![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 17 to 41 of 412. Go back in thread:
Posted by Dinah on March 2, 2006, at 22:42:58
In reply to Re: trigger warnings *Trigger* » Dinah, posted by Larry Hoover on March 2, 2006, at 22:37:58
Sometimes things might be triggery that are not especially graphic. Would reading that someone you care about just SI'd be considered a trigger? Or that they were considering suicide? Even if there was nothing graphic about the post?
What would graphic be? Would mentioning a location be graphic? A method?
I personally always mean SI as self injury.
Posted by Larry Hoover on March 3, 2006, at 8:52:06
In reply to what does 'trigger' mean, posted by asmita on March 1, 2006, at 6:33:59
Did I over-post on this subject?
This whole thing has been growing in me for a long time, as an issue to discuss. And now it seems the issue has come up through the posts of others, including Dr. Bob. So, maybe I can not feel guilty asking for something (you didn't have my childhood, so....whatever), because I didn't start it.
I can't believe that we're so protective of individual sensitivities that a responsible and solid member of our community can get blocked for *implying* the word f*rt (something we all do, every day, by the way, f*rt f*rt f*rt), but there is no protection against insensitive or even intentional provocation of emotional distress through graphic expressions of SI, or threats of imminent self-harm.
I'm not asking for anything to change, other than a requirement for proper warnings. No censorship is involved.
Lar
Posted by Dinah on March 3, 2006, at 10:13:31
In reply to Re: what does 'trigger' mean, posted by Larry Hoover on March 3, 2006, at 8:52:06
?
I thought we were discussing it?
I doubt that insensitivity or intentional provocation are often involved. I think it's more a question of not knowing when it's appropriate.
I'm sure I frequently post unneccessary trigger warnings, and likely just as frequently don't post ones I should.
So I was trying for a dialog of when people would like it posted.
My own personal threshold is in describing the results of cutting, or in poetically describing the act of cutting.
As far as what triggers me to want to do the same thing.
Posted by Dinah on March 3, 2006, at 10:18:53
In reply to Re: what does 'trigger' mean, posted by Larry Hoover on March 3, 2006, at 8:52:06
Of course there are other types of posts that upset me in one way or another. And types of posts that I never respond to, even if I'm not aware of being upset (so I probably am upset on some level).
But for me those aren't standard enough to require a warning.
Posted by Larry Hoover on March 3, 2006, at 11:49:41
In reply to Re: what does 'trigger' mean - Possible trigger » Larry Hoover, posted by Dinah on March 3, 2006, at 10:13:31
> I doubt that insensitivity or intentional provocation are often involved.
I've been trying to explain that insensitivity is in fact a very common occurrence. As to intent, I cannot address that while remaining civil.
> I think it's more a question of not knowing when it's appropriate.
It's high time that we sorted that all out.
> I'm sure I frequently post unneccessary trigger warnings, and likely just as frequently don't post ones I should.
Over-doing the trigger warnings doesn't bother me. Under-doing it most certainly does.
> So I was trying for a dialog of when people would like it posted.
>
> My own personal threshold is in describing the results of cutting, or in poetically describing the act of cutting.
>
> As far as what triggers me to want to do the same thing."Graphic or explicit" descriptions of such acts was exactly what I mentioned in my first draft for a FAQ rule.
If the description invokes an image.....it's a trigger. Or, it should be presumed to be one.
I know many people who are gone from Babble, maybe forever, because of this. Lots of occasional visitors, who come back only so long as it takes to be reminded of why they left in the first place. Babble is impoverished because of this insensitivity to triggering.
Lar
Posted by Larry Hoover on March 3, 2006, at 11:52:03
In reply to Re: what does 'trigger' mean » Larry Hoover, posted by Dinah on March 3, 2006, at 10:18:53
> Of course there are other types of posts that upset me in one way or another. And types of posts that I never respond to, even if I'm not aware of being upset (so I probably am upset on some level).
>
> But for me those aren't standard enough to require a warning.I'm trying very very hard to not make this a rule that's all about me. My idiosyncracies are mine alone. But, I think there is a core issue, that supercedes any one individual's reaction. I think we can find common ground that is clearly definable.
Lar
Posted by Dinah on March 3, 2006, at 11:52:56
In reply to Re: what does 'trigger' mean - Possible trigger » Dinah, posted by Larry Hoover on March 3, 2006, at 11:49:41
I'm sorry, Lar. But I'm still not grasping the nuts and bolts specifics of what you're suggesting.
Maybe it'd be easier in email?
Tho I'm going to work today, so I won't be around for a bit.
Posted by deirdrehbrt on March 3, 2006, at 21:35:36
In reply to Re: what does 'trigger' mean - Possible trigger » Larry Hoover, posted by Dinah on March 3, 2006, at 11:52:56
Just catching up again.
What does it for me (as far as SI) is verbage that evokes a visual image of the act. When I can see it, in my mind, I get triggered.
Descriptions of ab*se do the same, along with romantic or detailed examples of suicidal ideation.
I agree that poetry, graphic descriptions, or verbal acting out are things that should be identified. If they sneak up on you, they can be hurtful.
Some way to identify this is a good idea.
Just my opinion.
--Dee
Posted by Dinah on March 4, 2006, at 1:22:42
In reply to Re: what does 'trigger' mean - Possible trigger » Larry Hoover, posted by Dinah on March 3, 2006, at 11:52:56
Or not. Whatever.
Posted by Dinah on March 4, 2006, at 1:42:06
In reply to Re: what does 'trigger' mean - Possible trigger, posted by Dinah on March 4, 2006, at 1:22:42
Sorry, I'm clearly dyspeptic tonight in both meanings of the word. Naughty pasta sauce.
Posted by pseudoname on March 4, 2006, at 9:31:23
In reply to Re: trigger warnings, posted by Larry Hoover on March 2, 2006, at 12:39:06
Larry, your post was very moving. I had no idea of this about you.
I now realize the main reason I have never used “(poss trig)” in the subject line is that I've never posted about self-injury, suicide, etc.
However, after reading your post, I will earnestly be much more aware, and I will use warnings wherever called for, and I'm open to suggestions. Like ZH said, I'm sure you spoke for many others here. Thank you for writing what you did. I had no idea.
My reason for wanting warnings to be *voluntary* (as they are now) is that I fear the expansion of inadvertent, innocent rule infractions people will be PBC'd and blocked for. When the rule-breaking is clearly innocent or misunderstood or even impossible to predict, I experience these punishments as inhumane, abusive, arbitrary, authoritarian, autocratic, mindless, condescending, indifferent, frustrating, one-sided, suffocating... I can't even describe what they do to me. (I 100% knew what you meant when you said the trigger subject was so important to you that you were speechless about it.) I feel this way even though the punishments are always directed at *other* people – I've not yet been PBC'd.
These reactions stand in marked contrast to my other, strong, persistent very favorable thoughts and feelings about Bob and Babble. I think Bob's amazing commitment to creating a civil environment (especially free from personal attacks) makes Babble work.
But I literally lose sleep sometimes over other people's PBCs. So I was / am really leery of seeing more regulations I feel guaranteed to be powerless against, get punished for, and fail to understand. I'm not happy thinking THAT “minefield” is expanding.
But thanks to your post, I think the catastrophic reactions of people who are triggered by words & topics are clearly more serious than my reaction to punishment, which I see as a smaller and different sort of problem. I need better responses to it generally, and I can work on that.
So I'm willing to support an unavoidably displayed policy REQUIRING a warning (checkbox *or* personalized) for certain clearly specified content, even if I will sometimes be upset by its enforcement. I would appreciate it, however, if its enforcement never involved BLOCKS. Perhaps always just a PBC/PBS?
Despite feeling "speechless", Larry, you made an excellent post.
Posted by Larry Hoover on March 4, 2006, at 14:56:34
In reply to Re: trigger warnings » Larry Hoover, posted by pseudoname on March 4, 2006, at 9:31:23
> Larry, your post was very moving. I had no idea of this about you.
>
> I now realize the main reason I have never used “(poss trig)” in the subject line is that I've never posted about self-injury, suicide, etc.
>
> However, after reading your post, I will earnestly be much more aware, and I will use warnings wherever called for, and I'm open to suggestions. Like ZH said, I'm sure you spoke for many others here. Thank you for writing what you did. I had no idea.Thank you. Thank you, very much.
You had no idea because it is so hard to speak.
> My reason for wanting warnings to be *voluntary* (as they are now) is that I fear the expansion of inadvertent, innocent rule infractions people will be PBC'd and blocked for. When the rule-breaking is clearly innocent or misunderstood or even impossible to predict, I experience these punishments as inhumane, abusive, arbitrary, authoritarian, autocratic, mindless, condescending, indifferent, frustrating, one-sided, suffocating... I can't even describe what they do to me. (I 100% knew what you meant when you said the trigger subject was so important to you that you were speechless about it.) I feel this way even though the punishments are always directed at *other* people – I've not yet been PBC'd.
I'm not asking for a transformation, instantly. I'm asking that we begin the transformation.
Certainly, there will be innocent transgressions. And I don't expect blocks over this. PBCs will do the job. People didn't know. People don't know. But we will make sure it becomes known.
> These reactions stand in marked contrast to my other, strong, persistent very favorable thoughts and feelings about Bob and Babble. I think Bob's amazing commitment to creating a civil environment (especially free from personal attacks) makes Babble work.
Let's expand that Babble. Let's make it safe for more sensitive sensitized people to walk these paths without fearing emotional land mines.
> But I literally lose sleep sometimes over other people's PBCs. So I was / am really leery of seeing more regulations I feel guaranteed to be powerless against, get punished for, and fail to understand. I'm not happy thinking THAT “minefield” is expanding.If I was going to compare those two landmines, my PTSD would strongly tip the balance the other way.
> But thanks to your post, I think the catastrophic reactions of people who are triggered by words & topics are clearly more serious than my reaction to punishment, which I see as a smaller and different sort of problem.
No. No comparisons. Please. The battle to reform the blocking process must proceed on another front. Your PBC-related emotions deserve audience, as well. I just want to keep this discussion on one issue alone. Thanks.
> I need better responses to it generally, and I can work on that.
Thank you.
> So I'm willing to support an unavoidably displayed policy REQUIRING a warning (checkbox *or* personalized) for certain clearly specified content, even if I will sometimes be upset by its enforcement. I would appreciate it, however, if its enforcement never involved BLOCKS. Perhaps always just a PBC/PBS?
We need protection with teeth, even if no biting occurs. I think blocking is consistent with existing structures. It's still always going to be a judgment call.
> Despite feeling "speechless", Larry, you made an excellent post.
Thank you, once again.
Lar
Posted by Larry Hoover on March 4, 2006, at 14:57:40
In reply to Re: what does 'trigger' mean, posted by Larry Hoover on March 3, 2006, at 8:52:06
"She saw me crying, she heard my death threats, she knew about me buying a rope."
Here's an example that I just stumbled onto, in an unmarked thread, on the Social Board.
I bring it up because it's not a prime example of what triggers me, but because it is on the fringe. In my ideal world, that post would require a trigger warning, because it explicitly describes a suicidal mechanism. I know someone who used to post here, and he was the one that found his mother, in a rope. He told me that he had been triggered by a similar post, that he naively stumbled onto. Just as I did, a moment ago. I haven't seen him since.
I guess I want to speak for perhaps the most vulnerable people who post here. The sensitized. The ones with wounds that haven't yet healed. May not ever heal.
We were forced, by wilful people, to design public buildings to accomodate wheelchairs. So that a whole class of people would not be denied full public participation because of their history.
I am a wilful person, asking for more than courtesy to be extended to the sensitized people who would love to share in the warmth of the Babble community. As it is now, the structure has been built so as to exclude a whole class of people, because of their history.
Let's fix that.
Lar
Posted by Dinah on March 4, 2006, at 15:53:29
In reply to Re: what does 'trigger' mean **TRIGGER**, posted by Larry Hoover on March 4, 2006, at 14:57:40
Ok, so that was what I was trying to get at. For you mentioning a method would be a trigger?
Posted by Larry Hoover on March 4, 2006, at 16:21:28
In reply to Re: what does 'trigger' mean **TRIGGER** » Larry Hoover, posted by Dinah on March 4, 2006, at 15:53:29
> Ok, so that was what I was trying to get at. For you mentioning a method would be a trigger?
Yes. The detail is what does it. If it's easy to picture, it's a trigger.
Thanks for working so hard with me.
I hope other voices join me, here. I want a communal understanding, not one based on me alone.
Lar
Posted by JenStar on March 4, 2006, at 16:28:47
In reply to Re: trigger warnings, posted by Larry Hoover on March 2, 2006, at 12:39:06
hi Larry,
I'm sorry that you have such strong reactions to some posts, and I hope you can continue to work on that so that you don't get such horrible responses. It sounds very sad & unpleasant to go through that. ((Larry))Still, though, I'm not sure I agree that we should have a ban on certain content, or make it a ban-able offense if a 'trigger' warning is left off.
I'm terrible sorry that you have such awful reactions, but -- back to my same old story -- I still think that we all own our own responses to threads.
It's impossible to put the burden of keeping us "safe" onto others, and if we try, then Babble is only going to become bulky and unfriendly. I think that civility rules can take it a certain part of the way, but each of us needs to develop a strong internal ability to either ignore posts, or deal with them.
I don't feel that it's fair to ask others to do self-censor to such a degree, just in case an extremely sensitive person might be reading.
We're all so different in our reactions, and in WHAT we react to, that it would not be possible to build a comprehensive set of "don't write about this" rules that could apply to every reader AND be user-friendly by the writers. At least, that's my opinion.
I hope you stay here; there are lots of babblers who like you a lot and want you here. But I do think you need to decide for yourself whether or not it's safe to stay with the current rules, because I don't think they will -- and I hope that they won't-- become more stringent on forcing people not to talk seriously about certain topics. (This is different from "making light" or joking about certain topics...I think joking about certain trigger topics is awful and definitely should be banned. But serious discussions can be so beneficial to those who suffer from the condition being discussed!)
JenStar
Posted by JenStar on March 4, 2006, at 16:41:41
In reply to Re: trigger warnings » Larry Hoover, posted by JenStar on March 4, 2006, at 16:28:47
Larry,
I reread my above post and it sounds mean. I'm sorry - I didn't mean to sound mean. I don't want to hurt your feelings, or anyone else's either. I do NOT want you to leave - I just want to make that clear! :) I'm just worried, a lot, that if we start to expand the babble rules, then it will get extremely hard to post about certain topics. But I will also keep an open mind about it and be willing to accept changes. :)I hope you're well.
JenStar
Posted by Deneb on March 4, 2006, at 17:04:01
In reply to Re: what does 'trigger' mean **TRIGGER**, posted by Larry Hoover on March 4, 2006, at 14:57:40
> "She saw me crying, she heard my death threats, she knew about me buying a rope."
>
> Here's an example that I just stumbled onto, in an unmarked thread, on the Social Board.
> I am a wilful person, asking for more than courtesy to be extended to the sensitized people who would love to share in the warmth of the Babble community. As it is now, the structure has been built so as to exclude a whole class of people, because of their history.
>
> Let's fix that.
>
> LarLarry, that's a quote from one of my posts. If you had a problem with it why didn't you bring it to my attention? The thought didn't even cross my mind that it needed a trigger warning. I'm seriously bad at this stuff.
Deneb
Posted by Deneb on March 4, 2006, at 17:11:47
In reply to Re: what does 'trigger' mean **TRIGGER** » Larry Hoover, posted by Deneb on March 4, 2006, at 17:04:01
I'm really bad at judging when trigger warnings are needed. If trigger warnings became mandatory I would imagine I would be blocked for a year very soon.
I would really like to learn how to determine which posts need trigger warnings and which do not. I need a lot of practice with this. Will someone help me with this? I really don't want to trigger people, but much of the time I just don't know what needs a trigger warning.
Deneb
Posted by Larry Hoover on March 4, 2006, at 17:25:44
In reply to Re: trigger warnings » Larry Hoover, posted by JenStar on March 4, 2006, at 16:28:47
> Still, though, I'm not sure I agree that we should have a ban on certain content, or make it a ban-able offense if a 'trigger' warning is left off.
I believe you missed the point. It's not to censor content in any way. It is to warn people of content.
It is trite to suggest to me that I might simply avoid reading provocative posts, as the only way to do that with any assurance, now, is to not read any. To leave.
To use a metaphor, if a post rings my bell, it is too late to keep it silent. You can't unring the bell.
Lar
Posted by Larry Hoover on March 4, 2006, at 17:28:18
In reply to sorry if my previous post sounded mean! » JenStar, posted by JenStar on March 4, 2006, at 16:41:41
> I'm just worried, a lot, that if we start to expand the babble rules, then it will get extremely hard to post about certain topics.
It's not meant to make it harder to post, in any way at all. Go ahead, say what you need to say, but be sensitive to the provocative quality of your words. Warn people of the graphic and/or explicit nature of the post content. Warn me. Let me choose to read or not. If the warning is there, and I read it anyway, my bad.
Lar
Posted by Larry Hoover on March 4, 2006, at 17:31:30
In reply to Re: what does 'trigger' mean **TRIGGER** » Larry Hoover, posted by Deneb on March 4, 2006, at 17:04:01
> > "She saw me crying, she heard my death threats, she knew about me buying a rope."
> >
> > Here's an example that I just stumbled onto, in an unmarked thread, on the Social Board.
>
> > I am a wilful person, asking for more than courtesy to be extended to the sensitized people who would love to share in the warmth of the Babble community. As it is now, the structure has been built so as to exclude a whole class of people, because of their history.
> >
> > Let's fix that.
> >
> > Lar
>
> Larry, that's a quote from one of my posts.I purposely did not connect you to that string of words.
> If you had a problem with it why didn't you bring it to my attention?
This was a gentle way to do that. I hadn't gotten around to contacting you about it, personally. Sorry, for that.
> The thought didn't even cross my mind that it needed a trigger warning.
Exactly my point.
> I'm seriously bad at this stuff.
>
> DenebYou can learn anything, Deneb. You've already clearly proven that.
Lar
Posted by verne on March 4, 2006, at 17:33:28
In reply to Re: what does 'trigger' mean **TRIGGER** » Dinah, posted by Larry Hoover on March 4, 2006, at 16:21:28
I can't count the times I've read a post that innocently talks about drinking - even in passing - "after the movie we enjoyed a couple martinis" and I wind up going on a beer run as soon as I leap from the chair.
Then again, that shouldn't be a surprise since drinking to excess is another form of self injury. Although in my case, talk about alcohol, seems to be my only self-destructive trigger.
I'm sorry if, while discussing my darker moments, I've triggered anyone else into less positive behavior. I don't know how we safely talk about certain topics.
I actually would like to see one more babble board that allows EVERYTHING - no rules, no civility guidelines, no warnings - where anything goes. This room would act like a safety valve and depressurize all the other rooms.
We could call it the "Pillow Room".
Verne
Posted by Tamar on March 4, 2006, at 19:42:26
In reply to Pillow Room, posted by verne on March 4, 2006, at 17:33:28
> I can't count the times I've read a post that innocently atalks about drinking - even in passing - "after the movie we enjoyed a couple martinis" and I wind up going on a beer run as soon as I leap from the chair.
Yeah, Verne; I know what you mean. And I think this demonstrates how difficult the issue of triggers is. I know people who find talk of adultery very triggering; I find the subject of sexual assault or domestic violence triggering. If I know about a particular person’s triggers I can usually remember to be sensitive, but it’s sometimes hard to know what will trigger people. I joked once about wanting trigger warnings for posts about slugs…
> Then again, that shouldn't be a surprise since drinking to excess is another form of self injury. Although in my case, talk about alcohol, seems to be my only self-destructive trigger.
I don’t know if you’re comfortable with cyberhugs, but if so I’d send some your way. I drink too… I agree that it can be very self-destructive.
> I'm sorry if, while discussing my darker moments, I've triggered anyone else into less positive behavior. I don't know how we safely talk about certain topics.
>
> I actually would like to see one more babble board that allows EVERYTHING - no rules, no civility guidelines, no warnings - where anything goes. This room would act like a safety valve and depressurize all the other rooms.
>
> We could call it the "Pillow Room".
>I actually rather like this idea. I suppose the danger is that people might post offensive things about other people there… I’m not sure how it would work in practice. I don’t feel triggered by posts about self-harm, suicidal ideation or drinking, even though I have problems with all those things. But the things that trigger me are rather idiosyncratic.
Still, I think it’s true that self injury and suicidal ideation are intensely triggering to a great many people. I think Larry has a good point. I don’t know if a red-coloured warning would solve the problem, because it still requires people to be aware of the triggering potential of their posts, which seems to be a complicated issue for some posters.
Maybe the answer is to insist that posts containing any reference to self harm or suicide be marked with a trigger warning or a red flag. And this could apply even if the references were ‘mild’. I suppose definitions could be listed in the FAQ, and drinking could perhaps be included. And although it’s not my issue, I suspect adultery could be on the list too because I’ve seen how upset people can be about it. And maybe it’s obvious, but I’d include CSA, sexual assault and domestic violence.
I do think it’s important for Babble to be safe, though of course the idea of safety differs from person to person. And it’s difficult to guarantee safety in any community. But maybe we can find ways to make it feel safer.
Tamar
Posted by Racer on March 4, 2006, at 21:35:43
In reply to Re: what does 'trigger' mean **TRIGGER** » Deneb, posted by Larry Hoover on March 4, 2006, at 17:31:30
I like the idea of a red-flag for trigger posts. I like it better than having the word trigger in the subject line, certainly, and I like the idea of warning others that it may contain something difficult to read about.
I know I've posted things here that could certainly trigger strong emotions for people. And I know that I'm more sensitive to it now, since the trigger warnings came around on the Psych board.
And as for the rest of it, I tend to agree with those who have sounded in for voluntary red flags, and personal responsibility, and guidelines that won't necessarily result in a block for failing to flag a post. I say that, though, knowing full well that people will be reminded, if they don't flag a suspect post; and that ignoring those reminders will eventually lead to a PBC and a block, simply because at some point it becomes clear that it's no longer accidental. In other words, I think that there would be blocks for not flagging posts if it becomes a regular occurrence.
Also, I think that the group dynamics here would prevent a lot of non-flagged posts. I think there are a lot of people here who are working on their boundaries and learning to say, "Hey -- that upset me, couldja warn us next time?" This might be an interesting view of how that translates into compliance?
The other thing that I think of, by the way, is a stronger system of civility buddy. (This just struck me while reading this thread...) Maybe, before it gets to a block, someone who had difficulty figuring out when to flag something, could request a Civility Buddy -- and the post wouldn't appear until approved by that Civility Buddy. What I'm actually thinking, now that I am thinking about it, is maybe like a deputy system, only it's the CBs. Volunteers who could get into the system and read the posts waiting to be posted, and approve them -- which would post them -- or disapprove, which would send them back for revision. OK, I admit. That's off the cuff stuff, and it's a system that would get quickly unwieldy, but in the case of someone who genuinely wants to learn, and wants to avoid both upsetting others and getting blocked, something like that might be a tool. It would have to be voluntary -- maybe at the PBC level they could be offered a chance to join the CB system, rather than risk a block for another infringment? Something like that?
Regardless -- I like the red flag idea. Hope to see it implemented.
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Administration | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.