The Negative Consequences Of Trigger Warnings

The purpose of my research is to explore and offer analysis of the controversy over the use of trigger warnings and safe spaces on college campuses, in order to understand when, where, and most importantly, regarding what subjects their use is appropriate.

Roxane Gay’s persuasive essay, “The Illusion of Safety/The Safety of Illusion” is about trigger warnings in the media. Her argument in the essay is that trigger warnings in the media give a false sense of security to the people the warnings seek to shield. She explains how trigger warnings are futile because you cannot protect someone from their own self. She also proposes that as time goes on anything can have the potential to become a trigger to someone.

In the article “Trigger Warnings, Safe Spaces and Free Speech, too” published in the New York Times by Sophie Downes, Downes argues in response to a letter sent out by the dean of the University of Chicago. The letter states that safe spaces and trigger warnings were an issue deterring students from having free speech and therefore would not be supported on the Chicago campus anymore. Downes argues that the letter was just a poor attempt to advert attention away from the real issues on the campus—ones that the dean will not meet with student council about and will not talk about at all. Sophie Downes argues that safe spaces and trigger warnings actually encourage free space and enhance support and community—two values that the dean said were deterred by the existence of them.

The issues discussed in class: safe space and trigger warnings, coddling of the American mind are relevant to the generational group of Millennials. The media tends to showcases us, the millennials, in a negative light and describes us as overly sensitive. Our generation wants a warning towards hate words or topics that deal with abuse. Conversely the people that are against trigger warnings can be described as insensitive.

After reading the article I concur with the author’s views on colleges coddling students who are offended by words or small actions is doing more harm than good. The article covered the issues in detail and gave many examples of the conception before the 1980’s when children could roam free in the world with less worry for parents to where next generation who had more protective parents because of the increase of kidnappings, removal of physical activities in school, school shootings, and bullying after the 1980’s.The authors discuss how coddling is not good for students, society, the workplace, government or the future. Coddling removes cognitive thinking and the use of good critical thinking skills. Coddling will force students to think with emotion instead of logic. Society will not always bend over backwards to appease ones feelings or change to make someone feel comfortable. Thinking with emotions can create a fog that can hinder ones view of reality.

The Oxford dictionary defines trigger warnings as a statement at the start of a piece of writing, video, etc., that alerts the reader or viewer that a material contains potentially distressing material. Trigger warnings were originally intended for war veteran, who returned to their homes with PTSD. The use of trigger warnings has changed in the past few years because they have begun to make a big impact on college campuses. Today the use of trigger warnings in a university class is considered a controversial topic. There are many who argue that professors should be required to issue trigger warnings for their classes, however, the topic of trigger warning is ambiguous and many oppose the use of trigger warnings in a university setting.

The topic of trigger warnings have been a hot topic amongst people. Trigger warnings are a warning or a statement that the following material or phrases could be harmful to the psyche of certain individuals about to experience the material. This spans across the average worker to professors at universities. This topic rose from about 2011 on the internet and has reached a high to where people are discussing their thoughts on the matter. Everyone has a stance on whether trigger warnings should be issued when discussing a potential topic that could cause distress for a student or anyone in a class. With the rise of mental health disorders being diagnosed in students, some seek professional help or a better diagnosis because of there helpfulness. Students have been at odds sometimes because of trigger warnings. The debate on whether or not to implicate them in a classroom setting is the main topic of the argument.

Trigger words are common-throughout anyone’s daily life. Imagine this, an elderly women loses her husband of fifty years. The man kept a four leaf clover in his pocket at all times for good luck. Did the world completely eliminate four leaf clovers from the world to accommodate her loss? No, not at all— the elderly women had to mentally prepare herself to handle the mental distress that could come. Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt in wrote an article in September of 2015 titled, “The Coddling of the American Mind.” This article covers overall mental health mostly in American college students. The students demand security from words and ideas that are uncomfortable in the learning environment. Lukianoff and Haidt cover every aspect concerning the views through the students, therapist, professors, and even the general public. There is a serious epidemic of micro-aggressions, trigger words, and an over-use of vindictive protectiveness. The two author’s ideals stated within are realistic, however, getting to the conclusion is a bit hectic and spastically placed throughout.

In the two essays, How Trigger Warnings Are Hurting Mental Health on Campus by Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt and The Trigger Warning Myth by Aaron R. Hanlon, the authors have opposing sides to trigger warnings abusing mental health. Lukianoff and Haidt claim that trigger warnings hurt the mental health crisis on campus. In contrast, Hanlon argues that trigger warnings are not the problem and that is what happens when the mental challenges of students become flashpoints in our culture. I agree with both authors because mental health seems to be avoided rather than supported, therefore, trigger warnings being a problem and because our culture has made it difficult to adapt to people with mental disabilities.

The term trigger warning is a statement at the beginning of a piece of writing or video, alerting the audience that it contains distressing material. But why have trigger warnings been prevailing? Why is the subject upsetting college students, academics, film-makers, etc.? Once a minute subject affecting a small section of the population, the use of trigger warning has now become a debate. A debate on whether our society is using triggers to an extreme measure or if they are actually really necessary. There are two articles that will be mentioned later on, both discuss the issue on the topic and how it is affecting college students. The reality that society doesn’t see is that trigger warnings are being taken advantage of.

A negative outcome of safe spaces that cause major consequences to Millennials is trigger warnings. Although trigger

Trigger statements are becoming more and more popular in syllabi, especially on college campuses. These provide students, especially those with post-traumatic stress disorder, with a warning about possibly uncomfortable content that could cause a flashback or panic attack. There are several different opinions about trigger warnings. Jenny Jarvie, the author of the article “Trigger Happy,” believes that they have gone too far and are a detriment to society (Jarvie 6). To enhance Jarvie’s point further, in their article “The Coddling of the American Mind” Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt explain how trigger warnings cause metal illness on campuses across the country. The opposing view is that they are necessary to have a fulfilling learning

In Lindsay Holmes’s article “A Quick Lesson on What Trigger Warnings Actually Do,” she states that trigger warnings are misinterpreted cautions notifying whether or not a discussion could cause emotional distress, and often are not implemented for this reason. Holmes begins by recounting when the University of Chicago announced they would not be focusing on Trigger Warnings or safe places; although the university later tells expresses that their initial statement was misinterpreted, the author uses this to open the discussion on the importance of trigger warnings.

Being able to distinguish the type of trigger warnings needed. can also be inconvenient to the learning environment. “Trigger warnings are also challenging to implement, because identifying potential triggers isn’t easy. Individuals with past trauma are often triggered by seemingly neutral things that have nothing to do with the content an instructor might present in class—the scent of a certain type of cologne or hearing a song associated with the traumatic event they experienced” (Flynn). People who do feel they need trigger warnings may feel triggered to unusual things that aren’t commonly discussed in classes.

Lindsay Holmes’s “A Quick Lesson On What Trigger Warnings Actually Do” is a persuasive piece written in response to the backlash that The University of Chicago received against implementing trigger warnings for their students. Likewise, Holmes sets up her argument in the hopes of persuading the general population the importance of creating safe zones and use trigger warnings for those who need them. In order to do this, Holmes uses a series of rhetorical devices throughout her essay to develop her argument for the use of trigger warnings. Holmes achieves her goal of persuading the audience that trigger warnings should be taken into consideration through her intentional use of rhetorical appeals, anticipated objections, and hypophoras in this essay.