This was good to read. Iv always been against trigger warnings, primarily for reasons mentioned about resilience, toughness, the increased ability to handle tough situations in real time. But listing college course content is a fair thing to pre-warn about. I don’t see the bad in that.
The term trigger warning is a little much. You don’t need to say trigger warning when you are naming what the triggers will be. “This podcast will discuss rape, please use discretion”. I think some books should mention this on the inside cover because holy crap I didnt know what I was in for in the Handmaids Tale.
The issue that stands out to me about caveats is the infatilization accompanying the term "trigger." Want to let me know there's a rape scene? Fine. Use the term "caveat" or even "warning." "Trigger" calls to mind screaming children play acting as university students. Blame our culture, I guess.
Baby lawyers who refuse to take courses in subjects that are uncomfortable for them should have exclusion clauses in advertisements about their future practices.
I have a somewhat convoluted attitude to "permission to skip". I think that a case can be made for a permission to be granted for either artistic or factual but emotionally charged depictions and descriptions of potentially disturbing/harrowing content (including visuals). But I think it should not be granted for those who don't want to or feel they cannot engage with the ideas and information and their "cold" analysis. I think you can (and should be permitted to) engage on intellectual level only, without being forced to undergo emotional harrowing.
To use a personal example: I grew up in EE before the fall of the wall. Thus I was subject to a lot of WW2 and Holocaust related "content", including highly emotionally charged written/literary works, school trips to places of mass execution and the like, and (at least some) factual survivor accounts; as a teenager and young adult. On the other hand, I did NOT have the same kind of exposure to the Russian Revolution/ Stalinists era atrocities. Some, but nowhere near as much. I genuinely don't think my understanding of and concern towards the latter is any less, and arguably the trauma-adjacent emotional impact could be counterproductive, because empathetic horror is such an unreliable, sneaky beast.
So, students unwilling to discuss the subject of rape shouldn't take a module that involves its discussion. But those unwilling to read vivid and/or emotionally charged victim statements arguably should be as to skip those IF they can discuss the topic in the abstract.
The difficulty comes when studying arts, of course : can you truly understand certain swathes of 20th century literature without ACTUALLY reading Solzenicyn, Borowski, Primo Levi and the like. Or, to shift focus to your side of the pond, American Black literature without reading Hayden's "Middle Passage"? I'm not sure. That's a very difficult one.
Paul, thanks for writing this post, I enjoyed it! Coincidentally with your subtitle, one of my favorite movies is “Kiss kiss, bang bang”. When I’ve showed that movie to a few dates in the past, it’s been helpful to first provide trigger warnings about offensive jokes.
I think it’s true that the precise term “trigger warning” is associated to an unfortunate degree with a particular brand of political rhetoric, which means that many people are negatively polarized against it. But I see voluntary trigger warnings as a way to reduce discomfort for people with essentially zero downside—that’s great!!
I loved this topic Paul. As a metaphor, the post really triggered my thinking and opened my mind to processes which are now part of my brain one but also very complex internally…..I developed the skill of self directed orientation in brain two but now it is a brain one with some brain two journey - when confronted with a new opportunity or topic. Reference - Danny Kahneman…..
I might also add a good self directed orientation to new events or topics is a major process in the journey to unpack by critical path planning, thru learning and doing - the negative symptoms of schizophrenia. This is one of the most difficult parts of the internal journey of solving schizophrenia… unpacking numerous iterations and connecting the dots in the big picture to make sense of how these iterations make sense in the world.
Referencing a historical conversation between Paul and Robert Wright…After watching Mission impossible one and two, mission impossible two is much more exciting in my opinion.. I am now thinking of starting season one of severance… I am well orientated and looking forward to it… rather than calling the current topic trigger warnings, one might think of orientation…. my adult education professor and coordinator of the program had a PhD in “orientation”from the University of Alberta. His work on orientation had a huge influence on me. In my high school there was hardly any orientation to new materials which was a deficit to learning… For example, walking into a grade 9 English class and the first words from the teacher were to read directly from Julius Caesar…. I was in total shock and just wondered what the hell is this? I was traumatized as Shakespeare was never introduced in anyway just reading from the play… not a mention of middle English… I find with my own lived experience that a good orientation often helps one connect the dots. This is a skill that seems to be a deficit with most people today to contact the dots or see the big picture with perspective and make sense of how the learning integrates and connects to the larger world.
I personally think it matters, but also I havent seen much warning for written content. Visual content is a huge medium for example there was a rock show a few years ago when the singer urinated on someone (and it wasnt Marilyn Manson). Noone consented to seeing that and unless I’m at a certain club I dont go to performances to see someone get urinated on. You can also be okay with certain discussion in certain settings and not others too
I agree that there is a huge difference. I've noticed that posts like this one tend to lump all trigger warnings into one big group, but the reality is that different contexts and mediums have different needs. A professor sharing context with a captive audience is very different than an influencer sharing a post on social media is different than a news org writing an article for a the general public. It feels like we need more alignment that warnings on visual content serve a different purpose than warnings on written work...and I would argue that the warnings on written work have not served us well culturally as they attempt to remove discomfort or complexity from discourse, particularly in more quick-hit environments like social media or news stories. Helping people learn to navigate conceptual complexity seems like a good thing overall, especially since the world is complex and being able to navigate it requires an acceptance of grey zones.
This was good to read. Iv always been against trigger warnings, primarily for reasons mentioned about resilience, toughness, the increased ability to handle tough situations in real time. But listing college course content is a fair thing to pre-warn about. I don’t see the bad in that.
The term trigger warning is a little much. You don’t need to say trigger warning when you are naming what the triggers will be. “This podcast will discuss rape, please use discretion”. I think some books should mention this on the inside cover because holy crap I didnt know what I was in for in the Handmaids Tale.
The issue that stands out to me about caveats is the infatilization accompanying the term "trigger." Want to let me know there's a rape scene? Fine. Use the term "caveat" or even "warning." "Trigger" calls to mind screaming children play acting as university students. Blame our culture, I guess.
Many people use "content note" nowadays.
Baby lawyers who refuse to take courses in subjects that are uncomfortable for them should have exclusion clauses in advertisements about their future practices.
I agree with you about the notes/warnings.
I have a somewhat convoluted attitude to "permission to skip". I think that a case can be made for a permission to be granted for either artistic or factual but emotionally charged depictions and descriptions of potentially disturbing/harrowing content (including visuals). But I think it should not be granted for those who don't want to or feel they cannot engage with the ideas and information and their "cold" analysis. I think you can (and should be permitted to) engage on intellectual level only, without being forced to undergo emotional harrowing.
To use a personal example: I grew up in EE before the fall of the wall. Thus I was subject to a lot of WW2 and Holocaust related "content", including highly emotionally charged written/literary works, school trips to places of mass execution and the like, and (at least some) factual survivor accounts; as a teenager and young adult. On the other hand, I did NOT have the same kind of exposure to the Russian Revolution/ Stalinists era atrocities. Some, but nowhere near as much. I genuinely don't think my understanding of and concern towards the latter is any less, and arguably the trauma-adjacent emotional impact could be counterproductive, because empathetic horror is such an unreliable, sneaky beast.
So, students unwilling to discuss the subject of rape shouldn't take a module that involves its discussion. But those unwilling to read vivid and/or emotionally charged victim statements arguably should be as to skip those IF they can discuss the topic in the abstract.
The difficulty comes when studying arts, of course : can you truly understand certain swathes of 20th century literature without ACTUALLY reading Solzenicyn, Borowski, Primo Levi and the like. Or, to shift focus to your side of the pond, American Black literature without reading Hayden's "Middle Passage"? I'm not sure. That's a very difficult one.
Paul, thanks for writing this post, I enjoyed it! Coincidentally with your subtitle, one of my favorite movies is “Kiss kiss, bang bang”. When I’ve showed that movie to a few dates in the past, it’s been helpful to first provide trigger warnings about offensive jokes.
I think it’s true that the precise term “trigger warning” is associated to an unfortunate degree with a particular brand of political rhetoric, which means that many people are negatively polarized against it. But I see voluntary trigger warnings as a way to reduce discomfort for people with essentially zero downside—that’s great!!
I loved this topic Paul. As a metaphor, the post really triggered my thinking and opened my mind to processes which are now part of my brain one but also very complex internally…..I developed the skill of self directed orientation in brain two but now it is a brain one with some brain two journey - when confronted with a new opportunity or topic. Reference - Danny Kahneman…..
I might also add a good self directed orientation to new events or topics is a major process in the journey to unpack by critical path planning, thru learning and doing - the negative symptoms of schizophrenia. This is one of the most difficult parts of the internal journey of solving schizophrenia… unpacking numerous iterations and connecting the dots in the big picture to make sense of how these iterations make sense in the world.
Just to add that with me most orientation now is self exploring and self directed
Referencing a historical conversation between Paul and Robert Wright…After watching Mission impossible one and two, mission impossible two is much more exciting in my opinion.. I am now thinking of starting season one of severance… I am well orientated and looking forward to it… rather than calling the current topic trigger warnings, one might think of orientation…. my adult education professor and coordinator of the program had a PhD in “orientation”from the University of Alberta. His work on orientation had a huge influence on me. In my high school there was hardly any orientation to new materials which was a deficit to learning… For example, walking into a grade 9 English class and the first words from the teacher were to read directly from Julius Caesar…. I was in total shock and just wondered what the hell is this? I was traumatized as Shakespeare was never introduced in anyway just reading from the play… not a mention of middle English… I find with my own lived experience that a good orientation often helps one connect the dots. This is a skill that seems to be a deficit with most people today to contact the dots or see the big picture with perspective and make sense of how the learning integrates and connects to the larger world.
Do you think there is a different between trigger warnings for visual content and written content?
I personally think it matters, but also I havent seen much warning for written content. Visual content is a huge medium for example there was a rock show a few years ago when the singer urinated on someone (and it wasnt Marilyn Manson). Noone consented to seeing that and unless I’m at a certain club I dont go to performances to see someone get urinated on. You can also be okay with certain discussion in certain settings and not others too
I agree that there is a huge difference. I've noticed that posts like this one tend to lump all trigger warnings into one big group, but the reality is that different contexts and mediums have different needs. A professor sharing context with a captive audience is very different than an influencer sharing a post on social media is different than a news org writing an article for a the general public. It feels like we need more alignment that warnings on visual content serve a different purpose than warnings on written work...and I would argue that the warnings on written work have not served us well culturally as they attempt to remove discomfort or complexity from discourse, particularly in more quick-hit environments like social media or news stories. Helping people learn to navigate conceptual complexity seems like a good thing overall, especially since the world is complex and being able to navigate it requires an acceptance of grey zones.