[url=https://i.imgur.com/8KQOTbb.jpg]Use trigger warnings in your writing.[/url]
[url=https://i.imgur.com/C6k9vDX.jpeg]They’re important.[/url]
[spoiler]That’s two links by the by.[/spoiler]
Edit: Just so we're all on the same page, let me explain a bit more why trigger warnings are important.
[b]Trigger warnings do not exist for people who have normal responses for things[/b]. If you have a particularly empathetic author/dev/etc. they may slip in trigger warnings just so people aren't made uncomfortable, but normal folk aren't the target here. When people encounter trauma in their lives, it's not uncommon for their bodies to develop a defense response to those traumas. As a result, [b]some people have involuntary, visceral responses to certain subjects that can have both short term and long term negative effects on their mental health[/b], i.e. a trauma response. Not only is the immediate response blown way out of proportion compared to what someone who hasn't experienced the trauma, it can also then remind the victim of the trauma they've encountered in the past, resulting in a long-term depression, or worse.
As a result, [b]trigger warnings should be interpreted less like an ESRB rating[/b] which serve to help a younger audience avoid media they or their parents don't want to see, but ultimately won't be severely damaging in any way, and instead [b]they should be seen as something more similar to an epilepsy warning[/b]; just like a scene that has no effect on a regular viewer can cause an epileptic seizure for someone with epilepsy, relatively minor scenes related to someone's trauma can trigger a trauma response, even if people without that trauma find that scene to be relatively tame.
Now obviously, as trauma can take a million different forms, trauma responses can be triggered by a wide variety of stimuli, and it's legitimately impossible to add a warning for everyone. However, certain traumas are more prevalent than others, and those widespread ones should [i]always[/i] have a trigger warning when they appear in the story, in order to protect the mental health of its audience.
Or in short;
Use trigger warnings.
They're important.
English
-
In certain scenarios I can see it, but on the other end if you’re getting so offended that a trigger warning is needed is it really gonna matter if the trigger warning is there? Probably not because people would see trigger warning and would not engage with the argument being made. In short: Trigger warnings aren’t needed
-
I don't think you understand the point of a trigger warning. Trigger warnings don't exist to warn people that they might get mad, they exist to warn people that the story in question might trigger a trauma response. For instance, if someone was abused a child, then if a book has child abuse in it, their body might enter a defense mode, and they can have a mental breakdown. The severity is different from person to person, but it almost always has a severely negative impact on the victim's short term and long term health. Trigger warnings serve essentially as an informational disclaimer saying "Hey, just so you know, we're going to be talking about this subject.". That way, the audience doesn't get blindsided by their trauma response, and can make an informed decision as to whether or not to consume the media in question.
-
I think this raises a question: should the rules of writing or speech be bent to fit the needs of a small percentage of people. Do the needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many.
-
[quote]Do the needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many.[/quote] Needs of the many? Are you saying that most people need to NOT have trigger warnings in thing they read? Why? The needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many, because the many are entirely irrelevant here. They are not harmed, hindered, or helped.
-
This is a really stupid take, because a trigger warning usually takes the form of one or two sentences at the beginning of a book, movie, game, etc. Nobody's "needs" are being hampered by stating that your book is going to be talking about difficult subjects, and no "rules of writing" are being broken. It's literally just having the common decency to let someone know you're about to talk about something that may make them uncomfortable, and that they're allowed to leave if they want.
-
Trauma can be associated with anything. In short anything can be a trauma trigger to someone so this would require trigger warnings on everything. Also, most “triggering” content is reserved for things that are 18+ so people who shouldn’t spontaneously break down at a word or a description.
-
Yes, trauma can be associated with anything, but some traumas are more common than others. While it's impossible to accommodate everyone, you should do your best to accommodate the widest amount of people you can; i.e. addressing the most common triggers. [quote]Also, most “triggering” content is reserved for things that are 18+ so people who shouldn’t spontaneously break down at a word or a description.[/quote] How does that meme go? "Tell me you've never had a traumatic experience without telling me you've never had a traumatic experience?" Yeah, that's not how it works. You can't just "turn off" a trauma response, and it's got nothing to do with maturity. It's the body's defense mechanism against past traumas. It's involuntary, and severely crippling. Like, I'd like to see you walk up to a veteran with PTSD and try to tell him he's too old to get triggered over reminders of the war. See how well that goes for ya.
-
Most of the most common traumatic experiences in the word are basically everywhere in media. Let’s take military ptsd for example, there are hundreds of military movies that could in some way trigger someone’s trauma response. People aren’t online talking about the traumatic response they endured while being exposed to military movies.
-
Actually, yes, they are. There are dozens upon dozens of studies on military PTSD that talk about the severe effects veterans can have from watching movies with realistic depictions of military operations. Just because you aren't part of the crowd doesn't mean the crowd doesn't exist. Maybe do a little bit of research before making sweeping statements like that, hm? The fact that things that may trigger someone's trauma response are common in media is [i]exactly[/i] why we need trigger warnings. We need people to be able to feel safe that they can go to the theatre and not have a mental breakdown because someone decided their mental well being wasn't as important as keeping a "spoiler" under wraps.
-
Edited by Reprimer: 6/20/2024 6:42:56 PMMy retort to that would be if you have sever military ptsd why are you watching a military movie
-
Military is the easy example, though. Usually, when something's a military movie, it's very obvious. The problem is, it's not always obvious. There are plenty of media that talks about child abuse, or suicide, or other very not nice topics, and there's no indication on the surface that those topics will be talked about. Take Doki Doki Literature Club for instance--which for the record, does have a trigger warning, and a very good one at that, props to them. You can play through the first half of the game totally unaware that the game tackles multiple very dark subjects. You're essentially trying to argue that "it's the audience's responsibility to know whether or not they can handle the subject matter", and yes, I agree, that's the exact reason why we need trigger warnings; so the audience [b]has the information they need to make these decisions in the first place[/b].
-
It’s the audiences responsibility to deal with their trauma and move past it. My grandpa was drafted in Vietnam, saw some pretty horrible stuff, he was actually the only one who survived from his Unit. He had sever PTSD when he got back. However he grew past it through therapy and thought. Now he jokes about it like it was nothing. So it’s not impossible to grow beyond trauma.
-
Yes, confronting trauma and learning to cope with it is important, however you don't want to throw that trauma in someone's face before they're ready. They need to take things at their own pace, and at their own speed. Trigger warnings allow people to make educated decisions, so that they can learn to grow past it. Throwing their trauma back in their face before they're ready to confront it can sometimes turn out well, but just as often it makes things even worse, causing the trauma to double down. Hence, we need trigger warnings, so that people don't get blindsided with a slap to the face full of trauma, and can instead tackle it once they feel they're ready to face it. Honestly, that you have a relative who had severe PTSD like you claim, yet you're still so adamantly against trigger warnings is baffling. Theoretically, this should mean you know how debilitating it can be.
-
I think there are some good arguments against trigger warnings. We’re going to encounter difficult conversations/situations/etc in life without warning, so we are going to have to learn to deal with them without warning. I can see how they can sometimes be appropriate, but it can be a slippery slope to walk down. The list of potentially triggering things is endless and a permanent “safe space” mentality can end up being a self-made prison. I wouldn’t assume that anyone who doesn’t use trigger warnings is only trying to shock and doesn’t have experience with the material. I’m also really sceptical that trigger warning = sensitivity to the content. The tweets imply that everyone who has experience with a particular trauma agrees on the best way to deal with it. I don’t know why this idea keeps cropping up in discussions about mental health, but I suspect it’s something to do with greater awareness of sensitivity, and less value placed on good old-fashioned grit. IMO, both are important.
-
Edited by The First Aifos: 6/19/2024 3:34:47 PMOkay, but answer me this; would willingly subject someone who has an epilepsy to an epileptic seizure to help them "know how to deal with it?" Hopefully, the answer there is no. As someone who actually has a trauma response, this isn't a simple "oh this topic makes me uncomfortable, now I'm sad", it's a "suddenly I'm having a total mental breakdown that's going to leave me with a depression that can last for weeks or even months". While you're right that learning how to cope and deal with these things is important, you don't want to, for example, drop a picture of someone hanging themselves in front of someone with a trauma response to s**cide and tell them you're trying to "toughen 'em up", but that's often exactly what people who are against trigger warnings do, and in worst case scenarios, when the person with the trigger response is the one who attempted, these kinds of scenes can do more than just make them feel bad; it can trigger their s**cidal ideation. It's not a stretch to say that trigger warnings can legitimately save someone's life. And like, here's the thing; you mention that not everyone tries to deal with their trauma in the same way, and that's true, but a trigger warning doesn't automatically ban someone who has a trauma response from experiencing the media in question, it just lets them make a more informed choice, saying "do I have enough mental fortitude to confront this topic?". Once again, as someone who has a trauma response to certain topics, I've still purposefully consumed media that deals with those subjects. What's important isn't me totally avoiding the trigger, what's important is having the information needed to make an informed choice. The thread above isn't saying that everyone who has a trauma response needs to be coddled like a baby, it's saying that once they see that trigger warning, they can feel reasonably safe that the topic is being handled responsibly in the given media, because if you drop a trigger warning, then the audience knows you respect people with that trauma response enough to let them know what's coming.
-
Edited by eeriearcade: 6/19/2024 4:00:15 PMMaybe I should have worded my opening sentence “I think there are some good arguments against [b]overuse[/b] of trigger warnings.” I don’t think trigger warnings are all bad. However, as far as I’m aware, there’s no consensus about how helpful they are — there’s research that suggests they are at least open to debate. The tweets read to me like “everyone agrees how to deal with trauma and anyone who disagrees hasn’t experienced it”. I’ve had a couple of conversations recently where people have assumed I don’t know what I’m talking about because I have a different angle on some of these things.
-
While I would also say there's good reason not to overuse trigger warnings (though honestly where to draw the line for "overuse" is pretty tenuous), I would also say it's better to give a warning for something that wasn't needed than it is to not give a warning for something that is. As an author, I would feel much better if I learned that I put in a trigger warning for something I thought was pretty minor, and didn't really need one, but then it wound up actually helping someone than I would learning that something I thought was minor enough to not warrant a warning wound up causing someone a trauma response. In any case, I can't speak for any, like studies or anything, but all I can say is that trigger warnings have helped me, personally. As for the tweet sounding like the person is saying everyone agrees how to process trauma, I still don't see it, you may need to break that down for me how it's coming off that way. For me, it's basically just saying you don't want to blindside someone with a trauma response by exposing them to their trauma without warning for the sake of "spoilers".
-
The stuff about not wanting to use trigger warnings / give away spoilers = “shock value”, “trauma -blam!-” and “not represented authentically or realistically.” Followed by: “If an author has first hand experience with… then they’ll make sure there’s a content warning…” They’re automatically downgrading the value and experience of authors who don’t include a trigger warning.
-
I mean, I'm sure you've seen examples of poorly written use of potentially trauma-triggering subjects used for cheap shock value, right? It's totally not an uncommon thing, and usually when people are worried about "the spoilers", they're people who don't write things authentically or with respect, and it really is just there for the shock. Now, it's not a 100% thing, but usually if the subject is being tackled in any meaningful way, losing the potential shock of the spoiler is something the author is mostly okay with, because the shock value isn't the point. The point is the context surrounding it. Maybe the phrasing is a bit too all-encompassing, but I tend to assume that when people say something like the "if the author has first hand experience" bit, that it's always intended as a general rule, not a 100% all encompassing this applies to everyone thing. The main point that I take away isn't that "no trigger warning = bad use of subject", because of course these subjects can be handled well even if the author doesn't put in a trigger warning (though if an author adamantly refuses a trigger warning, that is a red flag), but rather that "trigger warning = good use of subject", because often that means the author isn't aiming to just surprise you with it, and rather the subject is in the story for some other reason.
-
Well your comments are much more nuanced than the tweets If you find trigger warnings helpful, that’s great. Personally, I question how helpful they are generally. I also grew up in an era that didn’t have them anywhere, so it’s difficult to now see them as something essential.
-
Well, according to the tweet, the comment did come from a child, so that lack of nuance really shouldn't be surprising. In any case, I also grew up without trigger warnings, they're totally a newer thing for me too. That's how I know they're helpful for me. I'm not sure what makes you say you don't think they're all that effective generally, though. 90% of the time the only people I hear saying they aren't effective is coming from people who don't have the associated trauma response, and almost always whenever someone does they always appreciate gratitude that it was there. Nothing is ever 100% of course, but generally it seems the attitude towards them is that people with trauma find them helpful to their mental health. Even in the worst case scenario, where they don't actually do all that much, they at the very least help people feel more secure, at very little cost.
-
Edited by eeriearcade: 6/19/2024 8:29:54 PMIt was said by a child and then typed up by the parent, who finished with “That blew my mind. She is so right.” You also chose it as an example of the most valid Twitter take you’ve ever seen. So yeah, I think it's fair to take issue with the very sweeping statements. I’ve had trauma responses to things. The last one caught me at a difficult time, but in the long term, it taught me that I need to figure some stuff out and learn how to deal with encountering this stuff unexpectedly. I feel like that’s been a valuable thing for me. Maybe if I had been relying on trigger warnings, I would never have learned how to do that. I’m not saying trigger warnings are all bad, but I do think there is a tendency for *some* people to think safe spaces are *the* answer. IMO, they’re a temporary answer only. To work through stuff, you have to confront it. Sometimes, you are not going to even have a choice — it’s just going to appear when you aren’t expecting it.
-
I'm not saying I disagree with the tweet--I still do believe it's right for the most part--I'm just saying the lack of nuance is to be expected, given that it was said by a child (assuming the parent wasn't paraphrasing which is possible). In any case, I do believe that confronting your trauma is ultimately a healthy thing to do, [i]but[/i] it's important to let people do so to their own time, and at their own pace. Facing your trauma is good, but forcing people to face it when they aren't ready is not. You were lucky, you came out with something positive in the end, but many people do not. Facing your trauma in an unhealthy way, or when you're not ready to do so, can lead to things only getting worse. I still occasionally engage with media that triggers my trauma response, but I need to be in a good mindset to do so. If I'm not, then my brain will take a dark turn very fast, and things can get really bad. By engaging with it, on my own terms, I've become better at engaging with it in general, even when confronted with it unexpectedly, but that I was doing so on my own terms was important, and the moments when it was thrown at me without any sort of warning are definitely when things were the worst during that process. And like, sure, it's true that in real life you're not going to always have that choice, but throwing someone to the wolves and hoping they make it out to "toughen them up" is never the solution. Sure, sometimes it works, but it's always much healthier to build towards confronting these things gradually. Because, yes, there are some cases like yours where it all turns out okay, and they learn to confront their trauma better, but there are just as many cases where the opposite happens, and being confronted with their trauma doubles down on the symptoms, and things only get worse. Trigger warnings help people avoid that. It helps them take things one step at a time. Some people will use trigger warnings to never confront their trauma, and while that's not ideal, it's better than their trauma doubling down because of the lack of a warning.
-
Maybe the thing we can agree on is there has to be a balance between protecting ourselves from these things and allowing ourselves to be exposed to them. Too far in either direction is usually not healthy.
-
For sure. As is the case with most things in life, balance is key.