This is simple. "Trigger warnings" are a form of censorship. "Safe spaces" are a form of self-segregation. Both are anathema to the academy. To address the pr

This is simple. "Trigger warnings" are a form of censorship. "Safe spaces" are a form of self-segregation. Both are anathema to the academy. To address the proposed censorship policy first, universities are the birthplace of free speech. Free exchange of ideas is absolutely essential for the transfer and furtherance of human knowledge. Both instructors and students must be able to state their ideas without fear of reprisal. With regard to so-called "safe spaces," in my experience they are little more than ethnic enclaves with University funding. Whatever their original underlying rationale, "safe spaces" formed based on race, nationality, ethnic identity have become the norm. Further, universities are not supposed to be comfortable. They are designed to confront our deepest beliefs, to intermingle people of vastly different backgrounds, and to teach not only technical skill, but the ability to cooperate with those with whom we have little in common. They are supposed to submerge people of different backgrounds in the same environment. If you are comfortable, you are doing it wrong. Finally, who determines who deserves a "safe space" and what requires a "trigger warning"? Inevitably the answer is the ever-expanding administration. The concept that these hired bureaucrats should be policing faculty speech is both inane and dangerous. This new brand of political correctness ends with the shattered careers of educators. It ends with students educated about a reality that doesn't actually exist. It ends with censored education.