Advocates for the use of trigger warnings suggest that they can help people avoid or emotionally prepare for encountering content related to a past trauma. But trigger warnings may not fulfill either of these functions, according to an analysis published in Clinical Psychological Science.
If they warn you, and you still watch it, then get distressed, that’s on you, man. That’s a pretty low bar for accepting personal responsibility.
Yes, but if nobody is paying attention to them, then why bother?
The people who need them, generally are more likely to notice them.
Unfortunately they get overused a lot, as well as poorly used, when they are.
That’s not what they’re for lmfao. They’re so you don’t watch it at all.
Thanks, I was sitting here thinking the warnings were so you could AVOID shit you didn’t want to see and the headline had me questioning my perception of reality on this.
First sentence
Advocates for the use of trigger warnings suggest that they can help people avoid or emotionally prepare for encountering content related to a past trauma. But trigger warnings may not fulfill either of these functions
I think the followup is even more relevant:
Instead, warnings appear to heighten the anticipatory anxiety a person may feel prior to viewing sensitive material while making them no less likely to consume that content
I really doubt that it doesn’t make people less likely to consume the content. A lot of the time with NSFL stuff, you either don’t expect it or it isn’t described well enough to prepare you. I’ve seen a lot of shit that I would not have watched if there was a warning through the years, shock stuff in comments etc. And I’ve chosen to not watch stuff that had a warning many times, and often see comments saying they won’t watch it either.
