TW for brief mentions of… basically everything that I trigger-warn for, actually.
I have anxiety triggers that are almost never warned for.
This is because my triggers are either very uncommon (people are drinking aaaaaaaaaaah) or impossible to implement warnings for (unfortunately, I cannot get the people who hate me to say “TW for pressing Ozy’s ‘I am a horrible person’ buttons”). This affects my thoughts on triggers somewhat!
First, there’s a certain well-meant but ultimately futile effort among people to warn for every conceivable trigger. It’s not going to work. I know someone who’s triggered by brunettes.* It would be absurd to warn everything “trigger warning: brunettes” because of one guy. I am never going to get people to warn for the presence of drug use, and I am slightly less likely to get people to warn for public embarrassment (although that one’s a common enough trigger for people with social phobia I think they should consider it). We should only trigger-warn for things that are common triggers– violence, eating disorders, suicide, rape and abuse, etc. I probably have more than a hundred readers who are triggered by rape at least sometimes. I have one who is triggered by brunettes. It is not worth my time to warn for brunettes.
Second, trigger warnings are really, really, really fucking important.
I don’t watch comedies unless they’ve been pre-vetted by someone I trust. There’s too high a chance that all the humor will be based around someone being embarrassed in public, and then I will have to spend the entire movie with my eyes closed and ears stopped up repeating to myself “it’s only a movie, it’s only a movie” and it will be terrible for everyone. But, you know, I can live a happy life without comedies, and comedies are not particularly harmed as a genre by my assiduous avoidance of them. But imagine, on the other hand, rape survivors and gender blogs. I think everyone can agree that gender blogs would be greatly harmed if we no longer had rape survivors comment, given the gendered nature of rape. And rape survivors would be harmed by no longer having a group of people that is much more likely than average to be supportive to talk to. But without trigger warnings, every time they read, no matter what brain-state they’re in, they might be hit by something that reminds them of their rape, and that will make it less likely that they read the fucking blog, and that is a crappy situation for everyone.
It’s not just about courtesy, it’s about blind, naked self-interest.
Now, there are two common misconceptions about trigger warnings I would like to take a moment to address.
Trigger warnings are coddling abuse survivors. I honestly have no idea where this idea comes from. I am not saying “this article is about rape, rape survivors keep out!” I’m saying “this article is about rape, so if you’d like to read something else you should probably read something else.” It’s not making them weaker, it’s empowering them to control their own mental health.
I am [identity X] and I don’t need trigger warnings. If you are a person who has survived abuse or who has an eating disorder or whatever, and you don’t need trigger warnings, GREAT. I’m honestly happy for you. Skip over them. But they take literally five seconds of my time, and they do actually help a lot of people. I think that’s a worthy thing.
Triggers aren’t real. Whenever I hear someone say this I want to go have an anxiety attack on their doorstep.
Trigger warnings no longer refer to just mental health things, they refer to anything people find annoying. It’s a fair cop; I think it’s an outcome of people trying to warn for literally everything that could possibly trigger someone, which is as previously discussed impossible. Where you draw the line about what to warn for is an individual thing; I’ve gone everywhere from “basically no warnings” to “very liberal with the warnings” myself, and I’m currently on the very liberal side. Actually, some people have transitioned to using content notes instead of trigger warnings when just referring to things that people may not want to read. Personally, I figure that if you’re not actually triggered by it you can work out what the article is about by the title or the first paragraph and hence avoid it.
Trigger warnings just help women. Err, what pile of sexist shite is that? (And, yes, I have read people say this, usually so-called MRAs.) Are we saying men aren’t raped or abused now, aren’t suicidal or self-injurers, never have eating disorders or anxiety attacks? Or are we saying that men are such masculine piles of manly manliness, free of such silly human things as ‘feelings,’ that they could never be reduced to panic by mere words? Except, um, that’s not true. Trigger warnings help all kinds of people with mental health problems! They are a good thing!
*Not really, but I don’t want to invade his privacy by sharing what his actual trigger is, and it’s similarly random.
anyways, a prankster one time mocked Melissa McEwan (hope I spelled that right) and said the word “trigger” was triggering for them because they were held up at gunpoint…..
even though it was a prank, it brought up the point that different people will have different triggers and it is impossible to create a “safe space” so maybe people could move onto something else and say-“We talk about some grizzly stuff here but free speech is very important so proceed at your own risk.”
The Talk needs a trigger warning….
I find the discussion of a man’s penis being cutt off then thrown in the garbage disposal triggering….
Then evil Sharon Osbourne saying his penis should be fed to the dog….
vicious stuff…
“I think everyone can agree that gender blogs would be greatly harmed if we no longer had rape survivors comment, given the gendered nature of rape. ” Whenever I start to think that you just might be starting to really understand the male perspective, you always manage to disappoint. Rape is not a gendered crime. It never has been a gendered crime, it never will be. It, like pretty much everything else in this world, is an equal opportunity piece of shit occurrence. It is the height of arrogance on your part to speak of trigger warnings and rape and… Read more »
Hmmmmm! Yes it does smack of a tad of sexism and presumption! It’s a bit like the arguments (Ongoing) that Rape Trauma Syndrome is a special subset of PTSD – and all the gendered arguments that go with that – from the supposed empirical, and based only on one sex being assessed, to the “It’s Real becasue I say so ” arguments. The whole trigger warning on articles dealing with rape comes from that neck of the woods. It’s odd how I have personally observed the exact same behaviour, that is supposed to be the hall mark of rape –… Read more »
Give me a little bit of credit. All I meant by “gendered” is that male and female rape survivors often have different experiences because of their gender.
The only difference, I would argue, in experience by gender with regard to rape is in how men are treated after the fact in comparison to women.
Interesting. Personally, I’ve often found trigger warnings clunky and somewhat patronizing as an alert external to the content. I like using, whenever possible, a self-descriptive title instead. For example, I recently posted some thoughts on a suicide mentioned in my local paper. I feel that if someone’s triggered by that sort of thing, they are perfectly capable of recognizing that something titled “On a Recent High-Profile Suicide” is likely to contain discussion of suicide. If you absolutely have to use a title that makes the triggering content seem out of the blue, a trigger warning makes sense. But it seems… Read more »
I like trigger warnings. (And I’m copying the one that holds for the post for this comment!) I like them because having to look at what may be triggering for people makes people think about whether that rape analogy is actually a good argument or whether you’re just going with the most horrible example you can come up with. Because caring enough to look at what may be triggering means you’re by definition not a troll. All good things. I don’t ‘need’ trigger warnings myself (although I do appreciate them on ‘squick’ subjects, I don’t actually get triggered by them… Read more »
I actually had a weird conundrum about trigger warnings a handful of days ago – I wanted to write a comment which included a link to an article, and I wanted to put a trigger warning on the article. The problem is, I couldn’t figure out how to indicate what kind of triggering content there was without making the trigger warning triggering by itself. I wound up not posting the comment, but the article is one of my go-to stories of weirdness, so this problem may come up again. Is it appropriate to provide a trigger warning without a description?… Read more »
Hmm, I don’t know. If I were linking to an article that contains victim blaming I would probably just say “watch out for the victim blaming in this article” or something. I know I’ve linked to articles with specific warnings against reading the comments.
I suppose if the article contains something disturbing in terms of vivid descriptions, I’d probably write just that – “there are disturbing vivid descriptions of _____ in the article”
Some blogpost here posted a few days ago had a trigger warning for “discussion of boundary violations”. My reaction to this, posted in the comments, was “Oh, for heaven’s sake”. It got nerfed by the mods, for reasons that are not immediately clear to me. To me, that’s exactly the kind of ludicrous trigger warning that’s brilliantly spoofed at http://isthisfeminist.tumblr.com/ For one thing, there’s a huge difference between harrowing survivor stories of rape and abuse and a quasi-academic “discussion of boundary violations”, and to slap them all with the same “trigger warning” feels very wrong, trivializing the former in a… Read more »
“For one thing, there’s a huge difference between harrowing survivor stories of rape and abuse and a quasi-academic “discussion of boundary violations”, and to slap them all with the same “trigger warning” feels very wrong, trivializing the former in a rather unpleasant way.” I suppose that depends on how you read it. I don’t think warning someone who has survived the former that a discussion of the latter may trigger them, somehow minimizes their experience. That sort of reminds me of the same arguments made about slapping same-sex marriage with the title of ‘civil rights.’ (It’s different…but similar). Right like,… Read more »
What makes that one rather ridiculous is that “discussion of boundary violations” is hopelessly vague. Rape is a thing, y’know? Abuse is a thing. Rather like the famous definition of porn, we might not be able to define them very well, but we know them when see them (or read about them). Discussion of boundary violations? That could literally cover everything from tales of friends who give unwanted hugs to the blogposts of parents who force their kids to eat their greens to the comic story of some poor sod who finds a couple shagging in a library study room… Read more »
I do agree with your ending sentence that if the article title tips people off a trigger warning isn’t also strictly needed. I mean, let’s give people some credit in their reading comprehension. And I do agree that a trigger warning like “boundary violations” is vague…perhaps nearing the edge where it’s vague enough to almost no longer serve it’s purpose. However, I also think that limiting it as you do can end up making trigger warnings so restrictive that they no longer serve their purpose either, because then you can end up with some legitimately triggering discussions that come with… Read more »
Yeah… I am fine with trigger warnings in theory, but my particular issue with trigger warnings is that they seem to make an arbitrary distinction between what is likely to make someone upset and what isn’t. Yes, of course there is a spectrum and there are certain things that we are all more likely to agree are upsetting than others, but where do you draw the line? Exactly what are (to use the phrase that some have above) “the usual suspects?” And what happens when several of us strongly disagree about who ought to be included in that list and… Read more »
Hmmm…so basically what I’m getting from your comment is that you have no problem with people posting genuine trigger warnings. It’s when people start putting in their own opinion of an issue into a trigger warning that it becomes a problem? Like for your example of “general Republican douchery…” well that’s hardly a useful trigger warning anyway. It doesn’t really, specifically, help warn anyone who may be triggered anyway. All it really does is poke at the Republicans, which presumably the article would do that anyway. I definitely think trigger warnings should be informative and not agenda pushing. On the… Read more »
@HeatherN Actually, I’m worried I might be being misunderstood here. You suggest that I don’t have a problem “with anyone posting *geniune* trigger warnings.” …but my concern is that it is usually a bit difficult to discern or at least to agree on what is and is not genuine. And I don’t want to say that the problem is only present when people discuss politics. *Any* hot topic provokes strong feelings and I give everyone the benefit of the doubt that their trigger warnings are all meant genuinely. Ie, they know that if someone like themselves were to stumble upon… Read more »
Ah right, I think this is something of a misunderstanding of what a trigger is. A trigger isn’t just “oh this makes me uncomfortable,” or “oh I don’t like this.” A trigger warning isn’t there to tell people what they should or shouldn’t be upset about. It’s not even there to warn people that a subject may be sensitive or “adult themed.” A trigger warning is there for people who have a very personal, emotional and physical response to a subject. When someone says “trigger warning for discussions of rape,” they aren’t actually directing that to everyone. Something like that… Read more »
Well, again, while *I* would not be inclined to label anything with a “trigger warning” that I didn’t think would very likely cause someone out there to have a panic attack (if I was going to use the label at all, which I probably wouldn’t), what I’m saying is that I don’t think that that is how it has *come to be used*. I think it, instead, has come to be far overused, and imagine, based on how you would prefer to define the word that you would agree… I guess my question would be, don’t you agree that the… Read more »
Oh, just wanted to add that the original article gets into what I’m saying about how they’re used now I think; Ozy wrote: “Trigger warnings no longer refer to just mental health things, they refer to anything people find annoying. It’s a fair cop; I think it’s an outcome of people trying to warn for literally everything that could possibly trigger someone, which is as previously discussed impossible.” Ozy says its a “fair cop,” and think zie is saying something similar to what I was saying, but doesn’t know what the reaction should be. Zie never really says… If it’s… Read more »
“I guess my question would be, don’t you agree that the real-world usage of the term “trigger warning” has become so overused by the internet that its usage ought to mostly just be discouraged at this point?” Trigger warnings are mostly used online…just try to impose a consistent policy of term usage and standards of practice onto the internet…I dare you…lol. 😉 But seriously, yes there is inconsistency, as Ozy points out…and yes that can be a problem. One of the other commenters was pointing out about how someone used to over-use it so much it became meaningless, and then… Read more »
Ahh, trigger warnings. I had to defollow a friend on LJ because she kept on putting them on every single post she did. At first I’d see “trigger warning for uncomfortable subjects”, steel myself (while we’re sharing, my vision gets foggy and I throw up at eating disorders being used for laughs or kinks) and then I’d see a vague line about Anakin from Star Wars getting beaten up. Eventually I got complacent, and what d’you know, there was a video of the baby scene in A Serbian Film.
Yeah, too high a false positive rate makes warnings useless. Computer security warnings are notorious for this – you see them all the time and they’re never actually a problem, so you just start ignoring them…
Yeah, this is a very interesting point. Since everything -could- be triggering it’s tempting to warn about everything, but then you might as well warn about nothing.
To trigger warn or not, that is the question? Not quite – it’s even how to warn that can be a bigger issue. It seems mad to some, but the very use of the “Trigger Warning” meme can it self be a trigger – it even encourages people to “”not”” read content, that for them, is not triggering and even helpful. I’ve even had to deal with people who have developed a high level of attachment to “Trigger Warnings” as proof of their own Victim Status and lack of power in the face of two words. The meme has taken… Read more »
My susceptibility to triggers depends on my state of mind. If I am feeling unstable, I avoid alcohol and any kind of media that might trigger me. If I am feeling stable, then I can read about rape and child abuse as much as I like.
I like having the choice.
As for your argument that combat veterans don’t get PTSD trigger warnings, THEY SHOULD! It is bad that they don’t.
Yes. I have a friend who can’t watch certain movies for this reason. Any movie with sustained gunfire in a semi-realistic tactical situation is a problem for her. (Mobsters getting in a pistol fight: OK. Almost any war movie: NO)
I agree MediaHound – I too am skeptical of their current usage.
Trigger warnings have gone a level deeper into the comments themselves. And sometimes within the comment, the trigger warning is placed not at the top of the comment, but at the top of a paragraph within the comment. I personally don’t have readable trigger warnings, though there are horrific written descriptions that cost me emotional strength to read – I find particular visual imagery much more disturbing, as there is no real way to stop or ease into images.
[quote]I don’t watch comedies unless they’ve been pre-vetted by someone I trust. There’s too high a chance that all the humor will be based around someone being embarrassed in public, and then I will have to spend the entire movie with my eyes closed and ears stopped up repeating to myself “it’s only a movie, it’s only a movie” and it will be terrible for everyone.[/quote] I hate “cringe humor” centered around public or social embarrassment. I fucking can’t stand shows like Curb Your Enthusiasm, and American Idol tryouts are of course definitely out of the question. (I don’t watch… Read more »
A good read. Just for discussion on the subject of triggers referring to anything people find annoying: I, too, am of the opinion that anything can be a trigger (brunettes, left-handed redheads, whatever), and that there’s the extent to which it’s futile to attempt to account for ALL of them. The best compromise I’ve found is as follows: provide trigger warnings for “the usual suspects” (rape, abuse, etc.), though I feel Personally? One of my very few triggers is media depicting the slaughter of so-called “punch-clock villains” by so-called protagonists (usually brooding, one-dimensional anti-heroes), who are almost always superhuman in… Read more »
Er, that should have read…
On the subject of “slaughtering punch-clock villains” (some who may not be aware that they’re working for a bad guy, or be aware but too afraid to quit) one could sometimes make the case that the heroes (or antiheroes) don’t know whether they’ll surrender peacefully or warn the big bad (especially if their plan involves taking said big bad by surprise) and probably don’t have time to secure them. This is tactically sound, if morally questionable. On the other hand, if they just barge in and slaughter everyone they see without even trying to be stealthy, then unless they have… Read more »
“(And as for The Matrix, I only vaguely remember the film so I’m not sure about that particular scene, but people have endlessly debated the morality of slaughtering everyone present when potentially anyone could turn into an agent, who are basically superbeings that could respawn endlessly, and the goal is supposedly to free all humanity from a form of slavery – except the “slavery” part is itself also questionable.)” Not to mention the stupidity of it. Remember how they shot up that hallway full of security guards to get to the rooftop? Remember that they found a helicopter there that… Read more »
I think that public embarrassment/shame as a potential trigger definitely needs to become more aware in the public conscious. Not only in trigger warnings, but just in general.
Also, I’ve always thought that people who disregard the importance of trigger warnings (and the problem of triggers in the real world) are basically victim-blaming a second time, which is horrible.
I agree that public embarrassment should be more often acknowledged. Not just as a trigger but to give people more of a choice. If I know a film is going to misogynistic or include bullying or public shame (esp. without addressing it properly) then I won’t go see it. Simply to boycott stupid themes in comedies. I know if I relaxed, I’d probably still enjoy it as these aren’t my triggers, but I don’t think these films should be encouraged any more than they already are.
I”m so glad that I’m not the only one who feels really REALLY uncomfortable with public embarrassment scenes. It’s why I don’t really enjoy a lot of TV/movies and especially any reality shows…watching someone be publicly embarrassed makes my stomach knot up and I feel waves of embarrassment and sympathy for that person, fictional or otherwise. I don’t get a kick out someone else’s misery…I get secondhand misery, and like second-hand smoke, I feel it is bad for me and I will avoid!
I completely agree. I was glad when I read this too because I always thought I was the only one who didn’t get any enjoyment out of movies like that or find them all that funny. There’s a lot of comedies I don’t watch because of the potential for that being the humor and it makes me so uncomfortable that I want to crawl out of my skin and I too don’t watch a lot of reality TV because of that as well.
Yeah, I could watch Girl With The Dragon Tattoo without flinching….but I can’t even watch the trailers to Borat without my skin crawling.
It wasn’t until wicked recently that I even realized this was a legitimate trigger. I used to just tell myself I was being over-sensitive or whatever, which isn’t the healthiest way to deal with it.
I’m the same way. I thought Bridesmaids was a hilarious movie, but during that party scene where the protagonist adn that other women kept grabbing the microphone from one another, I had to stop the movie and leave the room for a few minutes.
“I cannot get the people who hate me to say “TW for pressing Ozy’s ‘I am a horrible person’ buttons”).”
Ozy, I would like to say you are a wonderful person! In addition, I may sometimes come off as blunt, harsh or inflexible. This is just how Lamech types on the internet. Don’t let it make you think Lamech dislikes you. Again Lamech thinks you are a wonderful person.
Here here for Ozy being a wonderful person!
Thirded! <3
Fourth’d.
You have a trigger associated with being called a bad person and you started a blog (with a non-traditional philosophical position no less) on gender? I don’t mean to invade your privacy, but how much did it cost to get your car’s chasis re-enforced to accommodate your GIANT METAPHORICAL GONADS? That is amazing and you are amazing for gazing right into your own abyss, letting it gaze back into you, and continuing to post such amazing, articulate, poignant, thoughtful posts. I have no concept of exactly how hard that must be beyond stories from others who have to deal with… Read more »