Discussing Trigger Warnings - WorkingitThrough2

@audienta

I agree with you that a trigger warning should be about content. I thought that your suggestion to make it a content warning could be a step in the right direction for clarity. Perhaps there could be a trial where you test it out to see if it works better?

Triggers were originally meant to be about identifying that something reminds you of trauma and therefore has to potential to cause distress, such as flashbacks. On social media a lot of people say they are 'triggered' when actually they mean they are emotionally activated. They are now used interchangeably to describe when someone has an emotional reaction to something they 'don't like'. I have seen this in the general support rooms and people often shut down topics for the fear of being 'offensive'. Given the nature of trauma, most topics are offensive, because we were offended against! I want there to be safe spaces for these topics.

I think that TW's can also be overused and often out of context. Other times (usually when discussing relationships) they are not expected, but those topics are commonly some of the most triggering topics. I think it's important to separate the 2 because for a trauma trigger you would do grounding and focus on safety. For someone who has established safety, when they have emotional activation, you would focus on helping the person tolerate their emotions within their window of tolerance. This helps them know it's safe to feel them and they are survivable. This is how they begin to integrate memories and inner experiences which is the goal for healing. This is how we stop emotional activation turning into avoidance or rumination. This is the practical side of my earlier posts about how to manage people being at different stages.

My concern is that some here have become emotionally activated by the trigger warning itself and we all have to do better for these members. Using cups should never be harmful and trigger an increase in avoidance patterns. When we are stuck in avoidance, TW's can become another learned avoidance. For these members (and all members) we have a duty to help them feel safe first and foremost. We all use avoidance now and then, but if it becomes a pattern, we aren't doing our job as a community to help people in the right way. The balance between safe spaces and meeting needs to validate is difficult and delicate, which is why I advocate for validating the emotions (which we all have in common), rather than events. Otherwise talking about the events over and over can become rumination and a form of self re-traumatisation. If there really is a consensus for trauma 'event' focused topics then perhaps there could be sessions with more experienced listeners (lived experience) to facilitate this separately and therefore anyone attending knows what to expect, because it is often the unexpected element that causes avoidance reactions.

I suggest this because when TW's are used in general chat, the content comes with it straight away, which doesn't give anyone time to leave. The topic of conversation in the room naturally changes and so it is difficult to ignore even if you temporarily mute a specific person sharing. I think that letting people know you want to discuss something and then waiting for those with you in the room to decide, is polite and gives people time to leave and come back in say 15 mins. I do this myself to manage my own triggers/dysregulation. In addition, there are some cases where people become addicted to seeking validation and get stuck in harmful patterns of rumination. Having time boundaried spaces for this meets the need, which is essentially the principle of therapy sessions. But therapists have skills to pull someone out of harmful patterns. Do we have people with these skills here? Who are willing to do this in a group? If not, is it safe to continue?

Lastly, I think if we are going to use TW's, there should be clear guidance on what they are (content wise), it's relation to trauma specifically and what is expected from members in terms of when and when not to use them. Then how to use them. This would make it more approachable for our neurodiverse members too.

The CTAD clinic did a great video on activated vs triggered here: https://youtu.be/GWWCBBj8idY

There is a great video about the trap of validation & rumination here (she calls it the difference between emotional dumping and emotional sharing): https://youtu.be/dfxOBpe_YMs

Yes, that's the word!

@audien

All i did is make a suggestion "If this is the case maybe 7CUPS should think about phasing TW out. "

It is a suggestion because i used the words "Maybe" to show uncertainty & "Think" as in to ponder. In other words Maybe they should Think about it. I hope you can at least step out of your police roll long enough to realize that is all i did.

@audienta

I want to say thank you for allowing this discussion to take place. To all of you who so graciously participated with your voice, I say thank you.

This post was introduced to give our opinions of how we are affected by seeing trigger warnings, and I think that everyone has done a great job. I only hope that no one leaves feeling shorted or misunderstood. It is these type of discussions that helps us all to learn and to grow and to be able to hear other people's point of view without judgment.

Thanks 7cups, Way to go😊