At some point in the recent past regressive leftist feminist academics came up with this idea that any content shown to people (especially students) that may contain something that may "trigger" anxiety or distress in people who have experienced trauma should contain "trigger warnings", to help them either mentally prepare for that content, or to skip it completely. Supposedly this helps them because the upsetting content doesn't come by surprise, and they can expect it.
Several studies have been made about this, and basically invariably they have found that these "trigger warnings" actually have the exact opposite effect. In other words, rather than alleviate the anxiety and stress caused by the potentially upsetting content, they only make it worse. They only increase the amount of stress, anxiety and negative feelings that these people experience (compared to there not being such warnings at all).
When you think about it, it actually makes sense. People who are susceptible to being upset by such content, either because of past trauma or, more likely, having been indoctrinated into wanting to be victims, are being pretty much told "this is where you should feel anxious".
Consider this analogy: Many people are, for some reason, almost morbidly afraid of being zapped by anything that's electrical (such as a static charge). If they are just suddenly zapped by something with no forewarning at all, they usually just get a bit startled and might become a bit upset by the small pain, but that's about it. However, if they are eg. dared to get zapped, they are told that they are going to get zapped and that they should allow it (eg. for a dare or a bet, or whatever), and they are slowly approached with whatever device will be used to zap them, they become extremely anxious and jumpy about it. Even just bringing the device close to their skin, without still touching, usually makes them quickly back off, perhaps with a small scream. They become extremely hypersensitive and anxious about it. And if the zap ends up happening, its sensation will be strengthened many-fold because of this psychology. They are expecting it to hurt like hell, so when it happens the sensation is strengthened because their brain makes it stronger. A bit like a placebo effect strengthening the effects of something.
Or consider this different analogy: Suppose you are watching a horror movie, and you are fully immersed in the experience, with full willing suspension of disbelief, and are enchanted by the movie. In a scene, with suspenseful music, a woman slowly approaches a closet door to check what's inside, expecting the serial killer to potentially be there. The scene is very suspenseful, and causes anxiety, because of its setting. All the cues have been given in advance that something scary may suddenly happen when she opens the door, so the viewer is anxiously waiting for it. Even if there's nothing in the closet, you still felt anxious and nervous, because of the expectation. In a completely different context watching a woman approaching a closet door would not cause such anxiety.
"Trigger warnings" act in the same way. They act as cues to the susceptible audience that "this is where you should feel anxious and nervous", and thus they do. Even if the content wouldn't otherwise cause them any sort of stress, the "trigger warning" actually makes them feel it anyway. These "trigger warnings" actually condition them to feel stressed about the content, even if they wouldn't otherwise. And even in cases where the content may be slightly bothering, the trigger warning only strengthens the feeling, because of the anxiety of expectation.
Some of these "trigger warnings" can be astonishingly obnoxious, up to the point of almost looking like a parody, yet used in all seriousness (Poe's Law is in full effect here). In one particularly obnoxious example the "trigger warnings" consisted of a flashing red light in a corner of the video and a loud beeping noise, every time a scene in the "educational" video was coming that was potentially "stressful" to the viewer and could cause an "anxiety attack". And these obnoxious beeping warnings were throughout the entire video, loudly signaling the viewer "this is where you should feel nervous!"
But why are they an ingenious form of psychological manipulation, as I titled this blog post? Because they reinforce the victim mentality of the indoctrinated students. They cause anxiety to the students, and therefore the indoctrination that they are victims feels validated. The notion of "I need trigger warnings because these things cause me severe anxiety" is reinforced by... the trigger warnings themselves. They reinforce and perpetuate this feeling. It's like a vicious cycle, where the thing designed to alleviate the problem actually only perpetuates and accentuates it.
It's ingenious because the regressive leftist academics want this to happen. They want their students to feel victimized, and to be anxious, and to justify their activism with these feelings. Not only do they want completely normal people to become easily "triggered", they actually don't want the ones who have a genuine traumatic past to actually get better. They want to perpetuate the sense of victimhood, the feeling of being powerless and oppressed, not cure it.
Several studies have been made about this, and basically invariably they have found that these "trigger warnings" actually have the exact opposite effect. In other words, rather than alleviate the anxiety and stress caused by the potentially upsetting content, they only make it worse. They only increase the amount of stress, anxiety and negative feelings that these people experience (compared to there not being such warnings at all).
When you think about it, it actually makes sense. People who are susceptible to being upset by such content, either because of past trauma or, more likely, having been indoctrinated into wanting to be victims, are being pretty much told "this is where you should feel anxious".
Consider this analogy: Many people are, for some reason, almost morbidly afraid of being zapped by anything that's electrical (such as a static charge). If they are just suddenly zapped by something with no forewarning at all, they usually just get a bit startled and might become a bit upset by the small pain, but that's about it. However, if they are eg. dared to get zapped, they are told that they are going to get zapped and that they should allow it (eg. for a dare or a bet, or whatever), and they are slowly approached with whatever device will be used to zap them, they become extremely anxious and jumpy about it. Even just bringing the device close to their skin, without still touching, usually makes them quickly back off, perhaps with a small scream. They become extremely hypersensitive and anxious about it. And if the zap ends up happening, its sensation will be strengthened many-fold because of this psychology. They are expecting it to hurt like hell, so when it happens the sensation is strengthened because their brain makes it stronger. A bit like a placebo effect strengthening the effects of something.
Or consider this different analogy: Suppose you are watching a horror movie, and you are fully immersed in the experience, with full willing suspension of disbelief, and are enchanted by the movie. In a scene, with suspenseful music, a woman slowly approaches a closet door to check what's inside, expecting the serial killer to potentially be there. The scene is very suspenseful, and causes anxiety, because of its setting. All the cues have been given in advance that something scary may suddenly happen when she opens the door, so the viewer is anxiously waiting for it. Even if there's nothing in the closet, you still felt anxious and nervous, because of the expectation. In a completely different context watching a woman approaching a closet door would not cause such anxiety.
"Trigger warnings" act in the same way. They act as cues to the susceptible audience that "this is where you should feel anxious and nervous", and thus they do. Even if the content wouldn't otherwise cause them any sort of stress, the "trigger warning" actually makes them feel it anyway. These "trigger warnings" actually condition them to feel stressed about the content, even if they wouldn't otherwise. And even in cases where the content may be slightly bothering, the trigger warning only strengthens the feeling, because of the anxiety of expectation.
Some of these "trigger warnings" can be astonishingly obnoxious, up to the point of almost looking like a parody, yet used in all seriousness (Poe's Law is in full effect here). In one particularly obnoxious example the "trigger warnings" consisted of a flashing red light in a corner of the video and a loud beeping noise, every time a scene in the "educational" video was coming that was potentially "stressful" to the viewer and could cause an "anxiety attack". And these obnoxious beeping warnings were throughout the entire video, loudly signaling the viewer "this is where you should feel nervous!"
But why are they an ingenious form of psychological manipulation, as I titled this blog post? Because they reinforce the victim mentality of the indoctrinated students. They cause anxiety to the students, and therefore the indoctrination that they are victims feels validated. The notion of "I need trigger warnings because these things cause me severe anxiety" is reinforced by... the trigger warnings themselves. They reinforce and perpetuate this feeling. It's like a vicious cycle, where the thing designed to alleviate the problem actually only perpetuates and accentuates it.
It's ingenious because the regressive leftist academics want this to happen. They want their students to feel victimized, and to be anxious, and to justify their activism with these feelings. Not only do they want completely normal people to become easily "triggered", they actually don't want the ones who have a genuine traumatic past to actually get better. They want to perpetuate the sense of victimhood, the feeling of being powerless and oppressed, not cure it.
Comments
Post a Comment