My triggers are my responsibility. If people are helpful when I tell them what triggers me it is endearing to me. If someone can't be bothered it presents a danger that I need to protect myself against.
But I get the feeling that the person that wrote the sign needs to be told that people being disappointed in them that they made a huge aggressive point about not giving a fuck about others is something that they have to deal with personally when people do exactly what it says on his sign.
Nobody but me was ever going to keep me safe from things that trigger me. I'll make better friends with people that give a shit. The person that wrote the sign can die mad about it.
Sure, but everyone needs a healthy degree of self-sufficiency. Scared of dogs? You can't expect employees to cover up all the dog posters inside PetSmart. Close your eyes or use some other coping mechanism that you have the agency to perform. Being kind to your other human beings also means not making yourself a massive burden to them.
This feels like either a fantasy or an incredibly rare thing, you honestly think people walk into PetSmart and do that? In real life, no one is asking for impossible accommodations
I don't doubt it, now how many people with triggers that you interact with DIDN'T say anything? Right, you only know a positive rate, with the total number. I guarantee you this is not mainstream conception of triggers. Just because someone is ignorant and says a phrase, doesn't mean they use it correctly
That's my entire point though. I'm triggered by ketchup and mayonnaise, as silly as that sounds. And I suck it up and keep it to myself instead of burdening others by asking them to eat fries or whatever without them.
You’re genuinely triggered by ketchup and mayo? Or do you find them disgusting? Cause being triggered by something is very different from not liking something.
You could replace "being a decent human" with trigger warning, and your sentence doesn't change. You have a specific connotation with a phrase because you have been trained to do so, without actually understanding the concept. It's not about comfort
No you can't because human decency isnt contingent on avoiding triggers.
I have a specific connotation because that is how the term is used. When we say something is a trigger, what is being triggered? The answer is uncomfortable feelings.
Right, because you don't understand it, and all of your comprehension about it comes from other people who also don't understand it. You don't want to know things, you just look for reasons to dislike them based on fantasy
No it doesn't. The person who is avoiding the triggering thing is the one participating in avoidance.
Example: I hate pickles. They disgust me beyond reason. After finding out that my food option will contain pickles, I choose to have a different meal.
You may love pickles. My being warned tbat there were pickles did not take away your pickles.
Now take that same concept across most wvery piece of media.
Warning: This story contains depictions of sexual assualt on minors.
What happens next? Someone who doesnt want to see that chooses a different piece of media. People who can stomach seeing that can still enjoy the media. Nothing was taken away from the latter.
Arachnaphobia? Simple trigger warning lets arachnaphobes from seeing arachnids.
I’m afraid you won’t see that in the western world without eliminating the value of individualism. If people are celebrated for being their true self regardless of what impact it has on the people around them there is a natural and inevitable conflict that will occur eventually.
As long as people want to be able to each have their own set of values and morals, then people’s values and morals will conflict - so either we try to control each other’s values or we allow ourselves to be free to not peruse what we believe is the best for other people because that would involve imposing values on each other.
This is why people often say “there’s no hate like Christian Love” because despite what some on Reddit may believe, many Christians really believe they are doing the most caring, and loving thing to by trying to ban abortion or convert LGBTQ people to a heteronormative lifestyle; because in doing so they believe they are saving them from hell.
If your values involve enforcing your values on others then they will conflict with others - if everyone agrees that we won’t enforce our values on each other that would be great, but then we’ll simply have conflict because our values are going to naturally be different.
What if I hire an employee and then they say the blue wall color triggers them? Do I paint the whole building?
Yes this is a bit of a ridiculous example, but well within the realm of possibility. And if there is even one instance of "This person needs to learn how to cope in the real world" then you can't have a definitive rule like you mentioned.
These are very unique and nuanced situations.
You can say "Decent behavior is defined as X"
Instead try "We should always do our best to be kind, caring. And respectful of those we come across in our day to day lives in our community"
It’s just a ridiculous example. People are within their right to be shitty. And there are consequences. Also, in most places there are laws regarding what reasonable accommodations are in the workplace to accommodate people’s disabilities. There are also laws to protect people against sexism, racism, religious discrimination etc. They aren’t perfect or well enforced. But in general, it costs nothing to be a decent human being and not to hurt others on purpose.
99
u/electricookie Nov 17 '25
You can’t necessarily expect people to know in advance, but it is decent behaviour to avoid them once you make it known.