Hadley Freeman on trigger warnings

Why are you in favour of women not working? She was bullied beyond comprehension at her previous job due to her being female. So I guess you’re in favour of bullying female humans too. The word for that — and for preventing women from working — is misogyny.

Also, regarding blood specifically, the primary curriculum covers the importance of blood in our body and the job it does. Many lift the flap body books do. Children should be being taught about blood and anatomy as part of a wider conversation around healthy living.

Surely they (certainly the girls) get taught about menstruation in KS2?

100 percent this.

That post was a striking example of the closed minded divisiveness that is causing so much trouble in society.

You might not give two hoots.

That doesn't mean it doesn't matter though!!!

I completely agree, @RedToothBrush .

I’m sorry for what your family went through, @Notgreatreally . But as Red says, what you need it a Content Warning, not a Trigger Warning.

Trigger warnings tell the viewer/listener/reader that here is something that will rightly be distressing for them. It’s reductive, what actual “triggers” someone with trauma can be something totally unexpected (like Hadley’s example of water retention).

It sets up the expectation of a negative emotional reaction, and that a sensitive person would feel that way. Priming the pump as Red so eloquently says.

A content warning lists any issues contained within, and makes no value judgments not inferences as to how an audience would react.

”Scenes of sexual violence” is not triggering for me (fortunately) but I choose not to watch things containing them. Content warnings are useful, Trigger warnings are manipulative.

I don’t give two hoots what word is used. Trigger/content. That’s pedantics for the untraumatised. I just want to be entertained with something that won’t ruin my peace and start the nightmares up again.

Though on reflection I would have thought giving triggers a separate category helps most people avoid spoilers. I hate that I have to get spoilers to the programmes just so I can avoid stuff.

I started saying Content Warning instead of Trigger Warning after hearing a lecture from someone in HE who showed a lot of papers to say 'trigger' effectively primes people to get anxious and upset.

They recommended 'Content'. And TBH for the topics I do, I am warning about the content - i.e. you weren't expecting this but I'm going to talk about something that may be traumatic for you, not triggers.

For those who don't like Murdoch publications heres the article Hadley mentions from a few weeks ago by Jill Filipovic for the Atlantic https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2023/09/trigger-warnings-feminism-teen-girls-mental-health/674759/

Read my previous posts about leading and emotional priming. Yes it matters. It's not a minor difference.

Is there a difference between content advice and a trigger warning? I thought CW was just a more neutral way of saying the same thing?

I can go with Content advice. But absolutely not trigger warning.

I didn’t mention that but yeah! It was the whole thing. There was a generic “adult content” warning at the beginning. But sudden indecent exposure of a penis accompanied by some very aggressive and sexual lyrics about how women don’t want sex enough were triggering. So that was an example of a time when a more specific trigger warning should have been used.

Sorry, 'Scenes of full frontal trans nudity' is different to 'trigger warning: flappy lady penis dances'.

(This is where sex still matters too).

I think if your going to show the dark side of Hadleys character then you should pick her support for Woody Allen.
https://amp.theguardian.com/film/2020/may/29/do-i-really-care-woody-allen-comes-out-fighting

Where to start with this article is hard to know, but from the first couple of paragraphs (a) Use of the word ‘adopted’ to minimize the relationship between a parent and child (b) The lie that Mia Farrow accused him- seven year old Dylan accused and still accuses him.
It is a truly despicable piece of writing that she should be ashamed of.

'Scenes of full frontal male nudity' is different to 'trigger warning: flappy penis dances'.

And tbh the problem with Jordan Gray's flappy bits wasnt just the nudity but the ill judged misogynistic lyrics that accompanied them.

I think context is very important. I’m a survivor of SA and CSA and all these years later I’m still receiving therapy for PTSD.

In the first example, if I couldn’t learn about rape law then I wouldn’t think of studying law at all. I’ll be honest I don’t know much about law but if there was an option to do property or civil law instead, maybe I’d do that. Or if it was simple as “I can learn about this topic, I just want an advanced warning so that I can manage my reaction or prepare some coping strategies or even literally just not be taken by surprise by it” then that’s a lot more reasonable.

Another example I can think of where a trigger warning should have been used was when Jordan Grey got his/her penis out on Channel 4 without the usual nudity warning. For me, nudity is not triggering on its own… but a male penis suddenly, when you don’t expect it is a trigger. While I’m trying my best to cope with the trauma, I would also say that actually in that specific context a therapist teaching me that I’m supposed to be cool with a penis appearing at literally any moment is the opposite of helpful! It just reinforces what happened.

So context is important. Sometimes they are vital, sometimes they are overused, but we shouldn’t be throwing the baby out with the bath water.

(I think Victoria Smith also writes very well about this: how sometimes coping strategies for sexual trauma are treated as if they are a bigger burden to society than they are to the person who is jumping at shadows).

Perhaps you are right that content is different in context to trigger.

Trigger is very much an emotive word. Whereas content is neutral.

Completely agree. Saying something 'contains content relating to suicide' is fair because we also know that it has a social contagion element in its own right too. It's perhaps the one area I think it's reasonable to make a point - but I also highlight that the term isn't saying 'trigger' either. It's a neutral term which is effectively empowering a viewer to make an informed decision.

The term 'trigger warning' however is loaded. It's emotional in tone and suggesting that a viewer may get upset.

One primes, one informs. And the power of informing is not to lead and needs to be limited in its scope. If you over use it, you are liable to do more harm than good by creating a culture of guilt and anxiety across everything. It is the leading, emotional projection that is the problematic bit - it tells you to have a certain reaction. Saying something has certain content just tells you the content not the reaction.

Content warnings are different to trigger warnings, the word 'trigger' is loaded.

And whilst content warnings for suicide is IMO ok, for other things not so much. Like blood in a biology less or law students asking not to learn about rape laws. It's all in the nuance.

I suffered from infertility and miscarriage and pregnant women 'triggered' me for a while but shutting myself away from life wasn't going to help. It was important I was exposed to pregnant women / children / other people having babies because, although painful, feeling that and acknowledging that life moved on for everyone else was part of the healing process. Had I not been exposed to that pain my life would have become very small and very sad.

Since no-one knows the past experience of someone in a classroom or lecture theatre, it seems wise to give ongoing reminders that 'you may be triggered by something here, if you are, do what you have to do to manage that, and then after the lecture/lesson COME AND TELL ME so that I can make sure you haven't missed anything vital - handout - information - reading recommendation'.

My worst triggering was completely unpredictable, lecture on early Irish churches, very good, lots of aerial shots of lesser known sites which, most unexpectedly, included the one where I'd buried three family members in the previous twelve months. No way the speaker could have predicted that, or any reason why he should. Even if I'd known in advance I don't think I'd have known just how visceral my reaction would be. But it wasn't actually harmful, and I did what we all have to do, moved on.

I'm a member of a FB parenting group where the members use trigger warnings for practically everything, and then follow them with lots of dots so that the triggering content isn't visible unless you choose to expand the post.

Things I've seen warned about include:

• all talk of weight loss/gain
• losing your job
• a horse (just being a horse, nothing traumatic occured)
• snakes
• pregnancy tests
• doctors appointments (for non-traumatic things)
• child with minor injury (no blood)
• growth scan photos
• divorce
• using a food bank

The list could go on and on. It's bizarre. I don't dare post anything!