@Arkandel said in Emotional separation from fictional content:
See, the issue here is that labeling can only get us so far. Nevermind for a moment that this can be a code limitation (not all games have customizable/tag'able +event code) or even the fact no games as of now that I can remember actually require or even recommend the practice - which means we might be holding STs accountable for not doing things staff itself didn't prioritize enough to mention, it's still not that easy to pigeon-hole these things.
There aren't any that don't allow for a summary.
There is nothing whatsoever preventing (the hypothetical) you from adding a line at the bottom of the summary, ex: "Note: This scene may contain elements of child abuse and satanic rituals. If these things are not for you, do not attend."
Is "mature content, caution is advised" enough?
No, not by a long shot. "Mature content" is all the content on some games. That gives someone almost no information at all to the extent that it's borderline useless.
"There might be something that involves mature content in here!" doesn't allow players to make an informed decision at all because it is not, in most game settings in which this becomes an issue, at all informative.
People do not have an issue with "mature content". They have issues with specific forms of mature content, not any and all mature content on the whole.
What if we start with good ol' fashioned murder of adults by the bad guys but at some point there's a dead kid as well?
This? I would not consider a huge deal personally. If I was going to put in a notice, it would be 'involves witnessing the death of NPCs of all ages'.
Or how about unintended consequences - we hit the PCs with some hostages they need to rescue from a gang, and one of them is a woman who had a bruise on her cheek - was she beaten? Or the plot I already mentioned I ran which included abused animals.
If it relies on inference to guess at what might have happened (bruise)? No.
Abused animals? 'Involves cruelty to animals.' (Same would be true for a goat sacrifice or something in the above. <shrug>)
What I'm saying is these things... they're a sort of minefield. You can try to be a good sport and warn players but you can't have laundry lists of everything that might be encountered in a plot ahead of time, including things posed spontaneously or without necessarily giving them a lot of thought - I can see myself posing the aforementioned woman's bruise along with other evidence of rough treatment for the hostages (they're dirty, dehydrated, one guy has a broken ankle, one girl has a black eye - shit!) and not think too hard someone might fixate on that.
Again, inference is not the same thing as a scene that involves walking into a scene in which a husband is brutally assaulting his wife and I am reasonably sure most players are well aware of the difference; the slope is nowhere near as slippery or inferential as you're presenting it to be in this argument. Someone simply having a bruise is something one could encounter on almost any game. Walk into any given bar RL and you'll probably see someone with a bruise or injury, same with any grocery store or shopping mall.
Speaking of this though, one thing I've noticed is the insistence some STs have to go all-out on gore, substituting it for horror. Some plots feel like there's barely a step without stepping into someone's entrails or walking by to see gutted, brained carcasses rotting nailed on walls - I suppose there may be a separation between super-intense overemphasized grossness and signs of real world abuse but again, what's the solution? Because I've never seen anyone offering FTB for those segments in PrPs.
Would a "graphic violence" label suffice here? Does it need to be specific? Should it be?
I would include a gore warning, personally. In part, because it's not actually the act of witnessing the actual act of violence in this case, but that's sorta neither here nor there. 'Extreme gore factor' would cover it more accurately, since you can have gore without actual violence, and violence without actual gore, really. You could be running a pure investigation scene that involves a forensic investigation of the area you're describing above, for example, in the aftermath of whatever violence took place.
While I have no clue about how good or bad the rest of this site is, this covers some things fairly well, especially here:
Linked Article:
The idea for content warnings arose in order to recognize — and respect — the diverging struggles and experiences of others by supplying an easy, advisory mechanism for would-be readers.
This way, they’re prepared and are able to choose whether or not they wish to be subjected to content that may adversely impact their mental state.
However, there’s a tendency for people to claim that these steps are a form of coddling, rather than see them for what they really are: Simple and considerate notice markers that empowers would-be readers with the decision of choice.
Instead of this being seen as a way to appreciate the importance of mental health, more often content warnings are greeted with hostility by people not personally affected taking personal offense — as if their rights were being threatened or revoked.
Complaints range from “Why can’t people worried about reading content just stay off the internet?” to “Grow up” to “Just deal with it” — never once considering that they’re preoccupation with situations that don’t directly concern them. That, possibly, their well-being only reflects self-centeredness and a refusal to value the feelings, mental health, or anxiety of others.
Notice you felt the need to include a spoiler warning in this thread while reading the article, and think about that a sec. Now think about which is actually more important.
