#HOUGH. ough. ok it's out of my system.

[ilikeyoshi]

no ok i'm gonna.

mentions of rape and trauma, including symptoms of reliving that trauma.

"many modes of fiction and storytelling aren't expected to trigger tag."

just because it's normalized doesn't mean it's the best or even a good practice.

"printed books don't include content warnings."

no, but what printed books usually have over fanfiction is resources like "does the dog die", which i personally think isn't good enough and that it would benefit (reasonable) readers AND writers if content warnings were encouraged and more normalized (readers so they aren't unexpectedly exposed to harm (except by assholes), and writers so they aren't condemned for heavy topics (except by assholes)).

fanfiction, except maybe the huge juggernaut fics, don't have the popularity to be recorded in the same fashion. (neither do lots of lesser known books, but i think this isn't a good thing for anyone and actually makes the need to normalize trigger warnings in the actual creation MORE important, not less.)

"the content warning 'chose not to tag' means there may be triggering content. it is not the same as 'no tags apply'."

yes, that's all true and fine. for fellow people with bad trigger responses: take note of this. 'chose not to tag' means there could still be triggering content, not that there isn't or won't be triggering content. this is a good thing to know for your safety.

and the biggest issue i have with that post: "readers are responsible for protecting themselves from triggering content."

yes! of course they are. but how are they supposed to do that without trigger tags? like, this is a genuine, non-gotcha question. i want to understand what these writers think triggers are and/or what they actually expect from readers.

and like, as a general "get this out of the way": i do believe there are people who are outraged for the wrong reasons and using this (and endless other controversies) as an excuse to 'justifiably' get mad, and those people are wrong, need to step away, and are hurting the issues they claim to care about. i ALSO believe it is disingenuous to ignore an issue or complaint out of hand just because it was delivered angrily, and that it's unfair to tone police someone who's been hurt. do i wish we could all express our issues calmly and politely? yes. do i think that's realistic or even right? not really. do i think it's important to listen to the heart of the issue as best as we can anyway? very much.

the problem i have with sentiments like "protecting your mental health is your own responsibility" is WHEN they're coupled with sentiments like "it's NOT my responsibility to provide you with the tools TO protect your mental health". the idea of "just close the tab" or "just hit the back button" falsely attributes the experience of being re-exposed to trauma ("triggered") as simply upsetting or unpleasant but not debilitating. this is not what happens.

traumatic triggers are sometimes straight forward: "rape depicted in fiction triggers trauma responses." a lot of times they're less straight forward. "mentions or implications of off-screen rape trigger trauma responses." and sometimes they're completely impossible for an outsider to predict. "omelettes trigger trauma responses (about rape)."

the last example is a real one, paraphrased from an article written by a woman who was raped. she describes (again, paraphrased) that "the morning after, she couldn't/didn't want to believe it happened, so she went through motions of normalcy by making her rapist omelettes for breakfast". it isn't that eggs are traumatic in and of themselves, but that eggs trigger(!) memories and traumatic responses about the rape. it is a trigger by association.

obviously, and as i recall she says this herself in her article, there is no world in which "eggs" is a trigger tag 99% of the population uses. it is a very obscure trigger that requires context to even fully understand how it's a trigger in the first place.

this, i think, is what all survivors of trauma and/or mental illness with obscure (and even non-obscure) need to accept: we WILL be triggered throughout our lives. we cannot remove these things from existence, and it is for our own best interest to develop safe and healthy coping mechanisms to help us through trigger episodes, as well as remove ourselves from the situation as quickly as possible.

i suspect this is what these writers are trying to say too—and it's GOOD advice. it is.

however... i find it, to be perfectly frank, callous and dismissive to suggest that writers—or any kind of creators—are irrelevant in this issue when they write knowable triggering content (NOT eggs, but things like rape) and do not take incredibly simple, easy, 2-to-5 second measures to warn for that content. i fear they do not understand (or do not respect) what being triggered—really, actually triggered DOES to a person.

the symptoms of trauma triggers are vast, and no two people experience them the same way, but some common and/or significant symptoms include: flashbacks, delusions, fight or flight response, vomiting, fainting, and suicidal ideations. the effects of these symptoms can result in extreme distress, exhaustion, mental illness, physical inability to go to work/school, damaged relationships, serious injury and death.

triggers are not "upsetting". they are debilitating and even life-threatening. and in my experience, they get demonstrably worse when the person experiences them AFTER establishing trust or interest in the triggering thing; as in, after they're 3, 5, 10 chapters into a fanfic, when a trigger warning before chapter one could have hurt them incredibly less, if at all. this has happened to me.

no, it is not a writer's fault that someone is traumatized or mentally ill, and no, i wouldn't hold a writer accountable (socially or legally) if someone died after having a traumatic response to content in their fic.

but i think it is so... weird? that some writers who KNOW this about trauma and mental illness are not immediately compelled to add a few words to their tags to prevent this from happening to someone. sincerely, from the bottom of my heart, it reminds me of healthy people who weren't masking for covid, despite the fact that if they were infected and asymptomatic, they could expose the elderly or immunocompromised to infection, which could KILL that person. yeah, you didn't hurt them, their trauma did—and yeah, you didn't kill them, their infection did—but how can you ACTUALLY feel perfectly comfortable not doing the bare minimum to protect another human being? how does it not eat you up inside that people might be dead as a ripple effect of an incredibly easy task you chose not to do?

i sincerely am trying to understand it, but i don't think i can. as a person who has been traumatized in multiple ways, both well-known ways and obscure ways, i cannot IMAGINE knowing there's a way to prevent someone else from experiencing the horrors (and dangers) of reliving it and just Not Doing It. especially when it's SO easy.

i see a lot of concerns about "spoiling the story" via trigger tags, and i can't help but think... that's not really how it works? i don't think "there's a rape in this story" is a spoiler, i think it's a content warning. i think if you're prioritizing spoilers over someone's mental and physical safety, that's weird as hell.

BUT, if it's really that big of an issue for you or your story, i have an alternative, equally simple suggestion: link to a google doc that lists all trigger warnings (that you know to apply; again, i'm not asking you to know one person in the world has an "eggs" trigger, and no other reasonable person is either), and tell people "this link contains trigger warnings that may include spoilers".

i think it's, frankly, a little entitled to say you won't trigger tag your fanfic because of spoilers. i think people should have the ability to make informed decisions, in advance, about reading your story. i think they should be allowed to spoil your story for themselves for literally any reason, ESPECIALLY to protect themselves from triggering content. this IS what people do for mainstream media, this IS what "does the dog die" does. this IS an established long-standing norm in public fiction.

as i said, i fully believe there are outraged idiots out there who don't actually care about the issue and just want to get their brownie points for being mad and aggressive. i do not think it's fair or reasonable to dismiss the issue entirely because idiots are co-opting it. there are idiots on every side of every issue ever. they do not lessen the merit of an issue just because they're loud and awful; they are living straw men. we cannot stop them, including by forsaking the issue they're co-opting.

and what really bothers me about that mindset is that there are people—genuinely harmed people—who may not express the issue politely or calmly, but their experience is still important and they're still saying important things. we HAVE to accept that people, right AND wrong, are going to tell us their side of things angrily sometimes, and we have to be willing to listen to what they're saying. you close yourself off to a TON of growth and opportunity for compassion if you refuse to acknowledge or respect other people's pain because they 'expressed it wrong'.

and you're right, no one can force you to do it. i just don't understand how you possibly justify not WANTING to do it without being, at best, ignorant, and at work, just... really selfish.

#HOUGH. ough. ok it's out of my system. #this isn't a threat or anything btw but i do unfollow anyone who thinks like this. #because. y'know. i understand that by thinking like this it means none of your posts (creative or otherwise) are provably safe for me. #like i'm saying this so you don't think it's for another reason. not as a “i will NEVER shop here again” gotcha. #yoshi talks