5 ms·

Good, let's stop using them and go back to talking about bad things like adults who have a reasonable grip on their feelings.

by Grakel 5y ago

xvector 5y ago
It 100% isn't adult behavior to talk about a subject that triggers someone if you know it may trigger them. For example, functional adults don't discuss topics like rape unless they are reasonably certain that discussion participants do not have an associated traumatic experience. The purpose of trigger warnings is to let people excuse themselves if you do not have that familiarity or certainty with your audience, e.g. a classroom setting. I'd argue that not using trigger warnings for such topics with unfamiliar people is immature and callous.
- Grakel 5y ago
  Life should not be a walled garden where we can control what topics come up. Life is beautiful because it is unpredictable, and I dare say painful at times.
- rsj_hn 5y ago
  > It 100% isn't adult behavior to talk about a subject that triggers someone if you know it may trigger them. The problem is that we have an epidemic of people who are triggered by normal words and even the mention of important topics -- like rape, murder, wars, etc -- that ordinary people do need to talk about, so when your sensitivity expands so much as to infringe on the ability of healthy adults to discuss the issues of their day, that's when it's no longer the case that adults can avoid discussing any topic that might upset the fragile minority.
  - Imnimo 5y ago
    > it's no longer the case that adults can avoid discussing any topic that might upset the fragile minority. Isn't that the point of a warning? You're still going to discuss it, just with a warning up front. If you were going to avoid discussing it, you wouldn't need a warning.
    - rsj_hn 5y ago
      So perhaps there is a misunderstanding here, but I think the point is that the warnings don't actually work, so if there really is something relevant that needs to be said, I'm not sure what the value add is of having the warnings. It's not like these are dirty jokes, where common sense says that those things don't need to be included in the lecture. What we are talking about (supposedly) is content that is necessary to be in the lecture. It's necessary for the students to learn it. So do the trigger warnings help or not? A good example here -- since this often comes up in the context of Universities -- is rape, and specifically rape law[1]. You have a situation where university professors are afraid of covering rape law because it might terrify their law students[2]. From the New Yorker article written by Harvard Law Professor Jeannie Suk Gersen: "Student organizations representing women’s interests now routinely advise students that they should not feel pressured to attend or participate in class sessions that focus on the law of sexual violence, and which might therefore be traumatic. These organizations also ask criminal-law teachers to warn their classes that the rape-law unit might “trigger” traumatic memories. Individual students often ask teachers not to include the law of rape on exams for fear that the material would cause them to perform less well. One teacher I know was recently asked by a student not to use the word “violate” in class—as in “Does this conduct violate the law?”—because the word was triggering. Some students have even suggested that rape law should not be taught because of its potential to cause distress." So when talking about this issue of "being sensitive" it matters a great deal whether the request is a reasonable one to remove unnecessary material or whether the request is unreasonable. It's not just a question of being considerate without taking into account the reasonableness of the request. Now there is nothing wrong with being upset at things -- I don't like the sight of blood. But I would never try to be a surgeon, nor would I complain in medical school that the sight of blood traumatized me. Someone with a fear of heights can't go to Pilot school. If I went to medical school, it would be my responsibility to know what I was getting into, just as someone going to law school is responsible for knowing what they are getting into. Otherwise, don't enroll. This reminds me of the beautiful Rumpole novels by Sir John Mortimer, where the main character is employed as a defense attorney but all his partners are bothered by so many criminals visiting their offices. I mean, there is a line between "please don't joke about polish people" to "please don't mention rape in this law school", and the pro-trigger-warning movement has crossed this line. They cannot reasonably expect to be shielded from these topics in lectures, this material will be on the tests and they need to learn it, and the secondary backup attempt of giving them "trigger warnings" to psychologically prepare them for the trauma has been shown to not work. [1] https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/12/17/harvard-law-professor-says-requests-trigger-warnings-limit-education-about-rape-law https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/12/17/harvard-law-p... [2] https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/trouble-teaching-rape-law https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/trouble-teaching-ra...
userbinator 5y ago
From what I've seen, they're mainly associated with one side of the political spectrum. The other side never did use them.
- sp332 5y ago
  There are plenty of signs like "a combat veteran lives here, please be courteous with fireworks."
  - kcplate 5y ago
    You apparently don’t know many combat veterans if you think they predominantly sit on only one side of the political spectrum.
    - sp332 5y ago
      Right, that was the point of my post.
  - porknubbins 5y ago
    Are there veterans in classrooms saying they can’t read books about war though? I don’t know how common this is but I suspect the original comment might have a point that one side of the spectrum has elevated victim status into a source of power/authority.
mosen 5y ago
I understand your sentiment, but certain situations can be quite difficult when you’re at the mercy of your own brain. Anxiety, chemical imbalances, and traumatic experiences can etch deep pathways into the mind.

Good, let's stop using them and go back to talking about bad things like adults who have a reasonable grip on their feelings.

by Grakel 5y ago

Good, let's stop using them and go back to talking about bad things like adults who have a reasonable grip on their feelings.

xvector 5y ago

It 100% isn't adult behavior to talk about a subject that triggers someone if you know it may trigger them. For example, functional adults don't discuss topics like rape unless they are reasonably certain that discussion participants do not have an associated traumatic experience. The purpose of trigger warnings is to let people excuse themselves if you do not have that familiarity or certainty with your audience, e.g. a classroom setting. I'd argue that not using trigger warnings for such topics with unfamiliar people is immature and callous.

Grakel 5y ago
Life should not be a walled garden where we can control what topics come up. Life is beautiful because it is unpredictable, and I dare say painful at times.
rsj_hn 5y ago
> It 100% isn't adult behavior to talk about a subject that triggers someone if you know it may trigger them. The problem is that we have an epidemic of people who are triggered by normal words and even the mention of important topics -- like rape, murder, wars, etc -- that ordinary people do need to talk about, so when your sensitivity expands so much as to infringe on the ability of healthy adults to discuss the issues of their day, that's when it's no longer the case that adults can avoid discussing any topic that might upset the fragile minority.
- Imnimo 5y ago
  > it's no longer the case that adults can avoid discussing any topic that might upset the fragile minority. Isn't that the point of a warning? You're still going to discuss it, just with a warning up front. If you were going to avoid discussing it, you wouldn't need a warning.
  - rsj_hn 5y ago
    So perhaps there is a misunderstanding here, but I think the point is that the warnings don't actually work, so if there really is something relevant that needs to be said, I'm not sure what the value add is of having the warnings. It's not like these are dirty jokes, where common sense says that those things don't need to be included in the lecture. What we are talking about (supposedly) is content that is necessary to be in the lecture. It's necessary for the students to learn it. So do the trigger warnings help or not? A good example here -- since this often comes up in the context of Universities -- is rape, and specifically rape law[1]. You have a situation where university professors are afraid of covering rape law because it might terrify their law students[2]. From the New Yorker article written by Harvard Law Professor Jeannie Suk Gersen: "Student organizations representing women’s interests now routinely advise students that they should not feel pressured to attend or participate in class sessions that focus on the law of sexual violence, and which might therefore be traumatic. These organizations also ask criminal-law teachers to warn their classes that the rape-law unit might “trigger” traumatic memories. Individual students often ask teachers not to include the law of rape on exams for fear that the material would cause them to perform less well. One teacher I know was recently asked by a student not to use the word “violate” in class—as in “Does this conduct violate the law?”—because the word was triggering. Some students have even suggested that rape law should not be taught because of its potential to cause distress." So when talking about this issue of "being sensitive" it matters a great deal whether the request is a reasonable one to remove unnecessary material or whether the request is unreasonable. It's not just a question of being considerate without taking into account the reasonableness of the request. Now there is nothing wrong with being upset at things -- I don't like the sight of blood. But I would never try to be a surgeon, nor would I complain in medical school that the sight of blood traumatized me. Someone with a fear of heights can't go to Pilot school. If I went to medical school, it would be my responsibility to know what I was getting into, just as someone going to law school is responsible for knowing what they are getting into. Otherwise, don't enroll. This reminds me of the beautiful Rumpole novels by Sir John Mortimer, where the main character is employed as a defense attorney but all his partners are bothered by so many criminals visiting their offices. I mean, there is a line between "please don't joke about polish people" to "please don't mention rape in this law school", and the pro-trigger-warning movement has crossed this line. They cannot reasonably expect to be shielded from these topics in lectures, this material will be on the tests and they need to learn it, and the secondary backup attempt of giving them "trigger warnings" to psychologically prepare them for the trauma has been shown to not work. [1] https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/12/17/harvard-law-professor-says-requests-trigger-warnings-limit-education-about-rape-law https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/12/17/harvard-law-p... [2] https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/trouble-teaching-rape-law https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/trouble-teaching-ra...

userbinator 5y ago

From what I've seen, they're mainly associated with one side of the political spectrum. The other side never did use them.

sp332 5y ago
There are plenty of signs like "a combat veteran lives here, please be courteous with fireworks."
- kcplate 5y ago
  You apparently don’t know many combat veterans if you think they predominantly sit on only one side of the political spectrum.
  - sp332 5y ago
    Right, that was the point of my post.
- porknubbins 5y ago
  Are there veterans in classrooms saying they can’t read books about war though? I don’t know how common this is but I suspect the original comment might have a point that one side of the spectrum has elevated victim status into a source of power/authority.

mosen 5y ago

I understand your sentiment, but certain situations can be quite difficult when you’re at the mercy of your own brain. Anxiety, chemical imbalances, and traumatic experiences can etch deep pathways into the mind.