In the article The Coddling of the American Mind by Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt, the authors go into great detail of describing the effects of trigger warnings. Using real world examples, Lukianoff and Haidt describes how college students are oversensitive and carried along the school year. The authors explain how this is a negative thing for the college students going into the work force in the future. In the beginning of the article, Lukianoff and Haidt explain how one word can offend a college student really quickly, even if the person saying it didn’t intend to insult them. The authors then tell the audience how popular comedians, like Chris Rock, have stopped performing on college campuses, because the students cannot take a joke. …show more content…
Lukianoff and Haidt take a real word example to prove their claim. The authors show what happens when you use trigger warnings in class by taking an article describing the difficulties of teaching law with trigger warnings. Students have pressured their professors to avoid the subject, because of the sensitivity involved. The article the authors used then compares this to a “medical student who is training to be a surgeon but who fears that he’ll become distressed if he sees or handles blood.” Without learning about subjects you need to be aware of in the world, just because they are a sensitive matter, will not set students up for success in the future. The authors show that students use trigger warnings in the wrong way that hurts their education. Even though it is the wrong way to use trigger warnings, students insist to use trigger warnings in class despite the negative …show more content…
During the 60’s and 70’s, people have thrashed out with their words and each other. This caused some awareness in schools due to the offensiveness of the matter. During the 80’s schools began on focusing on preventing this kind of speech on their campuses. Since then, students have become more and more sensitive in a negative way. The authors used an example of a kid shouting “Shut up, you water buffalo” at an Israeli born student. That incident made national news, just for calling another kid a “water buffalo.” Another example is when a university found a student guilty of racial harassment for reading a book honoring student opposition to the Ku Klux Clan. The picture on the cover of the book offended one of the student’s co-workers. Just because the student was reading a book, minding his own business, the student was punished from the university. Never said anything or hurt anyone physically, and his education was ruined by someone taking offense to a book he was reading. The authors used this extreme example to prove that accepting the fact that student are fragile and letting them be fragile is not the right way to go and the past can prove
In Kate Manne’s article “Why I Use Trigger Warnings”, she argues that trigger warnings are an important feature to incorporate in an educator’s curriculum, but not as a safety cushion for millennials to fall on to avoid work and serious or uncomfortable topics. Using PTSD studies along with failed tests of exposure therapy for the foundation of her points, she explains that trigger warnings can help mentally prepare a student for what they are about to read instead of blindsiding them and throwing them into a potentially anxiety-induced state where they can’t focus. Manne also brings up how people can react when reading political or religious material in comparison towards reading possibly triggering material in order to differentiate between
Charles R. Lawrence intended audience in his article “On Racist Speech” is college students and universities. His sense of tone is forthcoming. Lawerence word choice sets the tone by using the words conspicuous,dissenter, and bigot. The article gives examples of how universities do not protect minority college students. Lawrence states that universities should protect their students He also gives an example of how universities have tried to have rules to ban racist speech yet they have proven ineffective in stopping racial slurs. The regulations have not stopped the verbal brutality yet it has stopped the occurrences of physical fights. He mentions how students do not have any need to be hurt verbally.
This film was made in 2008, and maybe during that time this observation could be compartmentalized based on geographical location. The research is a bit outdated for the world we live in now. Social environments bleed together in today’s society. The reference of “middle class” becoming more extinct with political influence. The violence and dangers are not limited to congested areas of the economically challenged. We are no longer safe in schools, movie theaters, or work environments. These are no longer isolated incidents, becoming more frequent effecting many levels of our emotional and spiritual health. Humans have adapted the use of their stressful warnings to a non-useful state ignoring the signs. What use to be a safety mechanism is now a
Although some like Conor Friedersdorf, of the Atlantic, categorized students as “intolerant bullies, (34)” meaning that the reasons for protests were not really reasons at all. Chang argues that the issues students are expressing need to be improved upon as if not, we will continue to go round and round in this vicious cycle. The addition of the apartheid in South Africa backs up Chang’s argument as there is a consensus of it being a serious issue. This explains why he included this piece of history and how it relates to college campuses. Encouraging critics to listen to students, just as Meyer did to those of color, is the only way to prevent today's youth from bring up the same issues in future years. Just as Chang predicted, the next school year brought protesters to hundreds of colleges and universities. What happened at Mizzou was just the beginning of a country wide movement for racial justice on campuses that hasn’t stopped
In 1994, renowned college professor Nikki Giovanni published an awe-inspiring article. It contains guidance to black college students on how to academically apply themselves in college, and she teaches them how to deal with the ignorance of white people, from sharp tongued comebacks to gaining a professor’s respect. Along the way, the article “Campus Racism 101” states Giovanni has acquired a tenure, she has a teaching position for life, at the predominately white student body Virginia Tech (Giovanni 11). Nikki Giovanni’s “Campus Racism 101” uses logic when giving advice to black students on how to succeed in college, appeals to Giovanni’s credibility, and appeals to the emotions of racism all in order to educate how black college students need to deal with ignorance on a college campus.
They should start discussions about rape and sexist cases because it’s going on in today’s society and for people to know it’s okay to talk about it if it ever happened to them. Colleges need to prepare students for the real word so they need to have real life discussions in class for the students that are growing up and entering the workforce. College campuses are going through the mircoagression theory and professors fear to talk about trigger warnings in class when both students and professors should have freedom of speech in classrooms. “One of my biggest concerns about trigger warnings,” Roff wrote, “is that they will apply not just to those who have experienced trauma, but to all students, creating an atmosphere in which they are encouraged to believe that there is something dangerous or damaging about discussing difficult aspects of our history.” (49). Professors try to avoid teaching material that will upset sensitive students, but instead they should start warning students about the materials they are going to teach and set boundaries so students can know what they are about to learn to prevent teachers from getting in trouble or risk getting fired from their
Leo goes on to discuss how this leads to over-sensitivity, severe peer judgement, and even a sensitivity violation. Much of this is written in a sarcastic tone, because the idea of campuses across the country enforcing “sensitivity violations” is a ridiculous statement in itself.
In Roxane Gay 's op-ed, "The Seduction of Safety, on Campus and Beyond", she states, "Rather than use trigger warnings, I try to provide students with the context they will need to engage productively in complicated discussions", and this is exactly what I am talking about. People who understand that freedom of speech does not have to be taken away in order to stop "triggering" people. Communication is key and freedom of speech is our given right that allows us to communicate our thoughts and feelings. When I searched, "safe spaces in universities" on google, all I could find was article after article of people criticizing safe spaces and giving reasons why they should not happen on college campuses. The most used reason, was a reason that Shulevitz used as well, that safe spaces create ignorance in the growing teenager and become problematic. While this may be true, I feel I should of found more articles like Gay 's, emphasizing with victims and understanding the need for safety sometimes, but without ignorance. The world is scary, hurtful, and breaks you as you grow older. Safe spaces are needed for comfort, they can bring peace, and give someone a person who understands. It 's wrong to put college students behind a door and shut them in so they are not "triggered" by someone 's opinion, but it 's also wrong to not acknowledge that sometimes, people just need to take a break from all the speech in the world and re-cope themselves to
The author argues that the use of “trigger warnings” should not become a policy due to the student becoming uncomfortable over a certain lesson in class. The argument is effective in parts, but not as a whole. What about the students who actually are medically unable to deal with a lesson in class due to PTSD? This editorial really only showed the bad side of trigger warnings inside colleges classes instead of showing the pros and the cons like most would. Some people claim that the addition of trigger warnings would not affect a college student’s ability to complete the work. It would also be difficult to do well on parts of a test unless they have a friend who will attend class still and take notes for them. Over all, trigger warnings are not completely bad, but they can most definitely be taken advantage of by students who do not want to go to classes one
The Coddling of the American Mind, by Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt, is an article published by the Atlantic Journal about the negative effects trigger warnings and microaggressions have on students in college. Trigger warnings are disclaimers about any potential emotional response from a class or its material. (44) Microaggressions are words or actions that have no sinister intentions, but people take as such. (44) Greg Lukianoff is the president and CEO of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education. (47) As the leader of the foundation, Greg Lukianoff has witnessed and fought many legal occasions of trigger warnings and microaggressions resulting in the masking of freedom of speech. Coauthor Jonathan Haidt is a professor at New
Racism has always been a heated topic, and it is well-known that many students of colour still face racism in the form of bullying. However, Derald Wing Sue argues that there is a type of minute racism present in our daily lives. This implicit racism lies in everyday interactions called microaggressions. He defines the concept of microaggressions as “brief, everyday exchanges that send denigrating messages to people of colour because they belong to a racial minority group” (1). They are everyday messages that are subtle and often unintentional. I will discuss these acts of microaggression with an emphasis on students in a post-secondary White-based environment. That is, a university or college that is predominantly biased towards a White culture.
Although trigger warnings sound like a harmless idea to many, there is an extreme controversy about whether or not they should be used in college lectures. Many college professors have conflicting views about trigger warnings; some agree on using them while others are against it. This debate topic is particularly intriguing in Kate Manne’s article in the New York Times titled, “Why I Use Trigger
In the Article “The Coddling of the American Mind” by George Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt were very specific examples of college students who were demanding protection from words and ideas they don't like, and seeking punishment to those who give even an accidental offense. When this becomes a problem for education and mental health on campus, many different problems become relevant in our generation of students then what the baby boomers and the Gen X generations had to deal with. The article was explaining how words, subjects, and ideas may affect students, along with these ideas were Microaggressions: small actions or word choices that seem on their face to have no malicious intent but that are thought of as a kind of violence
They don't always know their history" (Fox). The fact that most English teachers do not put every factor into perspective demonstrates why the students are confused and why they become shocked and offended when approached by the word “nigger.” The students are not at fault here, yet they still take action, even if it is irrational. They do not want to read the book and, because of its controversial history, also most parents and other community members embrace the decision to eradicate this book from the school systems. We do not want to live in a society in where the majority of the masses are confused due to a novel because it blocks any sort of potential to progress and develop as a functioning
In the article The Coddling of the American Mind written by Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt, they discuss the way trigger warnings effect campus life and students in American universities. According to the article trigger warnings negatively effect the campus and the students attending the university. In American universities today, the intellectual development and right to freedom of speech of students is denied as a result of the use of trigger warnings by professors to what may be perceived by some to be offensive or disturbing.