There is no hard-to-watch text, image or video in this short post. It is important to make sure that they are non. Understanding 'trigger' is very important to us, especially in managing a conflict in the country we work at, Israel.
A trigger warning is a statement at the beginning of a lecture, article, film, etc., that prepares people that they may find the content upsetting, shocking, difficult to watch or listen to, especially if they have experienced something similar:
The trigger, the content that is hard to watch or upsetting, can conjure up experiences that actually happened to the person and also create new difficult experiences.
There are different types of triggers that we classify according to the main emotion they evoke. The trigger I will focus on is that content that provokes anger and resistance. Sometimes we will explain this trigger by saying that it actually produces the 'fight, run, freeze' reaction (3F).
If, in a conversation, we provoke a reaction of anger and resistance in the person in front of us, then we need to check not only the verbal content but also the form in which we express the verbal content.
It's amazing how much discourse in social media and the media is based on triggers of anger. The triggers are the heart of the Israeli public discourse.
I can formulate some questions that we are trying to solve. All the questions refer to the same problem from other directions:
Why upset those in front of us?
Does triggering our adversary, helps the conversation?
Does upsetting our opponent helps our cause?
Is the use of the trigger intentional? That is, do we want to intentionally provoke a reaction of anger and resistance? If so, why?
If our interlocutor uses one or several triggers, are we aware of the impact of the shock on our emotions, body and thinking ourselves?
Can we neutralize the emotional impact of the interlocutor's or opponent's trigger and activate a choice of our response? or
Does the trigger dictates our emotional tone and our thinking?
Can we not use the trigger as a tool for conversation and what are the advantages and maybe disadvantages we can get from such a conversation?
Triggers in our current social climate, are a fact of our cultural life. Our challange should be initiating an independent self process that will allow us to control ourselves and sometimes, lead the conversation into a creative resolution.
The fight, flight, freeze reaction
The fight, flight, freeze reaction is a natural response to danger that helps people protect themselves from harm. The reaction can be triggered by something as simple as a loud noise or as serious as a life-threatening situation.The fight response is when a person becomes aggressive and tries to fight off the danger. The flight response is when a person tries to escape the danger. The freeze response is when a person becomes paralyzed and can't move.Each response has benefits and drawbacks. The fight response can help a person protect themselves from harm, but it can also lead to violence and injuries. The flight response can help a person escape danger, but it can also lead to accidents. The freeze response can help a person avoid danger, but it can also lead to being harmed or killed.Which response a person chooses depends on the situation and their own personal preferences. Some people are more likely to fight, some people are more likely to flight, and some people are more prone to freezing.