Thread:User talk:WaitingforGodot/BDSM and rape/reply (7)

I'm just thinking that (more than?) half the time if the content of an article would trigger someone into a flashback, the warning itself would probably be enough too! Imagine a scenario where someone reads the phrase "trigger warning: abuse etc." and then starts thinking "perhaps I shouldn't read this, then, it'll bring back memories, that's something I don't want to relive oh I remember now... it was... shit..." and full-blown panic attacks just thinking about thinking about it. Yet, without that seed being planted there, perhaps they could have read the full thing without a problem. As you said, it's mostly unpredictable.

Formalising it as "YOU MUST PUT THESE EXACT WORDS AT THE TOP!!!" sort of bigs it up, it adds emphasis, it makes it a far more visceral concept. But a more subdued abstract that explains what you will talk about I think would be more of a reassurance to people. It would completely remove the expectation that reading about this stuff will cause you to have a panic attack - and thus, it enables open discussion that could possibly help people without sticking a big sign on top saying "FEAR IT!!! FEAR IT!!!".