Timeline for answer to Why does "graphic" mean violent or gory? by Tim Pederick
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
Post Revisions
18 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 17, 2022 at 9:21 | comment | added | Tim Pederick | @Fattie And I apologise if I was taking it the wrong way. I interpret “obtuse” as “unable or unwilling to get it; wilfully difficult or just plain stupid”. But I know there are people who see it as less harsh than I do. Maybe I’m just, err, obtuse in always taking it that way! ☺ | |
| Oct 16, 2022 at 16:40 | comment | added | Fattie | @TimPederick, I don';t think "obtuse" is name calling! Nevertheless, sorry and I deleted the comments. Cheers | |
| Oct 15, 2022 at 6:10 | history | edited | Tim Pederick | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Answering criticism from comments.
|
| Oct 15, 2022 at 5:41 | comment | added | Tim Pederick | @Fattie It’s not that simple, and name-calling is unwarranted. Rather than turn these comments into a discussion, I will edit a response to your concerns into the answer. | |
| Sep 27, 2022 at 17:18 | comment | added | Barmar | @TimPederick I'm old. My experience is mostly TV and movie ratings, not YouTube and video games. | |
| Sep 27, 2022 at 17:13 | comment | added | Tim Pederick | @Barmar My point was that I see “graphic language” used to refer to swearing, not descriptions of sex; a video game’s “Graphic Content Filter” turning off (or toning down) swearing is an example of this. Regarding animals, I was looking at the YouTube policies. I assumed that’s what you were talking about, as you quoted their phrase “violent or graphic”. Racism without any incitement to violence (e.g. anti-Semitic conspiracy theories) is something I’ve seen warnings/policies about, though I see now that the YouTube policies have a separate “hate speech” section for that. | |
| Sep 27, 2022 at 17:03 | comment | added | Barmar | @TimPederick Good point. "graphic language" is language that refers to graphic sex. I'm not sure that racist language fits in at all -- in my experience this hasn't been used as a warning much. Severe racist actions like lynchings would be "violence". The only thing I can think of regarding animals is the disclaimer in closing credits that "No animals were harmed", there are rarely specific warnings about depictions of animal endangerment. I'm speaking from a US perspective, maybe other countries are different. | |
| Sep 27, 2022 at 16:52 | comment | added | Tim Pederick | @Barmar If that were so, why would people use the phrase “graphic language” to mean swear words (including those that don’t refer to sex acts or organs)? Where does racial denigration fit into your violent/sexual dichotomy? Where do you list putting animals at risk, without actually depicting harm to them? What about medical procedures, which are gory without being violent? | |
| Sep 27, 2022 at 16:45 | comment | added | Tim Pederick | @Fattie Your experience (as I infer from your answer/comments) is that you don’t encounter “graphic” = “violent/gory”, and are happy to keep using it to mean “vivid in a positive way”. My experience is different, and so it seems is the asker’s. Like you, I don’t mean to be rude, but you’re being very dismissive by saying this doesn’t happen. (Now, if your argument was that it shouldn’t happen, that would be something else.) | |
| Sep 27, 2022 at 16:44 | comment | added | Barmar | When it says "violent or graphic", the distinction is that "graphic" means sexual. Furthermore, it refers to visuals, as opposed to language. | |
| Sep 27, 2022 at 15:33 | comment | added | Fattie | Hi @TimPederick I don't mean this in a rude way but I have no idea what you're saying here :) :) To make an extreme example: You often hear and see the phrase "emergency exit". Imagine a non-native speaker arrived here and asked "why does Exit in english now mean Emergency?" That's all there is to this QA. It's that simple. | |
| Sep 27, 2022 at 14:28 | history | edited | Tim Pederick | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Added examples where “graphic” seems to not be used literally.
|
| Sep 27, 2022 at 13:48 | comment | added | Tim Pederick | @StuartF “I don't see any evidence”—I don’t have anything definite, but what I have I’ll add to the answer. “I'm not sure what your point is there”—that is my point, poorly explained no doubt. Nobody would say “has content” as a warning, so “graphic” is what makes it a warning. So I find it understandable that it would become just a warning, without invoking the literal meaning of “graphic”. Whereas both “violence” and “graphic violence” are valid warnings, so it makes sense that “graphic” retains more of its original sense as a distinguishing adjective there. | |
| Sep 27, 2022 at 13:43 | comment | added | FreeMan | 1890s, heck. Even as recently as 1960 "gay" meant "happy". Flintstones. Meet the Flintstones... We'll have a gay old time! There's probably someone, somewhere casting aspersions at Fred & Barney by applying the modern use of "gay" where it doesn't belong. | |
| Sep 27, 2022 at 13:19 | comment | added | FreeMan | Have to agree. Just like in the 1890s "gay" meant "happy" and "joyful", today it has a totally different meaning and any attempt at using it in the older meaning will be entirely misinterpreted by a 2020s reader. | |
| Sep 27, 2022 at 9:18 | comment | added | Stuart | This answer starts off well but not sure about your later musings. I don't see any evidence that "graphic" can mean material that is sexually suggestive rather than sexually explicit. Also, you wouldn't say "This book has content in it" so I'm not sure what your point is there. And by the way a PG rating for "themes" means it has themes suitable for a PG but not a lower rating, just as a PG-13 rating for "sexual content" means it has sexual content suitable for a PG-13 audience but not a younger one. | |
| Sep 27, 2022 at 0:36 | comment | added | A C | I was surprised (and a bit amused) recently to see warnings that a movie not only included "themes" but also language, substances, and content! | |
| Sep 26, 2022 at 20:38 | history | answered | Tim Pederick | CC BY-SA 4.0 |