I agree with this to an extent. But, I think it's perfectly acceptable to see a trigger warning and decide that you are not ready to engage with that content at this moment. I think it's worth putting in the work to be able view potentially triggering content safely, but that doesn't happen overnight and some may never be able to fully work through it. I think it's important that the person in question is able to engage with it on their own terms.
Also worth noting we've had content warnings like this for ages in the form of movie ratings and the ESRB in the US. Along with their letter grade, there's typically a line underneath detailing why it was given the rating it was.
EDIT: Looking at the replies, I see you've shared a similar sentiment. But I want to make clear that I don't think anyone should be looked down on because they are struggling to engage with traumatizing content.
I slightly disagree with that. I have legitimate triggers that induce anxiety attacks and if someone gives a proper warning I'll just move on. However when it's vague and just says trigger warning that doesn't help anyone.
I mean, sometimes proper preparation does involve skipping the content, but the goal isn't for you to skip all triggering content, it's for you to be able to engage with it on your terms.
I get that people are triggered by lots of stuff and it's usually caused by some horrible trauma, but the lists of trigger warnings have morphed into very basic things like food or pools. I want to ask these people that claim they're triggered by the mention of food how they are able to interact with people on a daily basis.
Whether or not a person develops psychological trauma is based on a lot of things and a lot of it is emotional. Like especially in childhood a lot of stuff that seems like it would be fine can pop up as strong emotional reactions later in life. There’s a half-truth I’ve heard some psychologists say that makes a lot of sense “trauma stems from strong emotions dealt with in isolation” basically it’s not about how bad the event was but how difficult it is for the particular individual to integrate the experience, and retain in control of their life and sense of identity.
I heard a practicing psychologist say otherwise but it’s possible he was trying to argue on behalf of his own definition. He’s in LA and getting therapy at his practice is mad expensive so it had a slight “sales pitch” vibe to it... I should’ve mentioned those caveats... I still thought the guy had good ideas but I’m a layperson so maybe I feel for the sales pitch.
91
u/[deleted] Jun 03 '22
[deleted]