Okay. This has been bothering me for a while, and I want to know what you think.
It started with this article on "micro-aggressions". Then this one on "trauma warnings". And this morning, an op-ed about "safe spaces".
The subject of germs came up the other day in Block 2, and I suggested, only half-tongue-in-cheek, that we're getting too sanitized these days: a little dirt is good for you. It helps you build up immunities. Are we over-protecting ourselves?Now students’ needs are anticipated by a small army of service professionals — mental health counselors, student-life deans and the like. This new bureaucracy may be exacerbating students’ “self-infantilization,” as Judith Shapiro, the former president of Barnard College, suggested in an essay for Inside Higher Ed.But why are students so eager to self-infantilize? Their parents should probably share the blame. Eric Posner, a professor at the University of Chicago Law School, wrote on Slate last month that although universities cosset students more than they used to, that’s what they have to do, because today’s undergraduates are more puerile than their predecessors. “Perhaps overprogrammed children engineered to the specifications of college admissions offices no longer experience the risks and challenges that breed maturity,” he wrote. But “if college students are children, then they should be protected like children.”
At the same time, I am sympathetic to those people who have experienced psychological trauma, and I don't mean to belittle their sufferings.
So what do you think? Read any or all of the articles linked-to above, and respond below. (Or, directly to the in-basket, if you'd prefer.) By "respond", I mean a lectio. So, pick a passage from one of the articles, identify it, and respond to it. [Hat tip to Jacob Burns.]
Due Date: Monday, March 30.
Serena Lotreck says:
ReplyDelete“Drawing attention to microaggressions, whether they are intentional or not, is part of eliminating such stereotypes…” from “Students See Many Slights as Racial ‘Microaggressions’”
Sure. Most people probably commit microaggressions in complete innocence. They probably don’t know that what they’re saying is offensive. But that does not mean it isn’t, that doesn’t mean it’s harmless.
Someone who grew up in a stereotypically “All-American” environment isn’t going to be good at being politically correct. No matter how well meaning, they’re going to say things that are incredibly ignorant. Like asking someone of Haitian or Jamaican descent what country in Africa their family is from, simply because they’re black. Or saying that they want to marry a gay man because they have the best sense of fashion. Or saying that those who are bad runners run like girls.
People are idiots. They say these kinds of things often without thinking anything of it. But stupidity is not an excuse. If you run someone over with your car because you don’t think it’ll hurt them, they’re still going to be dead. If you make the stereotype, even if you don’t know you’re doing it, or think it’s funny or harmless, you’re still acquiescing. You’re still fitting yourself into the discrimination that permeates our society, the invisible lines that still divide and delineate us into groups based on race, sexual orientation, and gender.
“Don’t run like a girl. You hit like a girl.” I used to think that the way to overcome those slurs was to run and hit like a boy. But that’s just feeding in to the sexism that created those comments, because it implies that boys are better than girls, that masculinity is superior to femininity. Until people can say, “You run like a girl,” and not mean it as an insult, there will still be divisions along the lines of sex. Until people stop inferring that anything traditionally feminine is weaker or lesser than those things that are traditionally masculine, we are not equal.
It is the same with race. Saying, “Oh it’s harder to get into Harvard if you’re Asian, because there are so many smart Asians,” isn’t sympathetic. And sexuality. Saying, “Oh you’re gay? You must have the best sense of fashion,” isn’t complimentary.
It doesn’t matter if people think they aren’t doing any harm. Because they are. These ways that people subconsciously discriminate, uphold stereotypes, and spread ignorance need to be addressed. Racism and other kinds of discrimination aren’t as obvious as they used to be. It’s moved underground, and many people don’t even realize when they’re keeping it alive. It is in microaggressions that discrimination will continue to pervade our society, until we choose to really hear what we’re saying and stamp them out.
Hello everyone,
ReplyDeleteI have read all three articles - the topic is interesting and in ways - eye opening. However, I was drawn most to this phrase in the "Safe Spaces" article : " I'm old enough to remember a time when college students objected to providing a platform to certain speakers because they were deemed politically unacceptable. Now students wonder whether acts of speech or pieces of writing may put them in emotional peril."
What stuck out to me most was the shift of interest by students from political affairs to themselves. The previous generations were concerned about global things - things that would not affect only them - but the world itself. These were young students aspiring for change , and determined to make it happen. Now a days - what are we concerned with ? Ourselves. We have become an impatient self-absorbed generation. Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Snapchat , and all the other up-and -coming social media. It is instant , and conveniently on our smart phones. But what's it really all about ? Us! Generally speaking we post on social media about the things that bother us, annoy us, our day, the things we've accomplished, blahblah....but most of all ... the infamous selfie, which has even been added into the dictionary. If someone - let's say in the 70s or 80s - were to whip out a photo album and it was full of pictures of themselves, their cat, dog, lunch, coffee , and look ! More pictures of themselves- you would probably have thought they were crazy. Young people then were too busy breaking the rules of society and running off with other “round eyed Buddhists " ; they were all off to change the way people thought.
But how does change come about? Change happens when people's beliefs are opposed. If no one went against society we would still be in England under the rule of some king. With this being said, I think that we have become a little too sensitive about a lot of matters. For example, how the article stated that a Hampshire College refused to let a band play because it had too many white musicians. I feel that this is extremely unreasonable and I find it rather irritating. How can one grow and develop and even mature if his/her beliefs are never challenged, or if they never experience another persons point of view? “You don't understand anything until you learn it more than one way "- Marvin Minsky.
With all this being said, I do believe that our society is becoming too sensitive about some matters and we should take a step back. School or College environments may not be the best place to try and solve these problems. There are other places that people who have experienced trauma can go to. I believe the school environment should be safe, but it should not focus on emotional perils... that isn’t what it is for. School is to learn, to develop, and to challenge yourself.
"What stuck out to me most was the shift of interest by students from political affairs to themselves." An insightful observation.
DeleteBut don't be too hard on yourselves. A selfie can mean "I was here; I was part of an event that I want to remember." (It can also mean "Look at me! Look at me!", that's true.) And beware the power of the photograph to embarrass in the future!
Also, there are a lot of young people who are involved and advocating for change. It's not all about the selfie.
Hola people! So I read the Trauma Warnings Move From Internet to Ivory Tower and I must say I have mixed feelings about the subject at hand. I understand why people may want a trigger warning for some topics. As stated in the article "Loverin, 19, said. 'But a girl just raped a month ago and sitting in a classroom for the first time again isn't ready to face that head-on.'" I totally agree that a topic so closely related to something traumatizing like that should be understood by the professor about the student. However, later on in the text it is written "To illustrate her points [on eating disorders], [Laurie] Essig showed pictures of fashion models and images taken from pro-anorexia web sites. Two students took her to task, telling Essig, 'Oh, you should have given a trigger warning for people with eating disorders, they can't see images like that." This point I do not agree with. Yes, people do have eating disorders and it is not a matter to be handled lightly, but it is completely different from being raped or such in my opinion. This made me strongly believe that trigger warnings should be used in High School settings since College Students are adults and should be treated as adults not as children. Although some topics may be sensitive, "Life is life. You are going to get your feelings hurt and you should just suck it up and meet it head-on." You can't be sheltered your whole life or you will never grow and learn the hardships of life. Not everything will always be comfortable and go your way.
ReplyDeleteIt's just so hard to try to anticipate everything that might upset somebody. And you never know who's sitting in the classroom. If we try to anticipate everything, I'm afraid we'll become paralyzed.
DeleteTurner Bouley
ReplyDeleteMicro-aggressions Lectio
“I don’t see how you can have a therapeutic space that’s also an intellectual space,” he said. I read this statement and immediately felt skeptical. The speaker is exaggerating with his use of the word therapeutic. I assume they are trying to say that censoring everything will prevent us from learning. This statement isn’t untrue. However, adding a warning before something that may be inappropriate is a practice that is commonly used. It does not remove the sensitive material, but rather, allows the viewers to brace for it. We rate movies and television shows and warn viewers of violence and language. Trigger-warnings share the same purpose. This idea that all people need to man up and face everything at the same time is unrealistic. To say that people who suffer from mental trauma need to just deal with their issues is ignorant. Trigger warnings give people the choice to decide what they can handle. It is more compassionate to give people the power to choose when they are ready. You never know what the people around you are going through. The “real world” is harsh, so why add insult to injury? Putting a warning before sensitive material doesn’t mean that it is censored. Perhaps a rape victim sitting in class sees the warning and decides that they are not ready to see the material because his/her own experience is still too raw. This moment could be when they realize they need to put their focus on recovering. Perhaps “just dealing with it” is not enough to get them back to normal. Some people need extra help when battling their demons. Every person is different; some of us take longer to bounce back. Just because you’re not going the same pace as everyone else, it doesn’t mean that you should ignore your own needs to catch up with the crowd. Trigger warnings shouldn’t hinder a person’s education. An intellectual environment can coexist with a considerate environment. Intellect and controversial topics aren’t mutually exclusive. If someone close to you was going through something, it isn’t far off to say that you would be conscious of their problems and watch what you say. It can be difficult to do this for a room of strangers. It is conceivable how it would hard to be objective if you felt like you couldn’t mention certain topics. On the opposite spectrum, having no consideration for other people when you speak can be damaging. Trigger warnings are the happy medium for this problem. The sensitive topics will still be discussed, but the victims will know in advance and can leave if needed. In this technological age, people feel safe saying whatever they want from behind a computer screen. We could all use more kindness and consideration for other people. No matter who is in the room, we should be careful about what we say.
There's a vote for safe spaces. And I think that consideration of others is a good thing at all times. I worry, though, that people will use that -- well, I won't say as an excuse, but. . . It's the flip side of "everybody-gets-a-trophy", it's a "hey-I'm-a-victim-too" mentality.
DeleteHey. So I read the article about Microagression because I have seen the misuse of words lead into that. I never knew it had a specific name to it until Mr. MacArthur was talking about the differences between the three articles during class. In the article it states that students held up signs that said, "You're pretty.... For a darkskin girl". Now I have a friend who lives in Florida and she hears that all the time on social media and it makes her very mad! I know that most people probably have no idea the meaning behind those cruel words but come on! You should! It's like if I said to a white person, "You can rap really well for a white person", not one sterotype acquires to every person of a different background. Also, in this article, it said something along the lines of cringing when a black person speaks English correctly. I definately think this is a microagression, because I know plenty of black people that are intelligent either way! I don't know.. Microagressions just make me infuriated.
ReplyDeleteWhile reading the article “Trauma Warnings Move From Internet to Ivory Tower” I felt professor Laurie Essig’s feelings on trauma warnings best fit my own opinion, “’I'm treating college students like the adults they are, and institutions increasingly treat college students like medicalized children,’ she said.” Essig, an associate professor at Vermont's Middlebury College, shares my opinion on trigger warnings, one that seems to be becoming an increasingly unpopular one based on what college students would have you believe. But I believe Essig is right, students in college are adults and as such should act like and be treated like adults, not children. This is where I don’t see the point in trigger warnings at all, college students (and high school students to some extent) should be mature enough that they can handle discussing topics which would warrant trigger warnings, and if the topics being discussed with students younger than that might be traumatic to them then perhaps it shouldn’t be discussed. Yet still many push for trigger warnings for what I see as two equally bad reasons.
ReplyDeleteThe first reason I see people push for trigger warnings is the increased sensitivity of people since the start of the 21st century, to which I believe people need thicker skin. The world isn’t going to give you trigger warnings for all the potentially traumatic things you might see, so why should schools? The other reason I see people wanting trigger warnings is an increase in insecurity due to society and what is projected through it, they many dislike the idea that they aren’t special or unique. People want to see the bold face trigger warnings at the top of a paper and feel special because they can choose not to do the assignment. I see both of these as invalid reasons for the pressure put on teachers and professors to include trigger warnings with potentially traumatizing assignments.
On a slightly different note, at what point does something become so obscure that it doesn’t warrant a trigger warning? Does Beowulf need a trigger warning in case someone finds superhero-like figures dong manly things traumatic? Does Slaughterhouse Five need a trigger warning for people afraid of the concept of time travel and aliens? At what point can you tell someone that their emotional grief from viewing something is the fault of their strange phobias and paranoia and not the lack of a trigger warning for some absurdly specific trigger? Is there a single piece of film, literature, art, or any other form of media you wish include that absolutely no one would find traumatic for any reason, I say no.
-Ian Cook
As a matter of fact, there are people who who like a warning for Slaughterhouse. It's a book that people have tried on occasion to ban (but fortunately never around here).
DeleteReading most of these articles got me pretty fired up. I like to think I am someone with pretty thick skin, and it aggravates me that kids want to be sheltered away from the harsh realities of the world. Now I have never been a victim of rape or racism, so my argument might be insensitive to their point of view. In my defense though, their sensitivity is taking away from my education. Why should some students be sheltered like children when they are perfectly capable of handling the full extent of difficult topics? One article reads, “But a safe-space mentality has begun infiltrating classrooms, he said, making both professors and students loath to say anything that might hurt someone’s feelings”. I see this happening all the time from classrooms to social media. When reading out loud kids always make that long pause before saying the n-word trying to decide whether to say it or skip over it. In social media, everybody freaks out if a celebrity makes a slight joke about rape. For example Jennifer Lawrence got criticized for saying that she, “pulled out her rape scream” as a joke. She wasn’t trying to trivialize what rape victims go through, she was just trying to be funny. The problem that these people don’t understand is that avoiding the topic, and sheltering everybody away from the “hard” issues doesn’t make them any less real. How are we supposed to be able to find solutions to rape and racism if we can’t even talk about them in a safe environment, like a class room? Then students are going to be thrust into the real world where these issues still exist, and it will no longer be a safe environment. Also, how are students who have been through such traumas going to be able to move on with their lives if they can’t ever come to terms with what happened to them? Let’s say a rape victim is in a literature class where they read a passage about rape. I can imagine it will probably be pretty hard to read because it might bring back unwanted memories. However, from my viewpoint it could make that person stronger, and helps them to cope with what happened to them. (Now everybody is in a different place in their recovery, so maybe not everybody is at a place where they are ready to talk about whatever it is.) In the trigger warnings article they talked about how they showed pictures of pro anorexia websites and fashion models pictures when talking about eating disorders. One of the students then made the comment that people with eating disorders can’t see those images. As someone with an eating disorder that’s a little offensive. Is it hard to look at those images, yes. Is it a tad bit of a trigger to see those types of pictures, yes. That doesn’t mean I shouldn’t see them in a safe classroom setting. It’s important to be exposed to things that are difficult so you can learn to overcome them. It is also hard for me to hear about people going on diets, but I hear it at least once a week. It’s just something I’m going to learn to deal with. In my opinion not talking about rape or racism because someone might get offended is a little bit insulting to that person. They are treating people who have been through traumas different from a normal person. They are trying to shelter them, and I know it’s out of consideration, but honestly you aren’t doing anyone any favors.
ReplyDeleteWith all this being said, I think that every classroom and seminar should have an open door policy. This being that if a student ever feels uncomfortable, unsafe, or attacked at a school event they should be free to leave the discussion, and talk to their professor later to make up what they missed. This way not everyone gets sheltered, but those who do not want to be there, don’t have to sit there feeling helpless.
And this piggybacks on what some other people have said ["People are idiots"]:
Delete“But a safe-space mentality has begun infiltrating classrooms, he said, making both professors and students loath to say anything that might hurt someone’s feelings”. Sometimes that's how you learn what not to say -- when you say it meaning no harm and you suddenly are apprised that what you said in fact hurt.
“Wider cultural sensitivity to harm”
ReplyDeleteThis phrase caught my eye because I think that it sums up what all three of the articles were discussing. As a society nowadays we are so concerned with coddling people and shielding them from potential harm that I think we forget that pain and struggle are an important part of one’s growth as a person. If we are always coddled and shielded from any kind of pain then no one will ever be able to learn to develop coping mechanisms on their own and they will always be emotionally stunted. For example, if every time your four year old has a problem with a playmate you intervene and solve it for them, they will never learn to overcome struggles on their own and will remain at the maturity level of a four year old. Learning how to overcome struggles is an essential part of becoming a strong, independent member of society.
That being said I do have to say that I had mixed feelings on all of these topics. I found it to be one of those situations where I could see both sides clearly and it really depended on the specific situation what I thought. I do believe that sexual assault and violence is major problem at many universities and I think that any student who has recently been traumatized should have the right to be forewarned of any triggers. However I think that in the case of this article it is taken to an extreme level.
They discussed how the debate regarding sexual assault had many viewpoints that upset people, however isn’t everyone entitled to voice their own opinion? If you believe that someone else’s opinion might upset you, why go to the debate in the first place? I believe that campus counselors should be available but is a safe room with videos of frolicking puppies really necessary? After talking with a counselor if necessary I think that students should be capable of discovering their own healthy coping mechanisms.
There’s also the issue of cultural sensitivity infringing on people’s freedom of speech. Even though someone may be completely unjustified and misguided in what they are saying, as a country we have guaranteed that they should have a right to say it. A debate about abortion was cancelled because both of the debaters were men, however wouldn’t one of the male debaters be pro-choice if this was a debate? So why should it matter if they were both men? Both have a right to express what they believe and why they believe it and anyone who disagrees should either find a valid argument against them or not listen because this coddling of young adults in society is going to create a generation of fully grown toddlers. While I think trigger warnings are considerate and a reasonable request, censoring speech altogether is downright unconstitutional.
“In College and Hiding from Scary Ideas”
ReplyDeleteQuote: ‘“I was feeling bombarded by a lot of viewpoints that really go against my dearly and closely held beliefs,” Ms. Hall said.’
When sensitive topics are discussed in classes, I agree that some forewarning is appropriate. While I do not think that these discussions should be censored, there should be an option for students to opt-out if they personally cannot handle the subject matter. Some people who have dealt with difficult situations can handle these discussions, but every person heals differently and as such there should be an option available for those who will be uncomfortable. That being said, the article “In College and Hiding from Scary Ideas” and particularly the above quote demonstrate the dangers of the new culture of sensitivity sweeping through many college campuses.
Giving advanced warning if a college class will be having a debate about rape culture, for example, allows those students who would be uncomfortable to avoid the situation, which I believe is a good thing. However, many student groups on college campuses have taken the issue too far, and attempted to prevent these debates from taking place at all. If their only goal was to ensure the safety of students who might be triggered, why is an advanced warning not enough? For many students, their motives seem to go beyond personal safety. Instead, they want to hide from the fact that some people do not completely agree with everything they have to say. The above quote represents my biggest concern with these new initiatives on college campuses. The student said that she felt “bombarded” by viewpoints that went against her personal beliefs. However, the essence of personal beliefs is that they are just that: personal. What one person wholeheartedly believes is often completely different from what another person believes. However, this does not make one set of beliefs inherently more valid than another. And that is what many of these students seem to be saying: if you don’t agree with me, that offends me, and therefore you shouldn’t be allowed to talk. No one should be forced to listen to discussions that may cause them emotional harm, but their personal situation does not give them the right to shut down these conversations. It is not offensive to disagree with someone, and this is a lesson that many students are not being taught.
In the “real world” that colleges should be preparing their students for, people will always have different opinions. The answer is not to bury your head in the sand and pretend these viewpoints do not exist. The only way for our society to develop is for civil discourse to be allowed to take place, which includes the ability to freely express different viewpoints. If a topic may upset a student, then yes, there should be a system in place to notify students in advance and give them an option to opt-out. However, these possibly controversial conversations should still take place. Debate and civil discourse are essential parts of our political system, and colleges must teach their students how to deal with people whose beliefs conflict with their own. It is possible to provide these opportunities while still making allowances for those who may be traumatized, but unfortunately in the effort to avoid offending anybody many colleges have gone too far in limiting opportunities to have real, important discussions.
It's hard to know where the line is, but I'd say this quotation is way beyond it. If you won't listen to something that goes against what you believe. Then you're wanting everybody to play by your rules. But "civil discourse" -- yeah, I'm all for that.
Delete"Filmmaker and writer Aishah Shahidah Simmons, a rape survivor who teaches at Temple University in Philadelphia, said she is careful to tell students on the first day of class and in her syllabus that "we are getting ready to delve into some really difficult, painful information here," such as sexual violence and police brutality." I took this segment from Trauma Warnings Move From Internet to Ivory Tower.
ReplyDeleteI've read all three articles and from each I can say I felt a sense of being "triggered" in my own way. But particularly the "Trauma Warnings" article. I will say I completely respect the idea of trigger warnings, given they are to prevent students from feeling unsafe while in the classroom. Not unsafe from those around them, but unsafe with their mental psyche. There are too many situations popping up in our society where people are feeling offended, and less than. Which causes a frustration when no one feels anything is being done to protect those who have been assaulted or put in racist situations. This is a problem in which requires the world as a whole to work together.
Anyways, back to trigger warnings. I feel that we cannot shield all unfortunate happenings from young minds. College students should be entering college expecting to hear about the tragedies in the world. It is not a new event, tragedy and suffering has existed since the world started spinning. It is possible to be sensitive to those who suffer traumatic incidents, but it cannot be eliminated or else the rest of the world will not understand that scary things happen everyday. Those who have experienced traumatic incidents should stand strong in informing those around them on said incidents if comfortable. The world will not listen unless it comes from someone who has experienced something first hand. No one wants to hear about rape from someone who has never been raped. There are many in this world that will listen, but there are also many in this world that will choose not to simply because they feel it does not effect them. (Ignorance, I know. But there is much of it in this world.)
Basically what I am saying is that when it comes to trigger warnings, it's about preference. The world is not here to cover your eyes when a monster walks by and maybe that is what we need to start preparing children for. The idea that not everything is kind out there. Then maybe sensitive material will be disturbing in the way that children will want to make a difference in the world. Not run and hide from the fact that the world can be a scary place.
One quote that really stuck out to me in the article “In College and Hiding from Scary Ideas” was “Meanwhile, student volunteers put up posters advertising that a “safe space” would be available for anyone who found the debate too upsetting.” I was confused as to why a safe space was needed. The debate was organized by a student group. Nothing in the article suggested that attendance at the debate was required by any class. Nobody was forced to be there. The thing that I struggled to understand was why students who might be affected by the subject matter would choose to attend the debate. They would know better than anyone the effect that hearing about possibly upsetting topics would have on them. The article quoted Emma Hall, someone who was a victim of rape and an organizer of the safe space. She attended the debate but then returned to the safe space. The students knew that potentially controversial ideas and opinions would be discussed at the debate. That is why a safe space was created. So why did some students intentionally expose themselves to something that might trigger a strong response?
ReplyDeleteI agree that some safe spaces and trigger warnings are helpful for students who have experienced traumatic events. Trigger warnings especially are a good way to tell students that something may be unhealthy for their emotional health. However, they are useless if students ignore those warnings and expose themselves to the materials anyway. There is no way to completely sanitize the classroom and the world because there is no way to predict what might trigger strong emotions in someone. While victims of traumatic events shouldn’t be forced to relive the experience and should have the option to avoid situations where something might trigger memories, they shouldn’t expect the entire world to avoid potentially controversial ideas. If an event is happening where there is the potential of triggers, instead of protesting, just don’t go. If you are offended that an Afrofunk band has too many white members, don’t go to the concert. If a debate is about a topic that could trigger strong feelings in you, just don’t go. If you are angered by an academic essay, don’t read it. There are no trigger warnings in real life. Despite the interpretation of the First Amendment by some activists, controversial ideas cannot be censured. Everybody has the right to their opinion, no matter how offensive that opinion may be to someone else. It is ridiculous to try to stop all debate just because of the possibility of offense. People who have experienced trauma must learn how to cope with it other than by protesting anything that could remind them of it.
‘"What's different now is, partly as a result of this new ethos in the online world of trigger warnings, you are seeing people being willing to assert themselves and say, 'My emotional well-being does matter.”' - Trauma Warnings Move From Internet to Ivory Tower
ReplyDeleteAfter reading this second article, I discovered that I have mixed feelings about trigger warnings. The original idea and use of trigger warnings is a vague, yet useful idea for those who have been abused, assaulted, basically traumatized in any way that could relate to something in everyday life. Giving them a heads up would be beneficial to their own wellbeing in case they're still recovering, or have lasting emotional or physical sufferings from such an event.
However, if these warnings are being used for ideas that could simply offend people, that situation is completely different. The thing about these warnings is that they're supposed to warn those that went through awful events in their past, and give them a chance to either back out of the situation if they don't feel ready for it, or to get themselves together if they feel ready to look at a similar situation to their own in a mature way. When someone is offended, you don't necessarily see them having flashbacks to a form of abuse or traumatizing aftermaths. Trigger warnings for having the possibility of having one's feelings hurt shouldn't even be compared to the physical, mental, and emotional scarring that things like rape and domestic abuse can cause.
Okay, let’s loop back to the quote. These trigger warnings, of which some have to do with depression and feelings of lower self-esteem, give those affected the chance to have a feeling of importance in that they matter, and what they went through is important. Being someone who knows numerous people who have these struggles and have had some of my own, the idea of knowing that people care and you’re problems are important could be the last thing needed to start healing. That depends on the person and what they’re going through, however. Some just need the idea of feeling cared for, while other need much more help and stability. It all depends on what they went through.
The purpose stays the same, though. These warnings give someone the chance to say, “I’m important, what happened to me is important, and what I’m feeling matters as much as the feelings of the person sitting next to me do.” Trigger warnings that are used for the right events give either a chance for healing, or a warning for something someone isn’t ready to face yet. Even then, it gives them time to look over what happened, or is happening, and to work with it the healthiest way.
A trigger warning -- appropriately deployed -- does allow people to say "I matter." Or for others to say "you matter", for that matter. But it also might let people avoid healing. Although, if they aren't ready yet. . .
DeleteWhen you say "the idea of knowing that people care and you’re problems are important could be the last thing needed to start healing", do you mean last as in final, the last stage? Or as in, "Yeah, that's the last thing I need"?
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
Delete“It’s amazing to me that they can’t distinguish between racist speech and speech about racist speech, between racism and discussions of racism,” Ms. Kaminer said in an email.
ReplyDeleteThis is a quote from the article “In College and Hiding from Scary Ideas,” and I must say, it is one that stuck out to me more than any other. No longer is speech deciphered and dissected for true meaning, but carelessly picked apart for lines that may victimize someone. People have no longer learned to listen to other opinions with open minds and hearts, but to selectively hear opinions that personally offend and attack them. The modern trend of self-victimization to differing opinions is the first step to the containment and censorship of controversy, which isn’t productive to society or to an individual.
In the article, they discuss how students were emotionally overcome by the content of a speaker who had a drastically different viewpoint than them, and how they had to leave because it was so overwhelming. I can’t even begin to conjecture how they must have felt considering it was a sensitive topic that many of them had suffered with, and they were perfectly valid in their decision to leave the discussion as it was their right not to listen to it. However, providing them with a safe space does nothing but negatively reinforce the idea that because the area with the speaker was “unsafe,” they are only safe with people who have the same opinions and experiences as them.
This idea of categorizing the world in terms of “safe” and “unsafe” is extremely detrimental to college students, and only furthers the notion that if you are in someplace that is not explicitly deemed “safe”, you have the right to feel victimized and offended. It also leads students into a false sense of security before they step into the real world. Once you leave college, the lines of “safe” and “unsafe” are blurred. If people are being trained to search for protection from people with opposing opinions, open-minded and intellectual debate of differing viewpoints is now shunned and seen as a stimulus for emotional distress instead of a way for people to communicate and compromise.
I don’t know if I’m simply being insensitive, but I can’t help but feel that our generation is one of the most overly self righteous and emotionally frantic ones to date. We are so constantly sheltered and protected from those with different opinions that when we do hear them, we aren’t well-equipped to handle them in an intellectual manner. Colleges should not be treating students as though they are children, and providing them with a video of “frolicking puppies.” They should be teaching students to embrace new viewpoints and how to grow and learn from them.
Not everything should be taken as an attack, because not everything is one. Not everyone with a different opinion should be villainized, because their opinions are as legitimate as anyone else’s. And most of all, we shouldn’t all subconsciously look for ways to be victims, just because society deems us all to be ones.
In fact, we should all aspire to be like Megara from Hercules. Instead of viewing herself as a victim, she saw everything as a challenge of her strength. At one point in the movie, Hercules tries to save her because she’s a “damsel in distress.” Her response? “I’m a damsel. I’m in distress. I can handle this. Have a nice day.”
Come on guys, let’s all be Megaras.
An interesting literary allusion!
DeleteFrom "In College and Hiding from Scary Ideas"
ReplyDelete“Safe spaces are an expression of the conviction, increasingly prevalent among college students, that their schools should keep them from being ‘bombarded’ by discomfiting or distressing viewpoints.” This idea is one that I have never really taken a liking to. I feel that students should not be sheltered and that they should not hide from the real world. I understand their viewpoint, but I’m not convinced that it’s something that needs to be done or should be done.
It has always been my belief that students, especially college students, should be prepared for the real world and the harshness that sometimes comes with it. Because of this, I don’t understand why colleges would suddenly want to start protecting and sheltering their students. I understand that the material is still taught after the “trigger warning” is given, but I don’t think that a trigger warning should even be issued. In everyday life, things come at you without a warning. You don’t get a warning when a stranger is about to say something that may offend you or make you feel a little uncomfortable. Life isn’t always going to be pleasant and things aren’t always going to go the way someone may want them to. That’s just how life works. Those college students preparing themselves for the real world should become accustomed to moments that might be “discomfiting or distressing” without a warning given to them.
I don’t think I would call it being too sensitive. I think I would describe it more as people hiding from what they don’t want to deal with. These “safe spaces” are basically rooms that students can go to when they feel that they are becoming too uncomfortable to get away from whatever is making them feel that way. Again I go back to the real life comparison. There isn’t always going to be a room to which you can go run and hide from things you don’t like. In everyday life, people have to deal with things they don’t want to. They don’t get to run away to safe room where they can eat cookies and be happy.
I do understand that some people have gone through things in their lives that have been traumatizing, and I don’t mean to be harsh to them. What I’m trying to get at is that those people are going to have to deal with situations that may make them feel uncomfortable for the rest of their lives. And in those situations, they’re not going to have “safe spaces” to go to or “trigger warnings” to let them know what is about to happen. I feel that the best thing for those people would be to get used to being put into situations that make them feel uncomfortable early on so that they aren't affected by it as much later in their lives.
-Ben Clough
And thanks to everybody who took the time and made the effort to post here. I'm not sure my viewpoint is anymore coherent than before, but its useful to hear what other people have to say, and to have to put one's own thoughts into words.
ReplyDeleteI think we are overprotective, and trigger warnings can be pushed to far, but I want to be considerate of those people in turmoil.