5 ms·
The "real world" is not a safe space. It never will be. I used to have the same kind of knee-jerk reaction to content warnings; you might say I was triggered b
by jordemort 5y ago
The "real world" is not a safe space. It never will be.
I used to have the same kind of knee-jerk reaction to content warnings; you might say I was triggered by them. "The world isn't safe," I thought, "so you should just toughen up." Now that I am a geriatric millennial, I find my views have softened.
For people with marginalized identities, it can be particularly unsafe; depending on where they live, they might face discrimination in their communities. The local government might want to kill them. Their own families might reject them. They might feel unsafe in their own home, with no realistic hope of getting out any time soon.
For people that have been victims of traumatic events, "toughen up/get over it" isn't really an option. Again, the world is not a safe space; it might be littered with reminders of what happened to them, which may be perfectly innocuous to other people.
For people who feel unsafe in their homes, communities, or the world at large, going online can be a very important means of escaping their situation. It may actually be their only means of escape; it's very possible that the only communities that they are able to access where they can feel safe are online.
Sometimes signaling is just signaling. Not all signaling is for you. I've seen lots of CWs that I don't understand, or that I privately think are somewhat absurd, which is really just the same thing as not understanding them. I don't think the people who used those were trying to signal how woke they were to me, though; I assume those signals were meant for somebody else.
The "real world" is not a safe space, but the virtual worlds that we are building are not subject to the same limitations. People should be able to tailor the spaces they create to be as safe as they want them to be, for the people they want them to be safe for. Do not assume that a signal that wasn't intended for you was made in bad faith.
- IfOnlyYouKnew 5y agoYes, thank you... The argument is also contradictory: if the warnings risk "coddling" people too much, they must have the intended effect. But, at the same time, it's claimed that they are useless/absurd/etc. Both can't be true at the same time. And if one accepts that they protect people who had traumatic experiences of violence, it's really quite something to tell them to "get over it" without having any similar experience. Besides, if people truly believe that emotional suffering is a requirement for a well-rounded character, would they argue in favour of subjecting everyone to trauma? Not dude ranch a-night-alone-in-the-woods, but actual harm? Maybe they would themselves really profit from some more real-world experience of struggle? Maybe donating all their belongings and starting a new life in a randomly chosen country or something like that.
- DougN7 5y agoThey can be true at the same time: the warnings have different meanings to different people even at different times in their life. I’m coming to realize just how much real trauma there is in the world by having become friends with innocent people that went through hell. We need more compassion in the world, not less.