Safteyism is the big thing nowadays, and I support it—to a degree. The idea of having a safe space, especially in universities, is a nice idea. I don't support having it in a classroom, but a room where people can chat openly without fear of being judged...that sounds pretty good to me. I might go into the details in another post, but today, I want to talk about something super specific: trigger warnings on food (on social media).
Anybody who has never dealt with an eating disorder would probably say "that's stupid". I've dealt with an eating disorder and I think that. I appreciate the sentiment, and I'm sure the action comes from a place of kindness, but it's only detrimental—at least in my view. To each their own, but I have a few reasons for my view.
First, putting trigger warnings on pictures of food or talks of food is detrimental because food should be normalized. I won't speak for other disorders, but as a survivor of anorexia, I will say that food has to be normalized completely. It is a part of life, and the immense importance that is placed on it (especially for restrictive disorders, from my understanding) is only increased if you see a trigger warning. This actually goes into a second point: people with disorders think they are not "sick enough"—what if I'm not triggered by food? I'm supposed to be, right? This leads to even more issues because it's almost like gatekeeping. No, you don't have to be triggered by food to have an eating disorder. No, you don't have to be severely underweight to be anorexic.
Back to normalization. Food is given immense importance, which subsequently means that it gradually has to be normalized and treated like a part of life. Food is not a punishment nor a reward. It is everywhere around you. You don't get a trigger warning before you walk downstairs and see bananas on the table. Why do you need a trigger warning on twitter? I will admit, yes some people do get triggered by food. However, the reality is that everything can trigger someone. Are you going to to put a trigger warning before you talk about sports? What about athletes with PTSD? Are you going to put a trigger warning before talking about music? What about artists who can't perform anymore? There are any number of things that could trigger people. (I have gotten triggered by pasta before—would you have predicted that? No.)
One could argue that putting a trigger warning cannot hurt. What's the worst that could happen? Me writing this, for one. Jokes aside, I felt the need to say this because it is absolutely insane to put trigger warnings on FOOD. Unless you know something I don't know, it is something that you probably eat every day—maybe unless you're dealing with an eating disorder. I may sound harsh, but if you put a trigger warning on food, you are diminishing the point of trigger warnings. Please put them before discussing abuse, rape, violence, self-harm, etc. But please not on food. Again, it takes away from the normalization of food and even further, leads to a form of gatekeeping.
And if I may add, seeing food online hadn't triggered me in the past couple of years (other than when I was purposefully going to get triggered—we don't speak of those times). Seeing that trigger warning? Oh that triggered me alright.
I don't completely agree with this article, but I think the study here has a point. The abstract of the Harvard study notes:
Anybody who has never dealt with an eating disorder would probably say "that's stupid". I've dealt with an eating disorder and I think that. I appreciate the sentiment, and I'm sure the action comes from a place of kindness, but it's only detrimental—at least in my view. To each their own, but I have a few reasons for my view.
First, putting trigger warnings on pictures of food or talks of food is detrimental because food should be normalized. I won't speak for other disorders, but as a survivor of anorexia, I will say that food has to be normalized completely. It is a part of life, and the immense importance that is placed on it (especially for restrictive disorders, from my understanding) is only increased if you see a trigger warning. This actually goes into a second point: people with disorders think they are not "sick enough"—what if I'm not triggered by food? I'm supposed to be, right? This leads to even more issues because it's almost like gatekeeping. No, you don't have to be triggered by food to have an eating disorder. No, you don't have to be severely underweight to be anorexic.
Back to normalization. Food is given immense importance, which subsequently means that it gradually has to be normalized and treated like a part of life. Food is not a punishment nor a reward. It is everywhere around you. You don't get a trigger warning before you walk downstairs and see bananas on the table. Why do you need a trigger warning on twitter? I will admit, yes some people do get triggered by food. However, the reality is that everything can trigger someone. Are you going to to put a trigger warning before you talk about sports? What about athletes with PTSD? Are you going to put a trigger warning before talking about music? What about artists who can't perform anymore? There are any number of things that could trigger people. (I have gotten triggered by pasta before—would you have predicted that? No.)
One could argue that putting a trigger warning cannot hurt. What's the worst that could happen? Me writing this, for one. Jokes aside, I felt the need to say this because it is absolutely insane to put trigger warnings on FOOD. Unless you know something I don't know, it is something that you probably eat every day—maybe unless you're dealing with an eating disorder. I may sound harsh, but if you put a trigger warning on food, you are diminishing the point of trigger warnings. Please put them before discussing abuse, rape, violence, self-harm, etc. But please not on food. Again, it takes away from the normalization of food and even further, leads to a form of gatekeeping.
And if I may add, seeing food online hadn't triggered me in the past couple of years (other than when I was purposefully going to get triggered—we don't speak of those times). Seeing that trigger warning? Oh that triggered me alright.
I don't completely agree with this article, but I think the study here has a point. The abstract of the Harvard study notes:
We found substantial evidence that trigger warnings countertherapeutically reinforce survivors’ view of their trauma as central to their identity.This is exactly what I mean. I am not anorexia, but seeing someone put a trigger warning on food just made me think...should I be triggered by it? Here's another article on a different study from the same people.
I don't think trigger warnings should be done away with, but just...please don't put them on food.
Comments
Post a Comment