thomas-Symonds has been on Radio 4 saying that the party will stand by Azhar Ali and continue to campaign in Rochdale because he's not an antisemite, he just "fell for an online conspiracy theory" but respected colleagues have known him for decades and point to his record of standing against antisemitism. hmm probably not a good idea to elect someone credulous enough to fall for online conspiracies
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 11:30
|
|
