Time for a pop quiz everybody. What are the problems with trigger warnings?

a. there are less people with PTSD than you think
b. TW hurt people with PTSD because the internet is your therapists office
c. TW hurt people with PTSD because TW make trauma a central part of your identity
d. all of the above

Yes, that's right, it's d. It's always d. Pacific Standard just published an article titled: "Hazards Ahead: The Problems With Trigger Warnings, According to Research". The article is by Richard J. McNally, who "is a professor and the director of clinical training in the Department of Psychology at Harvard University and the author of the book Remembering Trauma."

But as the following studies show, these warnings may be counterproductive. The use of trigger warnings doesn’t just underestimate the resilience of most trauma survivors; it may send the wrong message to those who have developed PTSD.

Let's take this bullet point by bullet point, shall we?

1 - Most trauma survivors don't develop PTSD:

That's totally irrelevant. It's not like trigger warnings are only effective if a high enough percentage of people reading have PTSD. That's not they work.

2 - But PTSD isn't uncommon among survivors of sexual assault:

Um...k. Thanks for recognising that? It's great that you're recognising that sexual assault survivors have higher levels of PTSD than natural disaster survivors, but seriously this does nothing to support your point that TW are problematic.

3 - Still, many rape survivors recover within months of their trauma:

Oh, I get it...more rape survivors with PTSD minus a fast recovery rate brings us back to your original point about how PTSD isn't abundantly common. Great, but that's still not how they work.

4 - Confronting triggers, not avoiding them, is the best way to overcome PTSD:

Well, I'm glad to see that you finally have a point that is more sophisticated than "not a lot of people with PTSD, so don't bother", but the study you cite is about exposure therapy. Randomly bumping into triggering shit online is not the same thing as yanno, actual therapy. Also, exposure therapy relies hugely on choosing to confront triggers. There's serious agency involved. But this is coming from a dude who goes "internet, therapists office, eh, close enough".

5 - Making trauma central to one's identity bodes poorly for suvivors:

Actually, no, that's not what your data found. Note, this is McNally's own study:

My Ph.D. student, Donald J. Robinaugh, and I found that among 102 women who reported histories of childhood sexual abuse, the more central their abuse was to their identity—as measured by the CES—the worse their PTSD symptoms.

Which is admittedly, quite interesting. However, it's correlation, not causation. And even if McNally had proved causation, it's again, irrelevant to trigger warnings. There's no study showing that seeing a [TW] makes previous abuse more central to your identity. I've never heard someone suggest this, and in fact, McNally himself doesn't suggest this. He leaves that connection for that reader to make. And frankly, if two words on the top of an article or blog post can seriously adjust your sense of identity, in particular, causing you to see your future through the lens of abuse, then we should consider replacing trigger warnings with positive affirmations and give survivors some extra strength internet therapy.

But seriously, what sort of douchnozzle thinks that a study showing that PTSD is more common in sexual assault survivors is a talking point for proving that trigger warnings are counterproductive?

EDIT: formatting