(via The New York Times Weighs In on the Kudzu-Like Spread of Trigger Warnings | Slog)
[Interesting thoughts from Dan Savage on trigger warnings:]
…Express the tiniest doubt about the usefulness of trigger warnings—or their ubiquity and overuse in some corners of the web—and you will be accused of not caring about rape victims. But pause to consider that people are demanding trigger warnings on everything from discussions about colonialism to the works of William Shakespeare to, ahem, certain sex-advice columnists and it becomes clear that this isn’t just about protecting rape victims from content that may “cause symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder…” 
…So what purpose, then, do trigger warnings serve? It seems to me that they exist not to protect the reader, but to draw attention to the writer. You’ve heard of false consciousness? Well, trigger warnings are false conscientiousness. The writer who uses trigger warnings isn’t saying, “I care about you.” The writer is saying, “Look at meeeeee.” It’s narcissism masquerading as concern.
And then there’s this: there’s really no way to predict what could possibly trigger someone:

As the list of trigger warning–worthy topics continues to grow, there’s scant research demonstrating how words “trigger” or how warnings might help. Most psychological research on P.T.S.D. suggests that, for those who have experienced trauma, “triggers” can be complex and unpredictable, appearing in many forms, from sounds to smells to weather conditions and times of the year. In this sense, anything can be a trigger—a musky cologne, a ditsy pop song, a footprint in the snow. As a means of navigating the Internet, or setting the tone for academic discussion, the trigger warning is unhelpful. Once we start imposing alerts on the basis of potential trauma, where do we stop?

Triggers can be complex and unpredictable and they can be anything. Certain words, smells, pop songs, plays, advice columnists. So if trigger warnings are about protecting people with PTSD from flashbacks and panic attacks—which can be induced by anything and everything—and not about protecting delicate flowers from the sadz, then we’re going to need to slap trigger warnings on anything and everything…

(via The New York Times Weighs In on the Kudzu-Like Spread of Trigger Warnings | Slog)

[Interesting thoughts from Dan Savage on trigger warnings:]

…Express the tiniest doubt about the usefulness of trigger warnings—or their ubiquity and overuse in some corners of the web—and you will be accused of not caring about rape victims. But pause to consider that people are demanding trigger warnings on everything from discussions about colonialism to the works of William Shakespeare to, ahem, certain sex-advice columnists and it becomes clear that this isn’t just about protecting rape victims from content that may “cause symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder…” 

…So what purpose, then, do trigger warnings serve? It seems to me that they exist not to protect the reader, but to draw attention to the writer. You’ve heard of false consciousness? Well, trigger warnings are false conscientiousness. The writer who uses trigger warnings isn’t saying, “I care about you.” The writer is saying, “Look at meeeeee.” It’s narcissism masquerading as concern.

And then there’s this: there’s really no way to predict what could possibly trigger someone:

As the list of trigger warning–worthy topics continues to grow, there’s scant research demonstrating how words “trigger” or how warnings might help. Most psychological research on P.T.S.D. suggests that, for those who have experienced trauma, “triggers” can be complex and unpredictable, appearing in many forms, from sounds to smells to weather conditions and times of the year. In this sense, anything can be a trigger—a musky cologne, a ditsy pop song, a footprint in the snow. As a means of navigating the Internet, or setting the tone for academic discussion, the trigger warning is unhelpful. Once we start imposing alerts on the basis of potential trauma, where do we stop?

Triggers can be complex and unpredictable and they can be anything. Certain words, smells, pop songs, plays, advice columnists. So if trigger warnings are about protecting people with PTSD from flashbacks and panic attacks—which can be induced by anything and everything—and not about protecting delicate flowers from the sadz, then we’re going to need to slap trigger warnings on anything and everything…

  1. original-scream-sayonara reblogged this from mudwerks
  2. ifithurtsyourdoingitright reblogged this from mudwerks
  3. echnolon reblogged this from mudwerks
  4. normandary reblogged this from normandary
  5. angelus-silesius reblogged this from mudwerks
  6. n0rthof60 reblogged this from pricklylegs
  7. rodzilla-world reblogged this from pricklylegs and added:
    Like the article says, almost anything can be a trigger. Since there is no way of knowing what might bring up traumatic...
  8. elfboi reblogged this from tidaltree
  9. tidaltree reblogged this from bwansen
  10. jimmyneutrontaughtmetoeatdapussy reblogged this from pricklylegs
  11. bwansen reblogged this from teaologie
  12. lonelycoast reblogged this from thefuzzydave and added:
    Exactly.
  13. theoriginalbottom reblogged this from pricklylegs
  14. rilenious reblogged this from pricklylegs and added:
    People shouldn’t wander the vast expanses of the internet and expect everyone to pussyfoot around their sensitivities.
  15. edoowinnie reblogged this from pricklylegs
  16. lugubrious-tranquility reblogged this from pricklylegs
  17. froghair reblogged this from homicidalbrunette
  18. lunaismooning reblogged this from homicidalbrunette
  19. your-mothers-butt reblogged this from homicidalbrunette
  20. homicidalbrunette reblogged this from mudwerks
Short URL for this post: http://tmblr.co/ZjDnby1GWW0r7
blog comments powered by Disqus