Trigger Warnings

Post Reply New Topic

Regardless of what the research says, I know that TP appreciates TW so I'll use them when I'm writing content that I know she'll see. Her mental health matters to me so it's the least I can do. Other people like Raleigh say that they don't like them, so I'll keep that in mind too. That doesn't mean Raleigh wants to be triggered, but that warnings make it worse.

I think it's part of being a friend if we know other people's preferences and try to make accommodations accordingly.

Some of us don't write triggery-worthy material so it's a non-issue for those people regardless. Others should just be mindful of what they discuss and the emotional effect it can have on others - even people who are lurking the site and haven't joined.

Again I think the most important take-away here is that we all have different responses to trauma or disturbing content, but if we know how specific people are likely to react and we know which material is most likely to upset them, some of us might remember to take a few seconds and add a spoiler. I don't think that's too much to ask.

That makes sense. I guess trigger warnings are an individualized thing which would complicate research. People who find them helpfull may of just not been part of the studies for whatever reasons. Harder to have official guidelines when perspectives can majorly varry but it's safer to use them if you know that someone will likely be more triggered if you don't. I cant relate to getting triggered unless it's taking something as a personal insult/attack that was not intended to be & getting defensive & angry. I think that's the way I'll trigger others these days if I do. I really hope I don't trigger anyone in trauma ways but I probably have in the past

I don't have time to delve into this now, but I do wonder how this study was conducted. Exactly what was being measured, and how? Experimental psychology is a tricky science.

Would spoiler tags be better than the dots?

Spoiler tags is what I use if I feel what I am about to post will traumatize people.

As mentioned there is no way to know what will trigger people. It could be a minor thing that is seemingly unrelated to the original trauma that triggers someone.

The best I can advise is that if you are feeling fragile avoid The News and Current Events, Politics, Philosophy and Religion, and Love and Dating sections. It is not uncommon for members to take “vacations” from Wrong Planet.

Yes, there is no way to know what will or won’t trigger people, but as I’ve stated in this thread, certain things frequently do. I think those things should be labeled and put behind spoilers. Ideally, people wouldn’t need to take a break from a support forum because they’ve been triggered.

Yes. See earlier in the thread - viewtopic.php?f=13&t=417606#p9406530

In general I agree with this. But I do see a few gray areas, such as:

1) When a person suspects that they might have been abused (sexually or otherwise) as children, but they don't actually remember the abuse. Some people seem to think that the way to be supportive in this situation is to insist that if a person even vaguely suspects they might have been abused, then they definitely must have been abused. In my opinion, we should avoid pushing either the conclusion that the person's suspicion is true or the conclusion that the person's suspicion is false. It could be either, and we are in no position to judge. Instead, we can just express sympathy for how awful it must be to be haunted by such a suspicion. Also, if the person happens to have any means of digging up relevant evidence that could either confirm or falsify their suspicion, then I think they should be encouraged to do so.

2) Recovered memories, especially when resulting from controversial therapy techniques. (See Wikipedia article on Recovered Memory Therapy. See also retractor stories here and some relevant scientific journal articles here and here.) Here too, I think we should tread very carefully, not pushing either the idea that a given recovered memory must be true or the idea it must be false. I do think it should be okay (under some circumstances, at least) to acknowledge that there can be such a thing as a false memory (although one should take care to avoid expressing this in an insensitive way).

3) When a person talks about how they were abused, and then ties their abuse to grand conspiracy ideology. (We used to have a person here who did that and was eventually banned for unrelated reasons.)

Last edited by Mona Pereth on 09 Dec 2023, 3:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I understand what you're saying about suspected abuse or early memories Mona, but that's not what I was talking about. I was referring to specific trauma-related content that members do remember clearly, and post. My point is that if a member writes about something that happened to them in their own lived experience, and they aren't asking for advice about whether or not it might be true because they already know it was true, others should not chime in by suggesting they might be wrong.

The other day I shared something of a highly sensitive nature which was most certainly true. A member replied by asking "Did that really happen?", and then they compared my medical disclosure to cheap pornography. I felt doubted, invalidated, and judged.

The person has since apologised, but that was the point I was trying to make.

With this, I agree.

!	Cornflake wrote:
	Getting waaay off topic here - the thread is a suggestion of flagging one's own posts that may be troublesome for others to see, that's all.