SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the this-article-may-trigger-strong-emotions dept.
There is a lot of talk on the net these days about microagressions, and it's good netiquette to post trigger warnings before discussing sensitive topics. What's good in online forums isn't necessarily appropriate in-person, especially on University campuses. The cover article for September's edition of The Atlantic magazine discusses the harm that students' requests for trigger warnings on course content and accusations of microagression are causing, stifling open conversation on campuses across America. The authors also suggest that these student behaviors are actively causing harm to the students.
Avoiding trigger topics, instead of assisting those who have suffered traumas, perpetuates and enhances the pathology of the phobias they hope not to trigger. The hunt for microagression creates in the students cognitive distortions that are usually treated with cognitive behavioral therapy. The authors are calling this "The Coddling of the American Mind", and suggest it will create a generation of graduates unable to cope with the world after graduation.
The authors also appeared on the Diane Rehm show, on a segment called "The New Political Correctness: Why Some Fear It's Ruining American Education". Far from trying to shut down the conversation about race relations, the authors are trying to re-open it.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Francis on Tuesday September 01 2015, @04:15PM
Well, for one thing it normalizes freaking out over things that aren't a big deal. For example if you've been raped and you aren't freaking out because of something that should have received a trigger warning, you're not a real rape survivor and should shut up before you damage the cause. This kind of thinking has been a huge problem when it comes to child abuse as anybody who has been abused like that is expected to keep their mouth shut if they're not prepared to toe the party line on the issue. Leading to a huge number of people not feeling like the abuse was real abuse.
The main purpose it serves is to further isolate people that need to be working out how to develop a healthy connection with others. It's not going to happen if you're demanding a trigger warning over whatever it is. Memory is stored in an idiosyncratic way and trying to predict how the memories are connected in a group of people that likely have little in common is nigh impossible. In all likelihood the obvious triggers are the ones that are easier to deal with. It's walking through the minefield of other memories that connect to the trauma that are the real issue.
If there were a reasonable way of warning people about those random connections, I'd be more apt to accept trigger warnings as something legitimate. But, by the time you see the trigger warning, it's really too late for anybody that's that sensitive. The trigger warning itself is likely to be a trigger. If you've been raped and can't handle thinking about it, being given a trigger warning about a discussion about rape is probably not going to be very effective.