Comic Discussion > QUESTIONABLE CONTENT
WCDT: 2465-2469 (10-14 June, 2013) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
J:
it really is quite pretty.
celticgeek:
Is that the granddaddy of all the spiders in the "Spider Zone"?
Shjade:
--- Quote from: J on 12 Jun 2013, 13:55 ---
--- Quote from: Loki on 12 Jun 2013, 09:46 ---Westrim, MDBS: Shouldn't whether they want to be coddled or not be the choice of the person in question?
--- End quote ---
well that's the real question isn't it? honestly, it seems more than a little naive to even phrase it as being that simple.
the thing is that we aren't just talking about one person's choice here, we're talking about everyone they interact with in the world. is it right for any one person to demand that everyone else alter all of their behaviors in order to accommodate the issues and cater to the preferences of one individual? and if so, then how far is it reasonable to expect them to bend in order to do so?
--- End quote ---
That's taking things to an extreme. There's a pretty big gap between expecting the whole world to alter its output to meet your needs and refusing to warn someone you know has a thing about bugs that this movie you want them to watch has a scene with a mass bug attack in it. The former is expecting way too much. The latter is being a dick.
bhtooefr:
I'd say that "trigger warning" or similar on things that are common phobias/PTSD triggers is a good idea, although there's no obligation to do that.
Similarly, NSFW warnings on nudity or other content that could get you fired by a superior on sight are a good idea, but there's (usually) not an obligation to do that.
(And then I'm in one IRC channel where it's considered good etiquette to flag NSFW content involving women as NSFG (not safe for gays), too.)
Zebediah:
Interesting what you get when you google for images of "spider zone".
(click to show/hide)
If my son saw this, he would want one.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version