Red vs Blue takes on Trigger Warnings
- Thread starter MatParker116
- Start date
Recommended Videos
As the phrase is oftentimes used (and very typically only on the internet) in a lot of cases, it's more of a "[small]tiny edit potentially[/small] disturbing content" warning than anything. Which has already existed with other names for a long time. To use the phrase "trigger warning" to me implies a certain severity to a piece of content that you don't often see from people who use the phrase.Aerosteam said:
That said, there's the whole other side of people that hiss at even seeing the phrase or that it exists. Basically, for me, it results in a rolling of the eyes, and I'm not going to agree with its use in most cases, but it's not something to foam at the mouth over.
Well this looks to be quiet something.
thaluikhain said:
As far as I understand it is not necessarily speaking a false dichotomy, If a person could be triggered by any amount of stimuli I believe by nature it is a waste to not cure the event directly.
Furthermore PTSD has more symptoms then just the triggering, as outlined by the DSM
While not necessarily worse then the triggering itself I believe that treatment for this condition should be directed right away, as the triggers only handle (and as I have pointed out as a part of the associative nature of the trigger system, poorly) one segment of the condition, it would be better to seek attention.
Preferably neuroplastic therapy, or whatever it's called.
Which is why I stressed the necessity for government/insurance supplementation of these proceedings and being a Canadian I do believe it's covered, I'm fairly certain depression is.
However I should for the sake of clarity stress I do not believe the triggers themselves are government funded, I actually meant that given the choice between triggerwarnings and government funding for mental health, the latter wins out.
Finally I should stress man hours are wasted, it is cumulative.
Going under the average typed words per minute 41 or (1.463 words a minute) if I am correct that works out to 2 seconds wasted writing, trigger warning rape (which could be the absolute shortest if I am not mistaken, trigger warnings are and are not limited to longer words, full sentences, and multiple warnings ). Not much as you have said, I will agree however, I would like to stress if this was written on every piece of explicit material for ever possible form this compounds. Over the year it compounds and compounds as I doubt this trigger warning system would go away for quite some time if popularized, eventually becoming moralistic, tradition. Which is quite a number over time given the amount of explicit Martial created everyday but I think I will evolve that thought later.
Furthermore PTSD has more symptoms then just the triggering, as outlined by the DSM
http://www.dsm5.org/Documents/PTSD%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf
?Negative cognitions and mood represents myriad feelings, from a persistent and distorted sense of
blame of self or others, to estrangement from others or markedly diminished interest in activities, to an
inability to remember key aspects of the event.
Finally, arousal is marked by aggressive, reckless or self-destructive behavior, sleep disturbances, hyper-
vigilance or related problems. The current manual emphasizes the ?flight? aspect associated with PTSD;
the criteria of DSM-5 also account for the ?fight? reaction often seen. ?
?Negative cognitions and mood represents myriad feelings, from a persistent and distorted sense of
blame of self or others, to estrangement from others or markedly diminished interest in activities, to an
inability to remember key aspects of the event.
Finally, arousal is marked by aggressive, reckless or self-destructive behavior, sleep disturbances, hyper-
vigilance or related problems. The current manual emphasizes the ?flight? aspect associated with PTSD;
the criteria of DSM-5 also account for the ?fight? reaction often seen. ?
Preferably neuroplastic therapy, or whatever it's called.
Which is why I stressed the necessity for government/insurance supplementation of these proceedings and being a Canadian I do believe it's covered, I'm fairly certain depression is.
However I should for the sake of clarity stress I do not believe the triggers themselves are government funded, I actually meant that given the choice between triggerwarnings and government funding for mental health, the latter wins out.
Finally I should stress man hours are wasted, it is cumulative.
Going under the average typed words per minute 41 or (1.463 words a minute) if I am correct that works out to 2 seconds wasted writing, trigger warning rape (which could be the absolute shortest if I am not mistaken, trigger warnings are and are not limited to longer words, full sentences, and multiple warnings ). Not much as you have said, I will agree however, I would like to stress if this was written on every piece of explicit material for ever possible form this compounds. Over the year it compounds and compounds as I doubt this trigger warning system would go away for quite some time if popularized, eventually becoming moralistic, tradition. Which is quite a number over time given the amount of explicit Martial created everyday but I think I will evolve that thought later.
Which is a choice that nobody will ever be faced with, so it's a false dichotomy.cleric of the order said:
It is cumulative, yes. But how many words did you just use in your post? If you were to cut down every post you make by 4 words, that'd have a greater impact than not adding "trigger warning" followed by one word.cleric of the order said:
Hehe that was funny despite me usually not liking red vs blue.
I considered trigger warnings a waste of time. I will never use them in a serious manner nor will expect anyone else to do so.
If you are triggered by something someone says or writes then too bad for you.
I considered trigger warnings a waste of time. I will never use them in a serious manner nor will expect anyone else to do so.
If you are triggered by something someone says or writes then too bad for you.
As someone who works with veterans everyday, I'd like to comment that many of us regard PTSD as any other injury, just something that needs to be treated. I don't bat an eyelash when someone tells me they have PTSD, as probably half a dozen vets come through my office each week with that issue, and a laundry list of other issues. Saying "I've got PTSD" to me, gets the same reaction as saying "I have a torn rotatory cuff in my shoulder." That reaction being a relaxed "Ok, so how can I help you today?"Gorrath said:
I'm not a vet myself, but I personally don't see any issue with having warnings on content. Some people don't want to deal with their attacks from a trigger, or would at least like a heads up about it so they can prepare. Or perhaps mitigate the symptoms with some forewarning. I personally don't like seeing actual dead bodies. Never have, never will. So when I'm looking through a list of say, CNN's images of the year, encapsulating the major events, having the little window pop up saying "The following image is graphic, and depicts images of dead bodies" is helpful, and welcome. To me, that's the spirit behind the trigger warnings. That at it's core, it's to simply give people heads up about stuff they may not want to see if given the choice, or at least prepare themselves for something they might find disturbing.
How some people use the term for other stupid shit is a different subject in my opinion.
You're right, however I'd argue that there is actual productivity in dialogs, and I am addressing statements you made for the sake of mutual understanding. coming to greater conclusions, all that high minded democratic rationalist shit.thaluikhain said:
I actually want to understand more this pathological alturism.
Also, I've always written this way, I have a problem, and likely still do have a problem making myself understood through non-verbal means. I did say I need accommodation.
Anyway I make a good foil by being so wordy
In hindsight I should have asked you to define where or how that trigger warning is to be implemented. typing on tumblr, in literature, etc is rather fast.
but I know quiet well trigger warnings have been applied elsewhere.
that's a simple way of putting it but I suppose you are not off the mark with that.thaluikhain said:
I should watch my careless tongue around you, you might just bite it off.
The problem is, through whatever logical fallacy hole I am in, I cannot see an alternative.
There needs to be a gain or a loss(outside tumblr).
If one introduces trigger warnings en-masse and than it seems redundant if medication and therapy is also subsidized.
feel free to argue that point.
off hand I have to ask, I do remember you complaining about a certian branch of psychology, if you have any clinical psychological knowledge and some sources I could read if this would actually help someone suffering from this condition please do so.
Because from what I understand it functions like those that have disassociation and other trauma responses. From what I have been told, persons sexually abused disassociate during consensual sex thanks to unconscious association and trauma continuity.
If I am not mistaken the mechanism is the same, association. Though not directly equivalency, it is admittedly wrong to suggest that all rape survivors with ptsd would respond to the amorphous idea of sex in this way. However it is by nature reasonable to suggest the following; all rape Survivors with ptsd could suffer rape flashbacks because of any stimuli described, displayed or suggesting, or simply containing the suggested aspects of such a scene (tones, body language, power dynamics in bed, positions, places, or simply identifying with one of the characters), inside and outside media, by the very nature of association. Which would suggest that a rape trigger warning would not protect someone with PTSD resultant from rape flashback of the unpredictable nature.
that is not to say that there is no protection, just that it is an unreliable factor.
There is also the matter of distinction and definition of those trigger warnings. Would also mean attempted rape, implied sexual violence, possible sexual violence or any violence intermixed with sex be possible trigger people with trauma resultant from rape and thus need to be tagged as rape.As any variation form of sexual violence, such as molestation, sexual torture/mutilation (though one could argue that rape is the super group, I make the distinction because these overlap into torture, child abuse, abuse and anything else arriving from non sexual violence), hell genital surgery could.
But when one fall under the trigger super group of sexual violence and not of rape.
And that leaves the question why is rape necessary, one could simply state, the explicit sexual nature in some instances.
Likewise other Traumas memories of that a violent nature could be triggered by sexual violence. (being sexually abused into child abuse, torture for obvious reasons, etc,etc). PTSD based in miscellaneous trauma (distress) that is not necessarily violent or applied by human/personified free agents such as natural disasters, (as defied by the APA), non deliberate violent actions, starvation under great stress again could have similar responses with violence. or sexually violent depictions. As trauma is largely caused by violence this seems superfluous (though not the entirety).
Things linked to trauma while not limited to explicit content, makes up the majority of explicit content through association. This leads to an interesting conundrum for me, if trigger warnings are to applied in a utilitarian manner than why not apply it to all instances of violence and not just explicit as trauma is largely the result of violent actions or at least the ones fixated one and one can reasonably account for. Would it not be best to say, ?warning the following contains violence and sexual themes? or "warnings this contains things that some viewers find offensive" in things that can mange it. In opposition to specify something that is not as preventative as possible, too specific and rather inefficient.
Thank you for sharing your insights.Gorrath said:
From what what you described, you're acutely aware of your triggers and know the risks, and I completely respect that.
Some I worked with...were not so aware. However they also weren't living without assistance and I sincerely doubt they were being turned loose upon the amorphous and dynamic media beast that is the Internet.
I do have some direct, albeit limited experience here.
During my later years in high school, I entered a volunteer a program aimed at assisting others with disabilities and mental illness/trauma (for therapy and recreation). I learned a number of things, but first and most relevant to this subject, is that those with real disabilities (especially mental trauma, and who are aware of it) DON'T WEAR THEIR PROBLEMS LIKE A BADGE.
Because they're still just people trying to live normally.
(There's a fine line between empathy and condescension, and one I learned through hardship and necessity.)
The second thing, is that PTSD and other mental trauma varies heavily from person to person. One thing I noticed among the "socially functional" (those that lived without assistance) is that they are aware of their condition and their limitations, and thus, they took responsibility for themselves.
So the way I see it, treating them like people means recognizing that responsibility just as much if not more than their condition. I don't mean to say that we should pretend their issues don't exist (quite the opposite; I'm all for assistance and therapy, as I am for any problem), but I draw a line between those that expose themselves to triggers/risks through planned therapy, and those that just want to extort personal convenience from the public at large (and social leverage from this brave new "outrage culture").
IMO, Trigger Warnings sound like a good idea (akin to epilepsy warnings) but only on paper because (again, just my limited experience) triggers and reactions vary WILDLY. Some clients exhibited general anxiety when exposed and were pretty to avoid triggering, while others went off seemingly at random.
I recall one poor kid (IIRC a child abuse victim) literally soil themselves and run screaming in adrenaline-furor at the sight of a Popsicle. Yes, a damn orange Popsicle. It sounds kind of morbidly funny out of context, but it was an eye-opening and frankly, frightening experience for me.
Outside of my Peer Partners experience (the program), I know people in real life with PTSD.
One of my friends has PTSD due to an incident of gang related violence that occurred in his home country (he moved to the US partially for treatment; I met him about 2 years after the incident), where he was shot in the stomach at point blank with a handgun, and just prior, watched one of his friends suffer the same fate and die.
That wasn't related to me just by him, but his family when I called his ICE number.
In the 8 or so years I've known him, I've witnessed some of his episodes first hand (some taking the better part of three hours) involving, phantom pains, complete emotional breakdown, and reflexive behavior like curling up in the fetal position. His most common trigger was the sound of an ambulance siren, and I say "was" (tentatively) because he worked for years in therapy to lessen that (kinda important since he lives and works in an area with three hospitals within 5 blocks of him).
My point in in all this: He took responsibility for himself, and emerged better for it. I understand that others may not achieve the same results, but the key point is that without taking that responsibility (and foisting it upon others) he would never have overcome in the first place.
Yet, if I were to go by the "Trigger(warning)-Happy" crowd, the internet should post things like "TRIGGER WARNING: AMBULANCE" or "TRIGGER WARNING: SIREN" on anything with something even just RESEMBLING an ambulance siren.
So lets stop and think about that. Yes, it sounds reasonable on the surface but only because I KNOW HIM AND HIS SPECIFIC CONDITION; the general public DOES NOT and CANNOT.
If I extrapolate his scenario to thousands of others and their widely, various triggers (even excluding those that are just pretending to have PTSD; which boils my blood something fierce) I realize the task is simply infeasible; it'd require nothing short of public clairvoyance to achieve.
Because they're still just people trying to live normally.
(There's a fine line between empathy and condescension, and one I learned through hardship and necessity.)
The second thing, is that PTSD and other mental trauma varies heavily from person to person. One thing I noticed among the "socially functional" (those that lived without assistance) is that they are aware of their condition and their limitations, and thus, they took responsibility for themselves.
So the way I see it, treating them like people means recognizing that responsibility just as much if not more than their condition. I don't mean to say that we should pretend their issues don't exist (quite the opposite; I'm all for assistance and therapy, as I am for any problem), but I draw a line between those that expose themselves to triggers/risks through planned therapy, and those that just want to extort personal convenience from the public at large (and social leverage from this brave new "outrage culture").
IMO, Trigger Warnings sound like a good idea (akin to epilepsy warnings) but only on paper because (again, just my limited experience) triggers and reactions vary WILDLY. Some clients exhibited general anxiety when exposed and were pretty to avoid triggering, while others went off seemingly at random.
I recall one poor kid (IIRC a child abuse victim) literally soil themselves and run screaming in adrenaline-furor at the sight of a Popsicle. Yes, a damn orange Popsicle. It sounds kind of morbidly funny out of context, but it was an eye-opening and frankly, frightening experience for me.
Outside of my Peer Partners experience (the program), I know people in real life with PTSD.
One of my friends has PTSD due to an incident of gang related violence that occurred in his home country (he moved to the US partially for treatment; I met him about 2 years after the incident), where he was shot in the stomach at point blank with a handgun, and just prior, watched one of his friends suffer the same fate and die.
That wasn't related to me just by him, but his family when I called his ICE number.
In the 8 or so years I've known him, I've witnessed some of his episodes first hand (some taking the better part of three hours) involving, phantom pains, complete emotional breakdown, and reflexive behavior like curling up in the fetal position. His most common trigger was the sound of an ambulance siren, and I say "was" (tentatively) because he worked for years in therapy to lessen that (kinda important since he lives and works in an area with three hospitals within 5 blocks of him).
My point in in all this: He took responsibility for himself, and emerged better for it. I understand that others may not achieve the same results, but the key point is that without taking that responsibility (and foisting it upon others) he would never have overcome in the first place.
Yet, if I were to go by the "Trigger(warning)-Happy" crowd, the internet should post things like "TRIGGER WARNING: AMBULANCE" or "TRIGGER WARNING: SIREN" on anything with something even just RESEMBLING an ambulance siren.
So lets stop and think about that. Yes, it sounds reasonable on the surface but only because I KNOW HIM AND HIS SPECIFIC CONDITION; the general public DOES NOT and CANNOT.
If I extrapolate his scenario to thousands of others and their widely, various triggers (even excluding those that are just pretending to have PTSD; which boils my blood something fierce) I realize the task is simply infeasible; it'd require nothing short of public clairvoyance to achieve.
As cold as it sounds to others, I think it's far better for someone with real triggers to get help, or at least realize the risks involved in dealing with a seemingly "random" public rather than demand warnings for every single thing.
(Yeah, some PTSD is loosely categorical, like war vets' combat trauma, but the bulk of it really isn't.)
And in that, I thank you for showing responsibility and foresight.
I love the video, it points out how many "advocates" don't really know what trigger warnings even are in the first place, or what they're used for. Sticking them on any content that can be remotely offensive looks not only ridiculous, but also borderline censoring in some cases, and just plain coddling. People with PTSD don't need your misplaced pity-advocacy. They need therapy and people to support them like in every other situation or stage of mental illness. As people have already pointed out, trigger warnings are supposed to be training wheels that you're supposed to get over through recovery. Sticking them on everything to prevent as much exposure as possible doesn't make the situation any better. If someone broke their legs, you would try to get them to walk again once the casts are off and not keep them in their chair all the time.
Excepting, of course, that trigger warnings don't prevent anyone from looking at anything. They aren't censorship. They merely inform people of the content following them, so that people can decide for themselves if they want to look at it or not.NemotheElvenPanda said:
We already have that for the majority of media: disclaimers and content ratings, the latter which are required by law. If gunshots trigger you, maybe watching "Saving Private Ryan" is probably a bad idea.thaluikhain said:
Mildly amusing.
Though I agree some trigger warnings are overreaching, they do serve a purpose.
As others have said, there are warning labels for tv shows and music, so it doesn't bother me at all that people try to give you a "heads up" for their content.
It should be limited to serious trauma, though. Death, rape, explicit language, etc.
Though I agree some trigger warnings are overreaching, they do serve a purpose.
As others have said, there are warning labels for tv shows and music, so it doesn't bother me at all that people try to give you a "heads up" for their content.
It should be limited to serious trauma, though. Death, rape, explicit language, etc.
IMHO, if you have such a psychological hair trigger that it can be set off by anything that wouldn't already be included in a rating system, you should be exorcising caution whenever you interact with the outside world in any capacity if you want to avoid setting it off.
The big problem I see with trigger warnings is that they form a slippery slope that goes on forever; you're never going to be able to document and define every individual trigger, because the human mind does not work in absolutes; ultimately, psychological frailty cannot be catered to, because it is ever changing by virtue of occupying a space that is entirely mental.
Creating a satisfactory trigger warning system for everyone would be almost redundant; you would have to reveal all the content of a given work of media up front, before it even started.
No one can be conscientious of the psychology of a stranger, and it's unreasonable and honestly kind of unfair to expect them to. The media you consume as an adult is your responsibility, and you should understand that if you have a history of PTSD, when you expose yourself to media that is marked for extreme content that you are taking a risk.
The big problem I see with trigger warnings is that they form a slippery slope that goes on forever; you're never going to be able to document and define every individual trigger, because the human mind does not work in absolutes; ultimately, psychological frailty cannot be catered to, because it is ever changing by virtue of occupying a space that is entirely mental.
Creating a satisfactory trigger warning system for everyone would be almost redundant; you would have to reveal all the content of a given work of media up front, before it even started.
No one can be conscientious of the psychology of a stranger, and it's unreasonable and honestly kind of unfair to expect them to. The media you consume as an adult is your responsibility, and you should understand that if you have a history of PTSD, when you expose yourself to media that is marked for extreme content that you are taking a risk.
That's kind of silly. And that's from Harvard, huh? Hah.MatParker116 said:
The idea that a trigger warning can only be used to avoid discomfort is laughable. And from the quoted text, the article seems to imply trigger warnings and therapy are mutually exclusive--also laughable. Trigger warnings could be a good way to mentally prepare yourself for confronting your... trigger. Kind of like a jump scare, you know? If you're warned before a jump scare, it is significantly less scary.
I don't see what the deal with all the push back is. Trigger warnings, for me, have just been a silly meme up to this point, but honestly, what's the harm? We already warn people about possible seizures and the content of games--how would trigger warnings be any different? You think you'll be playing a game and it'll pause for a minute before every explosion while the "PC Police" talk to you about triggers? No--it'll be a little, rectangular box on the case, and maybe displayed for a few seconds during all the intro logos you skip.
Just my personal observation, but I believe the controversy doesn't really stem from their existence but rather a certain type of people who insist that ALL things must have trigger warnings, from movies to college classes to blog posts and so on and so forth. Of course, this led to a long back-and-forth in which a lot of people got upset, the extremists of both sides got pushed to the front of the argument, and in the end, what once was a simple attempt to be considerate now has a really weird stigma attached to it.BarbaricGoose said:
Tumblr's getting tired of it too, or at least the corners I see. Someone posted pictures of American content ratings systems when asked for "ideas for more comprehensive trigger warnings." The person who asked the question had no idea any kind of content ratings were even a thing, let alone how to use them. I understand trigger warnings are needed for people with PTSD, but so many younger kids are whining when something mildly upsets, offends, or angers them, that "trigger warning", when used on tumblr, has become shorthand for "my parents never taught me how to emotionally regulate, and I may, in fact, be too young to use the internet responsibly." Hell, on a site I go to, an article got posted up that was called something like, "Why asking me about my cultural oppression is oppressing me." Can ya tell it was written by a teenager? Bet ya can! That's why another article got posted up a day later called, The Difference Between Annoyance And Oppression. You know... because there is one. Full disclosure: Don't like certain ant colonies. Never did. But I'm not liking two people who presume to speak on my Frequency much either. They seem to have no liking for the kyriarchal bargain, think the Third Wave is an era of cinema they're just too sophisticated for, and probably haven't got any idea of who Eve Ensler even is. (If you don't, that's alright. You guys aren't making a video series on feminism in modern media.) In the past few weeks, they've begun demanding that certain media they enjoy should cater directly and exclusively to their specific tastes... just like the tumblr kids... and just like those gooberguts. Neither group sees the irony in that they share some of the same reasons that "Mad Max is not a feminist movie..."
O lordy that did give me a good laugh!
Yeah I find trigger warnings just meh. They are like content warnings but people do tend to take them too far. But what makes me mad is that the people who make the bigger fuss about trigger warnings and those that say everything has to have trigger warnings are making a mockery out of those with actual mental health issues or those who actually suffer from triggers. It's almost as bad as the people who sit and self diagnose themselves with mental health issues without actually knowing what those issues are, and are just doing it because it's the popular thing with the kids nowadays.
Yeah I find trigger warnings just meh. They are like content warnings but people do tend to take them too far. But what makes me mad is that the people who make the bigger fuss about trigger warnings and those that say everything has to have trigger warnings are making a mockery out of those with actual mental health issues or those who actually suffer from triggers. It's almost as bad as the people who sit and self diagnose themselves with mental health issues without actually knowing what those issues are, and are just doing it because it's the popular thing with the kids nowadays.
That's because the internet just loves to over-complicate things. If a topic continues for more than three months, you can rest assured that it's going to be involved in politics somehow.TakerFoxx said:
Also, people seem to be missing that the video was taking the piss out of both sides of the argument. Doc was going overboard with the Trigger warnings while Griff was overreacting towards them and getting pissed for no real reason.