emanix | A note about 'triggers'

Entry tags:

A note about 'triggers' - another rant.

Note: The following post is NOT likely to be triggering, at least any more so than a toiletry bag, but may offend/upset a few people. It is not, however, a personal attack on anyone, and the blog I am referring to is not on LJ.

I just came across yet another blog in which someone uses the term 'triggered' to mean 'somewhat upset/annoyed me'. I'm not going to link to it, as it's just one example amongst dozens that I've noticed lately. This is not what 'triggered' means, people.

Triggering is what happens in PTSD and similar anxiety disorders. It refers to an event or object, not always predictable* that causes the person to experience a flood of feelings and/or flashbacks that are incapacitating in nature, and in themselves intensely stressful. Misusing this term to mean 'anything that upsets you a bit' is intensely invalidating towards people who genuinely have experienced this.

I don't like to play the victim card, because I don't see myself as a victim. I went through a bunch of crap**, it left a few scars, physical and mental, I was incapacitated to the point of being unable to leave the house for several months, and I still have the odd recurrent symptom. I learned from it, was changed by it, in some ways for the better, took responsibility for my recovery, working through a long slow process of desensitisation in safe environment with safe people, and then moved on. I'm not interested in sympathy for what I went through. I don't think post traumatic stress is a club to beat people over the head with either, but I want to make it clear that I am coming at this from a position of knowing what I'm talking about. This is my lived experience, and I'm telling some of you - I really hope you know who you are - that your use of this term seriously trivializes my experience, and REALLY PISSES ME OFF.

By all means mark your posts about sensitive topics 'potentially triggering', but be damned sure you know what it means before you claim, yourself, to be 'triggered' by anything. In your parlance, it 'triggers' my urge*** to beat you until you understand both that PTSD (&c.) isn't a political tool, and that comparing your feeling of being a bit shocked/cross/angry (possibly the most intense feeling you've experienced in your sheltered life, but still a manageable sensation) to another person's being completely incapacitated by terror and despair is inconsiderate at best, downright offensive at worst.

*I was at one point triggered into an unexpected flashback by the sight of a friend's toiletry bag (ironically said friend is a trained psychotherapist, but of course he had no idea that his bag of shampoo etc. looked like the one belonging to my abusive ex-partner, or that hanging it on the door of a hotel bathroom would remind me of a situation in which I nearly died - then again, who better to have a flashback around than a friend who also happens to be a therapist?)

**Referenced lightly in my introductory post

***I am not a violent person, and merely having an urge does not mean I'm going to act on it, but boy have I had to grit my teeth.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Bravo to you for coming out with this!

FWIW, I feel similarly about when people who have no real health issues talk about 'not having enough spoons' or some sort of spoonish reference. It's been overused to the point of absurdity and IMO insults people who truly have chronic fatigue and health issues. It almost seems like claiming chronic health issues has become the new Fashionable accessory.

And I just know that there will be someone, somewhere, who would decide to take offense at what I said. ::sigh::

To be entirely fair, perfectly healthy people have an allocation of spoons too, they just have lots more, so I have less issue with that one, but I can see where you're coming from too.

BTW, I don't think I've commented on that icon of yours - adorable!

With you both, on both counts, and I think Chesh makes some excellent points below. Thanks for writing this!

I do agree with you in general but I would extend it to anything that causes flashback/strong immediate reaction because of previous traumatic circumstances/anxiety tendances. I don't pretend that these are all of the same severity or one on the same level of PTSD however I think it is a valid use of the term. For instance, I am quite claustrophobic (in the sense of a clinical phobia) so images or descriptions of certain very claustrophobic conditions can cause some sudden panic, I think that is a clear case of triggering. Secondly, slightly more debatably, I would say I occasionally get triggered when someone uses a phrase or similar that is very close to the phrases used in/just before some of the worse relationship experiences of my life.

In not personal examples, someone with GID might reasonably be said to be sometimes triggered by repeated missgendering, transphobic attitudes etc.

I do agree that people do miss use the word but I do think that above examples are examples of triggering in that there is a specific 'button' that someone is sensitive to and may have uncontrolled reaction to. This is not to say that there aren't a huge range of severity of trigger and that I don't agree with your basic point (I do and have a similar grump about spoons).

I would extend it to anything that causes flashback/strong immediate reaction because of previous traumatic circumstances/anxiety tendances

I was intending to cover this with my 'and similar anxiety disorders' - just have to go with the one that I've personally experienced!

*nods in total agreement*

thank you for posting. Very well said. x

I don't believe it's unreasonable to describe [panic attacks or sudden occurances of extreme depression] which may be brought on by a random occurance to be referred to as "triggered". Also, the experience of what constitutes a flashback can vary greatly.

The term 'Triggered' does get over-used, however.

Also, what constitutes a debilitating health issue in terms of this spoon thing? (which I've never heard of before)

Sure, that comes under 'and similar anxiety disorders'

The spoon theory comes from here: http://www.butyoudontlooksick.com/category/the-spoon-theory/

Ooooh, ok that makes sense. Yes, saying you're "out of spoons" would be a bit retarded because if you really were you'd be on the floor crying and unable to move (or as I call it, "having a bad day") rather than talking about spoons.

(deleted comment)

Fair point, well made

THANK YOU. Well said.

I find the co-opting of this phrase by those who are using it casually (in a non-PTSD/non-anxious context) to be immensely insulting to those who actually struggle with the real bio-physical response of a triggering. (Yes, I'm happy to give those with anxiety disorders and phobias the benefit of PTSD allocation. Trauma is trauma; we need not be competitive.)

However, PTSD trauma is (as you indicate) NOT simply everyday discomfort and whinging. It's much more specific as an embodied psychological experience where the experiencee has no or very little control. I find it particularly frustrating when people say things the equivalent of, "X really annoys me because X exists in the first place. Now X is doing some mundane thing and I don't like it, because I should have thought of it first. However, I'll exaggerate how I feel and claim that I feel triggered and this is unfair and I shouldn't be made to feel this way."

Or, even worse, "I went shopping and was totally triggered by the dress the sales clerk had on. It was so adorable!" (What the Hell?!)

Grawr.

I met a psych-theatre guy in New York who does performative therapy with political refugees (shamefully, his name is escaping me at the moment, as he is quite brilliant). He had a fascinating theory: In our grandparents' generation, one exaggerated one's courage. They made their heroic escapades all the more so, even when it referred to little things. They had noble accomplishments, they were brave, they had role models like John Wayne and Clint Eastwood who were rough and tough and made it work...

However, the next generations (ours included) grew up with Jerry Seinfeld and Woody Allen and their ilk, people that exaggerate their suffering, often in ridiculous ways. ("I got splashed by a cab, I spilled my coffee, they ran out of my favourite bagels, can this day possibly get any worse?") Psych-theatre guy thinks we all do this now because we do not get enough validation for our everyday suffering, since we all psychologically do not want to compete (and lose) when faced with the spectre of the Holocaust (Ultimate Suffering). He thinks this is sad, as our everyday challenges and little sufferings are still valid, and deserve some measure of validation, rather than pouring the energy into unsatisfactory self-perpetuation. Of course, this becomes even more of an issue for the vast sections of the survivors' community, when they already feel that seeking validation is like dancing across a mine field.

"I'll exaggerate how I feel and claim that I feel triggered and this is unfair and I shouldn't be made to feel this way."
Oh god, the 'my feelings are your fault and your problem' passive-agressive routine. I didn't even get into that one, and I'll try not to now because I might never stop, but so with you there.

Interesting theory about the different generations. Not sure about the holocaust bit, but I have thought rather often that while the fifties had a whole bunch of things that we don't want to bring back, a bit more of the 'stiff upper lip' attitude, and a bit of general pride in doing good stuff would go a long way right now. It seems like being happy, healthy, brave etc. are all distinctly unfashionable things to be, and people compete to have the worst deal (like all the rows about rape culture and male privilege versus female privilege that I keep tripping over and getting angry at because nearly all of them contain some idiot claiming to be 'triggered' in a way that makes it clear that they actually weren't).

I wonder how much of this is caused (ironically) by the tendency of hyperfeminist types to plonk 'trigger warning' in the title of any post that involves a hint of sensitive topic, without explaining what 'trigger' actually means - thus leading other, dumber, bloggers to make stupid assumptions and run with them.

Hm, being un-PC, and a bit uncharitable there... I should have said 'less well-informed' bloggers, rather than dumber, of course.

Don't worry, I don't think that merits having to sit on the naughty step with me ;-)

Mm, that's really interesting: thanks.

Yes: my impression is that there's lots of unnecessary competitiveness, loads of misunderstanding around trying to use similar scales for suffering (death vs. Oxford, for example)... I'm not sure about rooting this all in Ultimate Suffering as embodied by the Shoah - it seems more general and everyday, and in particular rooted in peer competition.

It seems to squick me particularly because we have no option but to trust peoples' own truth for themselves, and trust in their good faith in not exaggerating and attention-seeking unnecessarily, and there seems to be so much potential there for removing help and validation from people who really need it. I think the only way to tackle that is to emphasise the need to *not* be unnecessarily noisy about this, and that could silence those who do need help, and argh we're going in circles...

there's lots of unnecessary competitiveness, loads of misunderstanding around trying to use similar scales for suffering (death vs. Oxford, for example)
Gosh yes, and it is hard to not get into these arguments. I hesitated to make this post in the first place, because it was precisely not what I was after. I have no interest in competing with anyone, and in fact often avoid making mention of my own experiences with this stuff because I'm sure there are people who are/have been worse off than myself. I should add that the ex-partner in the 'oxford' anecdote is still someone I care about, and I had no wish to see that innocence taken away (still don't) - only for him to understand that he *was*, in many ways, an innocent. I'm aware, constantly, that there are plenty of things I haven't experienced, and I try to respect that in my dealings with other people.

I'm aware that people react in a diverse range of ways to the same events, and that people genuinely can feel triggered by things others find perfectly innocuous (the reason I included the toiletry bag story as an illustration of this), and indeed will almost certainly draw different lines as to what constitutes 'triggered' and what doesn't. What bugs me isn't that, but people who are using the term in contexts where they themselves make it clear that they weren't in fact overwhelmed in any way, which I feel is unfair to everyone - maybe someday they will genuinely have a reaction that overwhelms them completely, and there will be no word left to describe it because they've overused that one so much.

some multiple people use the word "trigger" for like things that pull a particular person in a system out to the front without warning.

Thanks for the info - sounds like a valid use I wasn't aware of. Still though, something that a person is most importantly *not in control of*.

Basically what I'm angry at are the idiots who use it in contexts like "that really triggered me - I was in a bad mood all evening", or worse, the one

cheshcat quoted above.
It's like 'crying wolf' on someone else's behalf - if people keep diluting the term by using it for stuff like that, then when someone really needs it taken seriously it may not be, and that's what upsets me so much.

Yeah, for me "trigger" is a word that has to include an element of "out of control in a very bad way" if you're going to use it properly. Flashbacks count. Extreme emotional reactions count. Feeling the urge to do something you're addicted to and trying to stop counts.* "Trigger" to me implies that it's something you're not able to stop even if you want to and that it's very hard to pull you out of that mental place. It is not a word to use lightly. It is a word that I wish no one ever felt the need to use. I've used it on occasion, but I prefer my life as it is now, when I almost never have need to acknowledge its existence in my vocabulary, and it boggles my mind that anyone could see it as a word to be used for everyday situations.

* Drink, use drugs, cut... I suppose it also counts if you're addicted but aren't trying to stop since it's out of control and something is causing you to desire whatever it is that the thing you're addicted does for you, but you're less likely to reference it in that kind of situation. You're more likely to acknowledge the presence and inherent negativity of the triggers as being problematic if you're attempting to stop.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

A note about 'triggers' - another rant.

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject