There are so many things wrong with
this New Republic article on the danger of trigger warnings that it's hard to know where to start. For one thing, the twin pillars of their argument seem to be "But where will it all end!?!" and "We can't do everything, so we shouldn't do anything", neither of which are particularly persuasive to me
(
Read more... )
Comments 4
Reply
Which, btw, I agree with. When I'm posting things that might cause issues I usually put it under a cut and add a note about it at the top of the page.
I do think the word "trigger" has a bit of a negative sense to it and I like the idea of using "content warning" or "content note" more frequently. From now on, I think I will use that it my own posts.
Hope you are doing well. Haven't seen you in a while.
Reply
Relatedly, under what conditions can we require people to confront material that might have triggers in it, particularly in pedagogical situations? Does the need of some people (regardless of how many there are) to be careful about some kinds of exposure require us to restrict other people from telling their stories?
I think there are thoughtful questions that caring entities and institutions are beginning to grapple with. I just wish the article had been written with more care.
Reply
The article to which you linked is just one continuous wank of "I don't want to have to think about other people at all," and "nobody else should either." Whatever happened to social responsibility? It seems to have been downloaded into personal responsibility across the board.
I think we all ought to be mindful about what we expose ourselves to, and what effects it might have on our mental health.
Reply
Leave a comment