I'm sure most people here know what a trigger warning is, but for those who don't, it's a warning to a reader about possible disturbing content, so they can avoid reading it if it might "trigger" a negative mental reaction, especially for people with PTSD. It seems common sense that you might warn someone about rape or abuse or other things we all agree are "disturbing". No different than a "viewer discretion advised" warning at the beginning of a TV show or newscast. Other times, they seem a bit excessive. Should there really be a "body dysmorphia" trigger warning on a post about going to the gym?* Are trigger warnings helpful? Are they overused? Should they be accepted as part of normal social etiquette? Just liked to hear your thoughts. *My friend told me about this one. As with all her stories, I'm not very familiar with tumblr and reddit where she gets them. This is meant to be an extreme example and I'm not "endorsing" it, I guess.
Helpful to some extent, but they go out of hand. Half the stuff people tag aren't even really "triggers" but just things that offend them. Offensive =/= PTSD panic attack
Good point. I mean, you could put an "offensive warning" if you wanted to. But that doesn't make it a real "trigger" warning. It is my understanding that "triggers" are about PTSD and not just about being offensive.
The thing is anything can be a trigger warning for anyone, I do think it is overused. Are we going to have people walking the streets looking out for 2 people arguing in the street to hold up a "trigger warning" sign for anyone who's been in an abusive relationship? And the term is very vague, trigger of what? There's loads of things, if you see it how do you know it applies to you or not? Whether you're watching a TV program or browsing this forum, you know roughly what the content is before you watch or read it and if it does adversely affect you then surely you just don't look at it. There's a ton of things I've seen on here which you could say are "triggers" for me, while yeah it does remind me of things from the past and may even make me upset, it doesn't have an adverse affect on me and if something I ever did see started to get too heavy, I would just stop reading it. PS you look proper cute in your new photo!
I think they do tend to be overused, but there are situations that warrant them. Generally should summarize, though...
As someone who's had problems with eating disorders, I think a trigger warning can be useful for that. I mean, it doesn't have to say "TRIGGER WARNING", but if a post is about something related to body image, eating and/or exercising, please make that clear in the title. Because it is triggering.
I'd appreciate a trigger warning if the content is gory - like a video of someone being decapitated. I do not want to see that, or anything similar that involves lots of blood, or death.
Yeah, I see a lot of people just saying 'trigger warning' which is definitely vague... On Tumblr I often see 'rape tw' or 'drugs tw' or 'blood tw' and stuff, which works better since it actually tells you what might be triggering and it won't show up for people who have 'rape', 'drugs', 'blood' or w/e blacklisted. If I reblog something that might be offensive but not necessarily triggering I usually just use cw [content warning] instead of tw [trigger warning]. And yeah, I think they're helpful but a little bit overused sometimes. I once saw a cute post about lesbian moms or w/e on Tumblr and someone tagged it 'bi erasure cw' which I thought was weird but yeah... I don't really understand the 'you don't have trigger warnings in real life' argument that I often see. I mean, in the USA you have this system for TV shows/movies: [in the Netherlands we have a similar system except we also have icons for scary scenes, discrimination and use of alcohol/drugs]. So why are some people so against trigger warnings being used on the Internet? Beside, it doesn't harm anyone? It just makes the Internet a nicer place for people who often use it to escape the real world for a little while...
I agree with tagging stuff since I don't like to see certain things (extreme gore for example). I'm only against it when It's not necessary. For example, like you said lesbian posts being tagged as 'bi erasure'. That's just being oversensitive.
It's a great idea, but people don't know what they need to be used for. I've seen photos of cats playing with toy mice where the title mentions it's 'triggering' because people could mistake the toy as a real mouse, and people could get extremely triggered by a photo of a cat playing with a green felt toy. I'm genuinely sorry if this is a common trigger and I'm just being ignorant, but I've certainly never heard of it before. Stuff that is ridiculously gory should just not be shared on the internet, period. I've seen videos of child abuse, beheadings, animal torture, bullying of disabled children, and bestiality shared on my news feed. It's going to be distressing for a lot of people. I think it would be better if people just didn't share it instead of people sharing it but putting a trigger warning on. That being said, I'm sure some people have really benefited from having trigger warnings on posts.
If you click a video titled "Execution of west journalist infidels" you sort of know what the content is and you can only find it if you go looking for it. The media pixelates it all or makes you tick an I'm over 18 box before seeing it. So if you are sensitive to seeing what used to be someone's brains sprayed all over the wall, there's plenty of opportunity beforehand to not see it.
^_^ Thank you :smilewave lol on topic, I agree about warnings with things that are violent. I'm very big into news and I'm always following the news and researching stories about conflicts and wars...so I appreciate a "graphic content" warning because I don't like to see actual videos of gory scenes. But like I said, that seems more common sense. Some of these other things are more esoteric. I also think a lot of people just don't want to be sensitive. They don't feel like they should have to.
I mean, it's Tumblr so I'm not surprised that someone tagged something a lesbian wrote about lesbians as bi erasure, but still............
I can't speak for the other person, but a couple of years ago I saw a video of a woman being executed on facebook, because the video autoplays as you're scrolling down and it was in another language and it wasn't totally obvious what they were doing until it had happened. I definitely didn't look for it, but it was being shared.
Two really good articles on the issue and the problems with it. For certain limited situations -- survivors of recent rape, certain populations with sexual abuse certain PTSD survivors -- there may be justification to at least have sensitivity to the issues. For most everyone else, it's entitlement and special snowflaking. Attack of the Trigger warnings: the latest threat to academic freedom - The Globe and Mail
I don't need any trigger warnings...I can stomach anything that's gory, or disturbing...But, there's people out there who can't, so I guess it's necessary...
Good article. I think that really illustrates how "trigger warnings" can be taken too far. I have nothing against "disturbing content ahead", but the idea that that content should now be removed from academic curricula...that's a problem and definitely an attack on academic freedom. As the article says, universities aren't here to protect students from reality.
I think trigger warnings are good, but for sensitive topics that warrant one, like gore or rape. Some people can take them too far though; there's a difference between something you don't like/something that grosses you out, and a trigger. I think people just need to properly understand the difference.
I generally appreciate those warnings and the Spoiler Alerts (which are sometimes used for similar reasons of covering up potentially disturbing material, and giving people the option to view it with a single click). I have no trouble with viewing whatever content...but for certain challenging topics (and this includes "offensive material" and extreme cases of bigotry/hate) I like to be properly forewarned, so I can get my head in the right place before reading. Such warnings have also led me to just "meh-skip" a thread entirely...some days, y'just don't want or need to read certain things. Furthermore, I certainly see no *harm* in posting such a warning...so if they genuinely help people, I have no issue with them. And while people are certainly right that there's a difference between "this offends me" and "this triggers a traumatic response in me", I have no trouble with the "trigger" language. Sure, most readers may not be traumatized by the content...but frequently someone could be...and I think we all pretty much understand the hyperbole and know how to take it (i.e., "hey, this is something that might upset you, so if you choose to read it, do so with open eyes").