Kristen Lamb had a stunningly well
written blog
post on Tuesday. It expressed her thoughts on a subject that's
been on my mind lately: the thought of “trigger warnings” on
books. I find myself ambivalent on the subject. On the one hand, I
can see the reasoning behind people getting upset it, falling into
the cultural facet of Empathetic Correctness. On the other hands I
can see how warnings that would help people with PTSD and similar
things prepare themselves for finding the scene in a book.
Huffington
Post has a very interesting take on it. Their opinion is that
it's not as bad as we're thinking, though it does have the potential
to become a problem. A lot of what they say has to do with the fact
that it would just be a few words on a syllabus warning those who
have suffered past trauma that it's coming up, not that they aren't
required to read the book for their classes.
The
Guardian has a different point of view. They say that it's one
step away from book banning. They hold forth on the fact that it's
catering to a overly sensitive crowd of students who don't want to
deal with the harsh realities of real life.
As I said, I can see the potential of
both situations. On the one hand, I can see needing a few trigger
warnings on things such as violent rape scenes, acts of domestic
violence, things like that which could send someone spiraling back
into a flashback of a terrible situation. But I also don't think that
there needs to be trigger warnings for every little thing that might
offend someone.
There's a difference between offending
someone and actually triggering anxiety/fear flashbacks. The first is
an act of pedantry. The second is something that can cripple someone
emotionally. In dealing with the trigger warnings on books, if there
is a violent rape scene I can see a warning about that in the book.
It gives a person who has been raped the information it's coming and
they can know what to expect, even brace themselves so they don't
react as violently.
I use trigger warnings in some of my
blog posts because I don't want someone having a flashback and losing
control. I warn them what's in my post so they know what they're
facing. This has driven some readers away. But others have come back
and told me how much they appreciated the warning so they can prepare
themselves for it.
There is such a thing as being too
Empathetically
Correct. The current trend for that is very disturbing. People
aren't looking for success because they're being told everyone is the
same. No one is reaching for anything because they expect to be given
the same privileges as everyone else. The idea of over generalizing
trigger warnings smacks of this.
Let's take a breath and do more
research on it. I think everyone should get their voices in on this
and let your opinion be known. If you're for it, that's great. If
you're against it, that's great. Keep things civil and discuss it in
the comments. Let me know what you think of all of this.
Personally, I'm against the idea of trigger warnings. I know there are some violent, unpleasant things that can cause painful flashbacks for people, but there are too many things that can be potential triggers--although I think the point about posting warnings for any possible thing anyone could find offensive is correct. That's just ridiculous, and unfair to people who suffer from actual PTSD. People need to remember trigger warnings have a place, and as long as they're used correctly, they're quite far from censorship.
ReplyDeleteAs I said, I can see both sides but you do bring up a good point.
DeleteHeads up, long comment incoming...
ReplyDeleteThis issue is complicated, and I think that slapping a trigger warning on books is too simplistic an approach. Trigger warnings are tricky because you don't know what will be triggering to whom and why. You might also not know that you trigger for something until you actually read/see/hear it. I have found trigger warnings to be dubiously helpful at best, and they are best used when related to visual content like videos or movies. I remember one site that posted trigger warnings on its forums -- but when I asked, refused to add a subtitle about what the trigger warning was FOR. Their response was literally that if I saw an unspecified trigger warning, I should just censor myself and not read the post. The fix would have been as simple as changing the title from "Trigger warning" to "Trigger warning: self-mutilation" or "Trigger warning: extreme violence" or "Trigger warning: sexual assault" or whatever the topic was. Because not all people trigger for the same things. Instead they were using trigger warnings essentially as a form of censorship, which is something that I just cannot stand. I try to be as informed as possible about the nature of content and aware of triggers that I can avoid, but when I asked them to clarify, they gave me the choice of either reading it to see if it would trigger me or censoring myself and staying away from ALL trigger warnings, even from things that wouldn't make me bat an eyelid. It would have been SUCH an easy fix for them, too. Rawr. Sorry for the rant, but I was very active on those forums and VERY pissed off when I got that response. Either do "trigger warnings" right or don't do them at all. Likewise, I wouldn't want a student to be scared away or excluded from literature or discussions of mature content because of a nebulous or poorly executed trigger warning. Nor would I want teachers to fear assigning that content.
I always appreciated my HS teachers and later my professors facilitating honest discussions about disturbing or mature content. Generally, if teachers assign that content, they are already aware of the nature of it and prepared to handle it in a mature way, including introducing the content in such a way that lets students know about any disturbing/triggering elements, and dealing with student responses.
To me, this seems to come from the same place and raise a lot of the same issues that the idea of censorship in kids' books, in YA, or in high school libraries does. If trigger warnings are included on books, then the school libraries will be less likely to stock or recommend those books, and the teachers will definitely be less likely to put that material on their curriculum because they don't want to change the syllabus or worry about the trigger warning rule. You've also got a teacher, professor, or committee deciding what is or isn't triggering, instead of the students taking agency. I certainly believe that a student diagnosed with PTSD, depression, an eating disorder, or recovering from substance abuse should be allowed to do an alternate assignment if they fear that reading material will be triggering to them. Part of managing an illness like that is being aware of the content you consume; I look up online summaries or ask the teacher about the content if I'm concerned. But everyone is different and I don't think blanket trigger warnings, decided by teachers without student input, are the solution.
So rather than putting trigger warnings on books, which I think would shut down the conversation and discourage or guilt teachers into not choosing certain reading material, I guess I would like to see more teacher training about how to handle assigning, introducing, and discussing sensitive content, as well as more teacher training about mental illness in education generally. A note on a syllabus is not enough nor does it seem very effective. Sigh. I know, in my ideal world, we have an amazing education system...
ReplyDeleteYou're not the only one who in their ideal world has an amazing education system. I wish our teachers could have the training to deal with every possible student combination, like mental illness or physical/mental disabilities. But that's not going to happen any time soon.
DeleteNow, your views are very interesting on the trigger warnings. Thank you for sharing them. You bring up several good points here too.
Thanks for understanding. I can see why people would want to have trigger warnings in classrooms, but this whole issue raises my hackles because the list of books that would be qualified for trigger warnings tends to overlap a lot with the list of books that people tend to want to ban already, "for the children" or whatever. For every kid who might trigger for something in a book, there's a kid who needs to read that book to know that they're not alone. But the teachers who assign that material also tend to already be sensitive to or trained in these issues, so...I just don't know. I can't help but wonder if there's another motive there. I appreciate trigger warnings when well used, and everyone has the right to a safe classroom environment, but I get defensive whenever something strays too close to censorship, so. Yeah. :P I don't know. Thoughtful post, thank you!
Delete