Alex Callinicos/SWP vs Laurie Penny/New Statesman Facebook handbags

[frogwoman]

I do think trigger warnings can have a place though. I once relapsed on an addiction because of something I saw on the telly that reminded me of the euphoria of drug use. If there'd been some kind of warning on there I probably wouldn't have watched it. Something else might have 'triggered' that relapse later on but I probably wouldn't have done it that day. I do think, as cesare said if I understood her properly, that rather than the fairly generic label 'triggering' more specific words to identify the type of 'trigger' would be more appropriate and it wouldn't be so open to abuse IMO

yep defo.

All sorts of things can remind you of a thing I think which is why in some ways it's a bit inadequate. certain sounds, settings which are completely innocuous to everyone else might remind you of the scene of the trauma or the addiction or anything else.

 

[TruXta]

I found that comment deeply triggering. I haven't touched a cigarette for a week but you've just re-triggered my nicotine addiction and I'm off out to smoke 40 Marlboro and some fuck off cigars. And it's all your fault for not giving a trigger warning

I'm ever so sorry.

 

[frogwoman]

frogwoman had some really interesting stuff to say about trigger warnings and mental health in a blog post she did a bit back. Do you mind if I link to that froggy?

No not at all I was mostly talking about anxiety related triggers but it probably applies to other stuff too.

 

[SpineyNorman]

No not at all I was mostly talking about anxiety related triggers but it probably applies to other stuff too.

Here it is

 

[cesare]

I do think trigger warnings can have a place though. I once relapsed on an addiction because of something I saw on the telly that reminded me of the euphoria of drug use. If there'd been some kind of warning on there I probably wouldn't have watched it. Something else might have 'triggered' that relapse later on but I probably wouldn't have done it that day. I do think, as cesare said if I understood her properly, that rather than the fairly generic label 'triggering' more specific words to identify the type of 'trigger' would be more appropriate and it wouldn't be so open to abuse IMO

Yes, I think if you're about to read/watch something that contains something that someone might react badly to, it's a good idea for the broadcaster/blogger/poster/writer to preface what they're saying with some kind of description/words. Overuse ends up with warnings being ignored, or feeling beset by warnings though. "Contains flashing imagery" "contains graphic descriptions of [whatever]" etc can be helpful if it's out of the ordinary content or something unexpected. It's a judgment call though because people's susceptibilities are so varied in type and strength and current frame of mind.

 

[SpineyNorman]

Have a quick search of stavver's use of trigger warnings, sometimes it is understandable and at other times it's almost hyperbolic but mostly just surplus:



I mean really?

How does that actually help? In order to know what kind of trigger it is you would need to read the thing anyway, so the triggering has been done. Unless of course all, for want of a better term, traumatised people are grouped in the same 'identity' and it's assumed best that they avoid stuff that could be a trigger for any kind of trauma. Which seems daft and a bit dodgy IMO

 

[tufty79]

How does that actually help? In order to know what kind of trigger it is you would need to read the thing anyway, so the triggering has been done. Unless of course all, for want of a better term, traumatised people are grouped in the same 'identity' and it's assumed best that they avoid stuff that could be a trigger for any kind of trauma. Which seems daft and a bit dodgy IMO

not necessarily.
(edit in cos my phone interwebs wonked out)
i'd rather read something saying 'contains depiction/description of rape' than get halfway through the film/article and realise it's a really bad idea to watch/read it.
i really wish someone had warned me that david tennant was going to get all rapey in 'the politicians husband' the other month. led to a right meltdown, that did.

i'm reading your post to mean that trigger warnings (or 'content warnings' - i've seen that used and have perferred it) trigger (whether they're worded as 'trigger' or not) and so should be avoided - sorry if i've got that arse about tit.

 

[rekil]

You think maybe we could get that Camila Vallejo on the boards?

She doesn't speak English so all her posts would be in forrin but I'm in touch with a couple of people over there so you never know.

Meanwhile why not compare this 17 year old's speaking skillz with LP's shit bluffing and obsequious oxford union hat waffle. Not just the content (thanks to Riklet for help, general gist for non-forrin speakers here) but the tone, sense of commitment and general unfuckablewithness.

Spoiler

 

[SpineyNorman]

not necessarily.
(edit in cos my phone interwebs wonked out)
i'd rather read something saying 'contains depiction/description of rape' than get halfway through the film/article and realise it's a really bad idea to watch/read it.
i really wish someone had warned me that david tennant was going to get all rapey in 'the politicians husband' the other month. led to a right meltdown, that did.

i'm reading your post to mean that trigger warnings (or 'content warnings' - i've seen that used and have perferred it) trigger (whether they're worded as 'trigger' or not) and so should be avoided - sorry if i've got that arse about tit.

I was really just talking about that particular one that firky quoted - I think flagging up stuff that could prove traumatic for some people is generally a good idea. Just think like a lot of good ideas some people seem to be taking it to absurd extremes.

 

[tufty79]

got ya - cheers for clarifying

 

[The Pale King]

How about coining the term "Pennista" for all those who follow in the footsteps of our beloved Miss Ms. (money) Penny?

Or Pennite?

 

[Tom A]

Or Pennite?

That would work. But any word that ends in "-ista" gives you instant revolutionary cool... supposedly.

 

[The Pale King]

There have been a couple of points which are, if not legitimate criticism, then at least points that it's valid for me to address and think about. Being committed to intersectionality means I do have to think about how my background might affect what I write, for example. The thing is, I knew all that already, and if I want honest unbiased critique, I look for it elsewhere.

I don't expect to find useful critique on this thread because it's simply full of lies, distortions and people determined to think the worst of me- just as I wouldn't ask my most ardent fans to offer me vital critique on a piece, because I know they'd be biased.

Tufty, how you expect to change my mind whilst calling me things like an 'exploitative lying shit' is beyond me. If you actually want me to pay attention to you, treat me like a human being and don't start with baseless insults.

So, to recap. On this thread (which has amassed a fair bit of wisdom I reckon) there are 'a couple' of points that are not legitimate criticism, but 'valid points to address', but Laurie Penny knows all that stuff already and there are 'unbiased' people whom she will talk to about those. She gives one of hundreds of examples and swiftly dismisses it.

I've noticed that these days no-one seems to want to really argue issues, but rather attack the standing of the person making the argument. You see nothing else at PMQs and it's the standard comment page mode of argumentation. We can't critique Laurie penny because we're 'biased' against her, or we are racists/sexists/soi-distant radical trolls/delete as applicable/keep going until you make one stick - so we simply have no right to question her work. Maybe someone in the broadsheet comment community has sufficient standing to question her, I don't know. She clearly sees herself as part of that milieu and us as 'biased' outsiders. Besides, she says she means well, and it's good intentions that count, so why can't we just be grateful?

 

[The Pale King]

That would work. But any word that ends in "-ista" gives you instant revolutionary cool... supposedly.

True - Pennite is too retro. They won't get it in Williamsburg

 

[rekil]

Every two months Laurie resurrects like a shit Jesus who nobody could even be bothered to betray.

From the graaaave.

(sorry bout size, text should bigger but fuckit, that painting just overwhelms me)

 

[ViolentPanda]

Even if you are one? I've heard plenty of people use the word in completely reasonable contexts, such as "this text contains triggers for x, y and z". How's that pleading victimhood? If you ARE in fact a victim of say for instance rape?

She hasn't said it is, she's asked whether it could be.
And that's a fair question. We have little idea, even with reference to a single trauma such as rape, of the actual degree of psychic trauma undergone across a range of survivors as well as how they handle/process it over time. It may be possible to posit that for some rape survivors, their susceptibility to triggers is low, and that there's "room" for some to claim triggering as a way of avoiding further interlocution and/or validating their own survivor-status.

I'm not, by the way, claiming that this is what has happened here, I'm merely advancing the possibility of such behaviour.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Sure, but.... Trigger words - is that really so hard to get? I mean, I've seen that used for years, so it could be that I'm the odd one out.

Personally, the written word has never "triggered" memories of my own traumas. It's always been sounds and smells, which fortunately aren't that prevalent on bulletin boards.

 

[TruXta]

She hasn't said it is, she's asked whether it could be.
And that's a fair question. We have little idea, even with reference to a single trauma such as rape, of the actual degree of psychic trauma undergone across a range of survivors as well as how they handle/process it over time. It may be possible to posit that for some rape survivors, their susceptibility to triggers is low, and that there's "room" for some to claim triggering as a way of avoiding further interlocution and/or validating their own survivor-status.

I'm not, by the way, claiming that this is what has happened here, I'm merely advancing the possibility of such behaviour.

All I'm saying is it's better to err on the side of caution and assume that if someone says "these words cause me to have a bad time because I was raped/beaten/x/y/z" then that's what they're actually experiencing.

 

[grit]

or don't you?

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

I don't on a forum such as urban, not due to the posters, but the topic. In this domain there is no correct answer just people spouting their opinion and on occasion linking to articles that share their same bias/view/whatever.

However I take a very different attitude to the engineering/technology forums I post in.

 

[SpineyNorman]

There is a difference between informed opinion and the kind of crap you tend to post though.

 

[grit]

There is a difference between informed opinion and the kind of crap you tend to post though.

There isint that's the whole point!

I can technically have an "informed opinion" that you would still disagree with. You really can't grasp this simple concept can you.

 

[TruXta]

There isint that's the whole point!

I can technically have an "informed opinion" that you would still disagree with. You really can't grasp this simple concept can you.

In fairness there's loads of room for subjectivity, bias, bullshit and bunfights on tech/sci issues too. Witness the many Apple/Google/MS/etc buns etc etc, not to mention the epic "plane takes off" thread.

So, in short, I think you're a bit off here.

 

[SpineyNorman]

There isint that's the whole point!

I can technically have an "informed opinion" that you would still disagree with. You really can't grasp this simple concept can you.

You could have an informed opinion and I may well disagree with it, also from an informed standpoint. That much is certainly true. This is because different peoples politics are based on different values and different ways of viewing the world (ontologies and that if you want to be a smart arse).

But you don't tend to have informed opinions, not on social or political questions anyway, and so you can be dismissed as just plain wrong rather than it being a simple disagreement surrounding two equally credible opinions.

You still can't grasp this simple concept can you?

 

[grit]

In fairness there's loads of room for subjectivity, bias, bullshit and bunfights on tech/sci issues too. Witness the many Apple/Google/MS/etc buns etc etc, not to mention the epic "plane takes off" thread.

So, in short, I think you're a bit off here.

Not really, in software engineering someone can state a view that can be tested and proven. So it is quite different.

I'm not referring to shit like "iPhone is better than Android". Im talking about things you can apply scientific rigor to

 

[grit]

You could have an informed opinion and I may well disagree with it, also from an informed standpoint. That much is certainly true. This is because different peoples politics are based on different values and different ways of viewing the world (ontologies and that if you want to be a smart arse).

But you don't tend to have informed opinions, not on social or political questions anyway, and so you can be dismissed as just plain wrong rather than it being a simple disagreement surrounding two equally credible opinions.

You still can't grasp this simple concept can you?

Whoosh.

 

[TruXta]

Not really, in software engineering someone can state a view that can be tested and proven. So it is quite different.

I'm not referring to shit like "iPhone is better than Android". Im talking about things you can apply scientific rigor to

I got that, what I'm saying is that "scientific rigor" isn't as rigorous as all that. Otherwise we'd have known everything 150 years ago.

 

[SpineyNorman]

Whoosh.

Yes, clearly I'm the one not 'getting it'

It's never possible to say a political statement or whatever is definitely right but what you appear to be missing is that it most definitely is possible to say that some political statements are definitely wrong.

Which isn't actually all that different from the physical sciences - theories etc can be disproven but never proven, and at the edges there are differences of informed opinion. A difference between two informed opinions might be likened to debates between string theory and the standard model. Differences of opinion between you and someone who's got a clue what they're on about are more like those between young earth creationists and actual geologists on the age of the earth or the universe.

 

[frogwoman]

Is there any chance that a mod could change the title of the thread so that we don't get people asking "why is this thread all about one person" all the time? FridgeMagnet?

 

[TruXta]

Is there any chance that a mod could change the title of the thread so that we don't get people asking "why is this thread all about one person" all the time? FridgeMagnet?

What's your new title suggestion?

 

[Belushi]

Is there any chance that a mod could change the title of the thread so that we don't get people asking "why is this thread all about one person" all the time? FridgeMagnet?

Seconded.