Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Trigger warnings don’t help people cope with distressing material

aeon.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 78 posts

Re: Trigger warnings don’t help people cope with distressing material

#61

Post by pgcj_poster »

eej2ya1K wrote: post #14
lilyball wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People who can be expected to experience increased distress from the topic are much more likely to choose to avoid it, so I'm not surprised in the least by that association. Also from the article: > critics argue that the avoidance of potentially upsetting material is actually a counterproductive approach because it offers no chance to learn to manage one’s emotional reactions. This is wrong. You don't learn to manag…

"Indifferent towards rape." Seriously? Not being triggered by a depiction of a rape in a novel doesn't mean you're indifferent towards rape. And while "springing" "triggering" "content" on a weak person is a bad idea, encouraging them to seek out triggering content on their own and approach it at their own pace is going to create a stronger, better person. It's not just about the trigger either - learning that you ca…

Approaching something at your own pace is a lot easier if you can know it advance where you're likely to encounter it.

Re: Trigger warnings don’t help people cope with distressing material

#62

Post by aaron695 »

lsiebert wrote: post #58

Trigger warnings are incredibly important for PTSD sufferers, and every time people criticize them or make light of them, they forget about the victims of CSA, the veterans, the disaster survivors, and others who struggle daily to manage their mental health.

> the disaster survivors

A person who's house burns down from a electrical fault isn't as affected as someone in a disaster?

This gatekeeping is the problem.

Awful things happen everyday to people.

This Facebook generation of Yay, I'm more hurt than you, so deserve more attention competition is pretty messed up.

Re: Trigger warnings don’t help people cope with distressing material

#63

Post by bobthepanda »

yabadabadoes wrote: post #57
bobthepanda wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Hey, this book contains a graphical description of rape" is very low effort, just like how telling somebody that a food you made yourself contains peanuts is very low effort. The only time lecturers wouldn't know when something might trigger someone is if they haven't actually read or looked at the content that they're about to present, which I find pretty hard to believe.

With a peanut allergy you have it and don't eat the food. With the trigger warning what exactly? It's easy to announce something you are going to do and do it. The article addresses how pointless and possibly counterproductive that is.

With a peanut allergy you have it and don't consume the food to avoid the adverse effects.

With a trigger warning you simply don't consume the content. Ideally, this is posted on the syllabus, so that the amount of time wasted arguing about this is minimized.

The article doesn't really "address" anything, it just makes value statements. For example, this paragraph:

> Consider a meta-analysis of 39 studies in 2007 by Sam Houston State University in Texas that found a ‘clear, consistent association’ between using avoidance-based coping strategies (that is, staying away from upsetting stressors or avoiding thinking about them) and increased psychological distress. For a more concrete example, look at the findings from a study, published in 2011, of women who witnessed the Virginia Tech shooting of 2007 – those who tried to avoid thinking about what happened tended to experience more symptoms of depression and anxiety in the months that followed.

You could say that the association is that people who avoid their traumas are more depressed and anxious, but you could also say the reverse, that people who are more depressed or anxious try to avoid the traumas that caused those things in the first place. It's an association with no causal link, so you don't know which direction the association runs in or even if one is directly caused by the other.

Trigger warnings are an avoidance mechanism, period. The only difference between this and a peanut allergy is that people don't feel the need to moralize about how we're enabling peanut-avoiders like it's a bad thing.

Re: Trigger warnings don’t help people cope with distressing material

#64

Post by ceejayoz »

antepodius wrote: post #47
ceejayoz wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not being triggered by a depiction of a rape in a novel doesn't mean you're indifferent towards rape. That wasn't the point being made. The point is that if depictions of rape are triggering to you, it's not necessarily important to work on not being triggered by rape depictions. Avoidance is generally acceptable there.

Isn't it better for a person to not be triggerable? Wouldn't you wish, if a friend of yours was chronically vunerable in a way that hindered them that, all else being equal, they would become more resilient- for their own sake?

Sure. That’s what therapy is for. It's still a long, tough road for survivors of trauma.

Triggering people in an unsafe, uncontrolled context can make it harder, not easier.

Re: Trigger warnings don’t help people cope with distressing material

#65

Post by mirimir »

antepodius wrote: post #47
ceejayoz wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not being triggered by a depiction of a rape in a novel doesn't mean you're indifferent towards rape. That wasn't the point being made. The point is that if depictions of rape are triggering to you, it's not necessarily important to work on not being triggered by rape depictions. Avoidance is generally acceptable there.

Isn't it better for a person to not be triggerable? Wouldn't you wish, if a friend of yours was chronically vunerable in a way that hindered them that, all else being equal, they would become more resilient- for their own sake?

Yes, this !!!

Being triggerable is a weakness. It gives others power over you. So why would anyone want that?

Also, not being triggerable does not mean being insensitive or cynical or tolerant or whatever. It's just about being able to deal with stuff without freaking out.

Re: Trigger warnings don’t help people cope with distressing material

#66

Post by crooked-v »

DaniloDias wrote: post #31
crooked-v wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Complaining about things you think are virtue signaling isn't meant to be useful; it's a manner of virtue signalling.

Wow, I whole-heartedly disagree. This is a constructive criticism of a communication technique. If a person is lacking in the mental fortitude to be exposed to unexpected information- but that person is still putting themself in unexpected information situations, it certainly suggests that they have judgement problems. I don't think that many people have judgement problems when it comes to avoiding pain. I agree with…

> but that person is still putting themself in unexpected information situations

Being able to reduce or temper that exposure is literally the point of trigger warnings.

Re: Trigger warnings don’t help people cope with distressing material

#67

Post by crooked-v »

thrillgore wrote: post #36

TWs are just a CYA for incriminating content. It doesn't change the fact that people won't be either knowingly or baselessly offended by something. Then again, I believe discomfort is a human experience and trying to insulate against it, runs against the human experience and life itself.

Serious question: Do you also disagree with movie classifications (G, PG, PG-13, R, etc) being prominently published?

Re: Trigger warnings don’t help people cope with distressing material

#68

Post by ceejayoz »

mirimir wrote: post #65
antepodius wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't it better for a person to not be triggerable? Wouldn't you wish, if a friend of yours was chronically vunerable in a way that hindered them that, all else being equal, they would become more resilient- for their own sake?

Yes, this !!! Being triggerable is a weakness. It gives others power over you. So why would anyone want that? Also, not being triggerable does not mean being insensitive or cynical or tolerant or whatever. It's just about being able to deal with stuff without freaking out.

> So why would anyone want that?

Even after decades of therapy, rape victims may still be triggered by descriptions/depictions of rape. Abuse victims may not be able to watch a movie with an abused child without breaking down, even after long, intensive therapy.

It's not generally a choice.

Re: Trigger warnings don’t help people cope with distressing material

#69

Post by mirimir »

ceejayoz wrote: post #68
mirimir wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, this !!! Being triggerable is a weakness. It gives others power over you. So why would anyone want that? Also, not being triggerable does not mean being insensitive or cynical or tolerant or whatever. It's just about being able to deal with stuff without freaking out.

> So why would anyone want that? Even after decades of therapy, rape victims may still be triggered by descriptions/depictions of rape. Abuse victims may not be able to watch a movie with an abused child without breaking down, even after long, intensive therapy. It's not generally a choice.

OK, thanks.

And upon reflection, I get that I'm triggered by dogs. Having been attacked by a doberman, many years ago. And surviving only because it was on a chain, and I didn't fall down. So it only took a chunk out of one ankle.

So now, whenever I encounter a dog, I immediately think about what I could use as a weapon.

Re: Trigger warnings don’t help people cope with distressing material

#70

Post by dokem »

crooked-v wrote: post #67
thrillgore wrote: post #36

TWs are just a CYA for incriminating content. It doesn't change the fact that people won't be either knowingly or baselessly offended by something. Then again, I believe discomfort is a human experience and trying to insulate against it, runs against the human experience and life itself.

Serious question: Do you also disagree with movie classifications (G, PG, PG-13, R, etc) being prominently published?

Have you ever actually needed to look at a movie rating to know if it was suitable for a child? No, you can just use basic reason and context.
Post reply on HN