• june@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    You literally just described how it’s a mental health save though. If a content/trigger warning gives you the opportunity it’s to skip the content and not be put into a bad mood, that’s a mental health save. For you, it’s maybe small. For someone with cptsd, it could be pretty fuckin big.

    • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      The entire point is most of the time it doesn’t come with such an opportunity. Is someone supposed to go through all the effort of skipping classes and assignments just because a label showed up on a topic? No.

      It’s not a mental save. It’s merely forewarning. The entire point is it isn’t providing a mental save. In my case, I only gain the benefit because I can skip the content with no other repercussions.

      • june@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        8 months ago

        Gotcha.

        I didn’t have that experience in school (albeit that was 10 years ago) and the only places I’ve seen TWs is the internet.

        So maybe it’s a situation of time and place when it is and isn’t effective. But in a case where there’s no opportunity to abstain, then I agree with you that it’s merely a forewarning and largely useless aside from keeping the topic from causing a bit of whiplash.

        • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          Take your train of thought one step further. Because there is no actual tangible benefit to be gained, it means there is no practical difference between a trigger warning and a basic content label. Treating them as anything more is simply glorifying a label.

          • june@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            To be clear, I conditionally agree with you based on the context and setting where it’s used. But, that’s what they are. Content labels. And a content label (ostensibly) should allow you to decide in advance if you want to consume the content. If you don’t have a choice in the matter, what’s the point?

            We’ve been rating movies for forever for this exact reason. To give people information to decide if they want to consume the content considering the violence, sexual content, language, drug use, etc.

            In the case of trigger warnings, they’re intended to say ‘this content is potentially triggering for some people due to this particular topic’ (SA, eating disorders, drug use, etc., all have vulnerable people who can be genuinely triggered by reading content about it, especially if it’s in detail). And having the opportunity to not consume that content rather than be slapped in the face with it is a mental health save. It has value in that context, which you even described in your own comment. You sometimes like them, and that’s when I’m saying they have value as trigger warnings specifically.

            I didn’t think I was being unclear and I’m sorry if I was, but we seem to agree here. You just appear to be saying ‘all trigger warnings are dumb and don’t help with mental health’ while going on to describe how they (sometimes) help with mental health.