Posted by JenStar on March 8, 2006, at 10:46:30
In reply to Re: Am I the only one? » littleone, posted by Larry Hoover on March 8, 2006, at 10:13:25
Larry, when I read mention of "medals being given in wars for this kind of bravery" I tend to wonder whether you see this as a battle with black/white and right/wrong? Or "evil" and "good" people?
I don't see it that way - I see it as a group of people trying to understand what you're saying, and debating what is the best way to make some improvements, if indeed improvements need to be made.
For me personally, I find it hard to identify with someone's root argument when I am faced with multiple empassioned similes and metaphors comparing the current situation to other situations which it does not, in my opinion, resemble.
To me, it feels like reading marketing hyperbole. And I'm sorry to say that, because you're clearly in pain, but it's how I feel. It makes me less likely to want to help someone when the method in which they present their argument doesn't appeal to me. I know it's important to get past that, as another poster commented, and I will try.
I'd be OK with red checkmarks for certain content: SI, CSA, abuse, extreme violence. But I think they should be mandatory. My reasoning is this: I like the atmosphere here. I like the fact that we are allowed to talk about topics that are considered "taboo" elsewhere, because in many cases, it seems to help people get better and to deal with their pain. I don't want to lose the spontaneity some people have when they post. And I don't want some poeple not to post at all because they're afraid that what they say might not be appropriate, or are not sure whether or not to use the checkmark. I would not want to see people blocked because they mistakenly did not use a checkmark.
I also worry that if people have to screen their work and find it "trigger-worthy" it might ceate emotional landmines for THEM. Someone whose main topics are always triggers, and MUST be triggered (or blocks may occur), could understandably become somewhat morose or down about it all, and might stop posting entirely. At least, that's how I see it.
It seems that the place would become more about the nature of the posts than the content of the posts. I don't think it's possible to make this place 100% before-the-fact safe for everyone. And again, if we try, I worry that we will make rules so unwieldy that the spirit of the site will suffer.I'm sorry that words here are strewn with so many landmines for you. However, I don't think we should fix the problem with mandatory trigger warnings. I'm OK with voluntary ones.
JenStar
poster:JenStar
thread:614568
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20060225/msgs/617444.html