I’ve just caught bits and pieces of this discussion on Twitter, and am mystified. I hadn’t been aware that was a controversy, and I’m still not sure what it is. I mean, if someone were to say to me, “You must put trigger warnings in your books for anything that might upset someone,” then I can see being pissed off; but, so far as I know, no one is saying that.
I’m clearly missing something in here. I don’t see why someone choosing to put a trigger warning on something should be a problem, and I’m a little lost trying to find the downside of requiring them on classics. Well, okay, I admit; were I a student, I’d be slightly–very slightly–miffed to see certain warnings on certain books because it might give away something I’d want to discover myself. But that doesn’t seem like a big deal. Also, the proliferation of trigger warnings might be related to the annoying trend among academics and elements of the middle class to say, “If I am upset or hurt, it must mean someone did something wrong, therefore we need to make sure no one does that thing ever again.” But, even if it is related to that, 1) I don’t see the problem as that big, and, 2) I don’t see trigger warnings as being a big part of that.
The joke, “Trigger warnings are a trigger for me,” is stupid and not funny, and has a tiny element of truth: proliferation of trigger warnings can sometimes be irritating. Is that enough of a reason to discourage them? I don’t see why.
I’m trying my best here to find a good reason to come out against trigger warning, and, as you can see, not having much luck. What am I missing? What are the broader aspects to this? Why is it a controversy? The only thing that’s obvious is that there things I’m not seeing, and I’m now officially curious enough to ask.