Hate them or love them, you probably don’t have an accurate idea of what trigger warnings are. Lately, they have become more of a meme than anything to be taken seriously. Madonna comes on the radio and suddenly every Lady Gaga fan is “triggered.”
In their true form, trigger warnings seem like a good idea. In the context of a college campus, they allow professors to be aware of students’ traumatic experiences and give these students a heads-up when topics involving serious subjects such as rape, death, abuse, self-harm or eating disorders arise.
The idea is that these topics may trigger anxiety or other debilitating mental blocks and prevent intellectual engagement in classrooms.
Why would anyone object to this? Because trigger warnings are now invoked when an individual is simply uncomfortable with opposing views and ideologies.
It is this extension of suppression in the form of trigger warnings — for topics ranging from grotesque material to basic conservative beliefs — that is dangerous in college classrooms. I personally am uncomfortable with others’ opinions I consider bigoted or hateful, especially with regard to my own identity. However, opposing views will always exist, and students who study controversial topics must be prepared to handle differing opinions.
Many people view students today as coddled and entitled. In recent years, students at mostly liberal arts universities have protested racist facets of their colleges’ history.
Protests have emerged at universities like Princeton, for the institution’s “treatment of Woodrow Wilson’s racist legacy,” according to The Atlantic. The University of Chicago’s dean issued a statement to incoming freshmen in August rejecting trigger warnings and safe spaces.
The problem with trigger warnings is that they stifle dialogue on controversial topics under the guise of tolerance and respect for others. To have engaging conversations about difficult topics in college classrooms, students must feel free to argue on behalf of their beliefs without fear of being labeled intolerant or disrespectful. These dissenting views are what challenge and strengthen our own opinions.
Trigger warnings are no longer about allowing traumatized students access to educational discussion. Instead, their purpose has stretched to stifle discussions on racism, sexism and U.S. imperialism. Students must be able to handle these threats to their ideology and identities, even if their identity is already marginalized.
I concede that opposition to marginalized identities can trigger traumatic recollections of hatred and abuse, but college campuses serve as a real-world space to learn and engage others’ opinions. We must be prepared to face difficult topics and views that undermine our challenges as marginalized groups.
The goal of trigger warnings should not be to avoid uncomfortable subjects, but only to warn students of material they may want to avoid because of past trauma.