Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

time.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 444 posts

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

#81

Post by PhasmaFelis »

I'm not clear why people on both sides of the debate seem to be interpreting "trigger warnings" as "no triggers allowed." It's meant to be exactly what it sounds like, a advance warning of upcoming content, so that vulnerable people can take appropriate action. That doesn't mean that such content should be forbidden, or that sexual assault victims should get credit for a course that they didn't attend; just that they can prepare themselves mentally, and decide in advance if that credit is worth the pain and discomfort it may cause.

I've had to help a friend having a sobbing panic attack because someone made a stupid rape joke and triggered her PTSD. It's not a laughing matter. But it's not an excuse for censorship, either.

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

#82

Post by cmdrfred »

qntty wrote: post #75
cmdrfred wrote: post #60

What I find rather interesting, is that throughout human history we never had a need for trigger warnings until now. We've had slavery, 2 world wars, famine, countless horrors inflicted on a countless number of people. Nobody asks for it. Then I look to the third world there we have things like female genital mutilation, are the women who had that horror put upon them concerned with trigger warnings? Nope. Not as far…

Well the US has had obscenity laws in place until recently. It's just that the people who decided what was "upsetting" were politicians rather than students and had the power to get rid of it completely.

In practice those laws rarely if ever were applied to college classroom or similar event. Speech within a private facility by individuals has always been protected.

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

#83

Post by nomat »

judah wrote: post #69
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…

Universities ought to return to what they once were: free and open exchange of ideas. Viewed in this light, the University of Chicago's rejection of political correctness is actually a softening of extremism: allowing for, rather than actively silencing, diverse political discourse. This is in stark contrast to neighbor Chicago school DePaul, who last month blocked[0] Jewish conservative minority voice Ben Shapiro fr…

I assume people like Shapiro collect fees from the school for speaking, so would it be correct to frame the issue as students not wanting their money to go into the pockets of a person that they don't support?

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

#84

Post by [deleted] »

jordigh wrote: post #73
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…

> "A trigger warning is advance notice about subject material that may be difficult for certain students to read, hear or see." But that's not what trigger warnings are for... it's not just about mild discomfort. They're to prevent panic attacks . https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trauma_trigger Whether trigger warnings are effective or not is a different matter, but of course if you portray them as being about being off…

[deleted]

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

#85

Post by [deleted] »

jtuente wrote: post #80
sp332 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're missing the part where they are victims, and all we're trying to do is minimize the damage. That's a calculated risk that each person is going to have to take for themselves.

They were victims; they're not actively victims in the moment of a discussion. The damage has already been done. Conversely, you can say that you're helping with the recovery and healing process. But it's important to acknowledge the aspects of the past, present and future as they relate to trauma.

[deleted]

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

#86

Post by DanBC »

cmdrfred wrote: post #60

What I find rather interesting, is that throughout human history we never had a need for trigger warnings until now. We've had slavery, 2 world wars, famine, countless horrors inflicted on a countless number of people. Nobody asks for it. Then I look to the third world there we have things like female genital mutilation, are the women who had that horror put upon them concerned with trigger warnings? Nope. Not as far…

> are the women who had that horror put upon them concerned with trigger warnings? Nope. Not as far as I can tell.

How many of them have you asked?

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

#87

Post by fixermark »

joesmo wrote: post #74
fixermark wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Sorry, but you cannot get a proper education with trigger warnings and safe spaces. [citation needed]

Citation is not needed because you can't learn something you can't discuss and you can't properly discuss anything with trigger warnings and safe spaces. I guess we traded trigger warnings and safe spaces for logic in school these days.

I don't see why you can't properly discuss anything with trigger warnings and safe spaces. You can discuss any topic you want, in the proper location, with people who want to discuss it. That's basically just human interaction etiquette, codified.

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

#88

Post by djrogers »

sp332 wrote: post #48
spriggan3 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They don't want students to have any spaces where they feel safe/accepted? That's weird. Why would a student need a special space to feel safe/accepted? Doesn't the university already provide students basic safety?

No, students get harassed and raped at a pretty high rate. And suicide is the #2 cause of death among young adults. Physical security and "acceptance" is a big public health issue.

thays just not true - the rate of rape and sexual assault is lower for college students (at 6.1 per 1,000) than for non-students (7.6 per 1,000).

[1] http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2014/12/14/campus-rape...

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

#89

Post by dang »

jordigh wrote: post #51
dang wrote: post #42

"Please don't use uppercase for emphasis." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Fixed, but I really did want to yell.

Understood, and thanks. Since it's no longer relevant I've detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12361418 and marked it off-topic.

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

#90

Post by cmdrfred »

sp332 wrote: post #79
cmdrfred wrote: post #60

What I find rather interesting, is that throughout human history we never had a need for trigger warnings until now. We've had slavery, 2 world wars, famine, countless horrors inflicted on a countless number of people. Nobody asks for it. Then I look to the third world there we have things like female genital mutilation, are the women who had that horror put upon them concerned with trigger warnings? Nope. Not as far…

When my grandfather got back from WWII, he went to work at a printing press. One day a neon sign fell and shattered just across the room from him. When he became aware of himself again, he had ripped up all of his fingernails trying to dig a foxhole in the concrete floor with his bare hands. Recovery is always the goal, not keeping someone continually vulnerable. And over time, in more controlled circumstances, expos…

Why didn't he and his fellows advocate for "trigger warnings" then? Perhaps a greater sense of personal responsibility? I'm honestly curious.
Post reply on HN