By Amiya Walia
(Blogging for final exam)
In recent times colleges in the United States have seen an increasing demand for trigger warnings in their academic courses. The movement in favour of trigger warnings in the early 1980’s was an effort to enforce political correctness and control freedom of speech regarding matters such as racial slurs (Lukianoff and Haidt). The current movement is focused on building a more inclusive space for those vulnerable to having extreme responses to potentially triggering stimuli.
The current debate revolves around the effect of trigger warnings
used on colleges campuses. Some argue that trigger warnings are harmful. The
University of Chicago in their welcome letter to the batch of 2020 stated that
they do not support trigger warnings or the “creation of intellectual safe
spaces”. Their rationale is that trigger warnings stifle intellectual growth
and academic freedom. Social psychologist Jonathan Haidt and Greg Lukianoff
believe that the goal of this movement seems to be to “shield young adults from
words and ideas that make them uncomfortable”. The commonly heard argument is
about college being the space for interaction with opinions different
from your own which will in turn lead to students questioning their own
convictions and broadening their worldview. Trigger warnings supposedly
interfere with this process because they enable students to avoid content that
might make them uneasy, hence forming a protective bubble around them.
These notions have arisen from the misconception of what trigger
warnings actually are and why they exist. Trigger warnings exist as clarified
by Jeanne Kay, “for medically documented conditions of distress which manifest
themselves through a variety of symptoms that can be as powerful as to create a
propensity for suicide and self harm.” These warnings are as non intrusive as
an email or a disclaimer shared before content related to rape, abuse, war.
Their usage does not censor or change the content of the course in any way
whatsoever. The purpose of these warnings is not to shelter students from
different perspectives but to allow those with mental disorders to merely
prepare themselves to engage with triggering content. Philosophy professor Kate
Manne points out that for intellectual growth to take place, students need to
be in a rational headspace.
Exposure to a trigger
without appropriate warning induces an irrational state of fear during which
students will be in no state to partake in the discourse (Manne). Trigger
warnings allow people to mentally prepare themselves to manage their responses
and give them a better chance to engage with sensitive content. A study carried
out on medical students perceptions on trigger warnings found that the students
believed that, “Trigger warnings allow students to know what is coming and
prepare themselves…[and they] help students understand the severity of the
material”. Understanding the severity aids in increasing awareness about the
serious health effects that trauma can have on people, according to the medical
students (Beverly et al).
Another objection to the usage of trigger warnings is that it
strengthens avoidance behaviour patterns by allowing students the option to
disengage with material being taught. This is being seen as problematic because
the most effective treatment to mitigate the effects of trigger warnings is
through “gradual exposure and desensitization towards triggers” (Danaher). Dr
Foa’s prolonged exposure therapy “stresses engaging with your triggers- slowly
and methodically until they lose their power” (Waldman). According to Jonathan
Haidt and Greg Lukianoff,“Classroom discussions are safe places to be exposed
to incidental remains of trauma, as a discussion of violence is unlikely to be
followed by actual violence,so it is a good way to help students change the
associations that are causing them discomfort”.
On the contrary others argue that it is not in the interest of
students to force them to engage with triggering material in classroom
settings. Dr Foa, a professor of clinical psychology explains, “When a trigger
arrives, the person may be overwhelmed and if a doctor isn’t present to keep
disturbance at bounds, the patient may have trouble coping with the flood of
alarming memory.” Therapy is a process that a person engages in willingly.
Coercing students to tackle their triggers in a classroom without the required
support system hardly seems appropriate. Professors are not adequately
qualified,cannot and should not be expected to play the role of a therapist.
Another point that requires emphasis is that trigger warnings are meant for
those who might have severe or extreme responses to content. They are meant for
those who experience reactions far more severe than discomfort. Reactions such
as panic attacks,flashbacks and compulsions to self harm(Holmes). It is
understood that PTSD and other responses to triggers cannot be cured through
avoidance, but neither will forcing students to confront their traumatic
experiences in classrooms; it could actually end up making it worse.
My own view is that colleges should shown acceptance and respect
for those likely to be impacted. The question arises as to why there seems to
be a sudden rise in requests for trigger warnings. The obvious answer being
that there is a need. Both mental health awareness and the occurrence of
mental health disorders have been on a rise (Twenge). Students experiencing
these disorders have mustered up the courage to make public their requirement
of these warnings. They have done so despite the constant stigma surrounding
mental health. Instead of accommodating their requests to make their learning
environment more inclusive, they have met by hostile responses that trivialize
their trauma and accusations that they are attempting to protect themselves from
opinions that they do not like. This raises the age old contention about
majorities being favoured over minorities as only a minority of students at any
college are at risk of experiencing traumatic reactions to triggers. On the
minorities request for trigger warnings, it is unreasonable for the majority to
be in the position of power to make the decision. Silencing the minorities
through complaints that they are intent on playing ‘the victim’ is in direct
contradiction to the democratic beliefs and inclusivity that colleges in
America are eager to broadcast.
Works Cited
Betsythemuffin. "Triggers: Not One-Size-Fits-All". Medium.
Medium, 09 May 2014. Web. 19 April 2018.
Beverly, Elizabeth A., et al. “Students' Perceptions of Trigger
Warnings in Medical Education.” Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 2017,
pp. 1–10.
Danaher, John. “The Ethics of Trigger Warnings: A Review of the
Arguments”.Philosophical Disquisitions. N.p, 14 February 2017. Web. 19
April 2018.
Filipovic, Jill. "We've Gone Too Far with 'trigger Warnings'
| Jill Filipovic." The Guardian. Guardian News and Media, 05 March 2014.
Web. 19 April 2018.
Jarvie, Jenny. "Trigger Happy." New Republic.
03 March 2014. Web. 19 April 2018.
Holmes, Lindsay. “A Quick Lesson On What Trigger Warnings Actually
Do”. Huffington Post. Verizon Communications via Oath Inc, 27 August
2016. Web. 19 April 2018.
Lukianoff, Greg, and Jonathan Haidt. “The
Coddling of the American Mind”. The Atlantic. The Atlantic Monthly
Group, September 2015 issue. Web. 19 April 2018.
Manne, Kate. “Why I Use Trigger Warnings”. The
New York Times. The New York Times Company, 19 September 2015. Web. 19
April 2018.
Mcewan, Melissa. “Survivors Are So Sensitive”. Shakesville.
13 August 2010. Web. 19 April 2018.
Waldman, Katy. “What Science Can Tell Us About Trigger Warnings”. Slate.
N.p, 5 September 2016. Web.19 April 2018..
"Trigger Warning." Geek Feminism Wiki. Web. 19
April 2018.
Twenge, Jean. “Are Mental Health Issues On the Rise?”.
Psychology Today. 12 October 2015. N.p. Web. 19 April 2018.
Zvan, Stephanie. “On Trigger Warnings and ‘Scientific Arguments’”.
The Orbit. 25 May 2014. N.p. Web. 19 April 2018.
.
Comments
Post a Comment