Are people abusing the concept of a trigger?

[tippy2k2]

Then give me an example.

PTSD. While the term itself is not "officially" recognised in scientific literature, it is used within the vernacular of psychology when dealing with emotional responses.

Which you could know by doing your fucking homework before ranting.

Though again, maybe you think PTSD is bullshit. I don't know.

To my knowledge, PTSD is considered a medical thing, which I specified medical things as having a pass on the "triggers" thing (to be fair however, I did call it "physical" thing since I was using seizures as an example but I was thinking "medical" in my head; I will change it to reflect that and I'm sorry about any confusion I caused).

 

[Entitled]

Then give me an example.

Any example where you can get people to agree that it's a legitimate use of the word "trigger". Maybe there's more to it than I know (as I previously stated) but all I see is rampant stupidity whenever that term is used (again, outside of actual, medical issues like Flashing Lights for Seizure patients). Give me some examples and show me that I'm jumping the gun. I'm perfectly fine with saying I'm wrong but I need something to demonstrate that first.

Your latest criteria is rather nonsensical. Any legitimate use of the word would, by definition, be used for actual, medical issues. Epilepsy might be a physiological one, but even in the filed of psychology, hardly anyone would argue that PTSD is a medically legitimate thing that exists, and that is pretty much centered around trigger effects.

Your question is so blatantly fallacious, I'm not even sure if anyone bothered to give a name to it. I guess we could call it the Excluding the Fitting Answer Fallacy.

 

[Something Amyss]

To my knowledge, PTSD is considered a medical thing, which I specified medical things as having a pass on the "triggers" thing (to be fair however, I did call it "physical" thing since I was using seizures as an example but I was thinking "medical" in my head; I will change it to reflect that and I'm sorry about any confusion I caused).

You specified physical issues the first time, which PTSD is not. You changed it to medical only afterward, and used the same example of a physiological issue. And to further this, when I brought up mental illness (also a medical issue), you challenged it. And I had already distinguished between "Tumblr" triggers and mental illness, so even that shouldn't be an excuse. I cannot be held responsible for what you're thinking, especially if you say something else. So yes, to be fair, you said something absolutely different than what you ostensibly meant.

But to further this comment, the responses you got, the ones you based your own response on? They could still apply to mental illness.

 

[Something Amyss]

As someone with Bipolar Disorder, Pure-O, and GAD (generalized anxiety disorder), a survivor of violence, child abuse, and sexual abuse I have triggers [....]I am sick and tired of this panty waist society that thinks being offended gives them any fucking rights whatsoever.

Amazingly, you talk about having conditions that could be legitimately said to have emotional triggers and than you downplay it as pantywaists who get "offended."

That's a disturbing lack of empathy and understanding from someone who claims to have those conditions. And if you're merely being offended, you're not being "triggered."

Your question is so blatantly fallacious, I'm not even sure if anyone bothered to give a name to it. I guess we could call it the Excluding the Fitting Answer Fallacy.

Maybe Tippy could be the trope namer?

 

[JimB]

It is obscene to expect the general public, in any way, shape or form, to accommodate your triggers. They are the burden of those who have them, not everybody else! I am sick and tired of this panty waist society that thinks being offended gives them any fucking rights whatsoever.

This strikes me as somewhat hypocritical, since you seem to think people who are offended have no right to request that others change their behaviors yet are asking that others change their behavior because you are offended. What is the difference between what you are doing and what the people you decry do?

 

[tippy2k2]

As someone with Bipolar Disorder, Pure-O, and GAD (generalized anxiety disorder), a survivor of violence, child abuse, and sexual abuse I have triggers [....]I am sick and tired of this panty waist society that thinks being offended gives them any fucking rights whatsoever.

Amazingly, you talk about having conditions that could be legitimately said to have emotional triggers and than you downplay it as pantywaists who get "offended."

That's a disturbing lack of empathy and understanding from someone who claims to have those conditions. And if you're merely being offended, you're not being "triggered."

Your question is so blatantly fallacious, I'm not even sure if anyone bothered to give a name to it. I guess we could call it the Excluding the Fitting Answer Fallacy.

Maybe Tippy could be the trope namer?

You can take all the snarky passive-agressive shots you want; I'm here trying to get your side of this debate, which is more than many can claim in an internet forum.

Every example I've seen myself and every definition that has popped up in here has basically equated "Trigger" with "being offended". However, from what you just said to chiggerwood makes me believe that either you have a different definition of what a trigger is or the definition that people in here (and in those articles the OP listed) are using is the incorrect use of trigger.

So let's level this playing field a bit; what is your definition of "trigger" and can you point me to a source that agrees with that definition?

 

[Dango]

While I am for sensitivity to certain subjects, the idea of sheltering victims is far more harmful than beneficial. People who go on about triggers and defending people from being triggered don't understand that it's more healthy for someone to attempt to live a normal life than be cut off from parts of society.

 

[Caiphus]

Yes, some people are hyper-sensitive on the Internet, or in real life, and will do or request silly things as a result.

On the other hand, some people, for whatever reason, lack empathy and will do or request silly things as a result. It goes both ways; people do stupid things from time to time.

I haven't had a huge amount of experience with triggers, or with people asking for warnings or whatever. I did study law for close to three years though, I don't remember anyone asking lecturers to cut rape material out of their classes. I do, however, remember one Game Grumps episode featured jokes about child abuse, so the makers put a trigger warning up. And a small, very loud, section of the audience went bananas at that, but that's my anecdotal evidence.

If those articles in the OP are true and accurate, then they are examples of hyper-sensitive people doing reckless, selfish or stupid things, as people occasionally do. It is a libertarian news site though, so I suspect that anything that may resemble "self-censorship" is going to be portrayed in a negative or hyperbolic light, but that's just my gut instinct. Both articles mention an "illiberal mob" or "rampant illiberalism", so, maybe a little.

 

[chiggerwood]

It is obscene to expect the general public, in any way, shape or form, to accommodate your triggers. They are the burden of those who have them, not everybody else! I am sick and tired of this panty waist society that thinks being offended gives them any fucking rights whatsoever.

This strikes me as somewhat hypocritical, since you seem to think people who are offended have no right to request that others change their behaviors yet are asking that others change their behavior because you are offended. What is the difference between what you are doing and what the people you decry do?

I'm not using the word obscene in the traditional sense of something being offensive or insulting. I'm using it a sense of having an underlying misguided ideology behind it to an extreme level. I would use the word in this sense when describing the actions of someone like Jack Thompson or the people protesting gay marriage. Maybe there's a better word for it, but I can't think of it. Hopefully I was able to stumble at least in the general direction of an appropriate explanation.

 

[Something Amyss]

You can take all the snarky passive-agressive shots you want;

Honey, I don't think you understand what "passive-aggressive" is. This is up there with "internet aspergers" and "internet OCD," the things I referenced previously. You may have noticed I give zero fucks about getting in anyone's face at any time when I think they're wrong. This is not characteristic of passive aggression.

I'm here trying to get your side of this debate, which is more than many can claim in an internet forum.

Yes, I got that impression when you posted the video from Billy Madison where his asshole principal says:

Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

And to further the point, I will use the followup line from Billy himself:

Okay, a simple "wrong" would've done just fine.

Of course, in that scenario, Billy was actually wrong. In this situation, you would be the one awarded zero points. The irony may escape you as you complain that I'm being passive aggressive and you're trying to understand.

Also, the video title includes "how to troll." I'm not saying that you're trolling, but I think this is quite a strike against the concept of trying to understand.

Every example I've seen myself and every definition that has popped up in here has basically equated "Trigger" with "being offended".

Yo mean, before my previous posts where I say otherwise, right? Because you've already read those and should know better. Oh, and Rhombus offered what should have been considered an example contrary, since he was the one that mentioned physiological triggers. Is it your belief that photosensitive epileptics are "offended" by flashing lights?

Hell, flashing lights can trigger my migraines, which I am not comparing in any way to the severity of epilepsy. That doesn't mean they offend me.

And that's kind of the thing: if you can't swap out the word and have it work, then it's probably not apt.

However, from what you just said to chiggerwood makes me believe that either you have a different definition of what a trigger is or the definition that people in here (and in those articles the OP listed) are using is the incorrect use of trigger.

oh, apparently you didn't read my previous posts then. I've delineated between the use of it on "Tumblr" and even compared it to the tendency of internet goers to self-diagnose with autism, and the way it's used (albeit largely non-clinically) for people with mental illness. If you cannot figure out what's going on with me directly telling you, I don't know what else to say. It does, however, explain your belief that I'm being passive-aggressive if directly telling you something multiple times is too subtle.

As for Chiggerwood, he's describing clinical conditions where the concept of "trigger" is used to describe instantaneous (well, kind of) emotional responses such as flashbacks, the equivalent of shouting "fire" in a crowded theater, and then talking about it being an issue of offense. I have a "different" definition in the same sense that I don't use OCD to describe someone who is fastidious or anal-retentive. But then, a sufferer who's talking about their own triggers probably shouldn't be boiling it down to a case of "offense" in the first place.

So let's level this playing field a bit; what is your definition of "trigger" and can you point me to a source that agrees with that definition?

Well, there's Wikipedia and its citations. Does my doctor or psychologist count? Or my prior psychologist? My girlfriend's deal with therapists who use the term, and besides Wikipedia, you can find numerous web pages (things like webMD, which also cite papers, as well as Google Scholar hits) online dealing with PTSD and triggers, abuse and triggers, trauma and triggers. You know, via Google search or your engine of choice. But I'm confused. According to you, you've already afforded an exception for medical issues. Surely you knew what you yourself were talking about just a little while back.

Is it your opinion that PTSD sufferers are simply "offended?" It would seem not, but if that's what you believe the term means, then shouldn't it apply here?

 

[Hero in a half shell]

Yes, a thousand mother fucking times yes. As someone with Bipolar Disorder, Pure-O, and GAD (generalized anxiety disorder), a survivor of violence, child abuse, and sexual abuse I have triggers and have had an insane amount of triggers in the past. However, never would I have even thought to put the burden on others to avoid all of my triggers. Instead I got, and am still getting therapy. It is obscene to expect the general public, in any way, shape or form, to accommodate your triggers. They are the burden of those who have them, not everybody else! I am sick and tired of this panty waist society that thinks being offended gives them any fucking rights whatsoever. It does not. If something in an article, or a picture, or a profession triggers you, then avoid situations where they will arise, quit demanding the world accommodate you, and get some professional help in the real world, not help from some random johnny on the internet, you are being selfish.

I'm sorry for your situation, and I have to say that the two people I know who also have real triggers (one from abuse, another from a psychological twitch) would also never think of imposing their problems on anyone else. They take steps to mitigate or avoid getting triggered, sometimes going quite out of their way to do so, but would never dream of blaming anyone for triggering them, because they are triggered by otherwise completely innocuous things (e.g. a particular type of car, or scratching or scraping noises.)

I know it's only 2 personal examples, plus yours makes 3, which is no basis of experience to make blanket statements from, but I wonder if people who truly get triggers from PTSD etc. actually want this type of censorship and pussyfooting, or if it's the case that Tumblr people are being incorrectly concerned on another's behalf and getting the situation completely backwards.

I know one of Freud's useful discoveries for psychology was the importance of talking out your problems and sharing your cares and burdens. While that may not be the best course of action for every triggering scenario the rather dictatorial use of Tumblr style trigger warnings seems an attempt to suppress and hide our issues rather than lead us to talk out and attempt to overcome or mitigate them, which may be damaging in the long run or lead to slower recoveries.

 

[Darkmantle]

It is obscene to expect the general public, in any way, shape or form, to accommodate your triggers. They are the burden of those who have them, not everybody else! I am sick and tired of this panty waist society that thinks being offended gives them any fucking rights whatsoever.

This strikes me as somewhat hypocritical, since you seem to think people who are offended have no right to request that others change their behaviors yet are asking that others change their behavior because you are offended. What is the difference between what you are doing and what the people you decry do?

Let me help explain the difference, at least as I see it. If you are triggered, the only person who is responsible for that is you. the only person whose actions you can control is yourself.

It is unreasonable to expect the whole world, to accommodate you.

 

[chiggerwood]

Amazingly, you talk about having conditions that could be legitimately said to have emotional triggers and than you downplay it as pantywaists who get "offended."

That's a disturbing lack of empathy and understanding from someone who claims to have those conditions. And if you're merely being offended, you're not being "triggered."

If you read the entirety of my comment, you will remember that I said that I got and am still getting help. It's not a lack of empathy, or a lack of understanding, it's an anger that these people are putting their problems on the world when they should be dealing with them with a professional, and avoiding the things that trigger them (such is the case with criminal justice classes, if you can't handle awful shit get out, I did). And what is worse is the people who abuse the term trigger, when what they are is offended or made uncomfortable. That's what I was referring to when I said "Panty waist", because it turns mental illness into a joke, and makes people see the mentally ill (hi) as a group to pander to instead of help, a people that are ready to snap, that you have to walk on eggshells around, instead of treating them like human beings. It makes mentally ill people look weaker than they are, and makes others disbelieve the mentally ill who have gone through years of hell to face their problems and become strong, to become more than a victim or a survivor, but somebody who looks at his problems as something that has been conquered or is waiting to be conquered. I wish to be mighty, to make a throne out of the bones of my problems, and use the skulls as goblets in a victory feast, but people don't see that the mentally ill can get to that point, and it's because of people using "trigger" as a magic word and attacking anyone that challenges them.



TL;DR: It's not a lack of empathy, it's an anger that people aren't getting proper help, and that people make the mentally ill look weak via their abuse of the word trigger. I want to be a conqueror on a throne of the bones my issues not a victim or survivor.

 

[Darkmantle]

Amazingly, you talk about having conditions that could be legitimately said to have emotional triggers and than you downplay it as pantywaists who get "offended."

That's a disturbing lack of empathy and understanding from someone who claims to have those conditions. And if you're merely being offended, you're not being "triggered."

If you read the entirety of my comment, you will remember that I said that I got and am still getting help. It's not a lack of empathy, or a lack of understanding, it's an anger that these people are putting their problems on the world when they should be dealing with them with a professional, and avoiding the things that trigger them (such is the case with criminal justice classes, if you can't handle awful shit get out, I did). And what is worse is the people who abuse the term trigger, when what they are is offended or made uncomfortable. That's what I was referring to when I said "Panty waist", because it turns mental illness into a joke, and makes people see the mentally ill (hi) as a group to pander to instead of help, a people that are ready to snap, that you have to walk on eggshells around, instead of treating them like human beings. It makes mentally ill people look weaker than they are, and makes others disbelieve the mentally ill who have gone through years of hell to face their problems and become strong, to become more than a victim or a survivor, but somebody who looks at his problems as something that has been conquered or is waiting to be conquered. I wish to be mighty, to make a throne out of the bones of my problems, and use the skulls as goblets in a victory feast, but people don't see that the mentally ill can get to that point, and it's because of people using "trigger" as a magic word and attacking anyone that challenges them.



TL;DR: It's not a lack of empathy, it's an anger that people aren't getting proper help, and that people make the mentally ill look weak via their abuse of the word trigger. I want to be a conqueror on a throne of the bones my issues not a victim or survivor.

I'm with you, I've been saying for quite some time now that I'm glad the tumblr-like peoples of the world never picked up on my issues, or decided my issues is a cause that they needed to champion. If they did, and I took their advice to heart, I may have never recovered.

That's what bothers me about these "trigger warnings" so much, they seem to do harm than good.

 

[chiggerwood]

Yes, a thousand mother fucking times yes. As someone with Bipolar Disorder, Pure-O, and GAD (generalized anxiety disorder), a survivor of violence, child abuse, and sexual abuse I have triggers and have had an insane amount of triggers in the past. However, never would I have even thought to put the burden on others to avoid all of my triggers. Instead I got, and am still getting therapy. It is obscene to expect the general public, in any way, shape or form, to accommodate your triggers. They are the burden of those who have them, not everybody else! I am sick and tired of this panty waist society that thinks being offended gives them any fucking rights whatsoever. It does not. If something in an article, or a picture, or a profession triggers you, then avoid situations where they will arise, quit demanding the world accommodate you, and get some professional help in the real world, not help from some random johnny on the internet, you are being selfish.

I'm sorry for your situation, and I have to say that the two people I know who also have real triggers (one from abuse, another from a psychological twitch) would also never think of imposing their problems on anyone else. They take steps to mitigate or avoid getting triggered, sometimes going quite out of their way to do so, but would never dream of blaming anyone for triggering them, because they are triggered by otherwise completely innocuous things (e.g. a particular type of car, or scratching or scraping noises.)

I know it's only 2 personal examples, plus yours makes 3, which is no basis of experience to make blanket statements from, but I wonder if people who truly get triggers from PTSD etc. actually want this type of censorship and pussyfooting, or if it's the case that Tumblr people are being incorrectly concerned on another's behalf and getting the situation completely backwards.

I know one of Freud's useful discoveries for psychology was the importance of talking out your problems and sharing your cares and burdens. While that may not be the best course of action for every triggering scenario the rather dictatorial use of Tumblr style trigger warnings seems an attempt to suppress and hide our issues rather than lead us to talk out and attempt to overcome or mitigate them, which may be damaging in the long run or lead to slower recoveries.

No need to feel sorry about my situation, I'm well on my way to elbow dropping that shit to oblivion. I got a good therapist and am currently working on building a throne out of the bones of my problems. The skulls shall be used for wine, and my daddy issues' ribs shall be a tasteless xylophone on which I shall play kitschy music on in my hall of doom. Good luck to your friends though.

 

[The Wykydtron]

I never usually post on these kind of subjects because they're just ready to erupt into flames at any moment but I poked my head in to see if I could finally figure out what the word "trigger" actually means.

So basically, PTSD by people who have no idea what PTSD really is. I see. I guessed as much.

This is why I can never take someone from the mystical (slightly insane) land of Tumblr seriously. I think they're being sarcastic or ironic when they say these things but they're legit serious. "Oh triggered lol, you just triggered me so your good points in our argument are totally wrong" Fuck off.

I just can't take this seriously, granted I have that problem with most things but this in particular. The level of "me me me me pay attention to ME, cater to MEEEEEEE" is so awful it's funny.

Maybe i'm generalising but really, you can't expect me to actually go onto Tumblr, even for research? I might catch something.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

yes, it's been turned into one of those buzz words people like to use when they are offended and want it to be a trump card to get people to do what they want. it's like the consolation prize at the oppression olympics.

are triggers real? very much so, there are many different ways to go about defining what a trigger could be for someone.

is there any sensible way to go about your day to day life to accommodate everyone's triggers that you have no idea if they do or don't exist? absolutely not, that would be like trying to walk through a constantly changing minefield, the best thing that can happen is the person politely lets you know mentioning/doing such thing can trigger some panic/*insert here* attack, and they'd appreciate it if you didn't do that around them.

So let's level this playing field a bit; what is your definition of "trigger" and can you point me to a source that agrees with that definition?

Well, there's Wikipedia and its citations. Does my doctor or psychologist count? Or my prior psychologist? My girlfriend's deal with therapists who use the term, and besides Wikipedia, you can find numerous web pages (things like webMD, which also cite papers, as well as Google Scholar hits) online dealing with PTSD and triggers, abuse and triggers, trauma and triggers. You know, via Google search or your engine of choice. But I'm confused. According to you, you've already afforded an exception for medical issues. Surely you knew what you yourself were talking about just a little while back.

Is it your opinion that PTSD sufferers are simply "offended?" It would seem not, but if that's what you believe the term means, then shouldn't it apply here?

You could just give a straight up answer to someone who clearly stated first post they weren't exactly sure what a trigger was and was asking for your definition on it, but I suppose that would take away from getting to belittle someone, and we can't have that, now can we?

 

[CrystalShadow]

I've read a couple of things with people complaining about triggers and I read that first story you had attached...

I still don't know what the fuck a "trigger" is.

Either I'm too stupid to get it or the concept is too stupid for me to get but is it seriously just a word and/or concept that potentially could make someone upset? Like...that's it? Like....if I say the word "rape", that could "trigger" someone into being sad or something?

Someone dumb (or smart?) it up for me please; what the hell are these people talking about?

EDIT: That was quick; already have three answers more or less confirming my thoughts. Thanks everyone!

My thoughts in a convenient package:

Spoiler

Note: This is directed at "triggers", not you OP

With that confirmed, the fact that the concept of "triggers" exist was taking it too far. Outside of actual medical issues (like flashing images causing seizures someone below mentioned or PTSD as mentioned by Zachary), this is one of the stupidest things I have ever heard of.

While I understand why you'd say that (it does sound rather dumb), I've been there.
granted, simply mentioning a word isn't enough to do much to me. Rather, the 'trigger' word is a warning that the subject being discussed (or shown. - one of the things that got me was a scene in an anime).
It sounds silly, but something which upset me so much I basically could't function normally for about a week, and was scared to go back to the site where the conversation hadvtaken place for even longer than that...

Well, anyway, it can really mess a person up.

But the idea isn't meant to be that you avoid topics (trigger words are a rather sillier concept) that may trigger someone. Rather, it's that if you're going to discuss a topic you know could be emotionally distressing to some (or if you know the people involved, what upsets them specificall), you give them enough warning that th3y can decide for themselves if they can deal with proceeding before you actually really start discussing me.

And yes, it can seem really stupid, even to the person it happens to. (I find it kind of pathetic that I'm so easily turned into an emotional wreck by some of the topivs that have done so to me in the past)

If somebody is talking about individual words being triggers though... That seems a bit... Extreme. Nor is it meant to be a reason NOT to talk about certain things. It's just meant to be something you should be aware of for certain topics, so you can give adequate warning for people to leave (before, say you start giving a graphic detailed description of sexual abuse, or something else disturbing)