Lovely People aka 'the bunny comic'

[Sc0ut]

Am I correct in guessing that needing to deal with such things may well include not being able to take some courses, or take up some lines of work, in general -- as, say, a person with a height phobia would probably not take a job involving repairing roofs or building skyscrapers, the one with arachnophobia shouldn't go into a line of work involving scouting farm fields for pests and beneficials, or even take the training for such work?

I don't know. This is not for me to guess since I don't experience this condition myself nor do I know anyone who does (that I'm aware of), I've just read about it. I've learned to be cautious about making these kind of "common sense" assumptions about life situations I don't experience myself after learning that, for instance, it was quite common during the age of sail for sailors to not know how to swim (and in some parts of the world it still is), or that there are people who are journalists despite being blind or nonverbal, which to me would seem like impossible hurdles in such a profession - but apparently are not. I think in certain cases, the event that generated the trigger might also generate the motivation for the person to get their education, such as an abuse survivor wanting to become a social worker or psychologist to help others in their shoes. This, of course, means they must engage with difficult content, but they would probably still appreciate the heads-up rather than it being sprung on them.

[Jitter]

I’m going to give an example of getting triggered myself. First however warning! I will mention a phobia you may not have heard about. Do not, I repeat do NOT jump to googling it before you read my message. It’s visually triggered and googling may well reveal you have it, in a way ranging from irritating to painful.

So, I’m trypophobic (this is the term I recommend you to not google). Trypophobia is the phobia of holes or more precisely of clusters of holes. Some sufferers get it from very many things and patterns, while for others it’s just certain kind of holes or pictures of them. Many get a bad reaction from viewing a stack of straight pipes from the end do that they see into many of pipes at once, and/or honeycombs. For me it’s only some organic kinds, and geometric or regular holes don’t do anything.

Interestingly enough, the existence of this phobia was not known of until well into the 2000’s when people happened to discuss it over the internet and discovered they are not the only one who gets this weird reaction. Unfortunately nowadays it’s hard to learn anything about it because many sites seem to consider it amusing to adorn pages telling about it with pictures that cause it to maximum amount of people.

It sounds ridiculous. I find it ridiculous, stupid, idiotic! I can extremely easily see how it seems like a made up thing, if you don’t have it. Yet I can’t help it. My son also has it. My husband was sure I had told my son about it and therefore “made” him get it, but I hadn’t! The intensity varies, sometimes he gets uneasy if there is e.g. foam in his drink or food, although mostly that kind of thing is ok. In my own case, if I get properly triggered, I’m a lot more sensitive for a couple of weeks.

I had followed a popular science page on Facebook and one day they put up a post about it. The preview picture of that post was of the thing that is best known to cause the reaction in many trypophobics. So, I had the picture thrown in front of my eyes and what has been seen cannot be unseen. So I got an... attack? Reaction? That was strong uneasiness and disgust but still manageable. I was stupid enough to think the damage was done so I can read the article. Not true. They had managed to come up with something A LOT worse (by photo manipulation, while the original well-known trigger was a photo of a natural thing). I had basically a panic attack, and went into a state where I was on the edge of a panic attack for hours. I couldn’t sleep for several nights, I needed to scratch incessantly, to put it shortly was awful. I get mild reactions now writing about it (which I why I can’t mention what the thing was).

I had had a respect for trigger warnings before, but had I not, this experience definitely taught me what it means to get triggered. For other people and other phobias or trauma it can of course be a lot worse. So, what am I trying to say? Firstly, a thing that seems trivial or impossible as a trigger to you may be serious for someone. The brain is WEIRD. Secondly, there is no way anything can include the warnings for everything that may trigger someone, because there is just no way to know. Even the person getting triggered maybe doesn’t know in advance. So you can’t be perfect. However you can and should try!

So what can we do? Firstly, try and be predictable. There can be monsters in your horror comic, however don’t put monsters into the Highschool Musical (without warning that is). Secondly, try and give a general idea of the content up front. Thirdly, if someone tells you what triggers them, please respect that. It doesn’t mean you can’t include / present / show etc that thing, but give the person the choice about whether they can take it or not. The warning is specifically meant as a tool to be able to cover the subject or issue in a way that is safe for everyone, and not as a label of “you should not be dealing with this thing because it may trigger someone”.

Furthermore, do not use a known trigger for “fun” like many of the articles about trypophobia do. That is ducking rude.

As with anything, there probably are people who try to use a concept for their own advantage, or otherwise misuse it. Such as some students demanding that an issue is not covered in a course because they don’t like it, but call it getting triggered to make it sound serious. The fact that such people exist, doesn’t render the concept and the need for the warnings null and void. Also it doesn’t give people (in this case, the professors) a free pass to ignore legitimate needs of warnings.

Oh and on the subject of “real life doesn’t have trigger warnings”. Indeed. I think this is a reason for the warnings p, not against them. People are already forced to deal with their issues in situations where it’s impossible to get the warning (such as encountering a spider in nature, or driving past a stack of pipes). They already have to strain themselves with the phobia/ trauma / issue. Why should you force them to strain even more?

[thorny]

Jitter, first of all, thanks for sharing that.

Second: in addition to being glad to get information, I think that this (quoted below) is in particular a really good point.

Oh and on the subject of “real life doesn’t have trigger warnings”. Indeed. I think this is a reason for the warnings p, not against them. People are already forced to deal with their issues in situations where it’s impossible to get the warning (such as encountering a spider in nature, or driving past a stack of pipes). They already have to strain themselves with the phobia/ trauma / issue. Why should you force them to strain even more?

[Sc0ut]

Thank you for sharing that, @Jitter. I'm actually trypophobic as well, but because my reactions aren't as strong as yours I tend to forget this a bunch, even in relevant conversations :'D Like, I will physically shudder and feel briefly sick if I see an offending image, but it almost always goes away as soon as I stop looking at it, with the exception of the image that made me realise I have this phobia. That kinda got etched into my brain and I remain extra sensitive to it. Because it's manageable for me, I've never asked for trypophobia content warnings to be included in anything, but I respect that it's not at the same level for everyone. Actually, the reason I share this is to illustrate that thinking "I also find this upsetting but I deal with it, why can't they" is not necessarily realistic with respect to the diversity of human brains. We can be affected in very different amounts by the same thing and seeing this difference doesn't indicate that anyone is faking it, or has unrealistic standards such as wanting to avoid even the slightest bit of discomfort. (Being neurodivergent I have some painful memories around not being believed that my sensory experiences don't match up with the majority's all the time, and things really are too loud for me sometimes even if they're not for others etc - while this is not directly related to the conversation, it's what drives me to make sure other people with atypical experiences are heard and not left out.)

[Vulpes]

I started to write a long-winded reply to ScOut, and thorny, and then Jitter... it turned into a confusing mess, so I'll switch to the TL;DR version:

I suspect that the trigger warning requests that academics grouse about are the manipulative ones, the people (unfortunately) trying to game the system. The term "trigger warning" has sort of become triggering to academics! That's a joke, but only partly - bad faith requests have turned it into a bad word in academia, to the detriment of those with real issues. If someone asks for a sensible accomodation, for a legitimate reason, I'd be surprised if they were turned down - indeed, I imagine this happens all the time, and I don't hear about it because people only complain about the outrageous ones.

I won't further hijack this thread, only say that the objections to unnecessary trigger warnings stem not so much from ego as from a concern for the academic integrity of a course, which the student making the request probably doesn't understand, precisely because they are a student, i.e. they haven't immersed themselves in the field. A biology course without evolution has lost all meaning; an American history course without mention of slavery is useless.

Jitter, I've heard of your phobia, and it did strike me as cruel that every website that described it had prominent photos of triggering objects. Thank-you for taking on the mental work of describing it, I hope it only caused you transitory discomfort! In the last decade or so, I suddenly developed a totally irrational fear of heights, only on man-made structures. It's stupid and frustrating, so I know what you mean about the helplessness of not being able to control your response.

[Sc0ut]

@Vulpes what would anyone gain by "gaming the system" and dishonestly pretending they need trigger warnings when they don't? If it's attention they need, there are plenty of less stigmatised and more accessible ways to get it (accounts on social media can go quite a long way, for one). After all, the idea of content warnings is mocked in more spaces than it is supported, both online and offline. I suspect the bad faith in these stories is not where you think it is. How would you even decide such a request is legitimate? Some people might have a psychiatric diagnosis to support their request with, but others' triggers are not related to that (see:trypophobia) and yet others might not afford a diagnosis even though they need it. If you're not gonna take people at their word on this, you always risk disbelieving people with legitimate issues. And for what? To avoid typing in a couple of words for a content warning here and there? Is it really worth it?

As for the ego aspect, you brought it up yourself.

[PyroDesu]

@Sc0ut

I'm fairly certain it's not requests for content warnings that are the problem per se, so much as (the possibility of) such warnings being used as the basis for unreasonable requests to modify the curriculum for an individual.

Accommodations are all well and good, but they must be reasonable. In my experience as a student who's used the services of my university's disability office, there's a not insignificant amount of discussion that goes on between the coordinators, student, and professor to find reasonable accommodations, but none have involved alteration to the basic course material. The closest I've personally encountered was a professor willing to modify the terms of presentations - such that they were given to him only, instead of in front of a class - to accommodate severe social anxiety.

It should also be noted that often disability services will coordinate with the counseling services on such matters - especially if there is not a pre-existing diagnosis.

[Haiz]

*manifests again*

content warnings are a very cool and multifaceted topic.

i have Triggers. some of them cause awful intrusive thoughts that are really hard to get rid of and make my body feel unsafe to inhabit. some remind me of recently acquired trauma and cause me to spiral or feel ill. none of these effects will like, put me out of commission or anything, but it's deeply unpleasant and can really distract me from Enjoying a thing or Working on something. it feels like a brain allergy. like, sure, i CAN drink this allegorical milk, but my allegorical guts WILL hate me for it.

many people have allergies and dietary needs and food in stores have to have ingredient lists on packages. in norway it's also required to inform about allergens on foods in cafés, etc. GOOD AND USEFUL THING FOR MANY!!
(i will say though, that while i don't personally have any direct allergies, im super sensitive to spicy food. i want to say i REALLY appreciate it when spicy food is marked as spicy. i seem to have a curse that no matter how much i try to purposefully avoid spicy food, if there's unmarked spicy food i will somehow pick that food. sometimes people will say, oh that's not very spicy to me, but MY taste buds have already been scorched to oblivion. thanks!)

my triggers are sometimes vague, uncommon, or overly specific. i don't usually expect warnings for those, and will often put in some effort to ask friends who have watched/read things if they think i could handle it. i often have friends message me like "hey, the next episode of Thing You Watch has an instance of Thing You Don't Handle Well and i wanted to let you know" and it always helps me so much to just have that heads up. i don't require my friends to do this or expect them to do this work for me, but it's very nice to have that support network. there's also sites like 'does the dog die' that is documenting various triggers in movies so that people have ways of checking beforehand if they need to.
i'm also getting pretty experienced at realizing when i need to put a series down because it just feels too bad for my brain. sometimes i can get back to it later, and sometimes i can't.

one of the more common triggers i have is gory stuff. how well i handle it varies. SSSS is fine to me, but i also know what to expect from it. taking an online course about driving and suddenly being confronted with pictures of a lifeless hand lying in a pool of blood... less great.

so i studied art history. at my university in norway, there were NO discussions about trigger warnings or any kind of accommodations, or at least not at the faculty i was at. i still very clearly remember a lecture from a class on political caricature art where there were many many powerpoint slides with artworks of beheadings and depictions of cannibalism. no warnings. no way to know this was going to happen that day. NOT A GOOD TIME FOR HAIZ. thank you french revolution propaganda i would very much rather not!!!

conversely, i also studied a semester in canada. the archaeology 101 prof gave us heads up before showing us slides with bog mummies in them. just a little "this might be gross to look at, so if you need to look away, do it now". it was that easy!!!!!

i think a lot can be said for common courtesy, and also creating a space for accomodation and letting students tell you privately if they have any particular triggers. of course there are some that cannot be avoided, but there are ways to communicate and find workarounds.


another thing i want to bring up is like... if you go to ao3 and find works labeled "creator chose not to use content warnings" or go to a tumblr blog that says "nothing on this blog will be tagged" in its bio, those in themself are a form of trigger warnings. that's a way of letting you know to proceed with caution if at all. it's still useful! it's not always accessible for someone to tag every trigger, or sometimes the themes of a story will be too vague to pin down with the big warnings. it still gives me a way to take responsibility for my own media consumption. other things i've seen are like "click here for a list of triggers in this media i made", so that people who don't want spoilers and don't fear no triggers can move bravely on, and people like me who gotta take care of their squishy brains can arm ourselves.



for lovely people... i want to say that i'm very glad that you've put such a succinct warning at the beginning of this thread. i think that's a very cool and nice solution. i'm also very thankful to my friend who gave me a heads up about the self-flagellation and underhanded digs at personal interpretations of faith.

minna's stance on TWs doesn't surprise me in the least, especially not when her perception of them is, like... the unfortunately not uncommon idea that Trigger Warnings Means Thing Bad. of course someone thinking that won't want to label their own works with it. more than that, it doesn't feel like someone who wrote That Ending or That Afterword would WANT to give a heads up about it. of course i wish she would write a more detailed description about what we can actually expect from this deceptively cutesywutesy comic about soft little bunnies, but i'm again... dissappointed but not surprised. SHRUGS


as a person i believe it can be incredibly important to tell all kinds of stories, including those about difficult and unpleasant topics that can be hard to read. but i also think it's exceedingly important to have boundaries and communication. it's important to have agency and choice. instead of saying the building will never ever burn down, it's important to have a good protocol in case it does. i will enter this building knowing it can be on fire, but i have seen the fire escapes and know where to go if i need them. is this metaphor making any sense it's 2am over here

[Yuuago]

for lovely people... (...) minna's stance on TWs doesn't surprise me in the least, especially not when her perception of them is, like... the unfortunately not uncommon idea that Trigger Warnings Means Thing Bad. of course someone thinking that won't want to label their own works with it. more than that, it doesn't feel like someone who wrote That Ending or That Afterword would WANT to give a heads up about it. of course i wish she would write a more detailed description about what we can actually expect from this deceptively cutesywutesy comic about soft little bunnies, but i'm again... dissappointed but not surprised. SHRUGS

I think you hit the nail on the head with that (re: the lack of heads up is deliberate.)

I was thinking today about this - I found myself wondering, if I were the author, and I wanted to describe it in a more detailed way (not even necessarily addressing the issue of warnings), what would I add to the description? Found myself kind of stumped, because my general feelings about the story and the endnotes were pretty negative.

The best I could come up with was to use something like the current description, but also add that it's a religious comic about people finding inspiration from Christianity to get out of a difficult situation.

But that doesn't describe it very well, and it doesn't deal with the matter of the author's notes at the end. I have a lot of difficulty imagining how someone who wrote and felt those notes might describe them even if they wanted to.

How would you all have described it? In this imaginary situation where you were the author and were providing a more detailed description than what's already there, that is.

[catbirds]

I was thinking today about this - I found myself wondering, if I were the author, and I wanted to describe it in a more detailed way (not even necessarily addressing the issue of warnings), what would I add to the description? Found myself kind of stumped, because my general feelings about the story and the endnotes were pretty negative.
...
How would you all have described it? In this imaginary situation where you were the author and were providing a more detailed description than what's already there, that is.

The length of the end notes on the bunny comic is actually a pretty rare thing... That meaning, rarely do we get something that so explicitly states the (already quite hamfisted) themes of the actual comic. Pretty much every motivation she consciously acknowledged was listed on there, and any unconscious biases were pretty easily extracted from the dialogue. However, as pretty much everyone blindsided by the comic thought, the summary of the comic that is given to the reader before going to the webpage is pretty abysmal.

Just going off two books I have next to me, it's usually good to mention the cause of the central conflict, or the central conflict itself. So, basically, the best way would be to replace the "until they run into trouble..." part with "until Lavender's wayward daughter turns on society, Marigold's Bible is censored, and Peony's friendship grows strained. Where will they go now to protect what's precious to them?" They all have to leave for their own reasons, but I think this thread fixated a bit on the bible because it caused the most problems with readers. And this way, people pretty much know everything that could trigger them or cause unease. "Trouble" seems too vague, but I feel like at this point I'm starting to sound like an elementary school teacher myself Why do I feel like I'm marking someone's comic summary?

Oh, oops, also at the beginning of the summary, many books describe the setting. E.g. the copy of Howl's Moving Castle I have right now says it's set in "the land of Ingary, where seven-league boots and cloaks of invisibility really exist." From this, you gather that it's a fantasy setting with magic. For the bunny comic, since it doesn't really have a name for its setting, I guess you could say "in this world ruled by the great, almighty corporation Alizongle, you can get anything you want, if you are a good bunny who obeys the World Council." Now readers will go in knowing you're probably going to criticize these companies in this fictional society where they're held up like gods and are the moral judges of the world (which is a big part of their role). "Social Credit System" pretty much exclusively brings up images of, well, a social credit system. You don't know what the author will say about it unless you're in her mind somehow

Anyway, perhaps we could attach a more detailed summary to the beginning of the thread in case anyone wishes to delve into the story? I mean, we already know Minna herself isn't planning on doing anything else with it.

[Sc0ut]

@Sc0ut

I'm fairly certain it's not requests for content warnings that are the problem per se, so much as (the possibility of) such warnings being used as the basis for unreasonable requests to modify the curriculum for an individual.

But we've already covered the fact that for the most part, needing a content warning does not mean the person refuses to engage with the content when it comes to education (though they might when it comes to entertainment) - they just want to be forewarned, so for instance they don't read difficult material when they're already having a terrible day but when they're feeling more on top of their emotions - or to look away when a certain image is shown (that they, again, can look up on their own later if necessary). I am concerned that even in a space where a lot of people explain what content warnings do for them, in obviously good faith, these nebulous examples of extreme bad faith behaviour keep getting brought up. Is it really that common? Does it happen ever? Because all of you who discuss the evil students who want to change curriculums do so from an abstract perspective rather than describing actual happenings you witnessed. So are we discussing a real issue or a theoretical possibility, or maybe one or two isolate examples that are blown out of proportion?

Sorry to keep insisting about this seemingly offtopic point, but to me the default suspicion, if not derision, that some people seem to have towards requests for content warnings feels very relevant in the discussion about the comic - since Minna is clearly one of those people, and it has come up in the comic. For me it's very unpleasant to see her assumptions of bad faith repeated here as well, after so many people took the time to explain the importance of content descriptions to them.

How would you all have described it? In this imaginary situation where you were the author and were providing a more detailed description than what's already there, that is.

I think it's a pointless exercise - the whole point of the comic imo is to shock and upset, and an accurate description would prevent a lot of that. The people I've known whose view on faith and the world was similar to Minna's current one took the outrage they caused others as proof that the world is hopelessly sinful, since the mere word of god offends people, and thought it's a positive to cause these reactions since they may lead someone to be "saved" after all. I think in Minna's case this is also spiced with a desire to have a dig at "politically correct" people who have been "mean" to her about the slur or about representation in the comic, which again is hard to do if the same people will not read the comic because they've had proper warnings

[catbirds]

I think it's a pointless exercise - the whole point of the comic imo is to shock and upset, and an accurate description would prevent a lot of that. The people I've known whose view on faith and the world was similar to Minna's current one took the outrage they caused others as proof that the world is hopelessly sinful, since the mere word of god offends people, and thought it's a positive to cause these reactions since they may lead someone to be "saved" after all. I think in Minna's case this is also spiced with a desire to have a dig at "politically correct" people who have been "mean" to her about the slur or about representation in the comic, which again is hard to do if the same people will not read the comic because they've had proper warnings

This is a good point, in which case I think we'd need a much longer warning list at the beginning of this thread. Within the comic, we already have people mocking inclusive pronoun use (albeit with different words), a pretty poor appropriation of real-world discrimination or oppression (the whole "drones coming to take you away to some facility" thing), ALMOST all of the comic's themes (technology as an absolute evil, driving yourself away to some secluded society being the only solution, etc…) and the list goes on. I've been negatively affected by a lot of these ideas before (actually it's an ongoing thing because I can't change some parts of me), so seeing them play out totally seriously while I was reading it was pretty… blehhhh

It's not a trigger list, but a near-comprehensive list of harmful ideas/stereotypes. I'm not sure if there's any way to broadcast to future comic readers that this is what the comic contains, though. Many people came here only AFTER they'd fallen into the trap of an innocent bunny comic, so listing warnings here is a good idea but difficult to put in practice. Plus, I saw it mere hours after it came out, at which point the most vocal minority (or majority?) had already somehow flooded the comment sections with praise. Can't help much there

Is it possible that we'll even have to put a warning list for Minna's content and other online presence at this point, too? Her streams also frequently have discussions reflecting these ideas, which I got blindsided by while working on calculus homework or something, so going on her profiles has made me uneasy as of late. Her videos, too, though to a lesser degree because they're somewhat edited. You know how it is, harmful beliefs don't just disappear once the creator turns off her drawing tablet.

(Note: I do think the current warning is good for people who found the comic through the forum, that I will not deny. I only wish we could have nipped it at the bud or something to that effect)

Fortunately, I doubt that this comic will become some classic, dearly beloved children's book. The initial shock did hurt people, but if it gets out into the world (e.g. store shelves), I think people will realize that these ideas are… not it.

[Sc0ut]

(Note: I do think the current warning is good for people who found the comic through the forum, that I will not deny. I only wish we could have nipped it at the bud or something to that effect)

Well, to be fair, when you google the comic, the first link you get at the moment is its tvtropes page, where the heavy-handed religious themes are discussed relatively early on. It still won't help the people who click through to it from SSSS but it's about as much as someone who isn't the author can do about it.

Speaking of "what can someone who isn't the author can do"... I wonder if Hiveworks have any rules about their authors using their webcomics to proselitise, or whether they're thinking of adding one now.

[Róisín]

Quite apart from those who think that the ex-soldier with PTSD asking for warnings about gratuitous violence or the rape survivor requesting warnings for extreme sexual violence are just being precious snowflakes, I have encountered in the real world a few nasty examples.

For 40 plus years I was, among other things, a lecturer in botany. My particular area was largely field botany. And I did encounter a number of cases where students would request me to take anything that touched on the ‘heretical and false theory of evolution’ out of my lectures because it offended them and ‘after all it is only a theory and not the Proven Word of the Lord’. Fortunately my Dean was on my side in wishing to retain the science in my subject. I would probably have retained it anyway, even if it cost me my job, but fortunately I was able to continue talking about how one plant family might evolve into another.

[Sc0ut]

Quite apart from those who think that the ex-soldier with PTSD asking for warnings about gratuitous violence or the rape survivor requesting warnings for extreme sexual violence are just being precious snowflakes, I have encountered in the real world a few nasty examples.

For 40 plus years I was, among other things, a lecturer in botany. My particular area was largely field botany. And I did encounter a number of cases where students would request me to take anything that touched on the ‘heretical and false theory of evolution’ out of my lectures because it offended them and ‘after all it is only a theory and not the Proven Word of the Lord’. Fortunately my Dean was on my side in wishing to retain the science in my subject. I would probably have retained it anyway, even if it cost me my job, but fortunately I was able to continue talking about how one plant family might evolve into another.

I'm afraid I don't really see the connection to the discussion about content warnings, though - we're now outside the realm of "involuntary physical reactions to certain types of content" and in the realm of moral objections to the course material. I think conflating the two only helps to muddy the discussion - and this is in fact one of the tactics used by people who discredit the need for content warnings. They are imo two very different topics that should be treated separately.