View Single Post
  #5  
Unread 08-22-2015, 10:03 AM
Julie Steiner Julie Steiner is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Posts: 8,711
Default

There's a big difference between finding something offensive or disturbing and having one's post-traumatic stress disorder triggered.

Here's a good reply to the Atlantic essay, from the perspective of someone who does get triggered by reading material. (My triggers are things like having a large man suddenly looming near. I've never been triggered by reading material, but I still wouldn't wish a PTSD episode on anyone.)

Note that the author of the reply essay doesn't use the warnings to avoid reading difficult material. Trigger warnings just give her the opportunity to mentally prepare herself to engage with that material, and perhaps save it until she's in a more convenient (e.g., private) setting. Her perspective is similar to that of a student veteran I spoke with a few years ago. He appreciated trigger warnings for scenes of graphic violence, so that he could postpone the reading of that material until he was home.

Trigger warnings (and strong language warnings, for that matter) aren't censorship. They ADD information, rather than taking information away. The kinds of things talked about in the Atlantic article attempt to make professors restructure curricula to avoid potentially distressing topics. Those things constitute censorship and an assault on academic freedom, and I decry them, but I hope we can agree that these things are SEVERAL hues down the spectrum from simply making readers aware of possible triggers.
Reply With Quote