Trigger Warnings: Yes/No/Context

No I certainly don't think people with PTSD should have to swear off media entirely. I understand that there's pain involved, but as I said pain serves a purpose. I would propose that people with PTSD should actively look to protect themselves from dangerous, harmful, or painful situations. If one has PTSD flashbacks from abuse depictions, for example, perhaps one shouldn't be watching, say, Law and Order, due to the possibility of abuse being depicted (and SVU is right out).

My point was, I dislike the underlying idea that because something has happened to you, you should expect and feel entitled to have the world change around you. It's dangerous, because instead of being proactive to protect yourself, you instead rely entirely others. I don't mind seeing content creators put up trigger warnings, especially if they go into detail depicting the trigger in question. But, the responsibility should lie on everyone, PTSD sufferer or not, to protect themselves, if for no other reason than there is no exhaustive list of triggers.

EDIT: of course, a page topper.

EDIT 2: A addendum to illustrate the necessity for general adoption of greater responsibility in protecting oneself: my roommate is complaining that he just got burned by spattering bacon grease, as he was cooking without a shirt on. What did you think was going to happen?

edited 6th Jun '14 10:40:48 AM by Sharur

Nihil assumpseris, sed omnia resolvere!

Okay, with that, I completely agree. :) But I would like to make one slight addendum:

I didn't know that about Law and Order, and most people aren't likely to have a general idea of a given show's type of content - especially for works that are not as commonly-recognised.

As I see it, providing that kind of information is exactly what an effective trigger warning can do. :)

The Revolution Will Not Be Tropeable

Part of the point of trigger warnings is to let people know to avoid Law & Order; part of the point is also to let people put a shirt on, so to speak — to prepare themselves for seeing something that might cause them problems if they went in with their guard lowered.

Of course people should take responsibility to look after themselves, but I don't see why other people shouldn't help them? There are a few cases where something horrible coming as a surprise is vital to a work, and there's an argument to be had there; but outside of those few cases, I can't see any good reason to not include trigger warnings (though again, I probably wouldn't use that exact phrase on the blurb of a book). I don't think it's a very onerous task.

Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent.

There's no reason you should; abuse depictions on the original series are few and far between (I'm struggling to come up with one in the first eight seasons and falling). Callous disregard, perhaps, but not active abuse. That's an SVU thing. More seriously, though, Law & Order was never one for graphic much of anything. It was a character show. You're in much more danger from a CSI episode.

Because other people are not in a position to effectively judge what the triggers of any possible person who could consume the work would be. Only the person with triggers is in a position to understand what their triggers are. It's not that we shouldn't help them; it's that we fundamentally can't. Their issues are intensely personal and often kept intensely private.

edited 6th Jun '14 5:58:23 PM by Night

Nous restons ici.

Just a thought, what's Buffy the Vampire Slayer rated? M? PG-13? That's for violence, language, horror themes, sex right? Yet some episodes make you feel like Angel when Darla was affecting him, blue, mind out of whack, restless. Watching something like The Body (coping with death,) Earshot (where the Slayer herself Sarah Michelle Gellar addressed suicide,) Seeing Red (rape,) and most of season six (self worth) can very much be a trigger for some. It is for some fans going by their reaction and edits, it certainly is for me based on digging up a decade old site that hinted at Faith, just some food for thought.

Currently reading up My Rule Fu Is Stronger than Yours

I remember I watched it in middle school.

It most likely was NOT meant for pre-teens but dealt with a lot of high-school situations, so I'm guessing PG-13.

Edit: Argh, phone posting. Tealdeer is that trigger warnings are useful (fanfiction or otherwise) and despite their inherent limits, I don't see any harm in them.

edited 8th Jun '14 6:41:47 PM by Sharysa

I see two problems with the inclusion of trigger warnings:

1) According to Wikipedia (and that is my main source on this, so I do stand for correction):

Given this diversity, how can one be confident of whether a given work includes potentially triggering elements? Indeed, given that the triggers seem likely to be quite specific to a given individual, it doesn't seem feasible for the writer to ascertain that.

2) A general trigger warning (something along the lines of "this work may contain triggering elements") might work—but then the lack of such a warning might be taken to imply the lack of a trigger; given the above-mentioned diversity of triggers, it seems likely that triggers will slip through, potentially leading to triggerings for sufferers and legal liability for authors and publishers.

This might be remedied by vastly broadening the list of elements that qualify a work for the warning—but I suspect that doing so would greatly reduce the effectiveness of the warning, as a given individual might have trouble determining whether the triggering elements are actually applicable to them.

I could, however, see a carefully-worded warning for specific instances of actual traumatic events—"this work contains scenes of rape", or "this work contains scenes of torture". I think that there are few enough common such events that a list of these shouldn't be too long even on works that contain all of the items on the list, and may have the additional advantage of warning off those who might simply not want to read about such things.

Outside of such a limited list, however, I think that I'm inclined to agree with this who have suggested having the identification of potential triggers in a work remain with those who are subject to a given trigger, simply because the range of potential triggers is so vast.

My Games & Writing

You can't, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't make any kind of effort. Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good: if you as the author look at your work and see that something probably could trigger someone (or one of your early readers points that out to you), then you should put in a warning. This won't catch everything, of course, but that doesn't mean it isn't worth doing.

Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent.

@Noaqiyeum: My whole point is disagreeing with the logic that the responsibility for such information should be on the consumer, not the provider. I'll give you an analogy: at the university mess hall where I often eat, there are listings of what foods are offered, and notices if the contents contain any of the top 8 most common food allergens(which correspond to something like 90% of food allergies). However, these listings are not always accurate, and the notices are not always accurate. Therefore, many with ethical/religious/health-related dietary restrictions will ask the staff if a food has X. There is also one regular who will ask at every station if the food is spicy or not. Thus, even with legally mandated warnings, not having these foods is important to these people, so they proactively check. PTSD is even worse than allergies: 90% of food allergies are to 8 allergens, while PTSD triggers are more widespread in scope, and very hard to categorize, as it doesn't have to be a full depiction of a traumatic event. It's all in the mind of the sufferer, associating the trigger with the traumatic event. For example, a few years ago I was in a freshman political science discussion section, talking with a classmate who told me that he had gotten a PTSD flashback the previous night from watching a television show where the main character had a surprise birthday, with all their friends and family jumping out. Apparently, that had triggered an episode for him.

Thus, I agree with Night's second point. I don't think that trigger warnings are much of a solution. Again, if you want to put a trigger warning in your own work, go ahead. However, I don't think it will help much. Either everything will have a trigger warning, and so it is either useless or a person with PTSD will have to swear off media entirely, or it will use a bureaucratic categorization method which will be inaccurate, warning off people who don't need to be and failing to warn those who need it. I'm sure it will help some people, if they see/follow the content warnings, but I believe no rule set can effectively encompass such a complex system. Instead, I would recommend a database of synopses, perhaps with tags denoting certain elements. (Actually that sounds like TV Tropes. But seriously.)

@Night: You're right about Law&Order; it was the first thing that came to mind. The only real "depiction" that I recall was one episode where the female psychologist, Olivet, was raped by her gynecologist. Between my utter unfamiliarity with gynecological exams and the camera being on Olivet's face the entire scene, it didn't seem like much to me, but to someone who had been in a similar traumatic situation, it could well be a trigger. Between the focus on the autopsies, and the Necro Cam, it has more things that would strike me as being an obvious possible trigger. However, between Law&Order's subject material, some cinematography including Nothing Is Scarier and discretion shots(partcularly in the openings. I remember one episode that opened with an infant in a carrier in an apartment; later an automatic weapon sprays through the apartment. Later the detectives are visibly affected, and while no body is shown, the carrier is blood spattered and clearly hit by gunfire. It shook me up as much as it did the onscreen detectives), and reactions to the various crimes, both from detectives and victims, that it could serve as a trigger, in my opinion. It certainly created an emotional response in me.

@imadinosaur: Certainly, if an author or creator wishes to, by all means. But if trigger warnings are systematic, then those with PTSD will rely on them, and that's a bad thing. No system can handle such a complex and diverse system of triggers. It's much better to develop a tool that those with PTSD can use to personally select their media consumption. Can trigger warnings help? Yes. Can they also fail, and actively hurt? Yes(e.g. someone who triggers their PTSD by watching a program that they normally wouldn't for fear of triggering their PTSD, "because it didn't have a warning, so it must be okay"). Given the complexity of PTSD, a significant number of those affected will fall through the cracks.

edited 9th Jun '14 1:56:58 PM by Sharur

Nihil assumpseris, sed omnia resolvere!

So just to confirm things since I came into the discussion fairly late, would the TV and film rating system count as "trigger warnings?" Because that's pretty much what they do, but I've noticed a lot of people focusing on the fanfic version with all the "can't be responsible for EVERYONE" points.

Sure, you can't be responsible for everyone and nor should you be.

I view trigger warnings like this: You're going swimming with some friends. You know that there's a rocky part of the water, but you don't know what level of swimming experience they all have—some are good swimmers, but for others you have no clue. So you bring them over, warn them to avoid the rocky patch if they aren't strong swimmers, and then someone accidentally sprains an ankle from getting tangled up in the kelp and panicking.

You didn't realize the kelp would be a problem because the injured person is normally a good swimmer. Nobody blames you for that, because you did your best to warn people and you can't control the individual pieces of kelp.

Nobody blames the injured person for getting tangled up and flailing, either, because "kelp around my leg and I suddenly can't move" could easily be mistaken as "someone/thing is dragging me under dssdgjjnniimm must get out must get out oh god I'm gonna die." Even the best swimmers can't always predict or control instinctual reactions.

What I'm getting from the discussion so far, unless I'm mistaken, is that either the hypothetical subject should have warned their friends about the rocks, the kelp, and also the fish who nip at your shirt now and then, or the panicking swimmer should have remembered that their sister pretended to be Jaws that one time when they were little, and they still get spooked when they're startled in the water.

Triggers are not always straight-lined "x reminded me of x." But that doesn't mean we have to warn people about everything that hints as a trigger, nor does it mean trigger warnings are useless and we should give up on them entirely.

—
Sansa Stark from Game of Thrones is a minefield of triggers for all the shit she goes through, but I was unexpectedly devastated when Littlefinger told her the single line of "Life is not a song, sweetling. You may learn that one day, to your sorrow."

It just reminds me of all the stuff that happens to me and a lot of other young people, in ways I can't even explain, and I have a seething hatred of Littlefinger for telling her that (as well as the more obvious reasons that he's a manipulative bastard who mainly wants Sansa to replace his True Love, her MOTHER). Have I sworn off Game of Thrones in case I get more upset? No. Do I have a grudge against George RR Martin for not warning me about that one line that I didn't know would hit me so much? No, because he warned everyone that this story is not an idealistic one and it has lots of risky and mature topics, so I knew in GENERAL what I was getting into.

edited 9th Jun '14 12:13:04 PM by Sharysa

You do make a good point—it's just that the limited list that I mentioned at the end of my post is the best version of "the good" that occurs to me, with a general warning (along the lines of "this may contain triggering material") seeming to me to be unlikely to be terribly helpful, and possibly even harmful.

I don't know how the ratings system works in America (where I gather from your location that you live—my apologies if I'm mistaken), so to be clear: I'm presuming that the sort of ratings system that you're referring to is of the sort that provides an age rating ("PG 13", "18", etc.) and content warnings (here (South Africa) we have indicators for violence, sex, nudity, (bad) language and prejudice, I believe).

If that's correct, then... Hum, I suppose that it could be used as a broad trigger-warning system (albeit that I don't think that it would be likely to be terribly effective as one—again, I gather that triggers are very diverse), but I don't think that it's intended as one. Rather, I think that the intent is to provide a broad warning to consumers of material that is often objected to, and especially for the purpose of helping parents to decide whether a work is suitable for their children.

I have no problem at all with a ratings system along those lines for most works, but don't think it likely to be very useful for dealing with trauma triggers.

edited 9th Jun '14 3:54:15 PM by ArsThaumaturgis

My Games & Writing

I would see adult themes used for a content warning as a catch all for such triggers such as death, suicide, rape, ect that might make those uncomfortable with such topics think, "This Is Gonna Suck" and exercise judgment in what they watch or read.

Currently reading up My Rule Fu Is Stronger than Yours

But is that useful for trauma triggers specifically? As I understand it, there's a difference between being squeamish about a subject and having a trigger, with the latter tending to be somewhat more specific than the former.

I do think that content warnings of this sort might have some utility, but only in a very general sense, indicating that someone might want to further research the work in question.

edited 9th Jun '14 4:59:27 PM by ArsThaumaturgis

My Games & Writing

I have heard from an acquaintance that TV Tropes is useful for her to decide if she wants to see a first run movie (TV and books she can shut off or close, but with a first run movie she's already invested $10-20 and can't tell the projectionist to stop the movie until she feels better again.) She just scrolls down to the usual Rape Tropes to see if they're on the page and which ones are present will tell her if it's likely to cause problems.

That's actually how I found out about Mysterious Skin. I checked if it had a TV tropes page, got the general idea, and tentatively decided to watch it. Very glad that I did both.

While I don't use the words specifically, I will do some form of content warning for fanfiction I write if it contains anything more intense than the original material. So I'm a context person.

I kind of think that for fanfiction specifically, if you have trouble handling the original work in some way, you really shouldn't be reading fanfiction for it.

However, sometimes there will be things that show up that are either more graphic/sexual/triggering/scary than the original work, or would be about on the same level for most people, but in a different way. For example, a show may contain PG-13 level violence, but no sexual content whatsoever. So while I would think it would be appropriate to mark sexual content in a fan-fic for it (especially rape or similar), I wouldn't necessarily feel obligated to mention violence unless it went above or beyond what was in the original work, or would be particularly sensitive for some reason. EDIT: Also, I would note if my particular fic suddenly increased in intensity, even if it was only to the level of the original work.

Anyway, that's just my two cents.

edited 28th Jun '14 6:45:50 PM by Ashfire