Trigger Warnings

Ok, I'm sorry in advance for what may turn into a really ugly argument, but I really do need guidance....

These days, trigger warnings are everywhere on social media (and bleeding out into other media)

It's one thing to say "This video contains graphic violence" as an FYI, but since my Facebook is populated in large part by people who are either extreme SJW or people who agree and encourage extreme SJW behaviour, I see it so often.

Today, I was tagged in several of those "fun" posts where you take a ridiculous situation and plug people from your friends list into it for a few laughs. This particular one was ""You're in a mental hospital. Use the first 7 people on your chat list." Then a list of silly things like "______ is licking the windows", "__________ is running around naked", "_________ is the doctor", etc. It was meant to be stupid, get a few laughs, then vanish.

The people tagged (including myself) all had a giggle, but then someone posted in the thread that mental hospitals used to be horrific places of torture, and this post may be traumatic to those with mental illness. The OP then took down the joke and apologized for it.

And I see this happen all the time. Trigger warnings, safe spaces, microaggressions, trauma, stigma, victimizing, dehumanization, discrimination, oppression...it's making my head spin. And my job exposes me to mental illness every day (especially PTSD), because I manage disability claims for military/law enforcement.

I'm having a really hard time taking a lot of this seriously. I don't want to make a blanket statement like "This generation is overly sensitive" but it seems so prevalent, and I think it rather has the opposite effect of what is intended a lot of the time. I think that there are MAJOR improvements that need to be made in the way we treat certain groups in our society and I think we should be sensitive to the needs of others, but where should we be drawing the line?

This is a very difficult topic, and one which doesn't have a good answer. The best we can do is try to be sensitive to the people around us but try to see things for what they are.

In your example I personally feel like the person who complained was overly sensitive. Yes mental treatment facilities were horrible places at one time, some would argue that they aren't that much better now, but that doesn't mean that the Facebook thing was insulting that.

We also can't know everyone's triggers. It's impossible. Some people are triggered by things that are common place in the world. I feel for those people and I hope that they get the help they need to work past those triggers, but they can't expect the world to change for them. The people closest to them, maybe, but not the world.

In the end you have to make the call that's best for you and the situation.

Ok, here is my opinion (off the top of my head):

When a lack of balance is identified by a group of people (for example, let's say: women being treated as inferior to men before feminism), a movement is created. This movement attempts to correct the problem, but as a pendulum set in motion, it eventually gathers too much force and completely misses the center and goes towards the other extreme (in the case of this example, the infamous "feminazis").

We are currently living in a time at which the pendulum for political correctness has swung all the way from its former extreme (intolerant apathy) to its current extreme (entitled empathy), which is why you see feminists demanding to take down movie posters that depict gender violence (X-men movie), or why some people would have prefered that the Gorilla live and the child that fell down into its habitat at the zoo die.

I don't think there really is a right or wrong point of view in these cases, though. I think the answer is less about who is right and who is wrong, and more about how individuals and groups deal with the issues. In other words, we can debate all day long about whether a cartoonist should or shouldn't draw a satirical depiction of Mohammed, but we will not come to a concensus. What we can all agree with, though, is that the reaction by the "offended" party should always be civilized, and never degenerate into violence.

I would retract it, whatever it was, and do a follow up PM to the person explaining the intent and apologizing for hurt feelings.

Its only a funny post in a sea of funny posts, likely to be forgotten by everybody within a week...accept the person who had those memories thrust on them unexpectantly.

If you find people in general react this way to your posts regularly, you may consider examining your sense of humor. If it is one person in particular, you might want to check in on them, as a friend, a little more. They are still hurting and could use it.

Manu wrote: What we can all agree with, though, is that the reaction by the "offended" party should always be civilized, and never degenerate into violence.

I think we can all agree with that, but what I'm seeing far less than actual violence is "shaming." Someone says something that someone else doesn't like, that person is then accused of shaming some other group (women, minorities, LGBT, fat people, skinny people, etc) who is then criticized to the extent that THEY feel shame for saying it.

And that's what I'm concerned about and have trouble with. A few months ago, someone was making a statement and used the phrase "don't drink the Kool-aid" and people got LIVID about insulting the memories of the Jonestown victims and triggering people with reminders of violence, etc....The OP immediately apologized and retracted, but I kept pushing for the validity of the phrase and their ire turned to me.

It's the "Shame Wars" that I'm really having a hard time with. It's making people afraid to tell jokes, speak their mind, and sometimes, speak at all about a particular subject. I don't think it's no productive, but I don't know how to address it, or if I even should, since these kinds of people are so prevalent in my community.

Miss_Leah wrote: It's the "Shame Wars" that I'm really having a hard time with. It's making people afraid to tell jokes, speak their mind, and sometimes, speak at all about a particular subject. I don't think it's no productive, but I don't know how to address it, or if I even should, since these kinds of people are so prevalent in my community.

When I posted about violence, I was making an obvious reference to radical Islamic terrorism. But not all violence is physical, or as explicit. These shame wars you speak of, they are also a form of passive-aggressive violence, which -sadly - often works because they isolate a person and make them feel excluded from the "group" for their behavior. Only when social shaming is recognized as a legitimate form of violence will it begin to be addressed by the same people who currently practice it.

rugadd wrote: If you find people in general react this way to your posts regularly, you may consider examining your sense of humor. If it is one person in particular, you might want to check in on them, as a friend, a little more. They are still hurting and could use it.

No, I rarely, if ever, makes posts that elicit this kind of response. But I see it all over my social media from others, because people I know have posted about it.

I'm aware that many of the people who are behaving that that are in pain themselves, but does that give them a free pass to restrict what other people say by publicly shaming them?

Like Manu said, this sort of reaction is often a legitimate response to an identified insensitivity, and to an extent may well be necessary to call attention to the insensitivity. But it's often a question of degree. A few years ago, when one of my sons joined Facebook, we noticed that some of his friends were commenting on his posts with statements like "That's retarded" or "That's so gay." My son politely let them know why he was not okay with comments like that. He didn't set out to shame any of his friends, although of course he's not responsible for any shame they themselves may have felt when their insensitivity was pointed out to them. As I have felt ashamed of things I have said that inadvertently displayed my own unconscious insensitivity.

But yes, like you Leah, I am noticing this happening more and more myself, and it does feel as though more militant people are in fact setting out to shame others for their unconscious insensitivities. I think we can acknowledge the need to call attention to the insensitivity while decrying the way the message is delivered in the individual context. Just as the person who uses the insensitive comment / joke / whatever needs to have their attention drawn to why it is insensitive, perhaps the person calling her/him out needs also to have his/her own attention called to the insensitive manner in which they are choosing to accomplish that.

tl;dr: We should assume the best in people on both sides of any debate.

Atticus509 wrote:
tl;dr: We should assume the best in people on both sides of any debate.

Yes, all of this.

That's exactly what I'm trying to say. But how can this be breached with those militants? Or can it be breached at all? Generally when attention is drawn to their extreme behaviour, they cry out that their suffering (either real or imagined) isn't be properly acknowledged, or that they're being oppressed.

Miss_Leah wrote: But how can this be breached with those militants? Or can it be breached at all? Generally when attention is drawn to their extreme behaviour, they cry out that their suffering (either real or imagined) isn't be properly acknowledged, or that they're being oppressed.

While that may happen, I'm also not going to assume that the other person is going to react badly.

One of my favorite tricks in this kind of situation is personalizing it to me rather than to the other person. I might use an example of a time when I have gone off on someone for their callous remarks and only then realized that I was displaying the same degree of insensitivity as the person I was trying to correct.

That works both ways. To use Manu's example of the X-Men movie poster, it sparked quite a discussion in my household. I pointed out that I had not noticed the violence-against-women imagery that had some so enraged. On a crass level, Jennifer Lawrence and Oscar Isaac are big right now, so it makes sense for Fox to want to feature them in promo materials displaying high stakes and danger to the heroes. But deeper than that, while the character of Mystique happens to be a woman, she's also been portrayed in six movies and hundreds of comics to be one of the most capable and deadly mutants out there. So I wasn't going to call for a Fox exec's head because to me, the image, rather than being one of stereotypical violence against women, was more like a display of just how big bad a big bad Apocalypse is if he poses a threat to Mystique -- but I could see how someone not as familiar with the previous movies or the source material could view it the other way.

Public shaming is not a restriction per se. Only the person whom is responsible for the page can restrict your access to it. If I were in a room full of people shaming me, I would leave.

I have very mixed feeling on this topic.

I do a lot of work with people who have or have had eating disorders and that expression "trigger warning" started popping up a lot on pro ana sites in the late 90's specifically because some people were attempting recovery but still needed a place to be where they felt understood and there needed to be some kind of warning system to help prevent exposing those people to information that would potentially trigger them.

The expression was used in a way that meant "You may not like what you read, so viewer discretion is advised!"

The expression is SO valid for so many reasons, particularly because your brain responds to trigger and repeated patterns. That just how its designed. And used in that way I think its great. If you don't want to see or be exposed to something, awesome. don't read on.

BUT

I fear that it sometimes becomes a way to avoid the reality of life, and avoid developing the emotional resilience required to cope with some of those realities. Bubble wrapping people does not help them. Maybe while they are in the middle of the trauma, isolation from upsetting elements is a good thing, but hiding from triggers (in my opinion) can often lead to increased anxiety, phobias, unhealthy emotional responses and an inability to self regulate oneself.

I have seen it as a way to self identify too, a way to label ones sense of significance. Which I think is very dangerous to a persons mental and emotional health.

rugadd wrote: Public shaming is not a restriction per se. Only the person whom is responsible for the page can restrict your access to it. If I were in a room full of people shaming me, I would leave.

This is exactly how public shaming works. They gang up on you and psychological stress you, to the point where you simply desist from whatever you were originally doing.

Brenna wrote: I have seen it as a way to self identify too, a way to label ones sense of significance. Which I think is very dangerous to a persons mental and emotional health.

I've seen it too, all the time. The former-Christian-turned-wiccan who sets up his "new" identity by crying out about how pagans for centuries have been burned at the stake, and even take a certain joy in bashing people of their former faith; vegans who feel the need to spell out "murderer" in ketchup on top of your burger; animal rights activists who take their time to actually assault people wearing fur coats. It's the whole "us vs. them mentallity" that gets the better of us and makes us participate in this social violence with no end.

Yes Brenna, I agree! I work with people with PTSD on a daily basis and triggers are a very particular things with very specific psychological/physiological reactions (though the reactions differs from person to person), and generally "trigger warnings" don't help them much (not the ones I've worked with anyhow).

And one of my biggest pet peeves is that a many of the people who use and encourage excessively sensitive behaviour in inappropriate places claim to have mental health problems BUT are not under any form of treatment. I don't understand how they are hyper aware of "triggers" but not aware that if you're that strongly affected by something you read, that you should probably be under treatment (and this is Canada, so free health care...). I suppose that comes from my job, of which part is ensuring people are under appropriate treatment.

I dunno...I find myself more and more resentful of the people who do these kinda of things. I just stay away from those battles on social media, but it hurts me to see good people being shamed within an inch of their lives for joke or offhand comment. And I resent that I have to second guess everything I say in my own community.

EDIT:
Just wanted to add - I believe in social justice, but within reason and moderation.

I am going to preface my opinion with a bit about myself to give some perspective. I in my life time have seen a lot of bad things. I have survived physical abuse that was pretty bad, sexual abuse which to be blunt was a lot milder then most who have had to deal with such things experienced, being forced to hide my sexuality while coming to terms with it because the military was dont ask dont tell, and the loss of a good friend to his own hand.

Why do I say these things? Because these are things that many people say have given them triggers. Or that some words, phrases, actions, are insulting to them. Frankly these statements annoy me. Why? Because YOU are responsible for your emotions and your reaction to the world around you. We are supposed to take charge of our outlook and our emotions not just as Jedi but as a healthy person. So no one should have to censor themselves or apologize for using a particular verbage YOU choose to get upset by.

Good example I came out to my family not more then five years ago. They still use terms like thats so gay or even the term that used to mean a bundle of sticks. Why? Because they mean an insult to me and my boyfriend? No they have never had an issue with the LGBT community even before I came out and are even more accepting now that I am out. They use those words because they have popular meaning in common parlance. My and my boyfriend use them BOTH and we sure dont hate other LGBT people.

What I think is that A) people need to get over their own outlooks and give people the benefit of the doubt unless given good reason to think otherwise. Unless someone says something directly and clearly meant to offend then you can just unsubscribe or not participate in the conversation if you do not like the phrasing, C) toughen the heck up. To quote Rocky Life is hard and mean and will beat you to the floor if you let it and nothing hits harder then life does. Life isnt about blame its about getting up and continuing on and not letting other people dictate your self-worth that word has SELF in it for a reason.

Miss_Leah wrote: people who use and encourage excessively sensitive behaviour in inappropriate places claim to have mental health problems BUT are not under any form of treatment. .

THIS THING RIGHT HERE.

This is what Im talking about with the identifiers. I am by no means diminishing real mental illnesses, but making it part of your identity and creating an environment that fosters it is the problem. It becomes a way to "show" people who you are. Like the special snow flake A type personalities who will tell you that they only drink mineral water at room temperature. Someone on a special diet or crossfitters :woohoo:

Im not saying there's anything wrong with doing these things, but people who cling to that as part of WHO THEY ARE, rather than what they do or what they experience is the same behavior as someone who uses their own emotional difficulties or potential mental illness as a way to feel unique. People who do that, never heal because they acnt. It becomes who they are, and they are often unable to let go of it which is why they never get real help or participate in helping themselves.


Also, social media battles. Not even worth it.

*disclaimer. This is my view from my own professional experience and education and does not encompass ALL mental illness. Im also not saying that anyone who does not recover from mental illness is to blame for their own situation. But I am saying that they have more control over it than many of them realise or will accept.

Brenna wrote: *disclaimer. This is my view from my own professional experience and education and does not encompass ALL mental illness. Im also not saying that anyone who do not recover from mental illness are to blame for their own situation. But I am saying that they have more control over it than many of them realise or will accept.

Ok first off you owe me a new tea because I just spit out a good bit of it when read that cross fit line.

Secondly your disclaimer is PERFECT. People have much much more control then they realize over their situation. I used to volunteer at a women's advocacy group for battered women and one of the first things you learn while getting certified as a DV and sexual assault crisis counselor is to give people their power back by explaining that they have choices and control far more then they think in many situations. Realizing that there is much that you in fact do control is a good first step to healing because helplessness and stagnation go hand in hand and will sink you into a pattern that does nothing but reinforce your issues rather then get you fixing them.

hee hee hee. my work here is done!


Thanks! Its more than just empowerment. Its also about education. there are SO many aspects to mental health that people just dont know because its not something that gets encouraged... and it doesnt really make anyone any money. But prevention and wellness is hardly a part of our medical model which I think is sad because that really IS dis empowering.

Manu wrote:

rugadd wrote: Public shaming is not a restriction per se. Only the person whom is responsible for the page can restrict your access to it. If I were in a room full of people shaming me, I would leave.

This is exactly how public shaming works. They gang up on you and psychological stress you, to the point where you simply desist from whatever you were originally doing.

Yes, but its not a restriction, its a room full of assholes. Why would I stick around once their character is shown?

[fixed]

EDIT:That last sentence is mine.