Speaking of being PC...

[PregnantPornStar]

I considered ignoring this whole thread, but I'll give it a shot and leave it at that.

I don't think "safe space," "trigger warning" and "PC" are necessarily related. Further, I am concerned about the implication that trigger warnings may be PC run amok. I think people who use all three of those terms in the same breath are conflating a number of different issues.

I don't think a trigger warning is appropriate for someone trying to avoid challenging or different points of view or writings, as has been implied. I do think, however, as society has become more aware of mental health, that advocates have come to recognize that a segment of the population has legitimate mental health concerns, particularly in regard to PTSD, which makes giving fair advance warning appropriate.

Several examples: I took a graduate level class on heroism two falls ago. The professor did not use the term "trigger warning" but acknowledged in the syllabus that some of the reading material focused on war and warriors and encouraged appropriate self care. He also asked in early class discussions (this was online) for people to self-identify if they felt comfortable.

On a recent thread here, a link was posted to a website with graphics of violence. Nothing was noted about said graphics, but another poster came along, found the violent photos, and noted that they were there with a "trigger warning."

It's pretty common place (and courteous) to mark a link NSFW if the content is not appropriate to be viewed on workplace computers. The NSFW tag also warns people with children, etc.

I don't think "trigger warning" is much different from NSFW. Common sense enables people to know when information has potential to upset people.

As to the question of whether so many people need trigger warnings - 1 in 4 women (best stat I've seen) experiences sexual violence in her lifetime. A vast population of US service members has returned from combat settings in the last 15 years, and we've become more aware of the connection between combat and PTSD (previously called shell shock and other terms that are escaping me.)

So, yes, a need exists. Who decides? Society through common sense and a bit of sensitivity. It's not rocket science.

Finally, perhaps it's unjust of me, but I question whether this thread was created to stir things up, because the OP is oblivious to climate, or from a genuine interest.

It is absolutely unjust of you, but I don't think that matters to you. [emoji1]

[church_of_dog]

It is absolutely unjust of you, but I don't think that matters to you. [emoji1]

And that makes you happy? Or what other feeling is that emoji intended to convey?

I'm not trying to be pedantic here -- I think that one of the reasons people are wary of your intent on this thread is because it seems inconsistent with the tone of your comments on another recent thread.

You may have started this thread with all authenticity, truly wanting to open a dialogue with the question/s you asked. I personally speculate that you did. However I also think the wariness expressed by others is reasonable, given the other thread.

So when you respond to someone expressing that wariness by again using a tone that feels disingenuous (manifested by using a smiley in what seems like an odd way because your typed words seem more like they would evoke sadness on your part, or curiosity, or even anger. But you added a happy face that makes the whole intent unclear), it certainly doesn't ease people's sense of you and your intent.

As you have no doubt read, FJ has had a lot of contentious conversations lately, and some of the folks that had roles in some of the unpleasant conversations have gone on to "settle in" and become engaged and engaging posters. You certainly seem to have the potential to do that, and on the assumption that you would like that, I thought I'd offer my thoughts on why that seems to be going in the opposite direction at the moment.

[PregnantPornStar]

And that makes you happy? Or what other feeling is that emoji intended to convey?

I'm not trying to be pedantic here -- I think that one of the reasons people are wary of your intent on this thread is because it seems inconsistent with the tone of your comments on another recent thread.

You may have started this thread with all authenticity, truly wanting to open a dialogue with the question/s you asked. I personally speculate that you did. However I also think the wariness expressed by others is reasonable, given the other thread.

So when you respond to someone expressing that wariness by again using a tone that feels disingenuous (manifested by using a smiley in what seems like an odd way because your typed words seem more like they would evoke sadness on your part, or curiosity, or even anger. But you added a happy face that makes the whole intent unclear), it certainly doesn't ease people's sense of you and your intent.

As you have no doubt read, FJ has had a lot of contentious conversations lately, and some of the folks that had roles in some of the unpleasant conversations have gone on to "settle in" and become engaged and engaging posters. You certainly seem to have the potential to do that, and on the assumption that you would like that, I thought I'd offer my thoughts on why that seems to be going in the opposite direction at the moment.

Thanks? I think?

The smiley is because when someone is consistently trying to argue with me or claim I am some terrible person, I am able to smile and nod and continue on.

Anyway, I don't care to discuss this in this thread. My intent was to discuss topic at hand. I don't know where else to discuss, but this is obviously derailing the thread.

[Fascinated]

Well, we've been going around in circles on different threads for days now. (We need some fundies to start doing/saying stuff!)

But, I kind if see both sides here. Certain subjects like sexual abuse and suicide are obvious known triggers and people should be sensitive in environments where they may be discussing these issues.

But, the truth is we all have experiences in life that will cause us to be upset in even seemingly innocent situations. For example, I was a little unhappy reading the 'wimpy white boy' discussion because our (white) premature son died. So, I had to leave that thread. But, it's not always as easy as removing yourself in such a way. I remember vividly a friend of mine relating how happy she was that another of her friend's baby was a 'fighter' and a 'survivor'. She had no idea how hurtful this was, but I have never forgotten it.

My point is that we cannot protect everyone from these triggers. They pop up out of the blue on tv, in books and out of the mouths of well-meaning friends. I don't know a practical way to issue trigger warnings to everyone about everything. It's tough.

[PregnantPornStar]

It is tough. I think that is part of my concern. Trying and then the people who "fall through the cracks" are likely left in an even worse state because they were not "taken care of" and everyone else was.

I am also sorry about your baby. I had a very close friend who lost a baby very late in her pregnancy. I became pregnant shortly after. I fretted over telling her, but also knew she would be so upset if I didn't tell her ASAP. We tell each other everything. Anyway, I told her and she was happy I told her. I did warn her we needed to talk and she figured it out...so I suppose that was my "trigger warning."

I think it might be more appropriate to help people know how to discuss things in a more sensitive way. I don't mean tiptoeing around an issue, but even tone of voice can make a difference. Sounding nonchalant vs sounding empathetic can make a difference. No always, but it can.

[CuttySark]

I don't speak to every circumstance, of course, but in my recent experience (past 10 years) in academia as a grad student and instructor, trigger warnings are used precisely so that we *can* deal with harsher topics. I teach a class that sometimes involves talking about body modifications (historical), and giving folks a quick heads-up at the beginning of lecture means I can use my better slides without worrying about sending someone into a reactive tailspin if they don't deal well with, say, images of initiation rituals that involve scarification and blood. I don't have insurance coverage if someone faints in class and cracks their head. ;) (joke.)

On the other end, I deeply appreciated a prof who warned us in advance about a graphic reading. We were talking about the Atlantic slave trade, reading the diary of an overseer who recorded details of literally thousands of sexual assaults. It's a viral source, and giving folks warning to read it in a safe space if we felt the need meant that everyone could decide for themselves how best to proceed -- the warning made it possible for the class to cover a source the prof might have otherwise decided against using.

From where I stand in the trenches currently, having empathy for students makes more things possible, not less.

[CuttySark]

Vital source. Tapa won't let me fix what my autocorrect destroyed. [emoji14]

[laPapessaGiovanna]

I clicked on this thread ready to rant about how tired about politically correctedness I have become lately, only to find out that the discussion regards a completely different topic. I had to go to educate myself about trigger warnings and safe spaces. I had already noticed trigger warnings on mainstream sites that publish pieces about sexual assaults, domestic violence, substance abuse, depression, suicide etc. Not having noticed them in more professional sites and publications that I often surf for work, I only thought they were a nice warning for non professionals and unaware readers, didn't think that they are "a thing" now, spreading in colleges and universities. Happy to have discovered something new.

I don't know if it is a tipically American thing or if it happens somewhere else. For example here it doesn't happen, none would think of giving trigger warnings. We tackle the topic in a different way.

I studied Education Sciences and I am currently an educator (not a teacher, I don't know if it is the correct translation), I have always worked only with adults, mostly drug addicts, and my former uni mates work with disabled people, prisoners in jail, victims of violence, elderly people and the likes. You can see that all the courses and the internships were potentially triggering and rightfully so because once you are a degreed professional you cannot badly manage a situation because you feel triggered. Obviously, being humans we all have difficulties, what's important is to know your weaknesses in advance so you can work with your colleagues to avoid making it a problem for your patients.

At uni potentially triggering subjects didn't come with a warning but there was an experienced educator, a sort of mentor, that followed us individually and as a class (also with lessons that would fit in the safe palaces definition given upthread) throughout all the lessons and the internships with the specific aim to provide support and help us growing up as mature professionals, able to face challenging situations, but knowingly avoiding those situations, that exist for everyone of us(we are no robots), where we would have trouble functioning correctly to help our patients. This for me and my colleagues was and is still extremely helpful.

I wanted to add though that as a child (since elementary school) I felt horribly triggered by some scientific knowledge. For example when I was 9 I read somewhere in a textbook about Cernobyl and for years was left with a crippling fear that the nuclear plant could implode inside its sarcophagus and maybe destroy half the world. Or that time I read about climate change and the greenglass house effect. I understood that those were somewhat irrational fears and I never talked about them, when actually talking about it with a competent adult was probably the only helpful thing I ccould have done, IF THERE WERE competent adults around.

In the end I think that's the important thing, that a competent and sensible adult that is in charge in the situation can make an evaluation and decide what's better and eventually support and help students that are having a difficult time. I don't think it as shielding people but only respect for individual weaknesses.

I think the line not to cross is putting trigger warnings or avoid topics with the only aim to avoid troubles and potential lawsuits or, as we say it, per pararsi il culo (untranslatable).

[Eighth-of-eleven]

TW

(thanks for the reminder ff, I posted before I thought)

Working for so many years with seriously mentally ill prisoners in a maximum security psychiatric hospital I have become so sensitive to the level of denial that exists in untreated PTSD. I have it myself, due to surviving many years of chilhood sexual abuse/rape and several years of working in a rather violence prone setting plus being assaulted by a mentally ill,person my self forcing me into medical retirement. I have witnessed murder, suicide, assault, rape, and constant verbal abuse as well in that setting.

While I was "dealing with reality" "sucking it up" "not being too sensitive" I became rigid, bitter, judgemental and not surprisingly began to drink a lot. I did not believe I should "protect my sensitive little soul" because "life just happens".

What I have come to realize is that that was all just self protective denial based bullshit. I AM sensitive, I DO need trigger warnings when they are available. If I don't get them, when I see them, I need to protect my sensitive heart and I need to appreciate and guard the sensitive hearts of those around me. And I am not the judge of what is hurtful to someone to whom I speak, when they say I hurt them, they are hurt.

[FundieFarmer]

TW. Before I was assaulted, I didn't see a need for trigger warnings. I also thought society was rampant with them, and that we were babying people by giving that little two-letter warning before tough topics. I mean, just get over it, right? It happened, move along.

Ha. If only.

Listen, I get it. I've been there. I survived and I really do mean survived, luckily. That night put into perspective how little tiny things can be the worst of triggers. I think that's where it's spotty, because how can you know exactly what everyone's triggers are? But you could know that some things weren't appropriate because with the rate of women in the US who experience those things, it's pretty safe to say that a TW for assault is a reasonable thing to do. I think that broader topics are safe and deserving of trigger warnings. And yeah, part of moving on and returning to a healthy life is moving past the regular need for trigger warnings. Two years and a lot of healing work later, I don't need the warnings like I used to. Others do. Overall, I look at it like this: You never know who is a new survivor. You never know who just experienced this days, a week before you mention it, or who is still triggered years later. You never know if the wound is still fresh and you've just dumped the salt. I'd rather offer that warning than hurt someone else, if I can avoid it. Who knows what help those two letters can give.

[laPapessaGiovanna]

Working for so many years with seriously mentally ill prisoners in a maximum security psychiatric hospital I have become so sensitive to the level of denial that exists in untreated PTSD. I have it myself, due to surviving many years of chilhood sexual abuse/rape and several years of working in a rather violence prone setting plus being assaulted by a mentally ill,person my self forcing me into medical retirement. I have witnessed murder, suicide, assault, rape, and constant verbal abuse as well in that setting.

While I was "dealing with reality" "sucking it up" "not being too sensitive" I became rigid, bitter, judgemental and not surprisingly began to drink a lot. I did not believe I should "protect my sensitive little soul" because "life just happens".

What I have come to realize is that that was all just self protective denial based bullshit. I AM sensitive, I DO need trigger warnings when they are available. If I don't get them, when I see them, I need to protect my sensitive heart and I need to appreciate and guard the sensitive hearts of those around me. And I am not the judge of what is hurtful to someone to whom I speak, when they say I hurt them, they are hurt.

Thank you. I am sure you did greatly at your job, but when it is too much to bear you need to be a wise person to understand it and quit. And you did it, you had the courage to do it. I know many professionals (psychiatrists, psychologists, social assistants and educators too) that don't want to understand this and go on thinking they are heroes helping the whole humankind when they are only suffering and often unable to function properly in their job, hurting themselves and their patients/clients, leaving their colleagues to deal with the fall out at work and their families to deal with their broken father/mother/spouse at home.

I really admire you. I often ask myself how I feel, if this work is wearing me, if I am risking to burn out, I trust my colleagues and my SO (he too is an educator in a different place) to warn me should it happen, because I don't know if I could see it on my own.

[latraviata]

I also had to look up what trigger warnings and save places are.

The country where I live and largely grew up in, is famous and sometimes notorious for the honest directness of its population. Especially Brits and Americans have some initial difficulties with it, but once accustomed, they experience the liberating feel because you at least know where you stand. Beyond "the pictures may be shocking" we never go and parents are not advised to send children out of the room for any adult programs or images.

Yet we are considered, according to the polls as one of the happiest nations in the world.

Personally, I can safely say that life has not been very kind to me and I never felt offended by random remarks in a discussion or made in my presence about particular subjects which might hurt my feelings or something.

Reading the entire Zsu post and reading whether Indian summer (we use that expression too) and crazy are stigmatising or not PC I started to have serious doubts about the mental health of some FJers.

[latraviata]

Thank you. I am sure you did greatly at your job, but when it is too much to bear you need to be a wise person to understand it and quit. And you did it, you had the courage to do it. I know many professionals (psychiatrists, psychologists, social assistants and educators too) that don't want to understand this and go on thinking they are heroes helping the whole humankind when they are only suffering and often unable to function properly in their job, hurting themselves and their patients/clients, leaving their colleagues to deal with the fall out at work and their families to deal with their broken father/mother/spouse at home.

I really admire you. I often ask myself how I feel, if this work is wearing me, if I am risking to burn out, I trust my colleagues and my SO (he too is an educator in a different place) to warn me should it happen, because I don't know if I could see it on my own.

Standard procedure in the Dutch institutes from university to shelter, care workers form high to low always have a supervisor.

[laPapessaGiovanna]

Standard procedure in the Dutch institutes from university to shelter, care workers form high to low always have a supervisor.

Here if you work "alone" (psychologists and psychiatrists who do private consults) you are required to have a direct supervisor. If you work in a team as I and most educators do, the whole team has regular meetings with the supervisor. In this way the whole team is your support and part of the supervision process, then catalyzed by a third part.

Edited because part =/= party

[latraviata]

Here if you work "alone" (psychologists and psychiatrists who do private consults) you are required to have a direct supervisor. If you work in a team as I and most educators do, the whole team has regular meetings with the supervisor. In this way the whole team is your support and part of the supervision process, then catalyzed by a third part.

Edited because part =/= party

Well, pretty much the same here.

[Eighth-of-eleven]

Here if you work "alone" (psychologists and psychiatrists who do private consults) you are required to have a direct supervisor. If you work in a team as I and most educators do, the whole team has regular meetings with the supervisor. In this way the whole team is your support and part of the supervision process, then catalyzed by a third part.

Edited because part =/= party

Level of care to non level of care in max security always work in teams. Safety first, because there is so much potential for, and actual outbreak of, violence.

[latraviata]

I can recall being pretty much forced into listening to a lot of crap in college from strong-willed professors and the like, but thinking back it was a learning experience for me at least and should probably be glad it happened. The whole "trigger warning and "safe space" thing seems to be a major trend as of late. Are there really that many people that need this? I can understand and sympathize someone that is seriously dealing with some sort of PTSD. But generally it seems that "facing our fears" as a concept has been tossed out the window. I need to keep thinking about it. Great topic!

Perhaps this excellent article will help you think it through.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/arc ... nd/399356/

[MatthewDuggar]

Perhaps this excellent article will help you think it through.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/arc ... nd/399356/

Excellent article, thanks!

[Beb]

Excellent article, latraviata. Food for thought, and thought is initiated by new and/or opposing ideas.

[PregnantPornStar]

There’s a saying common in education circles: Don’t teach students what to think; teach them how to think. The idea goes back at least as far as Socrates. Today, what we call the Socratic method is a way of teaching that fosters critical thinking, in part by encouraging students to question their own unexamined beliefs, as well as the received wisdom of those around them. Such questioning sometimes leads to discomfort, and even to anger, on the way to understanding.

But vindictive protectiveness teaches students to think in a very different way. It prepares them poorly for professional life, which often demands intellectual engagement with people and ideas one might find uncongenial or wrong. The harm may be more immediate, too. A campus culture devoted to policing speech and punishing speakers is likely to engender patterns of thought that are surprisingly similar to those long identified by cognitive behavioral therapists as causes of depression and anxiety. The new protectiveness may be teaching students to think pathologically.

This highlights my feelings on this.

I feel like we are building walls vs tearing them down.

[Criscat]

There’s a saying common in education circles: Don’t teach students what to think; teach them how to think. The idea goes back at least as far as Socrates. Today, what we call the Socratic method is a way of teaching that fosters critical thinking, in part by encouraging students to question their own unexamined beliefs, as well as the received wisdom of those around them. Such questioning sometimes leads to discomfort, and even to anger, on the way to understanding.

But vindictive protectiveness teaches students to think in a very different way. It prepares them poorly for professional life, which often demands intellectual engagement with people and ideas one might find uncongenial or wrong. The harm may be more immediate, too. A campus culture devoted to policing speech and punishing speakers is likely to engender patterns of thought that are surprisingly similar to those long identified by cognitive behavioral therapists as causes of depression and anxiety. The new protectiveness may be teaching students to think pathologically.

.

This. One of my best memories in HIGH SCHOOL was my AP lit classes in 11th and 12th grades. We read books By James Joyce, Hemingway, and discussed things that were extremely sensitive and difficult to discuss. That class more than any other taught me how to think critically and put things in perspective. It taught me empathy and basically that the world does not revolve around me and my feelings, to take other perspectives in consideration. And this was in high school. College was even better. While I was 100% against most of my sociology professors views, I took it as a lesson that not everyone thinks like me, and I learned how to support my views in that class. Yes--as long as I could support a viewpoint, he didn't dress me down or accuse me of racism, sexism, or whatever the flavor is that professors today use to shut down conversations that are not PC. So glad I went to college in the early 2000's! :dance:

This PC crap about trying not to offend everyone is stunting critical thinking. How can a person learn about the world and other perspectives if they are taught to be afraid of offending everyone? I fear for society :cray-cray:

[laPapessaGiovanna]

As far as I can see none in this thread has advocated the sort of thought policing that article criticizes.

More than one poster spoke against avoiding controversial topics and in favour of issuing trigger warnings that on one side enable the Professors to actually teach about controversial thoughts and on the other side are useful for students who can benefit from being prepared to face their nightmares and cope better.

[Terrie]

As far as I can see none in this thread has advocated the sort of thought policing that article criticizes.

More than one poster spoke against avoiding controversial topics and in favour of issuing trigger warnings that on one side enable the Professors to actually teach about controversial thoughts and on the other side are useful for students who can benefit from being prepared to face their nightmares and cope better.

Simply put, a good syllabus tells a student what to expect from the class. If a student is blind-sided by something like genocide in your class, you're a crappy teacher.

I'm also annoyed at people who respond to concerns with "Well, if you really have a problem, you should be in therapy." Um, what if they ARE in therapy? Are people with legit mental illness supposed to stay home and not participate in society until they reach a certain level of "normal"? There's something very ableist in the that kind of thinking.

Accommodating disabilities is about giving people tools to navigate a society designed around "normal" people, not coddling them like eternal infants. Telling people people "Be aware the course contains X, Y and Z." is giving people a tool to make decisions. Saying "You can't have X, Y and Z" is coddling.

[polecat]

I was diagnosed with ptsd after a series of issues I began having some years back. I have triggers. I have anxiety attacks/physical responses to certain stimuli. Triggers can be the most random (often seemingly innocuous) things that simply spark a memory of an event. I do not expect anyone to warn me of something that may "trigger" me because I often don't know myself until I'm already there. There are some types of conversations that I can't get involved in because I take them too seriously and get too emotionally invested -- and then I have to withdraw to avoid having a public meltdown. (And I've done this and am always utterly embarrassed afterwards). It's no one's job to protect me from myself or from something that might upset me. It's my job to know my own limits.

That said, I don't see what's wrong with warning a class that some subject matter may be difficult. Way back in the Dark Ages when I was in college (long, long before the current "pc" climate), we'd occasionally have a warning that the class would be discussing something difficult or graphic so that we could make the best decisions for our own needs. If someone cannot -- legitimately cannot -- handle an in-depth conversation about child abuse, sexual assault, domestic violence, etc., why would anyone want to force them to sit through it? Isn't that person the best judge of what is and isn't right for them? How does a TW hurt anyone? I can see that it might be annoying and eye-roll-y to someone who has no issues, but does it really affect your ability to learn? It's easy to tell someone to just "get over it," but sometimes that's a lot easier said than done.

And tbh, content warnings have been on TV for as long as I can remember. And I am not a young woman anymore. Really, who cares? And if you do care, why? As long as the TW isn't silencing the discussion but allowing those who cannot engage in a healthy way to remove themselves from it, I really do not understand what the big deal is.

[Eighth-of-eleven]

I was diagnosed with ptsd after a series of issues I began having some years back. I have triggers. I have anxiety attacks/physical responses to certain stimuli. Triggers can be the most random (often seemingly innocuous) things that simply spark a memory of an event. I do not expect anyone to warn me of something that may "trigger" me because I often don't know myself until I'm already there. There are some types of conversations that I can't get involved in because I take them too seriously and get too emotionally invested -- and then I have to withdraw to avoid having a public meltdown. (And I've done this and am always utterly embarrassed afterwards). It's no one's job to protect me from myself or from something that might upset me. It's my job to know my own limits.

That said, I don't see what's wrong with warning a class that some subject matter may be difficult. Way back in the Dark Ages when I was in college (long, long before the current "pc" climate), we'd occasionally have a warning that the class would be discussing something difficult or graphic so that we could make the best decisions for our own needs. If someone cannot -- legitimately cannot -- handle an in-depth conversation about child abuse, sexual assault, domestic violence, etc., why would anyone want to force them to sit through it? Isn't that person the best judge of what is and isn't right for them? How does a TW hurt anyone? I can see that it might be annoying and eye-roll-y to someone who has no issues, but does it really affect your ability to learn? It's easy to tell someone to just "get over it," but sometimes that's a lot easier said than done.

And tbh, content warnings have been on TV for as long as I can remember. And I am not a young woman anymore. Really, who cares? And if you do care, why? As long as the TW isn't silencing the discussion but allowing those who cannot engage in a healthy way to remove themselves from it, I really do not understand what the big deal is.

This,this, I so agree with this. So sorry you have experienced life changing trauma polecat.