+++
title = "Trigger warning and consent"
scribes = ["stanislav.md"]
voices = ["celine.md", "clementine.md", "antoine.md", "philippine.md", "kristien.md"]
+++

"a cross-generational conversation about different expectations re: trigger warnings. <<trigger warning = a warning ahead of showing someone objectionable material>> ; different criteria for what is violent, what is objectionable, in other words triggering. Antoine, a younger person, feels that his generation has a heightened expectation of trigger warnings. One hypothesis is that pandemic exacerbated this. The idea of being  <completely taken care of> seems to have solidified in the course of the pandemic. //in the course of recounting this conversation, it has expanded and evolved to, more generally, the change in expectation of care, for example from institutions. Where do we draw the line between expectation of care and refusal to 'put in the work', so to speak? Since the context is violence and learning, another question is where these overlap. Links with Lina's comment re: novelty, and how this might substitute/overwrite traditional categories, for example, obscene, or objectionable. Links to Oxana's work on the soul as passage. Objectionable - objections to this - passage proposed as more encompassing or more productive. Roving... 

Consent-trigger warning. Trigger warning is a form of gaining consent. In rel. practices such as BDSM, it's a question of defining boundaries. One objection was that this could be seen as moralising/foreclosure. So the middle ground between care and moralising/foreclosure. BDSM - consists of an ongoing practice of risk awareness. Risk awareness as a potential alternative regime to consent. Aim is not to relativise the need for consent but to understand it as a practice, and a process, and to understand its limitations, because otherwise it would be as if we assume self transparency (that we know everything about ourselves), that we would be able to communicate everything and that what we articulate will always be understood.

BDSM, has it become normative? Is that within its structurre? It there a politics bound up in its structure? Is it political? Is it a leisure activity? A mainstream commodification? Diversification of sexuality? Deviant? Is deviant political? Or just another thing on the menu? By opening a whole playing field that moves away from penetrative sex, is it a feminist movement?

Now shifting to French parliamentary politics, and how the profundities of conversation that occured within the international community of PAF insulated from the reality of the French elections. 

The politics of a name.