Tech, Bureaucrats, emailconfirmed, Administrators (Semantic MediaWiki), Curators (Semantic MediaWiki), Suppressors, Administrators, threadmoderator
116,094
edits
More actions
m
no edit summary
(Conclusion) Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit 2017 source edit |
mNo edit summary Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit 2017 source edit |
||
| Line 65: | Line 65: | ||
Alright, let's get down to the heart of the issue. I'm coming at this from a trauma-informed point of view. I honestly think the suggestion to merge all sexuality- related topics into [[sexuality]] because it's somehow a problem to have a page called [[fetish]] is.. not great. | Alright, let's get down to the heart of the issue. I'm coming at this from a trauma-informed point of view. I honestly think the suggestion to merge all sexuality- related topics into [[sexuality]] because it's somehow a problem to have a page called [[fetish]] is.. not great. | ||
Doing this for slurs is ''massively'' important. These aren't harmful topics, though. We might have some [[shame]] built into discussing these things in our culture, but that doesn't mean they don't merit discussing. And the | Doing this for slurs is ''massively'' important. These aren't harmful topics, though. We might have some [[shame]] built into discussing these things in our culture, but that doesn't mean they don't merit discussing. And the DWU does go into sexuality, just like everything else in the world of the banal. | ||
And the thing is, covering, say, sexual assault on either [[sex]] or [[sexuality]] ''would'' be harmful. You don't go onto those articles expecting to get that punch (and sexual assault is ''its own thing'' from consensual sex or sexuality). Same for describing sexual acts in | And the thing is, covering, say, sexual assault on either [[sex]] or [[sexuality]] ''would'' be harmful. You don't go onto those articles expecting to get that punch (and sexual assault is ''its own thing'' from consensual sex or sexuality). Same for describing sexual acts in detail on a page like [[sexuality]], which is also an important page for describing different sexual orientations, historical injustices, homophobia, etc. | ||
Linking off from [[sexuality]] to a page on [[oral sex]] works ''just fine'', because then readers get to actively decide if they want to read more on that topic. So if you ''do'' have a particular trigger, you get to have control over your reading experience. Putting it all on one page means there's no way to navigate this safely if there's one thing you'd rather avoid approaching. (And also, it's just better coverage. You can go into the particular topics more without ending up with massive pages.) | Linking off from [[sexuality]] to a page on [[oral sex]] works ''just fine'', because then readers get to actively decide if they want to read more on that topic. So if you ''do'' have a particular trigger, you get to have control over your reading experience. Putting it all on one page means there's no way to navigate this safely if there's one thing you'd rather avoid approaching. (And also, it's just better coverage. You can go into the particular topics more without ending up with massive pages.) | ||
So while I like the energy that went into this, this seems to be the ''opposite'' of a resolution to the problem of content warnings. For now, let's consider the matter closed. That said, when we have forums up and running, feel free to bring up these sorts of issues there, where we can actually [[Tardis:Who writes policy?|decide to make large-scale changes]].{{User:SOTO/sig}} 07:37, 3 January 2022 (UTC) | So while I like the energy that went into this, this seems to be the ''opposite'' of a resolution to the problem of content warnings. For now, let's consider the matter closed. That said, when we have forums up and running, feel free to bring up these sorts of issues there, where we can actually [[Tardis:Who writes policy?|decide to make large-scale changes]].{{User:SOTO/sig}} 07:37, 3 January 2022 (UTC) | ||