University of Chicago: ‘We Do Not Support So-Called Trigger Warnings’ • Hacker News Board

Re: University of Chicago: ‘We Do Not Support So-Called Trigger Warnings’

#441

Post by internaut » Sat, Aug 27, 2016, 3:02 PM UTC

lake99 wrote: post #310

Torgo wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They will be even better when we don't infantilize minorities by acting like we need the degenerated versions of these concepts.

To be fair, I don't think it's minorities that are asking for trigger warnings. They are groups with political agendas.

That is true. As many of you know there are an unusual number of transgender/sexual in the tech/geek communities and in my experience they get along with those of a conservative or christian bent and often have healthy non-rancorous debates with them. Perhaps they are supposed to be at war and some of them are but I don't see it. I think it helps a lot that people identify as geeks first so in a hackerspace it is assumed we're all in the same tribe, trying to be interesting people doing interesting things.

Re: University of Chicago: ‘We Do Not Support So-Called Trigger Warnings’

#442

Post by x1798DE » Mon, Aug 29, 2016, 10:10 AM UTC

davidf18 wrote: post #429

x1798DE wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There should never be bans of free speech consistent with that of the First Amendment (i.e, you can't shout "Fire" in a movie theater). Freedom of speech and the First Amendment are two different things (and I'll note that there is no limiting clause in the first amendment), and I think it would be helpful if people realized this. Freedom of speech is a broader principle that is (IMO) a good idea independent of any…

I'm not certain, but I think there was a Supreme Court ruling that said you can't shout, "Fire" in a movie theater as an action of free speech or the First Amendment. At any rate, people pay good tuition money to get an education and part of an education is the free exchange of ideas.

Yes, the Supreme court has given many "passes" to the government to regulate your free speech, but what I was saying is that it's important to separate the concept of "free speech" from the legal institutions that attempt to prevent their restriction (by the government). There are many situations where it is legally allowed for someone to curtail your freedom of speech, and that is independent of whether or not it is a good idea for that person to exercise their right to do so.

Re: University of Chicago: ‘We Do Not Support So-Called Trigger Warnings’

#443

Post by devopsproject » Mon, Aug 29, 2016, 6:13 PM UTC

paulcole wrote: post #422

burnitdown wrote: post #376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not using partner instead of girlfriend just in case some third party might get their fee fees hurt. This is insanity. The linked articles provide many absurd examples. This isn't a slippery slope, this is stupidity personified.

> I'm not using partner instead of girlfriend just in case some third party might get their fee fees hurt. This is insanity. Really, you're not willing to be mindful of your language to respect someone else's wishes? Also, "fee fees" really shows your level of thought and respect for other people so maybe I didn't need to even ask.

How is calling someone's girlfriend a girlfriend offensive?

Re: University of Chicago: ‘We Do Not Support So-Called Trigger Warnings’

#444

Post by therealdrag0 » Tue, Aug 30, 2016, 7:53 PM UTC

collyw wrote: post #215

basseq wrote: post #22

This is tough . With the aspirations of "civility and mutual respect" along with "rigorous debate, discussion, and even disagreement", I would hope any truly egregious edge cases disappear. In the middle, I think people have the right to remove themselves from discussions—civil or otherwise—that they don't want to listen to or engage. But that right doesn't limit others' ability to have those selfsame discussions in…

Its not tough at all. So called trigger warnings never existed until recently and very few people had problems. I never heard of anyone breaking down in class due to difficult subject matters in my 5 years at university (or after).

That's like saying "What do we need wheel chair ramps for?" I've never seen a person in a wheel chair get stuck trying to access the building. Partially disabled people are a minority, partially people don't pay that much attention, and partially people are self-selected out of such situations. Panic attacks are a disability. Trigger warners are not to censor, but to INCREASE the audience participation. If anything, it's anti-censorship.