Triggered by Words?

[SalixIncendium]

In another thread, someone used a term commonly known to describe a condition of hearing impairment. This word was used as a representation the author's username in a completely different context and had an entirely different intended meaning. However, someone else jumped at the use of the word calling it discriminatory.

Is it logical or rational to be triggered by words themselves, when used either out of context or in a completely different context? Why or why not?

 

[Sunstone]

It's a very common mistake. Very common. You see it daily on websites, including RF. The curious thing is people tend to dig in their heels and insist that their definition of the word is somehow superior to any other usages.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Not only that, but it would appear that there are certain words used to describe the human condition whose mere use, regardless of context, incite a knee-jerk reaction of being offensive to certain people.

I'm hoping someone can help me to understand why.

 

[Revoltingest]

Not only that, but it would appear that there are certain words used to describe the human condition whose mere use, regardless of context, incite a knee-jerk reaction of being offensive to certain people.

I'm hoping someone can help me to understand why.

An example would help.

 

[SalixIncendium]

An example would help.

I really don't want to call anyone out.

Let's just say that there was a physiological condition or malady called salixism, and someone asked what religion I follow, and I said Salixism. No other context is offered in the exchange other than that. Is it logical or rational for someone to say the use of the term is discriminatory? Why or why not?

 

[Sunstone]

@Saxliincenidum, Could you offer an example or two?

A couple of my favorite trigger words are "spiritual" and "material". To be sure, not everyone is triggered by both words, but many people are triggered by one or the other -- and between the two of them, a very satisfying number of people are triggered.

 

[Revoltingest]

I really don't want to call anyone out.

Let's just say that there was a physiological condition or malady called salixism, and someone asked what religion I follow, and I said Salixism. No other context is offered in the exchange other than that. Is it logical or rational for someone to say the use of the term is discriminatory? Why or why not?

A hypothetical example would work.
Language is just too tricky for me to grok your theme in the abstract.

 

[SalixIncendium]

@Saxliincenidum, Could you offer an example or two?

A couple of my favorite trigger words are "spiritual" and "material". To be sure, not everyone is triggered by both words, but many people are triggered by one or the other -- and between the two of them, a very satisfying number of people are triggered.

Some words that I've seen trigger people out of context:

• Audism
• Gay
• Black
• White
• Handicapped
• Blind

All of these examples have more than one meaning or definition, but their mere use appears to trigger some people.

 

[SalixIncendium]

A hypothetical example would work.

I just gave you a hypothetical in the post you quoted.

 

[Revoltingest]

I just gave you a hypothetical in the post you quoted.

Your later list clarified it a bit for me.
Would this be an example....
Discussing a handicap (ie, an advantage given to the weaker player)
in a game, would offend someone with a physical handicap.

 

[Sunstone]

I'm hoping someone can help me to understand why.

This isn't so much of an answer as it might help to shed light on the problem. Ernst Cassirer distinguished between "signs" and "symbols". Signs are a special category of symbols -- they are symbols that stand for just one thing. A stop sign, for instance, stands for just one thing: The concept that you should stop your vehicle.

Symbols, on the other hand, typically stand for multiple things. A "band" can be anything from a ribbon to a group. Cassirer noted that most of us have what he called "signal reactions" -- that is, where we react to some symbol as if it were merely a sign for something. For instance, we react to the flag as if it were a sign for the country, and no more than that. What you are describing in the OP would be, for Cassirer, signal reactions.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Is it logical or rational to be triggered by words themselves, when used either out of context or in a completely different context? Why or why not?

It's not a matter of logic or rationality; it just happens.

Reading is an involuntary reaction - literate human beings can't help but read and be affected by words that they see.

Are you familiar with the Stroop Effect?

Stroop effect - Wikipedia

BTW: I once heard a Stephen Pinker lecture where he mentioned that when you do the Stroop Test with "profane" words, the effect is even stronger than in the standard test with the names of colours.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Your later list clarified it a bit for me.
Would this be an example....
Discussing a handicap in a game, would offend someone with a physical handicap.

I certainly can be, but someone might be offended that doesn't even have a physical handicap and are just triggered by the word 'handicap.'

 

[Revoltingest]

I certainly can be, but someone might be offended that doesn't even have a physical handicap and are just triggered by the word 'handicap.'

It reminds me of a recent case where a student was triggered by
engineering terms "master" & "slave", which apply in electrical,
computer, & mechanical systems.
Just wait til she runs across "male" & "female" connectors.

Another interesting piece...
Watch What You (Don't Actually) Say

 

[Sunstone]

Signal reactions are so ubiquitous that I think they must be hardwired into us -- like cognitive biases.

 

[Jollybear]

It probably be a good idea before people get offended by words, that those words be defined first. If its not defined, perhaps the offendee can ask for a definition.

 

[Windwalker]

@Saxliincenidum, Could you offer an example or two?

A couple of my favorite trigger words are "spiritual" and "material". To be sure, not everyone is triggered by both words, but many people are triggered by one or the other -- and between the two of them, a very satisfying number of people are triggered.

Are we talking about trigger words, or words which carry a lot of personal baggage? A trigger, in psychological terms is this:

A trigger is something that sets off a memory tape or flashback transporting the person back to the event of her/his original trauma. Triggers are very personal; different things trigger different people. The survivor may begin to avoid situations and stimuli that she/he thinks triggered the flashback.
​

Using the term "spiritual" may have a lot of history for the person, but unless it was something that came from a place of actual past trauma, what we are talking about instead is words that are laden with connotations, both positive and negative. A trigger on the other hand will cause the person to experience the trauma. Or an event, or a sign, or any other number to things can cause a trigger response.

As a personal example,I drove down a country road the other week which I had not driven in 40 years. But as I approached the spot where I saw that Y in the road and that telephone pole right there where is was those many years ago, it triggered a physical, emotional, psychological, and even spiritual response in me that literally teleported me back into my body when I rolled my car on the spot I was at 2 AM 40 years ago. In this case, seeing that particular telephone pole and Y in the road was a trigger. I had come close to being killed in that accident.

So, if someone is claiming a particular word is a trigger to them, I would ask if they suffered a traumatic experience that is associated with that word. If not, then it's really not a trigger word. Triggers are about traumatic experiences, like a rape, a violent incident, etc.

 

[Vinayaka]

Triggers are just so personal. Names can be triggers. If a loved one was murdered by a guy named Podip, every time you hear the name Podip, you react. It's a natural function of the subconscious mind. Same for faces, smells, and yes, words.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

If someone calls my son handicapped, impaired, or disabled, I don't have any problems with that.

If someone calls my son "otherly-abled," or a lot of more recent terms, I'll roll my eyes and continue to refer to him as handicapped, impaired, disabled...

If someone calls my son (or frankly, anyone else) a retard, a moron, an idiot or so on, then I have a problem with that...when I grew up, retarded, moron, idiot, freak, etc., may have been the official medical/psychological terms used among specialists, but in practice had become insults.

By the time I became a young adult (and we adopted our son), the new "neutral" terms---handicapped, impaired, disabled--had been developed...I like those terms, and even though I am aware that some use them as insults, they don't have the emotional baggage for me.

As for the newer terms, I think it's just stupid to come up with some of the expressions.

I see the same sorts of things happening with concepts of race, ethnicity, gender, sexuality, politics, intelligence, education, and so on.

My feeling is that one should be aware of how others might take the words they use, and therefore be very careful when using words that might be fraught with other meanings. It ends up turning the discussion from some point that was intended, to something that is unintended...it disrupts or ends communication...

Likewise, those who get offended easily ought to take a chill pill...take a deep breath...and understand that the speaker might not really mean it in the way you're taking it...I do the same as much as I can these days...

In practice, that means I don't engage in conversations much with people who regularly use terms such as libtard or deplorables, or lots of other terms that I know are emotional landmines deployed by trolls...

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

Are we talking about trigger words, or words which carry a lot of personal baggage? A trigger, in psychological terms is this:

A trigger is something that sets off a memory tape or flashback transporting the person back to the event of her/his original trauma. Triggers are very personal; different things trigger different people. The survivor may begin to avoid situations and stimuli that she/he thinks triggered the flashback.
​

Using the term "spiritual" may have a lot of history for the person, but unless it was something that came from a place of actual past trauma, what we are talking about instead is words that are laden with connotations, both positive and negative. A trigger on the other hand will cause the person to experience the trauma. Or an event, or a sign, or any other number to things can cause a trigger response.

As a personal example,I drove down a country road the other week which I had not driven in 40 years. But as I approached the spot where I saw that Y in the road and that telephone pole right there where is was those many years ago, it triggered a physical, emotional, psychological, and even spiritual response in me that literally teleported me back into my body when I rolled my car on the spot I was at 2 AM 40 years ago. In this case, seeing that particular telephone pole and Y in the road was a trigger. I had come close to being killed in that accident.

So, if someone is claiming a particular word is a trigger to them, I would ask if they suffered a traumatic experience that is associated with that word. If not, then it's really not a trigger word. Triggers are about traumatic experiences, like a rape, a violent incident, etc.

Not just about traumatic experiences. It includes patterns of bullying, discrimination, oppression...

And, because positive emotions are not a "problem" we ignore that some words/places/etc., "trigger" us in positive ways...like when I drive near the place where an old girlfriend and I used to go parking (as opposed to where one almost died in an accident)...