4 ms·

There seems to be whole lot of slippery-slope happening in this thread. Asking people to respect trigger warnings for the most common types of PTSD (generally,

There seems to be whole lot of slippery-slope happening in this thread. Asking people to respect trigger warnings for the most common types of PTSD (generally, rape/sexual abuse) does not lead inevitably to banning everything that anyone has every been uncomfortable with. This is about reasonable accommodation. Consider the example of disability laws: you're required to install a wheelchair ramp/lift if an employee needs it; you're not required to let a quadraplegic person be a lifeguard.

qntty 10y ago
If we coddle people in wheelchairs, they'll never learn to wheel themselves up stairs. In the real world, there are stairs everywhere and they need to get used to that. I sprained my ankle one time in college and I crutched my way up the stairs just like everyone else. Why can't they do the same?
- ythl 10y ago
  Except mental handicaps are not as well understood as physical handicaps. Trying to accommodate every single mental handicap in society is futile and expensive.
  - maxerickson 10y ago
    There's nothing wrong with trying. There just needs to be recognition that resources are finite.
  - qntty 10y ago
    "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
  - PhasmaFelis 10y ago
    > Except mental handicaps are not as well understood as physical handicaps. The obvious conclusion there is that we need to work with doctors and patients to understand their needs better, not "this is weird, so no point in trying." > Trying to accommodate every single mental handicap in society is futile and expensive. This is exactly the slippery-slope argument I was talking about. Reasonable accommodations.
zubat 10y ago
It's dogwhistle politics. It's unlikely that anyone in the thread can claim authoritative knowledge on this topic - but it gets aired constantly in the media, so now everyone feels as if they should have a Strong Opinion, and their opinion lands ever-so-neatly on the side endorsing that view. Universities themselves are never in quite so simple a position as that. Like any large group of people there are conflicts of interest, ambitious power plays, and grandstanding gestures. U of Chicago happens to sit on an end of the political spectrum that allows it this united front. That doesn't mean its day to day is actually more free or open to questioning than a school like Oberlin that aimed to endorse safe spaces and trigger warnings top-down. Any genuine discussion of freedoms vs securities is most likely lost in the scuffle.

qntty 10y ago

If we coddle people in wheelchairs, they'll never learn to wheel themselves up stairs. In the real world, there are stairs everywhere and they need to get used to that. I sprained my ankle one time in college and I crutched my way up the stairs just like everyone else. Why can't they do the same?

ythl 10y ago
Except mental handicaps are not as well understood as physical handicaps. Trying to accommodate every single mental handicap in society is futile and expensive.
- maxerickson 10y ago
  There's nothing wrong with trying. There just needs to be recognition that resources are finite.
- qntty 10y ago
  "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
- PhasmaFelis 10y ago
  > Except mental handicaps are not as well understood as physical handicaps. The obvious conclusion there is that we need to work with doctors and patients to understand their needs better, not "this is weird, so no point in trying." > Trying to accommodate every single mental handicap in society is futile and expensive. This is exactly the slippery-slope argument I was talking about. Reasonable accommodations.

zubat 10y ago

It's dogwhistle politics. It's unlikely that anyone in the thread can claim authoritative knowledge on this topic - but it gets aired constantly in the media, so now everyone feels as if they should have a Strong Opinion, and their opinion lands ever-so-neatly on the side endorsing that view. Universities themselves are never in quite so simple a position as that. Like any large group of people there are conflicts of interest, ambitious power plays, and grandstanding gestures. U of Chicago happens to sit on an end of the political spectrum that allows it this united front. That doesn't mean its day to day is actually more free or open to questioning than a school like Oberlin that aimed to endorse safe spaces and trigger warnings top-down. Any genuine discussion of freedoms vs securities is most likely lost in the scuffle.