Recently, University of Chicago sent a letter to its freshmen class stating that it does not support trigger warnings or safe spaces. While I agree with the university's overall message, I do disagree with some of their word choice. Let me explain.
In sending this letter, University of Chicago was announcing that it would not limit or censor freedom of speech and the spread of ideas in order to eliminate discomfort. They said this with these words: "Our commitment to academic freedom means that we do not support so-called 'trigger warnings,' we do not cancel invited speakers because their topics might prove controversial, and we do not condone the creation of intellectual 'safe spaces' where individuals can retreat from ideas and perspectives at odds with their own."
For the most part, I agree with the core of this message. We should not try to suppress messages because they might make some people uncomfortable.
My freshmen year of college, my school, University of Dayton, cancelled the invited speaker Laci Green. Laci is a popular YouTuber who was traveling around to different colleges giving talks about sex education and sex positivity. She was cancelled because it was deemed that the content of her presentation did not align with the Marianist Catholic values that the university holds. As someone who strongly believes in the importance of sex education for everyone, no matter one's religion or sexual experiences, I was very disappointed and frustrated with my university's decision.
The only way that we grow, develop or advance as a society is by bringing up and talking about uncomfortable things. At one point, women voting, schools integrating, same-sex couples marrying, heck, even women riding bicycles was considered offensive. Aren't we glad that we talked about those things? Those uncomfortable conversations led to positive change.
So, I am fully in support of University of Chicago deciding not to cancel speakers on the basis of potentially offensive content.
I also agree with the university's belief that individuals should not be able to "retreat from ideas and perspectives at odds with their own." To live your life in an isolated world where you only ever expose yourself to opinions and ideas that match those you were raised with is a life of ignorance that I wouldn't wish upon anyone. How can you be sure of your own beliefs if they're never challenged?
However, I begin to have a big issue with University of Chicago's letter when they bring up "trigger warnings." Their use of the phrase implies to me that they either do not understand the various meanings of that phrase or that they are very insensitive towards their students.
It would be easy to misuse or misunderstand the phrase "trigger warning." Lately, it has been used as a colloquial term that deeply understates the impact of a trigger. People have been saying things like "that triggers me," in reference to things that make them excited, annoyed or other quite mild emotions. Others use it to make fun of people that they believe have made up their own mental illness. You see, while the general population and even the bright-minded administrators at University of Chicago may consider "trigger warnings" to be notices of something that might make you slightly uncomfortable, this causally thrown-around phrase is much more serious for others.
For people who struggle with PTSD or intense anxiety, a trigger warning about say, topics of abuse, may mean the difference between a calm afternoon and a panic attack. A trigger warning does not mean allowing anyone that is uncomfortable with a topic to skip a speaker. It means giving a simple statement of what content is going to be covered, so that those who may have a serious mental/emotional reaction to that particular subject can be mentally prepared, or, if they believe it is necessary, opt out. Anyone who has even dealt with PTSD or anxiety, or has experienced someone undergoing a panic attack or reliving their trauma understands the severity of this, and thus the importance of trigger warnings.
As one blogger suffering from PTSD said, "Some people feel like trigger warnings coddle sensitive people. I don’t see it that way. I see trigger warnings as a common courtesy to help prevent sufferers of PTSD, like me, from reliving our trauma."
Yes, giving a trigger warning may be allowing for some people to "retreat from ideas and perspectives at odds with their own." But in my opinion, a few ignorant people is a small sacrifice for protecting people that struggle with mental illnesses from reliving trauma and experiencing panic attacks.
University of Chicago, I support you in your value to protect the freedom of speech, to not censor uncomfortable topics and to fight against ignorance. I wish more universities would follow in your path. Just please, be aware of your use of the phrase "trigger warning," and understand the importance of those for people struggling mental illnesses.