I think this is the most appropriate place in the conversation for this, so I'm putting it in here.
The ETA up top says this:
There is discussion starting here about what category images depicting BDSM would fall into. The consensus seems to be that such images are possibly "explicit" but do not fall into the category of "non con," although commenters acknowledged that some readers would feel that BDSM was inherently non con. The consensus is that we should add a warning to the policy for such users, warning them that if they click through to "explicit" images, they may see images depicting BDSM.
I have to say that my gut reaction to that is to side with the anonymous commenter who says, "in that case what about people who find slash offensive? or incest pairings?" I've read ratcreature's reply here and while I think the assumptions about general Fanlore editor's attitudes are probably correct, I'm not very happy about relying on that long set of assumptions to protect what I feel is a matter of principle. Frankly, saying some people think BDSM is inherently sexual assault is as meaningful as saying some people think the earth is flat. There is no factual basis for the idea that does not involve a non-standard definition of BDSM, as by any standard definition, BDSM is inherently consensual. Certain slave scenarios require a consent label because of the slavery, not the BDSM.
Beyond how a policy is likely to be interpreted, there is also the issue of how things look. If this policy is implemented more or less as is, with an additional warning placed somewhere that explicit images may contain BDSM, what we would in effect have is a situation where depictions of underage sexuality are regulated while no other specific sexualities are, except for BDSM which gets a special warning. This does, in effect and regardless of intent, "non-normalize" BDSM, where other sexual activities, (and in the case of incest, activities that are criminal acts in most jurisdictions) are not singled out. I also think there is a danger that a reasonable person could infer that if the warning for BDSM refers to explicit images, then all BDSM will be labeled as explicit. Whether that is the intent or not, it could be construed to be the case by users and editors both.
I do not believe that there is any requirement that BDSM be singled out for special warnings anywhere. An image that could be interpreted as containing depictions of sexual assault can be treated with the appropriate template. An image that depicts BDSM activities can be labeled explicit or not depending on the image itself and the BDSM elements should be as irrelevant to that consideration as the sex/gender/orientation of the people depicted.
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
BDSM--Warning for it as per the ETA above.
The ETA up top says this:
I have to say that my gut reaction to that is to side with the anonymous commenter who says, "in that case what about people who find slash offensive? or incest pairings?" I've read
Beyond how a policy is likely to be interpreted, there is also the issue of how things look. If this policy is implemented more or less as is, with an additional warning placed somewhere that explicit images may contain BDSM, what we would in effect have is a situation where depictions of underage sexuality are regulated while no other specific sexualities are, except for BDSM which gets a special warning. This does, in effect and regardless of intent, "non-normalize" BDSM, where other sexual activities, (and in the case of incest, activities that are criminal acts in most jurisdictions) are not singled out. I also think there is a danger that a reasonable person could infer that if the warning for BDSM refers to explicit images, then all BDSM will be labeled as explicit. Whether that is the intent or not, it could be construed to be the case by users and editors both.
I do not believe that there is any requirement that BDSM be singled out for special warnings anywhere. An image that could be interpreted as containing depictions of sexual assault can be treated with the appropriate template. An image that depicts BDSM activities can be labeled explicit or not depending on the image itself and the BDSM elements should be as irrelevant to that consideration as the sex/gender/orientation of the people depicted.