A classroom should be a safe space. There. I said it.
Recently, the University of Chicago sent its students a letter condemning the idea of "safe spaces" in favor of intellectual freedom and freedom of speech. Over the past week, I have observed many people supporting this, claiming that Millennials are a bunch of pansies who cannot handle the real world. That's, simply put, is bullshit.
While intellectual freedom and freedom of speech are two foundational aspects of growing, the memo should have excluded the phrase "safe space."
A safe space is not a place where people walk on eggshells in order to make sure nobody gets offended. A safe space should be a place where individuals, particularly students, can maul over new ideas in a place where they do not feel judged for asking "dumb questions" in order to understand new concepts. A safe space is a place wherein people from different backgrounds can share their experiences with education at the foundation, recognizing that colleagues and peers are not trying to be offensive with their ignorance, they simply do understand. Here is where the ignorance can diminish through dialogue with a mature, respectful community led by an academic facilitator sensitive yet firm enough to handle the "difficult conversations."
The purpose of education is to create productive members of society. By ignoring the fact that classrooms should be safe, the University of Chicago is almost inviting students to be offensive for the sake of being offensive. How is that fostering the productivity of society? I recognize that the intention of the letter was to show students that they are not "special snowflakes" who should be sheltered from the harsh realities of life, but by diminishing the notion that classrooms should be safe environments, the letter does more damage than good.
Educational institutions should foster safe environments for intellectual curiosity to flourish. Believe it or not, many students have already graduated from the "School of Hard Knocks" before (or during) their college careers. Most young adults know that life is not unicorn kisses and candy canes: we have debt, we have low-paying jobs with corrupt bosses who aren't afraid to offend us on the regular, we have unusually high standards for ourselves, we have helicopter parents from whom we try relentlessly to escape, and finally, we have an entire culture that constantly accuses us of being spoon-fed, when in reality, we have dealt with more than our elders think.
Most young adults do not fit into the cookie-cutter identity the Baby Boomers have prescribed us. Sure, some of us do, and those are the ones who seem to cause the most noise, giving us our reputation. The belief that all Millennials have an inflated self-worth, are generally ignorant of the realities of life, are lazy, and, of course, become offended by almost everything is a stereotype. By sending out a letter, practically demeaning us, stating that the university is going to metaphorically pull the safe rug from under us inside the classrooms, the university only makes itself look ignorant.
The letter claims that safe spaces allow students to "retreat from ideas and perspectives at odds with their own." This should not ever be the case. If a professor is adequate, he or she will create a safe space wherein the students do not want to retreat from these ideas and perspectives, but rather, the students have a place wherein they can explore them without fear of ridicule from lack of previous knowledge. Perhaps the college should focus more on professional development for its instructors rather than blame the students over a stereotype.
Furthermore, the letter states that the university does not condone trigger warnings. Once again, I call bullshit. The purpose of a trigger warning is not to allow students to disengage from topics that make them uncomfortable, trigger warnings, as the word states, is a warning. It simply allows students who have experienced emotional trauma to mentally prepare for difficult topics that may cause flashbacks and/or an episode of PTSD.
Sure, life will not provide individuals with trigger warnings. The students with emotional trauma know that already, as they most likely deal with those circumstances on a daily or weekly basis. If someone has personally experienced these issues, he or she is stronger than the University of Chicago gives him or her credit for.
However, an educational institution dedicated to the personal and educational growth of all students should recognize that in order to make sure a student does not shut down in the face of his or her emotional trigger in an educational setting where the purpose is to be open and learn, professors should be able to warn the students of sensitive subject matter so that the student can prepare for it. In no way should a professor shy away from topics in order to keep from offending students, but providing a warning before covering issues like rape, graphic violence, incest, etc. allows students who have dealt with these things first-hand to anticipate potential issues, and deal with them/prepare for class accordingly.
The purpose of trigger warnings is not so a student is protected from opposing ideals. A trigger warning is intended to warn students of potentially upsetting material with from which he or she may have experienced trauma.
Life is not a safe space. But a classroom should be. The University of Chicago (alongside many American citizens) possesses an incorrect definition of "safe spaces." They imply that safe spaces, to Millennials, is a place wherein the students do not face opposition in ideas. This is absolutely not the case. A classroom should not stifle the freedom of speech and intellectuality. In fact, it should do the exact opposite in a safe environment free from judgment and condemnation for curiosity.
All intellectual institutions, from pre-school to graduate school, should always be a safe space for all students, regardless of their personal histories.
