Hey! Stop screwing my lunch!

[skreidle]

Video: Ants mate with half-eaten, dying queen | MSNBC -- [A more macabre video from the insect kingdom would be hard to find.]
We can't all be picky about our mates, and ants even less so. A new video taken by Adrián Skippy Purkart, a wildlife photographer from Slovakia, shows the ants swarming around repeatedly mating with their dying queen as a

Comments

[ashen_key]

...this is probably a lost cause, but any chance of putting, say, most of this under a cut? Because JFC, that's disturbing and wrong and probably triggery.

[i_r_lee]

what could this probably trigger?

[eruditeviking]

Upchuck?

Personally, I don't see what could be trigger worthy about this either. Of course I'll happily point out that it's not really that disturbing and certainly not "wrong" (stop anthropomorphizing and placing human scruples on animals). Then again, I though it was cool to watch Assassin Bugs mating during a picnic.

[kitchenwitch]

Most of this community is gross! That's why we're here.

[skreidle]

Exactly! WTF, man, WTF. :)

[evilegg]

So (again) I am the only person a little turned on?!

[skreidle]

<3

[evilstorm]

I could see it triggering sexual assault survivors; triggers aren't that logical, after all, and forced sex is forced sex even if it's phyla apart (and...slightly bizarre). This is hypothetical, I mean, but I could sorta see it.

[i_r_lee]

queen was releasing pheremones. ants weren't raping her *facepalm*

[evilstorm]

Queen was being eaten, trauma + sex can = trigger. Not to mention the article describes it as assault. Not that ants can consent, anyway. I did say it wasn't logical.

[kaelstra]

Triggers aren't always rational. I don't understand why you'd rather *facepalm* and seemingly argue than just do the decent thing and put it under a cut rather than risk upsetting someone. It's not that hard. Being a decent person isn't that hard.

[skreidle]

On the other hand, this is a community dedicated to how fucked up nature is. Hiding it doesn't make it less so, and the participants know what they're potentially in for. (That's to say, I've never seen a trigger warning in another post here, and there's been plenty about attacks/assaults/mating habits.)

In this particular post, the only thing that could perhaps be considered "triggery" is the phrase "assaulted by a sex-crazed drone swarm", but the short phrase it's in (plus the video and the short phrase that precede it) encapsulate the whole post, and the rest is behind a cut. I think the post's structure and flow would suffer if it were cropped further.

[kittysaysno]

Christ, stop telling people what is and isn't triggery, you don't know.

GG wtf-nature with the showing of the asses. GG.

[gekko]

So really, what you're saying is that the internet should tip toe around your triggers? And supposedly know what your triggers are? Or, you could just get a helmet--something that would be well advised for ANYONE who spends time on the internet.

Or...perhaps we should just censor the internet so as not to hurt someone's pretty little easily triggered head. It's ants, ffs.

[rime_r]

"The internet" and this community, is composed of individual posters who can choose what they say and choose to edit their posts based on people's responses. There's no psychic guessing of triggers or "censorship" involved here, putting something behind a cut would be a response to an actual request, and take like five seconds (probably the same amount of time it took the op to edit the post mentioning that a cut warning was requested). I think it's considerate to put something under a cut, after people say it bothers them, rather than going, "It shouldn't have bothered you, the internet's already full of fucked up things so I will change nothing." I don't necessarily know ahead of time what is going to bother people and I'm not necessarily going to be bothered by the same things as them, but if someone requested a cut I'd do it, to be considerate.