![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Triggers in Fiction
Oct. 2nd, 2021 02:58 pmThere are a lot of things that I find upsetting in fiction, so many in fact that I don't really consider that something that would prevent me from reading a story. It doesn't even necessarily prevent me from writing it, though there are things I choose not to write for that reason.
There are also a lot of different reasons I find things upsetting. And the reason and severity of upset are not necessarily correlated. Sometimes I dislike something for 'serious' reasons, but the level of upset it provokes in me is nevertheless simply not that great. Sometimes I dislike something for inconsequential reasons, but it provokes a disproportionate response in me. And sometimes things provoke exactly the response that might be expected of them.
One thing I try to avoid doing is calling any of these things triggers, but this is, perhaps, for a very different reason than is typical. I avoid doing this because I don't particularly care to indicate to the general public which of the things I find upsetting are relatively mild upsets, and which of the things I find upsetting are genuinely difficult for me to endure. I simply do not trust random people on the Internet that much.
Some people feel uncomfortable with others using the word trigger to describe their responses to fiction, but I feel there may be a somewhat misguided reason for this at times. There seems to be a sentiment among some that using the word for things that are not triggers will somehow dilute it. One reason I think this is misguided is that it attempts to judge whether some stranger's emotional responses meet some vague and arbitrary threshhold according to some internal metric of How All People Must Work (eg. if you're able to do X, you couldn't possibly feel Y). I think this inevitably ends up resulting in people diagnosing complete strangers on the internet while upholding the toxic ideal that a person's own knowledge of their mental states should be disregarded whenever it's inconvenient to others. This will also surely send a lot of people prone to self-doubt into terrible self-doubt spirals, which I think is alone enough reason to discourage this sort of thinking from being passed around. And even if someone isn't saying these things outright (and they often aren't), I feel they should be careful about what their words may imply in this regard.
All of this is also entirely unnecessary to defend fiction of any sort because a work triggering a person a.) does not indicate anything about its relative 'morality' and b.) does not mean the author is at fault for that adverse event. Different people may be triggered by different things, and absolutely anything can be a trigger. Something that brings you great joy could put someone else on a downward spiral for days. What one person finds to be a balm to their psyche may be incredibly harmful to another. And what one person considers innocuous may be absolutely intolerable to others.
Different people have different needs, and *that* is what needs to be acknowledged regarding triggers. *That* is why we can't just get rid of all works that are triggering, so as to prevent any possibility of upset. Because to abolish any possibility of such psychological harm from fiction, one would simultaneously have to abolish any possibility of benefit. One would have to abolish stories entirely.
There are also a lot of different reasons I find things upsetting. And the reason and severity of upset are not necessarily correlated. Sometimes I dislike something for 'serious' reasons, but the level of upset it provokes in me is nevertheless simply not that great. Sometimes I dislike something for inconsequential reasons, but it provokes a disproportionate response in me. And sometimes things provoke exactly the response that might be expected of them.
One thing I try to avoid doing is calling any of these things triggers, but this is, perhaps, for a very different reason than is typical. I avoid doing this because I don't particularly care to indicate to the general public which of the things I find upsetting are relatively mild upsets, and which of the things I find upsetting are genuinely difficult for me to endure. I simply do not trust random people on the Internet that much.
Some people feel uncomfortable with others using the word trigger to describe their responses to fiction, but I feel there may be a somewhat misguided reason for this at times. There seems to be a sentiment among some that using the word for things that are not triggers will somehow dilute it. One reason I think this is misguided is that it attempts to judge whether some stranger's emotional responses meet some vague and arbitrary threshhold according to some internal metric of How All People Must Work (eg. if you're able to do X, you couldn't possibly feel Y). I think this inevitably ends up resulting in people diagnosing complete strangers on the internet while upholding the toxic ideal that a person's own knowledge of their mental states should be disregarded whenever it's inconvenient to others. This will also surely send a lot of people prone to self-doubt into terrible self-doubt spirals, which I think is alone enough reason to discourage this sort of thinking from being passed around. And even if someone isn't saying these things outright (and they often aren't), I feel they should be careful about what their words may imply in this regard.
All of this is also entirely unnecessary to defend fiction of any sort because a work triggering a person a.) does not indicate anything about its relative 'morality' and b.) does not mean the author is at fault for that adverse event. Different people may be triggered by different things, and absolutely anything can be a trigger. Something that brings you great joy could put someone else on a downward spiral for days. What one person finds to be a balm to their psyche may be incredibly harmful to another. And what one person considers innocuous may be absolutely intolerable to others.
Different people have different needs, and *that* is what needs to be acknowledged regarding triggers. *That* is why we can't just get rid of all works that are triggering, so as to prevent any possibility of upset. Because to abolish any possibility of such psychological harm from fiction, one would simultaneously have to abolish any possibility of benefit. One would have to abolish stories entirely.
