Trigger Warnings - What's your take? (1 Viewer)

[bigbottom]

To be clear though, I understand what @chet is saying too.

A warning is one thing. You warn and then say the thing.

Where it becomes different is more in a conversation and if it turns to "You can't say what you're saying to me because it triggers me". 

Sure. But that’s not what a trigger warning is. That is someone complaining about being triggered, whether rightly or wrongly.

 

[ConnSKINS26]

A trigger warning is saying, "Don't bring up this topic or use this word because it will cause me to be uncomfortable or worse,"  so even if you don't explicitly ask someone to censor their language, the request is implicit.

That's not it at all. It's the opposite, and really only used in content that would reach a lot of people--not in one-on-one conversations. It's a warning before content, not a request for warnings in everyday speech. 

 

[Franknbeans]

I saw a right to lifer group holding placards of aborted fetuses once. Wish I had a trigger warning for that.

 

[chet]

That’s seems to be the opposite of how trigger warnings are supposed to work, as far as I understand it. I thought it was to provide a warning that what you are about to say may be offensive or cause feelings of discomfort. You give the trigger warning so you don’t have to censor yourself. 

Am I off base on this?

Maybe I am thinking about the videos where I see people get "triggered" by what someone says.  

If I am about to say something that is controversial, depending on how well I know the person, I might say something like, "the following might be controversial," but I don't think I'd ever give a trigger warning.

 

[bigbottom]

Maybe I am thinking about the videos where I see people get "triggered" by what someone says.  

If I am about to say something that is controversial, depending on how well I know the person, I might say something like, "the following might be controversial," but I don't think I'd ever give a trigger warning.

That seems to be a generic form of a trigger warning. 

 

[chet]

That's not it at all. It's the opposite, and really only used in content that would reach a lot of people--not in one-on-one conversations. It's a warning before content, not a request for warnings in everyday speech. 

Addressed above--I was thinking about where people get "triggered" by words or topics.

 

[badmojo1006]

When i think of trigger warnings, i dont think about this board, but the mental health people i work with. I do sometimes let it get to me, but most of the time, i let it go.

 

[KarmaPolice]

That's not it at all. It's the opposite, and really only used in content that would reach a lot of people--not in one-on-one conversations. It's a warning before content, not a request for warnings in everyday speech. 

I think it is starting to toe this line if some of the reports I've heard (mostly via podcasts, mind you) are true about trigger warnings for college classes.  Seems to toe more on the line of not wanted to hear things or discuss things (again, if these reports are true).  

 

[Joe Bryant]

Sure. But that’s not what a trigger warning is. That is someone complaining about being triggered, whether rightly or wrongly.

Yes. It's all in the conversation. 

For this thread though, I was talking specifically about a trigger warning at the beginning of an email or video.

 

[tommyGunZ]

Here's some additional information:

Common list of trigger warnings:

Imagine a world where every article you read is prefaced by warnings when any of those topics come up.  Imagine kids in schools requiring warnings before reading books with this content, or listening to lectures, on these issues.

Imagine a world of kids growing up feeling like they need to be prepared, in advance, to discuss topics that come up all the time.  Is this a better world where more healthy adults are being prepared in school, or a world where we're cranking out folks wholly unprepared to enter "the real world", or kids who are seeking to go out and rewrite "the real world" to put warning messages before potentially "emotionally reactive" messages are encountered.

Kids feeling like they should be prepared in advance to discuss topics is a bad thing?  

The world you’re describing sounds much preferable to the world as we currently know it.  50 years ago grumpy old men were probably saying the same thing about movie ratings, food labels, etc. 

 

[adonis]

Kids feeling like they should be prepared in advance to discuss topics is a bad thing?  

The world you’re describing sounds much preferable to the world as we currently know it.  50 years ago grumpy old men were probably saying the same thing about movie ratings, food labels, etc. 

“In my day, preparing in advance to discuss topics was called studying.  I didn’t need a warning that what I encountered might cause me emotional distress.  I read it, processed it, and discussed it. If I encountered something that caused me to have a panic attack from reading about, it’d be a clear sign I had some work to do with a psychologist perhaps to be prepared to handle the world without needing warnings that allowed me to avoid certain topics or emotionally prepare myself before reading them. “

- old man adonis

 

[bigbottom]

Here's some additional information:

Common list of trigger warnings:

Imagine a world where every article you read is prefaced by warnings when any of those topics come up.  Imagine kids in schools requiring warnings before reading books with this content, or listening to lectures, on these issues.

Imagine a world of kids growing up feeling like they need to be prepared, in advance, to discuss topics that come up all the time.  Is this a better world where more healthy adults are being prepared in school, or a world where we're cranking out folks wholly unprepared to enter "the real world", or kids who are seeking to go out and rewrite "the real world" to put warning messages before potentially "emotionally reactive" messages are encountered.

I’d rather there be a trigger warning for an Am Lit class that includes The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn as assigned reading, than removing the book from the curriculum altogether (which has happened in a number of school districts).

 

[tommyGunZ]

“In my day, preparing in advance to discuss topics was called studying.  I didn’t need a warning that what I encountered might cause me emotional distress.  I read it, processed it, and discussed it. If I encountered something that caused me to have a panic attack from reading about, it’d be a clear sign I had some work to do with a psychologist perhaps to be prepared to handle the world without needing warnings that allowed me to avoid certain topics or emotionally prepare myself before reading them. “

- old man adonis

It’s. Not. About. You.  

 

[KarmaPolice]

I’d rather there be a trigger warning for an Am Lit class that includes The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn as assigned reading, than removing the book from the curriculum altogether (which has happened in a number of school districts).

For sure, if those are the only two options.  I guess I would prefer that people be able to read, digest, and talk about things in context and not be traumatized by words and works of fiction.  Again, I will admit that it depends on age and context, but if we are talking about Sophomores in HS on up... 

 

[Otis]

To be clear though, I understand what @chet is saying too.

A warning is one thing. You warn and then say the thing.

Where it becomes different is more in a conversation and if it turns to "You can't say what you're saying to me because it triggers me". 

I still have no idea what a trigger warning is or really what the question is.  

 

[Joe Bryant]

I still have no idea what a trigger warning is or really what the question is.  

Are you being serious? 

If so, a trigger warning is statement before something that warns the reader or viewer.

Buttigieg did it with his email he sent:

Please note: this email contains language that may trigger feelings of trauma related to gun violence.

-- 

Twenty years ago, two Columbine High School students murdered twelve peers and one teacher. 

Two decades later, the rate of school shootings has increased. In 2018, there were more incidents of gun violence and more gun deaths at schools than any other year on record. In no other developed nation do students face these unprecedented levels of gun violence in their schools.

(The email goes on a bit to talk about his position on gun control and such)

The question is does doing this matter at all to you one way or the other?

 

[bigbottom]

For sure, if those are the only two options.  I guess I would prefer that people be able to read, digest, and talk about things in context and not be traumatized by words and works of fiction.  Again, I will admit that it depends on age and context, but if we are talking about Sophomores in HS on up... 

If it’s a sophomore Am Lit class, I wouldn’t have any issue advising the class ahead of time that the N-word is used liberally in The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, and that they should understand the context in which the words are used and the time the book was written. That would take like ten seconds and would avoid the knee jerk reaction some of the students may have that would undermine the learning process. 

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

There seems to be some sort of assumption as to what the audience can handle. 

 Is that fair to say?

Yes, I think that’s the crux of it.

The absence of a trigger warning makes an assumption about what the audience can handle.

Including a trigger warning makes no such assumption, and instead leaves such judgments up to the audience.

 

[Otis]

Are you being serious? 

If so, a trigger warning is statement before something that warns the reader or viewer.

Buttigieg did it with his email he sent:

The question is does doing this matter at all to you one way or the other?

Why would anyone have a problem with this?

 

[Max Power]

So if an email or video comes with a trigger warning and I choose to read/watch it, does that mean I can't be outraged?  Does it take some sort of liability out of the hands of the original poster?

 

[Apple Jack]

So if an email or video comes with a trigger warning and I choose to read/watch it, does that mean I can't be outraged?  Does it take some sort of liability out of the hands of the original poster?

Take it to the outrage warnings thread.

 

[huthut]

I have a blood test phobia (not blood, not needles, specifically getting blood collected) from a bad phlebotomist when I was in high school. I had a bunch of coworkers sitting around talking about getting blood collected and I literally felt sick and had to leave. I imagine for things that are more traumatic there could be a similar or stronger response. With that said, I also think some people over-use it to show how woke they are. 

 

[KarmaPolice]

If it’s a sophomore Am Lit class, I wouldn’t have any issue advising the class ahead of time that the N-word is used liberally in The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, and that they should understand the context in which the words are used and the time the book was written. That would take like ten seconds and would avoid the knee jerk reaction some of the students may have that would undermine the learning process. 

Fair point.   

Does this move beyond that point and students get to sit out that book because they don't think they can handle that word in a book?

 

[Joe Bryant]

Yes, I think that’s the crux of it.

The absence of a trigger warning makes an assumption about what the audience can handle.

Including a trigger warning makes no such assumption, and instead leaves such judgments up to the audience.

Unless he's just writing words to write them, the author makes the assumption that some of his audience might not be able to handle the content. 

On previous Buttigieg emails without a trigger warning, the writer assumed there was no content in the email that might reasonably trigger the audience. 

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

So if an email or video comes with a trigger warning and I choose to read/watch it, does that mean I can't be outraged?  Does it take some sort of liability out of the hands of the original poster?

Being outraged is your right as an American citizen; nobody can take it away from you.

 

[Max Power]

Take it to the outrage warnings thread.

I'm missing out on all the good threads

 

[Leroy Hoard]

Take it to the outrage warnings thread.

I thought you said outage warnings.  It would be nice if they warned me in advance on those.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Unless he's just writing words to write them, the author makes the assumption that some of his audience might not be able to handle the content. 

On previous Buttigieg emails without a trigger warning, the writer assumed there was no content in the email that might reasonably trigger the audience. 

I don’t think the first paragraph describes much of an assumption. “Might” is always a possibility unless we assume otherwise. I would say that “will” or “will not” are assumptions while “might” is the absence of an assumption.

I agree with the second paragraph. It’s usually quite reasonable to assume that people won’t be triggered by normal things.

 

[Max Power]

Being outraged is your right as an American citizen; nobody can take it away from you.

So a trigger warning is the polite thing to do for any controversial topic? If thats the case, I'll side on the we don't need them. 

 

[Joe Bryant]

So if an email or video comes with a trigger warning and I choose to read/watch it, does that mean I can't be outraged?  Does it take some sort of liability out of the hands of the original poster?

There is some angle of covering yourself in it. 

In this case with Buttigieg, if someone were to say they were upset by him mentioning Columbine, he could point to the warning at the top of the email and  

But that doesn't feel like why most people do it. 

Buttigieg is a hyper-smart politician with seemingly great political instincts. Meaning most of what he does and says has a reason.

Good writers (and he's one) don't waste words. Good writers make every word earn their space lest they be a distraction. My assumption would be Buttigieg said this to create a positive effect with readers. Both for those obviously who don't want to read something that will upset them but also for other readers who aren't upset by the topic. 

 

[bigbottom]

Fair point.   

Does this move beyond that point and students get to sit out that book because they don't think they can handle that word in a book?

It’s a good question. As I mentioned in my original post, my preference would be that the warning be included in the public syllabus for the class, so kids could choose whether or not to take that particular class. 

But if we’re talking about the warning in class, I would ideally handle it on a case by case basis if a particular student told me that he or she would be traumatized or have difficulty reading the book. Of course, the school district or whatever standards board exists might prevent me from handling it on a case by case basis, which is one of many reasons why I’m not a teacher. 

 

[Joe Bryant]

I don’t think the first paragraph describes much of an assumption. “Might” is always a possibility unless we assume otherwise. I would say that “will” or “will not” is an assumption while “might” is the absence of an assumption.

Thanks. We'll just disagree there. It was enough of a "might" to say something. 

 

[Otis]

I only skimmed, but is there some group of people who have a problem with this??  Is this a thing??

”You know what really enrages me??  Windows.  And doors. Really sticks in my craw. Oh, and armchairs.” 

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

So a trigger warning is the polite thing to do for any controversial topic? If thats the case, I'll side on the we don't need them. 

No, it’s arguably (but not certainly — there are reasonable differences of opinion) the polite thing to do before describing rape, gun violence, or other topics that some people find traumatic.

 

[Ilov80s]

Teaching in high school over the last couple years, I’ve begun doing this for certain subjects like lynching, Holocaust, etc. I know the English teachers give a heads up about books that might use the n-word or involve a rape scene. It’s not used as a way for the kids to get out of it. I can only think of one time in my memory that a kid responded to that warning by asking to be excused from something. The student had been raped by a family member and she wasn’t ready to deal with it in class. Typically it’s just used as a heads up that it’s coming and also a reminder to everyone that it’s a very serious subject that we need to approach carefully. I want to make sure nobody says something crass or tries to make humor out of a topic like slavery.

 

[adonis]

It’s. Not. About. You.  

Odd response

 

[bigbottom]

No, it’s arguably (but not certainly — there are reasonable differences of opinion) the polite thing to do before describing rape, gun violence, or other topics that some people find traumatic.

The first example I recall of what felt like a modern day trigger warning was in my Criminal Law class in 1995.  It was before the rape section of the course and the professor told everyone that we’re going to discuss some difficult subject matter, and that some of the topics may make people feel very uncomfortable, and the focus on legal elements of the crime may make it feel like we are ignoring the victims and the trauma they experience. He said it was going to be a difficult topic, but that we’d get through it. I think people appreciated that statement, and no one had a problem with it as far as I knew. 

 

[Ilov80s]

Tying into this, in history for example there’s the famous Billie Holiday song Strange Fruit that’s about black people being lynched. It’s a really powerful song but in a clas where I’m white and the class is 2/3 white and 1/3 black, it’s a subject I try to be careful with. There’s some videos that sometimes are played with it that show images of lynchings. On one hand the horror of it delivers an impact of how hateful racism can be, it’s also really brutal to see. I’m not sure how that feels as a black person to take that all in- especially in a space that’s still mostly white. Ofcourse not everyone in class would react the same. So it’s something we’ve watched sometimes and other times not- I decide on case by case basis after we talk about it as a group and the kids take an anonymous survey.

 

[rockaction]

Life is one giant trigger warning. I really think trigger warnings are indicative of a culture of softness and luxury, of a refusal to see the world as it is in both its beauty and cruelty. We tend to fancifully imagine a just and thoughtful world with just and thoughtful people. Life is nowhere near that.

Trigger warnings are the sign of a society in its decadent (decadent meaning "to rot") stages, indicative of an emotional immaturity and an inability to deal with subjects with seriousness that comes with an all-too familiar comfort of shelter from the potentially brutal storm that is the stark fact of existence in a world of seeming will and fate, of the tug between emotion and reason. 

Thank you.   

 

[Slapdash]

Life is one giant trigger warning. I really think trigger warnings are indicative of a culture of softness and luxury, of a refusal to see the world as it is in both its beauty and cruelty. We tend to fancifully imagine a just and thoughtful world with just and thoughtful people. Life is nowhere near that.

Trigger warnings are the sign of a society in its decadent (decadent meaning "to rot") stages, indicative of an emotional immaturity that comes with an all-too familiar comfort of shelter from the potentially brutal storm that is the stark fact of existence in a world of seeming will and fate, of the tug between emotion and reason. 

Thank you.   

Not saying I agree, but reading your post brought this song to my head immediately. 

 

[matuski]

I still have no idea what a trigger warning is.

 

[Ilov80s]

Life is one giant trigger warning. I really think trigger warnings are indicative of a culture of softness and luxury, of a refusal to see the world as it is in both its beauty and cruelty. We tend to fancifully imagine a just and thoughtful world with just and thoughtful people. Life is nowhere near that.

Trigger warnings are the sign of a society in its decadent (decadent meaning "to rot") stages, indicative of an emotional immaturity and an inability to deal with subjects with seriousness that comes with an all-too familiar comfort of shelter from the potentially brutal storm that is the stark fact of existence in a world of seeming will and fate, of the tug between emotion and reason. 

Thank you.   

I don’t know, I think it’s fair to warn someone before showing images of dead bodies hung from trees for example or mass graves. I’ve had teachers before who I think reveled in the shock value they got out of students by showing those things. I think a heads up on that would be nice.

 

[rockaction]

I still have no idea what a trigger warning is.

It's when you warn people that what they are about to see or read contains sensitive topics qua topic. In other words, the actual depiction or form that the discussion or artwork is about to take is not potentially offensive in its inception or depiction, but that the actual topics themselves are so sensitive as to potentially cause the audience member himself or herself to be in tumult or to be disturbed. 

 

[matuski]

It's when you warn people that what they are about to see or read contains sensitive topics qua topic. In other words, the actual depiction or form that the discussion or artwork is about to take is not potentially offensive in its inception or depiction, but that the actual topics themselves are so sensitive as to potentially cause the audience member himself or herself to be in tumult or to be disturbed. 

Stuff like this needs to be ignored away.

What if cupcakes disturb me?  Please don't talk about cupcakes without giving me a heads up first.

 

[Ilov80s]

I still have no idea what a trigger warning is.

For example If you click on one of the Twitter curated stories, sometimes it warns you it has sensitive material. Like it might have graphic images of people hurt/killed in a terror attack. Some people don’t want to see an image of a guy with his arms blown off.

 

[rockaction]

I don’t know, I think it’s fair to warn someone before showing images of dead bodies hung from trees for example or mass graves. I’ve had teachers before who I think reveled in the shock value they got out of students by showing those things. I think a heads up on that would be nice.

There is a difference between warning about graphic images or depictions versus warning about potential sensitivities about the actual topics qua topics, which is what trigger warnings, borrowing the practice from the modern campus, do. They warn of the potential sensitivity to the topic in relation to the topic itself, not the degree to which its form or depiction is graphic or potentially disturbing in nature.

We draw lines in our warnings because we assume we're adult enough and serious enough to handle tough topics. That we have a few bad apples that like to provoke or shock for provocation or shock's sake is a problem to treat on a case-by-case basis rather than with blanket warnings or blanket judgments on instruction methods or social protocol. 

 

[matuski]

For example If you click on one of the Twitter curated stories, sometimes it warns you it has sensitive material. Like it might have graphic images of people hurt/killed in a terror attack. Some people don’t want to see an image of a guy with his arms blown off.

OK.  Graphic content I expect a warning.. I don't associate the word "trigger" with that.  

 

[rockaction]

For example If you click on one of the Twitter curated stories, sometimes it warns you it has sensitive material. Like it might have graphic images of people hurt/killed in a terror attack. Some people don’t want to see an image of a guy with his arms blow off.

That's not what the trigger warnings that people are complaining about are doing. The trigger warnings people are complaining about are talking about the sensitivity of the topics themselves, not the nature of the form or depiction or artwork's graphic nature. We've always warned about graphic things such as that.

That's why Resnais's Night And Fog comes with permission slips and the like. It's also why critics judge the essence of the work in regard to its graphic nature. For example, the difference between wanton depictions of death (Faces Of Death) and political statements showing the graphic nature of death (Night And Fog). It's also the core of the intellectual and emotional difference between pornography and erotica, a subject that is taught -- or used to be -- in higher education and on the campus. 

 

[Ilov80s]

There is a difference between warning about graphic images or depictions versus warning about potential sensitivities about the actual topics qua topics, which is what trigger warnings, borrowing the practice from the modern campus, do. They warn of the potential sensitivity to the topic in relation to the topic itself, not the degree to which its form or depiction is graphic or potentially disturbing in nature.

We draw lines in our warnings because we assume we're adult enough and serious enough to handle tough topics. That we have a few bad apples that like to provoke or shock for provocation or shock's sake is a problem to treat on a case-by-case basis rather than with blanket warnings or blanket judgments on instruction methods or social protocol. 

It’s a broad concept and I think it has some useful applications and many applications that are absurd. I think the trigger warning everything crowd is wrong but so is the trigger warnings are all bad crowd. Like most things, it should be judged case by case.

 

[adonis]

I’d rather there be a trigger warning for an Am Lit class that includes The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn as assigned reading, than removing the book from the curriculum altogether (which has happened in a number of school districts).

Given that choice, me too. 

It not great that we have to make that choice though.