Trigger Warning Theory
Trigger Warning Theory
A. Interpretation:
Before starting a speech, debaters must verbally disclose if their speech discusses
nongraphic or graphic potentially triggering subject matters such as sexual assault,
[other triggering material they read], as well as offer to alter their speeches according
to the requests of their opponent[s] or judge[s]. To clarify, read trigger warnings.
B. Violation:
they didn’t
C. Standards
Our sole standard is safety:
Trigger warnings keep survivors safe.
Innocent Lives Foundation. "Importance of Trigger Warnings". The Innocent Lives Foundation, No Date,
https://www.innocentlivesfoundation.org/importance-of-trigger-warnings/. (JL)
While each of these symptoms is equally awful, we wanted to offer you a way you could help survivors cope with everyday life. Trigger
warnings are simple ways to help survivors avoid reliving the event, reduce distress, and allow them to
prepare themselves mentally. The American Psychological Association shares that vivid memories of trauma are more
distressing if they happen without any warning than if the survivor intentionally thinks about their
trauma. Instead, unprompted triggering information can cause a host of other issues from mental
health disorders like panic attacks, difficulty sleeping, and more. Trigger warnings are respectful ways to communicate
about deeply personal issues while refraining from delegitimizing someone’s experience. This does not mean that you must avoid the topic
altogether—it simply means that you should address the topic with nuance. People argue that trigger warnings do not allow the survivor to
heal from the PTSD, and this article does not dispute this claim. Rather,
trigger warnings acknowledge and respect that
people must deal with their trauma when they are ready; therefore, it does not force them to deal
with their triggers if they are not ready. Ultimately, it is up to the survivor to decide when they are
ready to deal with their PTSD. Like the American Psychological Association said, memories of trauma are worse without warning.
Safety is an independent voter which outweighs all other concerns in the round
because actions that harm the safety of this event harm vulnerable individuals, push
people out of debate and erode it as an activity. Safety is also the strongest internal
link to fairness, because if debaters do not feel safe in a round, they cannot debate,
which is definitionally unfair as well as destroys any educational benefits from a
round.
D. Voters
Education is a voter because it’s the only portable skill from debate.
Fairness is a voter because we concede fair adjudication of arguments when we make
them.
Drop the debater, two justifications:
1) Wins and losses determine the direction of this event. Them losing to this shell tells
them and others to read trigger warnings in PF.
2) Once the safety of a round has been jeopardized, it cannot be undone.
Competing Interps, two warrants:
1) Reasonability is arbitrary – we don’t know your bs meter
2) Reasonability causes race to the bottom – incentivizes debaters to read increasingly
unfair args and appeal to a “reasonable standard”
No RVIs:
1) Denies the antecedent – they shouldn’t win for proving they’re fair
2) Chills checking abuse – debaters won’t read theory for fear of the RVI
Frontlines
F2 But my prep!
1) This is ridiculous. If a debater chooses to run arguments about sensitive subject
matters, they obviously should be prepared to do so respectfully. They had a
chance to prepare for this and therefore there is no skew. People can write a
new case but people cannot choose their traumas.
2) Safety outweighs, they concede that it controls the internal link into fairness.
F2 Topic Education/Censorship
1) Safety controls the internal link to education because debaters need to feel safe
in order to debate. This outweighs any topic education lost because we can still
have topical education about other arguments with trigger warnings but
someone getting triggered removes any chance at any education.
Trigger warnings serve one and only one purpose: to notify and alert people of impending possibly
traumatic content in media, classrooms, news and other platforms — specifically in high schools and
college campuses. They often take the form of short messages such as “viewer discretion advised” or “contains violence or sexual
imagery that may be inappropriate.” In order to ensure mental and physical safety when viewing possibly traumatic content, trigger
warnings must become standardized within our society. “I think that America doesn’t really care… people
without mental illnesses use the term ‘trigger’ in illegitimate ways which delegitimize people with real
triggers and in media that contains for instance sexual assault triggers it can really harm people” said
sophomore Isra Hirsi. Trigger warnings are a tool to help students gauge whether or not something is
suitable for their mental health based off past trauma that they or a loved one may have experienced.
For example, within South we must use trigger warnings when we talk about racial violence. South has one of the largest populations of
students of color in the city, so South has a larger group of students who could be potentially affected by content related to historical or current
racism. We should especially mindful of the use of the n-word by non-black people. “The experiences I’ve had with the [n-word]… definitely
made me uncomfortable [even if] I don’t know if I’d call it a trigger,” said Hirsi .
South teachers and students need to take
student views of this word into account to ensure the comfort and safety that should be paramount in
the learning process. Despite the importance of trigger warnings, the word “trigger” is often misused. It has become a very politically
charged term, since it was first used by leftist feminists, mental health advocates, and racial justice activists. Therefore, stereotypes about the
term have been blown out of proportion because many people think leftists are taking advantage of the term and using it as a tool to shut
down opposing opinions.
This controls their internal link as people have to be ready to learn, if they can’t no
amount of topic education will matter.
F2 Random Studies show TW aren’t effective
Their studies miss the point of trigger warnings; disproves their results
Eamonn Briem. "Trigger warnings are an important tool for learning". Southerner, 5-16-20 19,
https://www.shsoutherner.net/opinion/2019/05/16/trigger-warnings-are-an-important-tool-for-learning/. (JL)
Even studies conducted at respectable universities have generally concluded that trigger warnings are useless ,
Studies done by
research universities are generally conducted by showing two groups of students traumatic content,
including a trigger warnings for only one group. Yet the students aren’t given the option to leave the
room before the traumatic content is shown, and therefore the studies don’t really prove anything. The
studies conclude that the level of unease between the two student groups is the same after viewing the content, but it’s easy for students to
hide their feelings if they are being forced into a certain situation. The
point of trigger warnings is to allow students to
decide themselves whether they need to leave or not. The entire point of trigger warnings are just that, a warning! They
give students the option to leave or to remain in the classroom and view the content based on their own preferences and experiences. The
point is not to neutralize or dial down the trauma just by warning students of what they are about to
see they are meant as an out for individuals who will be negatively affected by the content to take in
order to preserve their mental health. In now way harming anyone and in no way stifling anyone’s right to free speech.
F2 Commodification
1) This makes no sense. It is not commodification to point out that abuse needs to
be punished.
2) Voting for this shell solves back for itself in the long term because once
everyone reads trigger warnings, nobody will have to read this shell anymore.