Women's Issues

I'd point out that in Gossip Girl they are all liars and terrible people, it's far from just the women.

Still I get the wider point of it, the U.S. media and music industries often portray women as liars. This is then helped along by politicians and religious leaders (though that bit I didn't super get, but that may be due to the vicar I remember the best having been a divorced women) and resulting in kids just assuming that women lie and defences along the lines of "yes my client raped his daughter, but he didn't do it for very long and she's a liver if she says it was a thing over a long time period" not getting laughed out of court.

edited 13th Jul '15 5:11:24 AM by Silasw

Not as cargo ships?

If that's true about the Tim Hunt situation, then that is really fucked up.

Which is kinda the key point if it is true, IMHO... if that was the case, this should have came up much sooner.

It seems like damage control at this point....

@ Article: Yay depression....

Here's the Times story. I read the physical version, and don't have a site subscription, so I'm afraid I can't quote in full to get past the paywall. The transcript was reportedly leaked by an EU official, so it's possible that either it took a while for them to hear about the mess due to living in a different country, or, more alarmingly, that it just took the British press this long to do some factchecking and confirm what Hunt had been saying from Day One. Either way, the Times is a reliable enough source (even if it is a Murdoch paper) that it faking an entire EU report is unlikely in the extreme.

I'd rather err on the side of good will and think he was misquoted, there.

Doesn't this qualify for libel (or slander)?

Apologies for not putting any warnings on my last post, I just edited it to add them (yes it's a little late now but if anyone else comes across the post...)

I never got the point of trigger warnings, what is the purpose? To shelter people from subjects that may make them uncomfortable?

Actually yeah. You think people who lived through severe trauma want to just casually find that kinda stuff without any warning?

It used to be applied to people who suffer from things such as PTSD/shellshock or suffered a rape or a brutal assault.

Nowadays, the meaning seems to have changed through all kinds of uses.

'd

edited 12th Jul '15 11:28:27 PM by Quag15

It gives you a chance to brace yourself instead of just jumping straight into something that will cause depression to hit you over the head like a sack of bricks.

I don't really know, the first time I read about trigger warnings were over a the NYU student group wanting to force the college to put trigger warnings on history books and exempting students who might be triggered from seeing the content.

I don't have a very positive view of the trigger warnings and "triggering" concept.

Just think of it like smoking warnings and "this sundae has 1200 calories".

Being forewarned is preferable.

'Sides, it's far less intrusive than 99.99% of advertisements.

Well, being 'triggered' can have an extremely negative impact on your ability to function. Panic attacks are not really something you can just will yourself out of.

If it doesn't cause you much inconvenience and it potentially stops somebody from having their day ruined, or even just from feeling like shit for a few hours, then... why wouldn't you? It's not THAT onerous a request.

Although I do wonder if there's anyone where a Trigger Warning is a Trigger in of itself.

Really. Its not that different from content/rating warnings before a TV show ie "This show contains Drug Use, Strong Language and Adult Themes" or if you want a more specific example: In Australia, documentaries/reports that involve Aboriginal Australians in a capacity will have "The following program may contain footage/IMAGES of deceased Indigenous persons. Viewer disgression is advised"

Adding a label doesnt take up much time. Really of all the things people complain about the "esjaywuus" "ruining/being too sensitive", trigger warnings are like the least effort to implement.

I mean, my Film class had warnings about triggering content (explosions, racial violence and sexual assult) specifically so any war vets and assult victims knew what content to expect before entering the course.

I think this discussion shows the depressing effect that certain parts of internet culture has had on on how the idea of a trigger warning is seen.

A trigger warning is about giving people a heads up about something that might cause a panic attack/flashback/other serious negative psychological reaction in someone for some reason. The stupid use of it by some folks online has morphed it into "a trigger warning is something someone asks for because they don't agree politically with what is written there and feel offended by someone disagreeing with them". The people behind the morph are responsible for a massive spread if misinformation and a lot of pain and suffering.

A trigger warning is a content warning, same as tagging something as NSFW it's polite to tag stuff if it deals with rape as such, especially if it's particularly detailed descriptions being given.

TBH I've never seen "triggered/triggering" being used as a way of shutting down arguments that SJ minded people don't agree with outside of troll blogs that keep the festering heart of r/TumblerInAction pumping.

Yeah, that. Most of the people I've seen using the term either use it to shut down discussions or as an substitute to annoyed, while hardly having any serious traumatic experience.

I saw it being used outside Tumblr, on facebook, twitter and being unironically being used on a discussion over exercising and weight loss that admitting being fat isn't healthy is triggering.

It's really not at all limited to trolls, unfortunately.

But it seems to be no-where near the commonplace variety most people tell me it is.

"trigger" like many other words(troll,white knight,etc) as become meanless in long term, in this cases trigger as become pretty much "you annoy me, get away"

No, it definitely isn't. People just like to point and single out the worst proponents of their opponents' position. It's neither just trolling, nor common enough to be really influential.

No. And again no.

Trigger is a mental health term with significant documentation and is most commonly used to help in shaping therapies from clinical documentation to the 504 plan you have for kids in school.

It is not just basic decency, but actual human grace to accompany certain materials with a trigger warning and if you see someone trying to use that term fraudulently or in an otherwise disrespectful manner, you should call them out for their bullshit, not just drop a perfectly safe medical term.