"Trigger warning" before movie screening

[living sounds]

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2019/jun/18/film-trigger-warnings-violence-sex-drug-use-rocketman-bohemian-rhapsody

I would definitely call myself a "liberal" - but I'm disgusted by this kind of idiotic patronising BS, which is anything but liberal.

Especially in our "information age", can't we expect people to read a review first before they expose themselves to the grave, trauma-inducing experience of ... watching a movie?

Ironically, it's the historically unprecendented overall security and safety that makes people so anxious. First world problems...

 

[MountCyanide]

I actually thought I was a liberal for a while  but now that I've seen where that ideology has gone I now understand what a libtard is.
I 'm sure it's not that age has brought me more towards the center (being a former libertarian - and that label went bonkers too). Folks are just getting more extreme across the board. Radicalization has taken hold. Dismay and disarray has taken hold. If chaos was the goal of trolls/hackers then they've done one hell of a job.

 

[Scodiddly]

Two options here, really.

One option would be to appreciate that there are difficulties which you don't suffer from.

The other would be to moan about how the mainstream no longer caters exclusively to your demographic.

 

[JohnRoberts]

I actually thought I was a liberal for a while  but now that I've seen where that ideology has gone I now understand what a libtard is.
I 'm sure it's not that age has brought me more towards the center (being a former libertarian - and that label went bonkers too). Folks are just getting more extreme across the board. Radicalization has taken hold. Dismay and disarray has taken hold. If chaos was the goal of trolls/hackers then they've done one hell of a job.

Not to be a républicain at twenty is proof of want of heart; to be one at thirty is proof of want of head.
------
If you’re not a socialist before you’re twenty-five, you have no heart; if you are a socialist after twenty-five, you have no head.
-------
If you aren’t a liberal when you’re young, you have no heart, but if you aren’t a middle-aged conservative, you have no head.
-------

This is a very old theme, so old some of the political labels/stereotypes have flipped over the years.  8)

JR

 

[living sounds]

Two options here, really.

One option would be to appreciate that there are difficulties which you don't suffer from.

The other would be to moan about how the mainstream no longer caters exclusively to your demographic.

And the third and IMO preferable option would be to recognize that, yes, there are different people having different difficulties, but that there needs to be a balance in all things and that there are ways an individual can themselves address their difficulties.

A rational approach.

For example, I've always been pro smoking ban, because there is no way you can avoid inhaling smoke (which is demonstrably bad for you) otherwise at your places of work or leisure.

It's also a good thing to make infrastructure more accessible and accomodating for disabled people, who don't have a choice.

But nobody forces anyone to see a certain movie and there are ample ways to inform yourself beforehand to make sure a movie is the right one for you.

I would liken this development of oversensitivity to allergies. In the absence of real dangers people tend to get frightned by shadows. They have no idea how incredibly safe they are compared to all the generations before them. Getting exposed to these "triggers" might actually be healthy for many folks in the longer run...

I wouldn't call this a conservative approach, just a rational one. Rightwing ideology suffers from massive irrationalities, as does leftwing ideology. Often very different ones, of course.

At a certain age I would hope one has the ability to see these distortions for what they are, but human nature doesn't make it easy. ;-)

 

[Ricardus]

Two options here, really.

One option would be to appreciate that there are difficulties which you don't suffer from.

The other would be to moan about how the mainstream no longer caters exclusively to your demographic.

Hear hear.

And does it make non-liberals (whatever the F that even means) powerful to use the word "tard"?

 

[Ricardus]

Also, and I ask this every time I see a thread like this... HOW, exactly, does it harm you to see a warning before the film?

 

[Tubetec]

I think Kubrick had a worry about Clockwork becoming a trigger of some kind also ,

It a bit like having to apologise before you open your mouth just incase someone is offended , I always found the best movies leave you somehow speechless or wrestling a new concept or something is rewired in your brain . I didnt watch the Freddie mocumentary but they all say it was tame or sanitized compared to the reality .

 

[living sounds]

Also, and I ask this every time I see a thread like this... HOW, exactly, does it harm you to see a warning before the film?

I don't want to be spoilered. I really dislike having to watch movie trailers for that very reason. 

No really, this is more about what it represents: A subtle kind of censorship. And a wholly unnecessary one (see above).

 

[living sounds]

Two options here, really.

One option would be to appreciate that there are difficulties which you don't suffer from.

The other would be to moan about how the mainstream no longer caters exclusively to your demographic.

BTW, what would be my demographic? I like intelligent, innovative movies, there were far more of those in cinemas in the 90s. Now studios try to maximize profits by catering to all four demographics at once (male female over and under 25) showing part 7 of the same boring blockbuster superhero saga.

But thanks to streaming and the golden age of TV shows it really doesn't matter.

 

[JohnRoberts]

I am expecting them to start showing trigger warnings before the old classic B&W movies from the 30s and 40s.

Heads could explode from watching behavior on screen that was considered normal (or hollywood normal) for back decades ago.

We have seen massive rapid change in modern culture in less than a decade thanks to the megaphone of social media trumpeting outrage over almost everything.

JR 

 

[MountCyanide]

This is a very old theme, so old some of the political labels/stereotypes have flipped over the years.  8)

JR

Yes, and I thought it was only the person that was fluid not the ideologies themselves.

 

[living sounds]

We have seen massive rapid change in modern culture in less than a decade thanks to the megaphone of social media trumpeting outrage over almost everything.

JR

It's nuts. I'm still watching the old South Park episodes. Exceptionally funny and provocative stuff. Not actually mean or destructive, but very politically incorrect. Many of those would be unthinkably now. Not from the 30s or 40s, but from the late 90s and 00s.

The sad thing is that all these sideshows with imaginary issues prevent societies from solving the actual problems. For the right it's immigration or abortion, for the left it's bathroom usage, properly genderized speech or trigger warnings.

Facebook needs to be destroyed, we can't leave people alone in their echo chambers. Too many are not up to the task of evaluating information.

 

[boji]

Two options here, really.
One option would be to appreciate that there are difficulties which you don't suffer from.
The other would be to moan about how the mainstream no longer caters exclusively to your demographic.

I have no problem whatsoever sensitizing myself to an individual if they have special needs or concerns. In fact I enjoy it, because it usually brings me and this other person closer together.  Keeping our eyes and ears open for how other people feel about the things we say and do is a huge part of how we express love, care giving, and is the bedrock of how to be a good person.  However all this happens at the level of the individual.
This modern trend to deploy group identity or identity politics to force an impression upon people who fall in or out of a 'demographic'  (which is just code for 'other') is evil.  I find it a bit ironic that an artist would find it acceptable to put trigger warnings in front of someone else's artistic work.  What exact criteria  does the 'sensitive group'  get to use so as to decide that the artist --irrespective of their artistic intentions-- conveys triggering material?  To put it another way, how do we feel about the 'explicit lyrics' labels christian conservatives have forced record companies to put on album artwork since the 80's?  Is a trigger warning in front of a movie really that different?

 

[Tubetec]

The repercussions of social media has Facebook in the high court in Ireland just in the last days  , a murder case ,two 13 year old boys found guilty of torture rape and murder of a 14 year old girl , someone posted names and photos of the defendants but under the law their identity has to be protected , so the solicitors acting for the accused's took an injunction against facebook , sure enough special tech was used to pull all images off the boys off the network very very quickly ,  The victim isnt afforded any privacy even in death , and tv stations and media outlets gorge on selfies of the murdered young woman , theres something fundamentally wrong with that ,

There seems to be strong evidence pointing towards porn being a contributary factor in the murder of Ana Kriegel , and now the government wants to introduce a robust verification system for everybody who views porn , so you might need to give your social services number to access 'Die Vank Materiel'  in future  ;D
and of course the government get to know your own personal preferences too ,
What was the name for the computer system in Blade Runner again ? anyway its starting  to feel more Orwellian by the day, 'self regulation is over for social media' says Irelands Tánaiste.

 

[Scodiddly]

It a bit like having to apologise before you open your mouth just incase someone is offended , [...]

So which possibility would be more uncomfortable?  That people are suddenly getting offended by things that used to pass, or that maybe they were always offended but didn't feel safe complaining about it?

 

[iomegaman]

"Is your personal viewing experience so precious that you can’t consider the mental health of your fellow audience members?"

Bullshit.

This article makes a subtle shift from making it the industries responsibility to being MY responsibility, which is a fuck all stupid argument because the article is so poorly written as to be intolerably boring.

The guardian and most print-to-social-media-institutions are floundering for decent content and this article is proof.

 

[Kingston]

always offended but didn't feel safe complaining about it

this was life before social media for a lot of people. now that everyone has a voice apparently there is nothing but complaints, fights, disagreements, wars with words that mean nothing.

it is curious this still does not happen face to face ever. to me it's proof to stay out of all those sh*tboxes - while there is a civilized world still out here.

 

[boji]

An old friend's grumbly-drunk reply to this made me laugh:

"You'd think NC-17 rating, that red band trailer would be enough....manga-eyed millennial"

cracked me up.

 

[gltech]

So which possibility would be more uncomfortable?  That people are suddenly getting offended by things that used to pass, or that maybe they were always offended but didn't feel safe complaining about it?

Freedom of speech is paramount. "Offended" or "uncomfortable" shouldn't even factor in to it, no matter what used to "pass" or what passes now or anytime in the future.