Trigger Warnings

[Pancakes Rühle]

Does any believe that trigger warnings have been abused, and demeaned from their original intent and purpose?

I mean, when a chump tells me an article on ham sandwiches has to have a trigger warning for Anorexia, I get a little skeptical.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

I think they are used excessively, but I can't see why that would bother anyone. Either you aren't 'triggered' by the topic and ignore the warning or you are and you appreciate the author's foresight. What is there to be upset about exactly?

[Pancakes Rühle]

I think they are used excessively, but I can't see why that would bother anyone. Either you aren't 'triggered' by the topic and ignore the warning or you are and you appreciate the author's foresight. What is there to be upset about exactly?

That I'd have to read some chump be angry that I didn't add it in there to begin with.

I also think that it detracts from legitimate trigger warnings. You know, like a trigger warning about rape, in an article where someone talks in detail about a rape.

I don't give the same value to a trigger warning for anorexia, in an article which has no mention of eating disorders.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

If a person gets triggered by mentions of rape, I don't see how they would be impacted by a proliferation of anorexia trigger warnings, they would just ignore them if they don't apply. I'm agreeing with you that they are used excessively, but I just don't see the issue. Some people are being overly conscious of other peoples feelings, big deal. I don't know why that makes them chumps.

To be honest I feel like the argument of there being 'too many' trigger warnings is more often than not a smoke screen for not liking trigger warnings at all. Because you know, political correctness has gone mad and all that.

[Redistribute the Rep]

In my experience trigger warnings for eating disorders are entirely exclusive to recovery websites and forums. I wouldn't mind a few more of them in the mainstream

[Quail]

I mean, when a chump tells me an article on ham sandwiches has to have a trigger warning for Anorexia, I get a little skeptical.

Has this actually happened or is it just a straw man? Who would write an article about ham sandwiches anyway.

On a more serious note, I do think that trigger warnings are over-used but at the same time I don't see why it's a big deal. For the stuff that can trigger me, I'd rather people were over than under cautious. The rest of the time I just go about reading the article as though the warning wasn't there. If I was writing an article, I'd rather err on the side of annoying people who don't like trigger warnings than triggering survivors of rape/eating disorders/whatever.

[consuming negativity]

i hardly ever see trigger warnings even on sites like this

maybe it's just because i tend to stay away from sites like tumblr

generally-speaking i think they're helpful when used appropriately

[John Nada]

If this has anything to do with my thread. I though of somethings private. I was reminded of the Garner murder, and how Ice-T said they were basically putting a snuff film on TV. There's some seemingly unspoken rule that it's more acceptable to put dead POC on TV than White people. I figured it was better safe than sorry. If it's too much to read a couple more words, too bad.

My criticism is where the trigger might have literally involved a trigger. It may well be the case for a survivor. I suppose just type TW.

[Palmares]

I'm surprised this thread isn't in Discrimination. *shrugs*

I have thought about starting a thread about the very idea of "triggers", as I've thought about them alot more after experiencing (on top of various other trauma throughout my life) extreme trauma in the last year. Unsurprisingly, I've been unsure how to manifest it, such as the most appropriate way to word it...

But more on the topic at hand.... I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with the existence of trigger warnings (they have obvious benefits), however, I think context is important. The kind of consciousness that exists for it is obviously not ubiquitous: it's primarily a Western thang.

Recently, I caught up with a friend from Melbourne. They told me about all the latest activist scene gossip, etc, haha. They told me about how their ex-partner, a woman from Indonesia (temporarily lived in Australia recently), did an interview on a radical community radio station. Specifically, a friend of mine's radio program about women-centric music (lack of a better way of describing it). My friend asked her to tell some stories about her experiences in Indonesia. So she did. And apparently she did so openly and honestly.

Later there were complaints made about the program because a trigger warning had not been announced prior to the interview. I haven't heard the interview, but I have been told it included stories about experienced alot of sexual assault. And now, this Indonesian woman was angry that she was being attacked like this. To her, she simply didn't understand why it was necessary. Clearly, things are different where she's from.


On another note, what do people think warrants a trigger warning? I'm not trying to be divisive here, rather, I'd be interested in seeing simply where different people see the boundaries being.

Strangely enough, it reminds me in a weird way (though obviously not totally the same), of the ratings system of movies/music/games. I don't mean in the sense of the age limitations, but more so the warnings of ... "explicit" content, etc.

I dunno. I'll think about all this a it more. :unsure:

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

I probably would never use them on my own, I don't think I would remember. But if I wrote something and someone was like "hey put a trigger warning on that for xyz reason" I can't see why I would get bent out of shape. I mean my personal feeling is that people should face trauma head on, insulating yourself will eventually backfire on you 100% of the time. But it's pretty arrogant to set yourself up as the arbiter of that experience for a random stranger you'll never meet.

Definitely an anglo thing though, I think a lot of other cultures don't have the sense of a reliable escape path to avoid reliving traumatic experiences, simply because the entire culture is already living a collective traumatic experience.

[Quail]

On another note, what do people think warrants a trigger warning? I'm not trying to be divisive here, rather, I'd be interested in seeing simply where different people see the boundaries being.

Strangely enough, it reminds me in a weird way (though obviously not totally the same), of the ratings system of movies/music/games. I don't mean in the sense of the age limitations, but more so the warnings of ... "explicit" content, etc.

I dunno. I'll think about all this a it more. :unsure:

I've been using trigger warnings for about 10 years, mostly on mental health websites but also more widely now that they're kind of more mainstream.

I think there should be content warnings for basically any description of something that is likely to set someone off. So a desciption of rape, of suicide, of self harm, eating disorders, etc. Obviously we can't ever hope to cover everything because a lot of people's triggers are weird and very specific, but there are some things which are clearly a risk to a large proportion of people's mental health.


I mean my personal feeling is that people should face trauma head on, insulating yourself will eventually backfire on you 100% of the time. But it's pretty arrogant to set yourself up as the arbiter of that experience for a random stranger you'll never meet.
I do agree with you, in that the only way to actually heal and recover from trauma (or ED or whatever) is to face your issues head on. BUT, that should really be done in a kind of controlled environment. It's kind of reckless to just inflict flashbacks or triggers to starve/binge/cut on people who may not have enough of a support network in place to deal with it.

[BIXX]

My criticism is where the trigger might have literally involved a trigger. It may well be the case for a survivor. I suppose just type TW.

This is a joke right? Like a reference to that blog that's all trigger warnings?

[John Nada]

This is a joke right? Like a reference to that blog that's all trigger warnings?No, it was something that can happened at gunpoint. I don't need to spell it out.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

What did people expect when a woman from the periphery of world capitalism was asked about her experience, "everything was lovely"? I get it that people can react badly to hearing some things, but there are situations where you can reasonably expect to hear things that will make you upset or worse.

And, I mean, I think trigger warnings can work in some situations, although I have to admit I dislike the term intensely because of its association with the Tumblr faux-leftist milieu. Like support groups and sites. Outside these specific situations, only really general trigger warnings apply - i.e. it's probably a good idea to let people know if your text contains graphic depictions of rape, but you can't single out any single thing that could trigger someone. Unless you want to preface every single text with a list of every word you use, which is somewhat implausible.

I think the way in which some people abuse trigger warnings, the concept of being "triggered" (i.e. people talking as if being upset by something said in a discussion is the same as someone with PTSD being triggered) and so on makes other people less likely to take the correct use of these things seriously, just like Tumblr trans-Korean otherkin make people less likely to take actual trans* people seriously. And if someone is badgering you to put a big "trigger warning: ham" before your article about ham, they're probably not being excessively careful about other people's feelings, they're probably trying to be "enlightened" and popular.

[Pancakes Rühle]

Has this actually happened or is it just a straw man? Who would write an article about ham sandwiches anyway.

On a more serious note, I do think that trigger warnings are over-used but at the same time I don't see why it's a big deal. For the stuff that can trigger me, I'd rather people were over than under cautious. The rest of the time I just go about reading the article as though the warning wasn't there. If I was writing an article, I'd rather err on the side of annoying people who don't like trigger warnings than triggering survivors of rape/eating disorders/whatever.

Have you seen Cool Freaks Wikipedia Club on facebook?

[Redwood]

Do you need a trigger warning for posts with trigger warnings? Your critique is laughable. Get over it.

[BIXX]

No, it was something that can happened at gunpoint. I don't need to spell it out.
Jesus Christ I think I need to leave this board.

That's fucking ridiculous. TW puts the word "trigger" in your mind, just cause you don't type it out doesn't make it not the same as saying the fucking word. That's the dumbest reason to avoid saying trigger.

I think that this blog may be of use to you:
http://checkingoftheprivilege.tumblr.com

The person who runs it is making some joke, but the point is that when you start to avoid saying "trigger" because of gun violence (or if I was to reword that sentence to your padded-room language: avoid s*ying "tr*gger" because of g*n v*olence) that blog is what you look like.

Listen, trigger warning make sense, but what you're saying would literally make speech impossible as every word that adds context or meaning could be connected to a traumatic event.

[Lily Briscoe]

Trigger warnings outside of a mental health context just seem like an empty gesture that basically functions as a way for university students to signal to other university students that they are sensitive and enlightened.

[Decolonize The Left]

It would seem as though trigger warnings can't be 'overused' until the point where we can't tell what's a trigger warning and what isn't due to their popularity. Until then, if people think they're necessary to employ then they probably are.

[Quail]

It would seem as though trigger warnings can't be 'overused' until the point where we can't tell what's a trigger warning and what isn't due to their popularity. Until then, if people think they're necessary to employ then they probably are.

I dunno, I often see people doing stuff like sharing articles on facebook with a trigger warning for rape when the word rape is in the title of the article. I think that's kind of pointless.


I think the way in which some people abuse trigger warnings, the concept of being "triggered" (i.e. people talking as if being upset by something said in a discussion is the same as someone with PTSD being triggered) and so on makes other people less likely to take the correct use of these things seriously

I've been thinking about this actually... I use the term "triggered" to mean either triggered in the PTSD sense (flashbacks, anxiety, dissociation, etc), or I suppose prompted to carry out some mental-health related destructive behaviour (e.g. if someone with anorexia reads an article about someone who weighs less than them they will be triggered to starve themselves more). I think that when it comes to stuff like sexual violence, I can easily believe that a large proportion of the female population have some kind of trauma issues. Basically every woman I know has been raped; it's ridiculous and horrifying. I feel uncomfortable criticising the "watering down" of the notion of being triggered, because I do think there can be a lot of trauma associated with living as a member of a marginalised group and it's not my place to question what's going on in other people's heads. After all, people react differently to triggers. Some people have panic attacks, or cry, or dissociate, or some combination of those things. At the same time though, I do often wonder if when other people say "triggered," they mean the same thing as I do.

[#FF0000]

Have you seen Cool Freaks Wikipedia Club on facebook?

They certainly go overboard since I've seen people actually have to ask if the trigger warning they posted with their article was a joke or not. At the same time, I have a hard time even beginning to care. I understand why trigger warnings are used in mental-health related communities and it's easy enough to ignore the parts of the internet where folks are inclined to use trigger warnings, as Lily Briscoe said, as a way to show off how progressive and enlightened they are.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

I've been thinking about this actually... I use the term "triggered" to mean either triggered in the PTSD sense (flashbacks, anxiety, dissociation, etc), or I suppose prompted to carry out some mental-health related destructive behaviour (e.g. if someone with anorexia reads an article about someone who weighs less than them they will be triggered to starve themselves more). I think that when it comes to stuff like sexual violence, I can easily believe that a large proportion of the female population have some kind of trauma issues. Basically every woman I know has been raped; it's ridiculous and horrifying. I feel uncomfortable criticising the "watering down" of the notion of being triggered, because I do think there can be a lot of trauma associated with living as a member of a marginalised group and it's not my place to question what's going on in other people's heads. After all, people react differently to triggers. Some people have panic attacks, or cry, or dissociate, or some combination of those things. At the same time though, I do often wonder if when other people say "triggered," they mean the same thing as I do.

I get what you're saying, but that wasn't exactly what I was getting at. If a woman says that reading a description of a rape in a discussion made her uncomfortable, that's understandable. I think it's still technically wrong to use the term "triggered", but that's a secondary concern at best in these situations. I was talking, however, about people who are "triggered" by someone stating that dressing in blackface and eating fried chicken doesn't make you black (disclaimer: this is a thing that actually happens) and so on. These people are an insignificant minority, of course, but they're very loud in those parts of the Internet where the concept of trigger warnings outside a mental health context is used the most.

[Quail]

I get what you're saying, but that wasn't exactly what I was getting at. If a woman says that reading a description of a rape in a discussion made her uncomfortable, that's understandable. I think it's still technically wrong to use the term "triggered", but that's a secondary concern at best in these situations. I was talking, however, about people who are "triggered" by someone stating that dressing in blackface and eating fried chicken doesn't make you black (disclaimer: this is a thing that actually happens) and so on. These people are an insignificant minority, of course, but they're very loud in those parts of the Internet where the concept of trigger warnings outside a mental health context is used the most.

Are you talking about people using "being triggered" as a way of shielding themselves from valid criticism/shutting down the conversation? I'm a bit confused by your example.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

Are you talking about people using "being triggered" as a way of shielding themselves from valid criticism/shutting down the conversation? I'm a bit confused by your example.

That is definitively part of it - as well as simple trolling - but I would say it's not the entire story. Like, I'm pretty sure most "trans-ethnics" are vicious trolls parodying trans* people (that stupid liberals enable), but I would say some of them are serious. I mean, they're Shaver-level fantasists, but they're serious. And the offense they take at people telling them that, no, they're not "trans-black", "trans-black" is not a thing, is genuine. In their mind, they're the same as trans* people.

I've also seen people claim they were "triggered" because someone used the singular when talking about them (they are "multi-systems" or whatever), because someone used "they" instead of a horribly misspelled "she" and so on. In the dark corners of the Internet, "triggered" has become another word for "offended", particularly if the offense can be connected, no matter how tenuously, to some real or imagined prosecution (particularly imagined). So when someone from that milieu says they were "triggered", I don't know if they were genuinely harmed or close to harm, if they were offended, or even if they didn't have any reaction to what was said, but hey, ritual denunciation is fun.

[G4b3n]

Does it really kill you to read a 5 word TW?
When it might seriously upset someone with a lack of one.
Also the strawman is strong with this one.

[Quail]

Does it really kill you to read a 5 word TW?
When it might seriously upset someone with a lack of one.
Also the strawman is strong with this one.

This reads like a short poem :wub:

(I'm drunk and will reply to your post tomorrow Xhar-Xhar)

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

Have you seen Cool Freaks Wikipedia Club on facebook?

Scum of the fucking earth. Those dumb fucking Stalinist SJW nutjobs are the fucking end of intelligence, the very precipice of existence. "Cultural appropriation!" they shout like the braindead imbeciles they are while discussing if other cultures are allowed to eat this and that food. This repugnant national/cultural essentialism will undoubtedly merge with its closely related cousin, the blood-and-soil nationalist (this already happens now and then) for a total clusterfuck of idiocy.

[blake 3:17]

I think I've used one once (or gave some kind of warning) in a FB post -- because it started out sounding nice and was a description of a sexual assault and what happened afterwards. In general I think they're totally useless.

I have pretty severe PTSD and the things that can 'trigger' me are things like cars, fire trucks, candles. I live near a fire station and work beside a fire station.

I have a friend who likes to post stories on FB with headlines like "Father rapes son, kills mother then self" and will put a tw:rape, murder, suicide -- I have learnt to find it funny.

And all the bullshit about being "offended" -- ugghhhhhhh.... It's OKAY TO BE OFFENDED!!!! Sometimes the person being offensive is in the wrong, sometimes in the right, mostly it's neither here nor there. I'm more upset and disturbed that people don't have clean water and live through stupid wars -- OKAY I AM OFFENDED BY THAT -- than a minor breach of etiquette.