US students request 'trigger warnings' on literature

[Kilgore Trout]

I'm not sure how being raped, injured in a war, or senseless violated qualifies as being "sheltered."

It doesn't. I'm not sure how your strawman is supposed to address my post.

 

[Drolefille]

I have yet to see any ratings system that actually works. There are is so much involved behind the scenes in what goes into a rating, music, cable TV or regular TV, movies, video games, or whatever, any ratings system I have seen is far from consistent and it never has the intended effects anyways.


The Harry Potter thing is my concern. The book has no real witchcraft rituals, nothing Satanic, nothing that is even remotely innappropriate for its primary child/young teen audience, yet what if it were to be labeled with a "witchcraft" or "Satanic" trigger because the same widely misinformed parents who never read the books who had them added to the banned list want the triggers on them because they think bad things are in it? There is also the documentary Bully, which turned very political over its rating because it including "too much" R-rated language, even though the kids in the documentary do not get to have someone make sure they don't have to hear those words from their classmates. Or the PMRC, who thought it their duty to warn parents of not only sex and violence is in music, but of "occult themes" as well. Professor sensitivity and considerations is one thing, but we can't pad the world the protect everyone who may or may-not be sensitive to something, especially when much of the padding is done by people who believe it their political and/or moral duty to pick through things and label things as those of a similar background would label them and to find things that those who share similar beliefs will find offensive.

Trigger warnings online aren't "topics" so much as they are "potential psychological triggers." So abuse, violence, self-harm, sexual assault, eating disorders, etc. Not witchcraft, teaching evolution, etc.

I think that libraries, schools and universities already have systems in place to counteract censorship attempts by parents or "concerned citizens" and I don't see why they can't continue to work. The point is very much that trigger warnings are for the reader as advance warning (and in the case of optional reading to decide whether or not to engage), not for the reader's parents. With that intent, I don't think that "satanism" would be a trigger.

 

[ChristineES]

US students request 'trigger warnings' on literature | Books | theguardian.com

This whole thing is a form of censorship. I dislike book-burning and censorship.

 

[Drolefille]

This whole thing is a form of censorship. I dislike book-burning and censorship.

Again, how is it censorship? This is the equivalent of professors announcing to their students "Hey, this book is going to have some rape scenes in it."

Not "Hey, we won't teach this book because there are rape scenes in it."

 

[dust1n]

It doesn't. I'm not sure how your strawman is supposed to address my post.

I just assumed your attempt to poke fun of the softer generation stereotype was somehow related to the rape victim who made the request for the topic of discussion as described in the article in the OP. I guess it was my fault for assuming relevancy.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

I just assumed your attempt to poke fun of the softer generation stereotype was somehow related to the rape victim who made the request for the topic of discussion as described in the article in the OP. I guess it was my fault for assuming relevancy.

No, it's your fault for constructing a poor and lackluster retort to my scathing and insightful observation regarding the oh-so-precious and special generation.

 

[Apex]

If people are that sensitive towards verbal descriptions of rape, violence, or colonialism (seriously? WTF?) it is not unreasonable for them to bear the responsibility to look into the material ahead of time. They can easily determine if they will have problems ahead of time and talk with the professor (or whoever) about it. Expecting the rest of society to develop a system to appease them is irresponsible, unreasonable, and lazy.

 

[Drolefille]

If people are that sensitive towards verbal descriptions of rape, violence, or colonialism (seriously? WTF?) it is not unreasonable for them to bear the responsibility to look into the material ahead of time. They can easily determine if they will have problems ahead of time and talk with the professor (or whoever) about it. Expecting the rest of society to develop a system to appease them is irresponsible, unreasonable, and lazy.

Society or the people assigning the books to them?

If there was a handy website of books listed with applicable trigger warnings out there, perhaps that'd be feasible, but reading through dozens of reviews of each book to try to figure out whether there's rape or cutting or suicide in it is not feasible for a student when the professor who has assigned and knows the material could simply tell them up front by typing it into the syllabus

 

[Apex]

Society or the people assigning the books to them?

If there was a handy website of books listed with applicable trigger warnings out there, perhaps that'd be feasible, but reading through dozens of reviews of each book to try to figure out whether there's rape or cutting or suicide in it is not feasible for a student when the professor who has assigned and knows the material could simply tell them up front by typing it into the syllabus

Now cutting is included?

We may as well put a trigger warning for depression on Winnie the Pooh because Eeyore was such a depressing character.

 

[Drolefille]

Now cutting is included?

We may as well put a trigger warning for depression on Winnie the Pooh because Eeyore was such a depressing character.

Not cutting vegetables, self-harm has been on the list of trigger warnings provided since they became a thing on the internet.

People who cut themselves can indeed be triggered, much as a drug addict who gets a whiff of crack smoke might relapse. It's a psychological condition, not "I feel bad today." A veteran might want to know if you're going to be playing loud gunshots in the classroom as PTSD is also a psychological condition that can be triggered to serious negative effects on others as well as the student.

 

[dust1n]

No, it's your fault for constructing a poor and lackluster retort to my scathing and insightful observation regarding the oh-so-precious and special generation.

Correct. It was my fault for assuming your post was in any way related to the OP. I don't really find the retort particularly scathing or insightful considering its cliche, well-known, and been a common attitude around various cultures throughout the world by generations for at least the last century. "What's up with trigger warnings, am I right, folks?"

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Correct.

Enough said.

 

[dust1n]

Another classic quip. Any other unique observations?

 

[Gehennaite]

I have no problems with depictions of violence, but depictions of sex are a no-go. I don't want to be listening to that **** at all, and most certainly not in a public setting like school.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Back when "Saving Private Ryan" was released in theatres, it became suddenly apparent that more than enough patrons were experiencing PTSD in the theatre, taking them back to combat stress. The news then began discussing the movie and giving combat veterans a heads up that they may likely experience the tunnel vision, the adrenaline rush that the body has difficulty handling, etc.

I didn't think the news were conflating a problem at all. I think it was beneficial for those who wanted to see a box-office hit and Oscar success, but may be more susceptible to experiencing PTSD in the theatre with sights and sounds that are realistic to them.

There are resources for combat veterans to help cope with triggers. As are resources for survivors of sexual assault, survivors of catastrophic accidents (plane crash, auto accident, etc.).

I think requesting trigger warnings is superfluous, but not harmful. I don't see it as necessary as some, but I also don't see it as ridiculous as others. IMO, it wouldn't hurt, but what would help more is better access to coping methods for the unexpected triggers (like smells, clothing, seat belts, fireworks, big-box stores, back alleys, etc.).

 

[Nymphs]

I have no problems with depictions of violence, but depictions of sex are a no-go. I don't want to be listening to that **** at all, and most certainly not in a public setting like school.

Serious?

You think sex is more harmful than violence?

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Another classic quip. Any other unique observations?

Many.

 

[Quintessence]

Serious?

You think sex is more harmful than violence?

It seems to me they didn't say anything at all about their perceived harmfulness of these two things, but were expressing a personal preference that they have every right to.

 

[dust1n]

I have no problems with depictions of violence, but depictions of sex are a no-go. I don't want to be listening to that **** at all, and most certainly not in a public setting like school.

Strange you weren't consulted for sex education in schools, or anything.

 

[Nymphs]

It seems to me they didn't say anything at all about their perceived harmfulness of these two things, but were expressing a personal preference that they have every right to.

Of course they do.

I asked the question to clear up the confusion I had. :yes: