Trigger Warnings and Being an Asshole
I've been fascinated by the dust-up over "trigger warnings" that's inched across the feminist blogosphere this week. "Trigger warnings," for the uninitiated, are warnings placed before blog posts that touch on certain subject areas (or particularly graphic presentations of them) that could possibly "trigger" the past trauma of a survivor of sexual assault or abuse. So: To trigger-warn or not to trigger-warn?
The debate over the feminist blog staple began with sex writer Susannah Breslin, who thinks trigger warnings are condescending at best, and a disingenuous ploy to keep feminist blogs relevant at worst. The topic then migrated to Feministing, which employs trigger warnings for the simple reason that it "care[s] about rape victims." Feministing declared Breslin a "certifiable asshole," at which point the debate moved on to Jezebel, which doesn't employ trigger warnings, also cares about rape victims, and thinks Breslin is an asshole, too. (For the record, I think Breslin is an asshole, and that's often what makes her work compelling to this feminist, anyway). Melissa McEwan shies from the Breslin: Asshole? angle, but does provide the most impassioned defense of the warnings, writing:
A trigger is something that evokes survived trauma or ongoing disorder. For example, a person who was raped may be "triggered," i.e. reminded of hir rape, by a graphic description of sexual assault, and that reminder may, especially if the survivor has post-traumatic stress disorder, be accompanied by anxiety, manifesting as anything ranging from mild agitation to self-mutilation to a serious panic attack.
Those of us who write about triggering topics (sexual assault, violence, detainee torture, war crimes, disordered eating, suicide, etc.) provide trigger warnings with such content because we don't want to inadvertently cause someone who's, say, sitting at her desk at work, a full-blown panic attack because she happened to read a triggering post the content of which she was unprepared for.
We provide trigger warnings because they give survivors of various stripes the option to assess whether they're in a state of mind to deal with triggering material before they stumble across it. Just like someone who isn't easily triggered can nonetheless have, say, a shorter temper when stressed or tired or hungry, a person whose history of trauma makes some material triggering for them can often navigate triggering material without a problem, except when stressed or tired or hungry. Trigger warnings give them a moment to consider whether they want to deal with potentially triggering material right now.
We provide trigger warnings because it's polite, because we don't want to be the asshole who triggered a survivor of sexual assault because of carelessness or laziness or ignorance.
My personal position on trigger warnings is pretty clear to regular readers—you won't see a trigger warning on this blog. Unlike Breslin, I don't think trigger warnings are some sort of page-view ploy or a harbinger of the End of Feminist Days. But like Breslin, it seems that neglecting to trigger-warn does make me kind of an asshole.
I'll likely never stop being an asshole, but I am open to reconsidering my position on the warnings, and I'd like to know what my readers think about that. So: What are your thoughts on trigger warnings? Survivors, do you find trigger warnings effective? Are triggers too personal to be avoided with a blanket warning? What about feminist blogs that write about potentially triggering subjects in nearly every post (hi there!)? Anyone got a feminist argument against trigger warnings up their sleeves? How big of an asshole am I? Discuss.
Photo via Let Ideas Compete, Creative Commons Attribution License 2.0
9:56 am
I find them pretty useful. It isn't very often that I skip reading something altogether because of a trigger warning, but the warning allows me to assess my frame of mind and prepare myself mentally for reading something that I know could bring back hurtful, traumatic memories for me. I luckily do not suffer from PTSD as a result of my assaults, but I do have chronic anxiety and I find trigger warnings to be a really useful tool in my reading.
9:59 am
As a blogger who writes for a blog that ONLY discusses sexual violence, I find myself in a similar predicament and have asked myself about what to do when EVERY post might require a trigger-warning. I've been thinking lately about when I re-design the blog layout, maybe putting a general note up front and center that the content may be hard for some folks and include crisis phone line info. But generally, I only include trigger warnings on content that I think is particularly graphic, and it's something that I got in the habit of doing after reading blogs that I know are written by survivors who employ trigger warnings. A lot of folks use them more often than me, and if a reader called me out on it I would be happy to change my "policy" such as it is.
Personally, as someone who reads your blog regularly, Amanda, it hasn't bothered me. But I purposefully read about this stuff every day, so I know what I'm getting into. I'm definitely interested in hearing what your other readers have to say--I could use their opinions too.
10:05 am
Because trigger warnings are used for such a wide range of things, seeing one often makes me wonder why the warning is in place. Perhaps the trigger warnings, if employed (I, like you Amanda, don't use them and feel agnostic on whether they should be used) should be more specific. For instance, "Trigger warning: the following post explicitly describes the details of a violent sexual assault." seems more preferable than a flat "trigger warning" that is unspecific. I could see how a victim of rape might be interested in reading about policies surrounding sexual assault but may not want to read about the details of others' sexual assaults because it hits too close to home.
10:08 am
I'm in the same boat as tess. I don't often skip a post because of a warning, but it gives me a moment to steady myself before reading. For me, it's being exposed to a trigge unexpectedly that causes anxiety. If I know it's coming, i'm usually okay.
As for this blog, I come here expecting to read about rape and other triggering topics, so i'm already prepared.
10:10 am
I am a survivor of sexual assault who has worked for many years with other survivors in a variety of capacities, so I am pretty familiar with triggers and trigger warnings. I do certainly think trigger warnings have their place - usually when talk about or depictions of sexual assault are unexpected. (For instance, I kind of wish "Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" had one.) As a fairly regular reader of your column, however, I never feel like I "stumble upon" material that might be triggering. You're pretty unambiguous and upfront about your topics. It's not as if you write a headline about cupcakes and dive into a graphic depiction of an assault.
I don't think you're an asshole.
Mmmm, cupcakes.
10:14 am
I often find the comments here to be very, very upsetting. But I know that you have a very liberal commenting policy, so if I not feeling up to hearing about how dumb sluts deserve to get raped, or whatnot, I don't read the comments. To me, trigger warnings make more sense in a heavily moderated blog that makes an effort to be a safe space. Here, there is no such promise, so I think trigger warnings don't really make a lot of sense.
10:18 am
Perhaps I should have a blanket comment warning, like, "Comments generally horrifying"
10:23 am
I think that you should consider using trigger warnings, not because I think you're a jerk or because I've been seriously upset by the content of your posts, but because it's common courtesy. Like many of your readers, I will usually read a post that's marked with a trigger warning, since I read that kind of stuff all the time.
But I definitely appreciate the warning. When there isn't one, I sometimes feel upset or agitated.
10:26 am
The whole internet should have the blanket comment warning.
10:27 am
I am in favor of trigger warnings. I am not a survivor of rape or any other typically-triggering experience, but seeing the trigger warning often reminds me that the freedom I have to not be triggered by graphic material is a privilege. It reinforces the pervasive nature of trauma and raises my level of empathy/consideration for those who have survived sexual assualts/domestic violence, etc.
It takes me only a second to read the words "trigger warning" but the lessons about the nature of PTSD are more lasting, and it reminds me that there are people out there reading the same thing I am reading for whom THIS IS PERSONAL.
10:27 am
I would sometimes like a trigger warning for some things. Although not a victim of sexual assault, I do have a past that involves some painful memories. And, you're right, when I'm tired or stressed or hungry, I can't deal with those reminders. So, sometimes, there's a panic attack in the bathroom at work or curling up on the bed and not talking for an hour. But, unfortunately, most people don't think of that. I'm glad that some blogs do, but I also think people know what to expect from The Sexist by now. There's a lot of commentary on rape. There's a lot of commentary on violence. There's a lot of Sady sometimes, and she and Amanda seem to cause trigger warnings regardless (which is a compliment because it's two ladies REALLY talking, which is fantastic). So by now we know. But if we didn't, if it were a surprise attack by a violent past during work one day, it could be damaging.
Post-traumatic stress disorder is a serious problem, and panic attacks are no small matter. I've been there, I've had them, and, oh, I dunno, I'm being trained to treat people with them. If Breslin wants to be a close-minded asshat and decide that she knows what's best for those with PTSD, well, I guess that's great for her. But she's wrong. I can prove it with studies, I can prove it with my general knowledge, and I can prove it with experience. But, no, clearly because she has a blog she's allowed to talk about something she knows nothing about. Good on her. Those delusions must be funsies.
10:29 am
Maybe I should've put a trigger warning for Breslin on my comment....?
10:41 am
When my daughter was younger and she came to me with a cut or some injury I would say, "oh you have some blood, there, its all better now isnt it?" and she would stop crying and agree that it was and off she would go.
Some parents will shriek and add the panic.
Trigger warnings and victim culture are the second approach.
10:44 am
If we support trigger warnings for female rape victims we would have to support trigger warnings for all victims of something traumatic.
Otherwise we are infantalising, discriminating and reinforcing old gender stereotypes about the weaker sex.
10:44 am
I was talking about trigger warnings with a friend yesterday and telling her I found them ridiculous and kind of annoying. To my surprise she told me that she really appreciates them and uses them to gauge whether or not to read an article.
And I was shocked because neither of us have been through any kind of trauma.
I think that, on the whole, a person can't expect to go to a feminist blog and not read about rape or abuse and if that is something you're really not interested in, you might want to stay away. However, rape and abuse are not the ONLY feminist issues in the world, but I think Jezebel does it right by using headlines that clearly state what one is about to read. If you've got a good headline, you don't need a trigger warning.
10:51 am
I would say if the titles of posts are adequately informative they are not always necessary. I am often not in the mood for/triggered by things like excessively vicitm-blamey douchey articles, but I think on here the nature of post titles would usually be to refer to said douchey article, so I know not to read that sometimes. Trigger warnings can be helpful, but a non-graphic summary of the preceding content as either the blog post title or worked as the introduction is just as good. People's trigger levels are different though.
10:58 am
I find them helpful. I've got a touch of PTSD, which for me means I've basically got it under control, but it sneaks up on me once or twice a year. Between a headline & a trigger warning, I can decide if I want to take the chance & read this article 10 minutes before I'm due in a meeting, or if it would be better to wait until I got home. So far, I've never decided to skip something entirely because of a trigger warning, and you've had a couple of really great articles that I personally would have liked to see a warning on.
11:13 am
Ditto on the headline thing. I think anyone who reads this blog is smart enough to realize that a post with the words "Sexual Assault" in the title will be triggering for many of us with sexual assaults in our history. So- yea I think they're unnecessary and I actually kinda agree that they're condescending. Seeing so many people support them is surprising to me. Maybe it's just because my wounds are far in the past and reading about others' experiences gets me mad as hell... but unless there's a video (I've walked out of many a movie) I like being engaged in the feminist conversation- even when it makes me remember how effed up the men in my life have been to me.
11:18 am
Just from a pragmatic perspective, you and Jezebel don't need them as much as blogs like Shakesville that employ cuts less often. When you only leave one paragraph before the jump, the savvy reader can guess that a post with "rape" in the headline that discusses rape in the first graf may go on to have details of said rape below the fold, and can save that for later. Jezebel especially has very little content on the front page, and even a minimally alert skimmer will know exactly what posts might have to do with traumatic situations and be easily able to avoid them when necessary. This seems the most even-handed solution on a blog whose structure allows it, since (as Eo pointed out) people who are survivors of non-sexual assault traumas usually don't get trigger warnings even on blogs that are scrupulous. (I actually got completely back-alley jumped by discussions of emotional abuse on Jez one time, which led to a little bit of a "waaa my personal trauma never gets trigger warnings, I guess it's not REAL" emo moment, but really I think it's more sustainable to set up blogs that deal with emotional issues in such a way that everybody can decide what emotions they're willing to take on, rather than letting warnings proliferate.)
12:09 pm
I definitely think they have their place, but I also think it's perfectly fine to just have a general policy of not including trigger warnings--as a regular reader, that's definitely something I've picked up on. And your opening paragraphs, like someone else pointed out, often announce what you'll be discussing, so if that's something I can't read, I can skip it (and I agree with EVERYONE that the comments are much worse than the post, as far as triggering content goes).
1:15 pm
You know, I didn't even realize that I was assaulted before I read this blog, so Amanda, THANK YOU for opening my eyes.
With that said, I will have to agree with Jenny that the comments are much more disturbing than the actual blog, but most of the time they have been flagged so much that they are hidden. That is helpful.
Outside of that, though, I believe that most folks who come to read this blog know what they are getting themselves into.
And I, too, don't think you're an asshole... :)
1:18 pm
Definitely don't want you to add trigger warnings. I don't object to their being used sometimes, & I can appreciate the idea that a feminist blog should be a "safe space" of sorts where women don't have to fear seeing traumatic subjects discussed insensitively. But the way it's used on many blogs is just ridiculous -- if a post has rape or assault in the title/subject matter, the writer will put a warning, even if there's nothing in the post more graphic than the word "rape." I've seen it even with less violent topics like a woman being called called a bitch... which I suppose could be triggering to a woman who's been verbally harassed... but it just seems like major overkill. & anyway, the amount of asshole comments this blog gets renders the "safe space" idea moot.
Bottom line, I don't think it's necessary unless a post contains graphic details of a rape or other violent act, & the title /intro para are so innocuous that they don't indicate what's ahead. Which is rare, & doesn't seem likely to happen here.
1:43 pm
As someone recovering from an eating disorder, I am always grateful to see trigger warnings in particularly intense ED-related articles. I assume the same would be true for survivors of sexual assault.
Trigger-warnings are nothing more than an occassional annoyance for the average reader, but for those who are survivors of trauma, trigger warnings are a kind, helpful gesture. I support the use of them.
2:01 pm
This is something that doesn't affect me personally either way. I don't have any triggers to worry about, nor does it bother my lady brain to read two extra words and skip over the explanatory paragraph onto the article material. I cast my vote with the frequenters of the blog who are sexual violence survivors. If they want it, I want it.
2:27 pm
hey amanda, here's my take on it
I read your blog every day. I like your blog. I think that you handle extremely triggering topics in a way that minimizes the triggering content of them, and as a survivor of rape I really appreciate that. However, I do know that sites like feministing (which as you point out use trigger warnings) link to your page a lot, and someone who only reads feministing, and doesn't delve into other blogs unless feministing links to them, may not be prepared to not see a trigger warning, especially since there are so many very young readers on feministing. Samhita and her team do an excellent job of making sure that anything that might even slightly be triggering has a warning in front of it. To go from that to your page could be a big shock to some people, and while I understand that you do not promise the safe space that other sites promise, I still think that if the article is likely to be linked, and talked about on sites that do give their readers trigger warnings, you may want to either add them yourself, or ask that a particular site puts the warning in there on their own.
3:04 pm
I'm a domestic assault survivor and I recently had my day ruined by Twitter posts (in all caps, no less) recounting some awful domestic violence the Tweeter had just heard about (not even experienced herself). When I asked her to post a warning in the future, she got all self-righteous about the "education" she was doing. Here I am, a survivor, educating you, but I guess that's less important than having people reply "@ALLCAPSCHICK Omg!" Thanks for a day of flashbacks and feeling like garbage.
I agree with some posters here that an appropriate title might do the job on a smart blog, so if you're doing that, you're probably covered. But anyone who dismisses the entire concept is definitely an asshole.
3:40 pm
I'm undecided on trigger warnings, but I'll play devil's advocate and give an argument against -
Making someone with PTSD feel truly safe should be left to those who have been trained to work with abuse survivors. When feminist blogs use trigger warnings they're taking on language that implies an understanding of PTSD that the writer may not have. As well meaning as these bloggers and their commenters are, they may lack the skills to truly meet survivors' needs. Survivors could come away with the impression that the untrained person who does not have PTSD will know what language to use in which situations, and those people without PTSD may come away thinking that they now understand the complex psychology behind the disorder (I can't speak for abuse survivors, but I think the latter is rampant).
3:53 pm
It's really up to the blogger to use them. yes, it's a nice thing to do, but it's up to the blogger's discretion as it's their turf.
So no, I don't think anyone could consider you an asshole for not using them. That term is generally reserved for people who get all pissy that other people are doing something that you have guffawed over and decreed stupid, even though you've advertised to everyone that you haven't bothered to educate yourself about it... and then proceed to get pissyier when they call you out on it.
4:36 pm
I'm not a survivor, but I do work with survivors "of various stripes". I use trigger warnings to decide if and when I want to limit my exposure to distressing material, since a very important part of the work is self-care to avoid vicarious traumatisation.
I would imagine that other people appreciate trigger warnings for other reasons not related to survivor-hood, e.g. someone with depression deciding to limit how much they read about how awful the world is.
@Anne - yes. If you do start to use them, maybe read up a bit, and continue to ask for feedback?
5:41 pm
I demand more bubble wrap for my Internets. GUARD MY FRAGILE PSYCHE.
Seriously, as has been asked, does anyone go to feminist blog because the want to AVOID reading tales of female victimization? LOL
5:48 pm
CTD, are you really so threatened by the concept of trigger warnings? Did one kill your dog when you were a kid? :-)
6:04 pm
As an assualt survivor with PTSD, I like trigger warnings. It lets me know what is coming. My anxiety attacks can be fully prevented as long as the trigger doesnt catch me by surprise.
As for them being condescending, yes- having trigger warnings for only female rape victims would be condescending which is why they should exist for all things that are deeply traumatic on that level- depictions of combat, incest, sexual assault, molestation etc
6:34 pm
I don't think anyone should expect bloggers to use trigger warnings, including trauma survivors who read the blogs. But I don't see the reason for railing against them (or why some people have a weird need to mock them) since I think they are rather innocuous things.
Certainly, I can see that bloggers aren't trained to deal with PTSD. But most that would be inclined to use trigger warnings know their audiences pretty well. So it's kind of like- I apologize, this may be a stupid analogy but I'm not the best at analogizing- going to a hotel and getting courtesy items. It's a nice touch, and convenient, but you shouldn't expect it everywhere. People do what they can to help others. But they're not always going to get it perfect every time. But if trigger warnings cut out even just a few more instances of triggering for a reader, it's definitely a big help.
I hope Susannah Breslin is reading this, Amanda. She could pick up some pointers about more constructive ways to blog.
6:59 pm
My first experience with trigger warnings came on BUS - Bodies Under Siege, a self-injury support message board. It has members from many demographics, so it wasn't "infantalizing women" like some have suggested.
I really appreciated the specific trigger warnings, and there was a list explaining the abbreviations: ED (eating disorders), SA (sexual abuse/assault), SI (self-injury), PA (physical abuse/assault), etc. Like others have said, I usually ended up reading the posts, but it helped me prepare myself.
I just wanted to counter-act this idea (stated in comments) that trigger warnings are just for weak females. I think that's far from the truth. To me, trigger warnings are about respecting all people and wanting to help them stay safe.
7:38 pm
I am an adult survivor of repetitive and violent acts of childhood sexual abuse. I have acquired PTSD as a result of those years of my life. I find most trigger warnings to be useful. Usually if a story or article has a trigger warning attached to it I will think about how I am in that moment and either choose to read it, choose to read it later in a different and safe location, or choose not to look at. This helps keep me on the path to healing. That said, I personally am not triggered by factual or policy related articles. For me, the kinds of articles that can be triggering are those that recount some kind of sexual abuse or assault in detail.
7:51 pm
I support trigger warnings. I am a survivor and have been in a fragile state of mind off and on lately, but still enjoy the feminist blogs. The trigger warnings allow me to pick and choose based on how I am feeling at the time of reading.
The fact that you are asking reduces your a**hole score ;-)
7:55 pm
I find them redundant, tedious, and yes, condescending. If the title of your post includes the words "sexual assault," shouldn't one assume that that post is about, um, sexual assault? Or did you just trigger someone by even SAYING the words "sexual assault?" Oh noooo!
Come on...
8:25 pm
You know, it'd be really useful if we had some kind of classification system. I generally am in favor of trigger warnings so I can gear myself up for the intense stuff. So as not to beat a dead horse, I agree more with the "I don't want to be the asshole that sets off an episode of anxiety for someone with PTSD" argument.
A classification system could give readers some general idea of "oh, graphic, detailed description of a violent episode here" versus "discussion of victim-blaming," which generally both warrant trigger warnings at sites/blogs which employ them, but one may be fine for an individual while the other is upsetting. Sometimes the title of a post is a good clue, but sometimes it's really not - you're still unsure of how graphic the post will be.
8:45 pm
i have severe PTSD, and i generally appreciate trigger warnings on the blogs i read. i don't usually avoid the posts marked with them completely, but sometimes i'll open them in tabs and read them later, when i might be in a better frame of mind; other times, i can sort of mentally brace myself and not get blindsided. however, i've never minded the lack of trigger warnings on your blog (which i've read regularly for several months now).
i think this is more because of what trigger warnings represent for me. blogs that put trigger warnings on certain posts tend to be ones that expect and welcome readers with histories of trauma, and that think of them as people who matter, not just points to be made in arguments. you don't use trigger warnings as such, but i have always felt like you know i'm here and care what i think (in the general sense, i mean, not me personally). also, as other commenters have noted, you do a good job of telegraphing how detailed the post is going to get in the first paragraph or so, which for me works just as well as those two words.
9:08 pm
I am an assault survivor with PTSD. I like trigger warnings, though of course I don't believe that blogs *have* to post them. They are helpful before graphic descriptions; and sometimes I'm reading blogs during my lunch break at work, or at a friend's house, or on my couch after a long day, and I don't want to break into a panic attack. They're pretty serious business and they kill my night, my partner's night -- Panic attacks are awful.
When blogs do post trigger warnings, sometimes I'm feeling good enough to read on. I do care about feminism/sexual violence and often I do want to read these articles when I'm in the right frame of mind to handle them.
I like trigger warnings, because it reassures me that there are allies out there, who see me, who know that I'm not invisible. I don't find them condescending. I find them empowering.
10:18 pm
I think trigger warnings are wonderful. If they don't imply to you, just ignore them. You don't get annoyed at, say, seeing "Leave a comment" underneath a post - if you wanna leave a comment, it indicates that you can and where; and if you don't, you simply ignore it. It's just words. Doesn't do you any harm. Why get bothered by something that personally means nothing but does help others? I don't need them myself, but my partner does. I've experienced how he becomes when he's triggered, and it's awful. I'm very thankful that the main feminist site he reads (Feministing) gives the warnings as he'd get triggered a lot more often without them, and I don't know if he could cope with that.
1:55 am
I don't like trigger warnings. They are pointless. They sensationalize the post, and it is just wrong to do this with things like rape and child abuse. (Warning! Warning! Danger! Danger!) A descriptive title is all that is necessary. I feel like trigger warnings are also infantilizing in the extreme and treat readers like children that need to be coddled.
2:11 am
"I don’t find them condescending. I find them empowering."
This. In spades.
I like them just so that I can prepare myself. And unlike many others here, I skip reading lots of times because some days, I'm just not up for it.
5:35 am
Hey! Breslin linked this! I think Eo might be Breslin's secret identity.
I'm not a survivor, so not my call.
7:21 am
i have past issues with : eating disorders, self-injury, rape, mental abuse, victim blaming... not particularly in that order. i frequent feminist and support communities on an almost daily basis. sometimes, i can't handle a graphic description of an assault, or bulimic purging; but at the same time a discussion about recently proposed legislation on prosecuting assault perpetrators, or a broader discussion of ED statistics and media projected conventional beauty would be no problem.
'trigger warnings' are useful mostly for the extremely graphic details, for me. and that is also when i see them used most. as others have said, sometimes i decide to come back to an article later or just skip it altogether.
it's not hard to catch on to the fact that trigger warnings aren't used here, and i only come to read when i'm feeling braced for some ugly victim blaming topics. but i'm sure there are some readers who are not in the same place i am, and may be suffering severely from PTSD. i think it would be a good idea for the posts here to contain a warning for the unusually ugly descriptions.
you're not an asshole, you're pretty great. BUT trigger warnings don't take any extra time out of your writing/posting, while possibly saving one of your readers a huge amount of time by letting them avoid something particularly graphic.
9:20 am
I actually don't care either way. I'm not a trauma survivor, I don't mind seeing the trigger warnings. The only thing about this issue that bothers me is that some people are just SO ANNOYED BY THOSE DARN TRIGGER WARNINGS that they have to write missives about them on their blog, as some kind of proof that their hatred of feminism is valid. Hi, Susannah.
10:02 am
agreeing with "I'm not an assault survivor, so maybe just do what they want you to do"
11:18 am
What makes Breslin's point asshole-ish is that since SHE doesn't need a trigger warning, so NO ONE should. Just as one who is sensitive can read the trigger warning and decide not to read the article, those without need for trigger warnings can just skim past them and into the article. If one is so OPPOSED to the idea of trigger warnings on PRINCIPLE, one doesn't have to visit that site at all. Choosing trigger warnings as a platform to attempt to totally discredit feminism and the need for feminist spaces on the internet is just a ridiculous, shit-stirring ploy for more page views (that worked, unfortunately.) Just because Breslin has her own blog doesn't mean she isn't a troll.
I clicked over to her blog for the first & last times to read these trigger warning articles. She is a terrible writer, arrogant and unconvincing. I laughed reading her bio, the long list of magazines in which she's been published, followed by the irrelevant "I'm 6'1"." I was reminded of the "I'm on a horse," line in the "Man Your Man Can Smell Like" commercial. So this makes her a tall troll. Congratulations!
I don't think it's necessarily asshole-ish to not use trigger warnings on posts, but is asshole-ish to deride those who do.
11:24 am
D'oh, I hate typos, how does one edit here? Meant to say:
"What makes Breslin’s point asshole-ish is that since SHE doesn’t need a trigger warning, NO ONE should."
AND
"I don’t think it’s necessarily asshole-ish to not use trigger warnings on posts, but it is asshole-ish to deride those who do."
Mkay, I feel a little better.
12:16 pm
I think that it's just important to know what the particular blog you're reading does. Here, I know that they won't be used and the topics are frequently related to rape. On Feministing, I know they are used when appropriate. Either way is fine with me but I have the privilege of never having experienced assault. I do agree that warnings would be helpful on a wide array of triggering topics, but I would never presume that trigger warnings on rape posts are employed to "infantalis[e], discriminat[e] and reinforc[e] old gender stereotypes about the weaker sex" because CLEARLY men are raped and could be triggered as well.
1:43 pm
Ami: in practice, I'm not sure that feminist blogs (and Feministing in particular) are safe for male victims of rape in general, or that their policy on trigger warnings is really aimed at them. Especially in the comments. I seem to recall a few male rape victims on other sites complaining of entirely unsignposted triggering content such as claims that experiences like theirs are a distraction from the rape of women, or that their experiences aren't like real rape. (If you can't figure out why these type of comments are likely to be triggering, think about the responses male rape victims are likely to receive if they talk about or seek help for their experiences within society in general.)
Of course, it's still not as bad as some of the comments people write over at sites like I Blame The Patriarchy. Feministe's comments aren't necessarily that much better, though at least they eventually banned Olo.
Also: before anyone replies using NVCS statistics or similar to claim that men don't get raped, please take a look at the definitions they use. It'll save me a lot of time.
1:52 pm
To everyone who has commented that it's redundant to list "Trigger Warning" when the title of the article has the words "sexual assault" or so on in it - have you checked to see if that's true for every blog entry on this site? Because it's not at feministe. Jill, to refute this misconception, actually went and listed all the articles that had trigger warnings without an explicit description in the blog entry title.
You're not an asshole, however, because you don't presume to know everything about trigger warnings from a Yahoo! answer. No worries.
2:24 pm
As this discussion has illustrated there are a variety of people with and without PTSD who wish to avoid being taken by surprise with unexpected graphic and disturbing content. It seems to me that A general statement or warning that does not single out PTSD afflicted survivors, but instead includes them as part of a group of varied individuals who appreciate/benefit from advanced notice of graphic content is more reflective of reality, and less condescending. Clearly survivors are not the only ones who might be bothered by such content, as a "trigger warning" implies. There are a multitude of factors that influence my decision to deal with difficult subjects at a specific time, it is not just about avoiding potential triggers. It seems to me such a specifically targeted warning is unnecessarily reductive, and excessively paternalistic.
4:16 pm
I don't see how some choosing to warn people with PTSD about Rape, etc is something that needs to be looked down upon.
You don't do it? Okay, then you get to be "Hardcore with a keyboard". Enjoy it. -eyeroll-
5:00 pm
ABSOLUTELY. Of course, it's up to you. But it seems those who find them "annoying" aren't usually victims of sexual assault. As a survivor of sexual abuse, I find them extraordinarily useful. And it's not useful for only survivors-- as others have said, it can help everyone mentally prepare themselves if something they are about to read is disturbing. I agree with the others about the titles of blog posts; I think a blanket "trigger warning" is a bit too broad.
As someone who has also survived a suicide attempt and serious depression, I talked a lot about "triggers" in therapy. One of my biggest ones is reading an article, blog post, or story that has particularly saddening language or a heart-breaking storyline.
I think it is very important to use these warnings. It isn't because we're "coddling" survivors. It's because we care and because it also raises awareness. Those just now finding out about "trigger warnings" (ahem, Breslin) are hopefully realizing that certain subjects are touchy for people because of what they've been through. It's not about continuing victimization-- it's about allowing survivors freedom to search the internet without being pushed into panic attack mode after simply reading something.
Again, it's your choice... but I would be eternally grateful if I was given fair warning (and a choice) before I read something that may send me running for my Klonopin, hyperventilating.
5:07 pm
The trigger warning is the title of the post. Rather than having titles like "Some newspaper shows its hate for women!!!!" It should be something like "Some newspaper dismisses a woman's claim of rape!"
When I see that rape, or ANY OTHER TRAUMA I have experienced that might trigger me is in a post, based on the title, I can immediately avoid that. I don't need the added "trigger warning" statement. Further many times the trigger warning has come AFTER the thing that triggers me! The title makes no mention of what the post is REALLY about, there's a paragraph or two about a serious rape and then POW the trigger warning. THANKS! Really and truly thanks.
So please stop treating me like a child. Treat me like an adult by telling me what your topics are and I can decide for myself if I will be triggered and avoid it.
Thanks for listening.
5:46 pm
I find trigger warnings helpful, as long as they're posted at the very beginning of the article. It reminds me to assess my current frame of mind and decide whether or not to continue reading. It also gives me a chance to kind of build up my mental blocks to prevent being triggered, as opposed to when I'm reading something and it just hits me out of nowhere. I'm a survivor of both rape and domestic abuse, and I have PTSD because of both. Trigger warnings help me avoid unnecessarily triggering myself when I'm not in a good place to deal with triggering pieces.
6:37 pm
The thing is - you're not an asshole because, unlike Breslin, you're not writing whole blog posts about how dumb and pathetic trigger warnings are, and basically telling survivors who appreciate trigger warnings that they need to suck it up.
I realize that this isn't exactly a response to the question, but the people at Shakesville and Feministing don't (as far as I know) want to force everyone else in the world to use trigger warnings. They were just pointing out that there was no reason to write such an unnecessarily vitriolic blog post about the topic.
6:39 pm
I am not a survivor, nor a sufferer of PTSD. But I really appreciate trigger warnings. They occasionally let me know that I may be five seconds away from reading something at work, for example, that will leave me shaking with anger, crying silently, hoping nobody will tap me on the shoulder and ask me a question. I don't expect to be coddled and protected from the internetz (why would I be reading feminist sites at all?) but I have empathy and I have imagination, and these things affect me.
I'm going to be slightly judgemental and say those who object strongly are probably doing so because they get uncomfortable. It is one more thing to think about, and to consider the feelings of your fellow humans.
I will agree to one thing, though: it is not right to *just* put a warning for sexual assault related posts. Although it is an incredibly common trauma, the victims of other types of violence are no less deserving of consideration. My worst reaction was to a newspaper article on a government-demonstrator clash in my home country, which contained details from autopsy results. I didn't know what trigger warnings even were, then.
8:43 pm
I never avoid a post because of a trigger warning, but I really appreciate them. I've opened a few posts sent from friends, posted to sites where the headline is relatively benign but the story itself is a serious gut-check. I do like to have a heads-up where I'm about to read about the torture of a toddler, ya know? (that was an article sent to me today).
12:42 am
Throwing my 0.02 in: like several of the above commenters, I'm not a survivor, and have no problem with having to read two extra words if that helps anyone out. And clearly it does help people out, so yeah it works for me.
1:24 am
I don't need them, but blogs using them are no skin off of my nose. I can understand people saying "enough of this" if they were used all the time. But they don't seem to be from what I've seen, despite Breslin's swearing that they're on every other post.
So, I think Breslin really needs to get a thicker skin if she's fuming over them (and from what I've seen in her response on her personal blog, she's not responding to the debate very maturely.) For someone who says trigger warnings are all about coddling, I have to wonder if she needs some kind of coddling from trigger warnings. It's been said, her mindset seems to be "I don't need them so they just shouldn't exist in the world and I am very angry that they do!"
I find that kind of selfishness a lot more disconcerting than people using trigger warnings, honestly.
1:27 am
Oh, yes, and to answer the question: No, you are definitely not an asshole if you decide not to use them. Just don't write self-involved diatribes about them, and you're fine.
10:42 am
Stories on rape and sexual assault REALLY upset me, sometimes making me physically ill. Sometimes I want to read the story, other times I'd rather stay in a good mood. I like being given the option. It's just considerate. Maybe most people are desensitized to violence, but I don't have that luxury.
12:54 pm
I've worked for a number of years in a team that treats victims of sexual abuse. The nurses and psychologists in the team have to hear the details of many cases of often extreme abuse, and it's standard practise to give a brief warning before going into the details of the case - this just gives everyone a moment to prepare themselves, and there's evidence that this preparation minimises the traumatising impact of this kind of material.
I'd like to point out that this isn't about survivors, it's about mental health professionals who have training and support, and trigger warnings are still standard practise - so I don't see why this should be seen as 'babying' anyone. People get fucked up by hearing about fucked up stuff - we're not made of stone, y'know?
I've seen exactly the same techniques used in seminars dealing with other potentially traumatising material - war photography is the example that I'm thinking of right now. It's simply putting into practise the principle that there's a psychological purpose to trigger warnings, and (in my opinion) it's a responsible way of dealing with emotive, upsetting, or potentially disturbing material. That said, I don't think it has to take the form 'trigger warning' - as many posters pointed out, the titles etc of many blogs are warnings in themselves. But, a lot of blogs also have very mixed content, and this seems like a handy way for anyone who runs a blog to standardise practise.
2:07 pm
I'm a survivor of both sexual assault and domestic abuse and, as a result, deal with PTSD and dissociation. I find trigger warnings immensely useful. Not because I never choose to read potentially triggering material, but because I do choose to read it in places where the potential for being triggered is less of a practical big deal.
I mean, yes, dissociating -- or fighting not to dissociate -- has both physical and mental symptoms that always more or less suck. But dealing with those symptoms at home, where I otherwise feel safe, is one thing. Dealing with them, say, on my lunch break at work out at a coffee shop or wherever is another issue: If I'm fighting to keep my mind and body connected, I *can't* interact with the people at work as I need to (and I work on their schedule; they don't wait for me). Or if I'm actually dissociated out in public, I run the risk of not being *able* to walk, drive, or otherwise get myself home and away from what triggered me.
And no, I cannot remove all potential triggers from my life. I understand that, probably more completely than anyone who makes this argument to me can realize. But if I can control for *some* triggers or even control when I may experience those triggers? That's a big deal to me.
7:36 pm
I don't think you're an "asshole" for not putting up trigger warnings but I think people who make fun of other people who put up trigger warnings are assholes. I sort of feel like they are indirectly making fun of me because those trigger warnings can be very helpful to me sometimes.
I am a rape survivor and I really appreciate seeing trigger warnings b/c I still get nightmares sometimes and the day after I have a nightmare I usually feel pretty shaky and am more prone to flashbacks. Reading content about sexual assault on those days can be more difficult for me than on other days. It's nice to have a little heads up.
But, again, I don't think you're an asshole for choosing not to put up trigger warnings. I think Breslin is an asshole for making fun of it and I wish she cared enough about rape survivors to leave people who put up trigger warnings alone.
12:31 pm
I appreciate trigger warnings. They help me to both gauge whether to read something or let me brace myself if I do read it. I'm a survivor of CSA and have had problems with self-injury since I was 12. I'm almost 19 now, and getting to somewhere where I can mostly deal with triggers--mostly. I know some people have never been in a place where they need the warnings, but I'm thankful for them when they mean I don't have to deal with urges to hurt myself, panic attacks, or flashbacks.
12:39 pm
I find trigger warnings very helpful. I may eventually return to read the post, but when it comes to sexual assault, as survivor I often feel too 'raw' to deal with them at the time of reading. I don't expect trigger warnings, but I do appreciate them.
7:48 pm
I know I am late in commenting but I wanted to throw my 2 cents in.
As a male survivor of sexual assault I rarely find trigger warnings personally helpful. What triggers me is not flagged and what is flagged does not trigger me. I understand why that is, and where trigger warnings are used reasonably I am glad that they are, to judge by the other comments here, helping someone.
But, I often see “trigger warning” used not to actually warn people about a potential trigger, but as an attempt to act like the poster cares about what may trigger people (without having to think about what actually might). I’ve seen trigger warnings slapped on things that just don’t need them and when I do I feel like the poster is trying to use real suffering as a way to gain some degree of cred. Like real suffering is being used as a tool for someone else’s gain. (I think you had something similar, but more articulate to say about Sarah Palin calling out people for using the word “retarded” a while back.) And that pisses me off. Hell, I’m more likely to be upset by what a cheep ploy to use my pain for their gain than I am to be upset by lack of a trigger warning. Personally, and take it for what its worth since trigger warnings when used properly don’t help me, I’d rather no one use them than see them misused like this.