*opens mastodon*
*sees someone CW a joke about us politics that isn't even upsetting, which they are reposting because "the original poster didnt CW it"*
*closes mastodon*
Flareon you should add on Discord~
- she/her
Member of a traumagenic–catharigenic, semi-structural DID system (host: @LoganDark)
Feral female Flareon, somewhat kinky but terminally panromantic towards other ferals~
Please do not call us "alters", we are full people with our own souls, not just personality states! We say "system members" or just "members". "People" works too!
Discord: Emily the Flareon#3557 or @emilytheflareon
(open to friend requests! otherkin/plural <3~)
(but seriously add me if you interact uwu)
also feel free to use our asks as direct messages! :3
Discord
Emily the Flareon#3557
add me on discord
add me on discord
add me on discord
add me on discord
add me on discord
:3
You must log in to comment.
in reply to @micolithe's post:
Yeah, respecting that other people have different boundaries sucks, and giving people an opt-in for topics they don't want to read, regardless of whether people think it's upsetting or not, is just awful.
I feel like there is a reasonable desire for someone to not want to be in a place where they're expected to put that level of scrutiny in a CW. Some people have the energy for that and more power to them, But I don't.
It can be kind of a drag mentally going through a list of broad and ubiquitous topics that could tangentially relate to your post, every time you have a shitpost idea. Plus really if someone is that particular with their CW needs, then they're probably better at curating their online experience than I could be at anticipating their CW needs.
It's, really not that big of a deal, in practice. 90% of it is "just use it like a topic line" and not "Specifically Topics That May Be Sensitive To Someone Here Only, Ever." Talking about Kingdom Hearts? Just put it in the cw field, and if people wanna read about KH, they can. Have a horrible skin condition you wanna talk about for some reason? Just put something indicating that in the cw, and there you go.
The concept of a CW police that goes around yelling at people that don't CW things right or enough, or that every post has to be an egggshell walk, is an extremification. Have people been called out for not CWing stuff? Yeah. Have people gotten upset over a disjoint in what's worth CWing? Yeah. But it's not the "oversensitivity hellscape" people keep acting it out to be.
I'm gonna be real, I'm not gonna post like that and I'd rather not be in a website where most posts were tagged like that.
Most aren't. I'm just saying "most cw usage is like that," not "most posts are cw'd like that." I'd say like, maybe only 20% are, being generous? Out of one average page of timeline scroll (which is usually like 6-8 posts, rather than cohost's 0.4 average posts per screen of timeline scroll,) you might see one, but not necessarily. Other times you may see a thread of all cw'd things, maybe just for space respect. A lot of people never use them unless it's something they know is obvious should be.
"The concept of a CW police that goes around yelling at people that don't CW things right or enough, or that every post has to be an egggshell walk, is an extremification"
That person exists, it's you
So in trying to combat a harmful misinformative rhetoric, I'm telling people they don't CW things correctly on another website. Makes sense.
There was no harmful misinformative rhetoric until you started talking. everyone here dislikes mastodon cw culture from experience and you're ignoring that to be a soapboxing dick.
yeah the way people on co-host talk about mastodon and CW "discourse" is kind of eye-roll-y sometimes
i want anyone who is trying to comment on this and now cant because i locked comments to take a long hard look at your relationship with social media