Safe Space And Trigger Warnings Essay Example

Political correctness, cancel culture, and an increase in sensitivity has led to a higher demand for trigger warnings and safe spaces. The inclusion of trigger warnings and safe spaces across all mediums has become a nationwide debate, especially on college campuses.  Many students reading this plan on attending a university, so the decision on their implementation could affect future college experiences. While some people believe that it makes people feel more comfortable with sensitive topics, it would be difficult to please everyone because of different experiences and upbringings. Also, even though these measures protect students from sensitive content, it’s shown that avoiding your trauma is linked to depression and anxiety. While it’s true that safe spaces and trigger warnings can be beneficial for students with previous traumas, and some argue that their inclusion in universities does more good than harm, it’s important to acknowledge that these tools portray the idea that words can be forms of violence that campus authorities must keep under strict control, which is unrealistic because students at universities have different beliefs and past experiences, making it almost impossible to account for every student’s needs.

Some argue that safe spaces and trigger warnings allow students to avoid triggering their previous traumas and talk to people about their trauma without being judged. They argue that they don’t take away from the experience of the content being viewed, and are just a precaution for sensitive students. The text states, “No right should be so freely and recklessly exercised that it becomes an impediment to civil society, making it so that others are made to feel less free, their private space and peace invaded, their sensitivities cruelly trampled upon” (Rosenbaum 4). Allowing people to spew hate speech and cover it up as their “First Amendment right” is despicable and should most definitely be stopped. However, while poking and prodding at people’s sensitivities is not right, it’s something that is bound to happen in society. Not everyone will agree with what others stand for, and not everyone will like specific people, many times for no reason. While this is not a kind quality in humans, it happens, and more often than not, that can not be stopped. Avoiding issues and criticism are not positive either, in fact, it can potentially be detrimental to a person’s mental health. In the text it says, “A campus culture devoted to policing speech and punishing speakers is likely to engender patterns of thought that are surprisingly similar to those long identified by cognitive behavioral therapists as causes of depression and anxiety” (Lukianoff & Haidt). In the college setting, there is already enough stress when it comes to school work and social life, and by adding that new level of anxiety and depression, there’s no telling how far these students could spiral. By universities not implementing trigger warnings and safe spaces, people become less likely to succumb to the excruciating mental effect that many college students nowadays face.

Trigger warnings and safe spaces promote the idea that words can be forms of violence that must be strictly monitored by campus authorities. This is unrealistic because students have different experiences and trigger points that make it very difficult for the university to attain to all their students’ needs and would make other students need to tread lightly. Lukianoff and Haidt claim that “The ultimate aim [...] is to turn campuses into “safe spaces” where young adults are shielded from words and ideas that make some uncomfortable. And more than the last, this movement seeks to punish anyone who interferes with that aim, even accidentally. [...] It is creating a culture in which everyone must think twice before speaking up” (Lukainofff and Haidt). The people who accidentally trigger a classmate and are punished for it would become frustrated at the fact that they meant no harm in their comments, creating a divide between the university and its students. In addition, shying away from what makes people uncomfortable does not adequately prepare them for the real world. Lukainoff claims, “Frankly it seems this is sort of an inevitable movement toward people increasingly expecting physical comfort and intellectual comfort in their lives, [...] It is only going to get harder to teach people that there is a real important and serious value to being offended.” In the real world, being protected from uncomfortable situations most of the time does not happen. Being offended helps build character that would otherwise be unresolved feelings if continuously protected. So, by removing trigger warnings and safe spaces from college campuses, students are better prepared for what life will be like outside of the classroom.

Trigger warnings should not have to be monitored by college campuses because many of them restrict freedom of speech. By drowning out, “the ideas that we find offensive” (King), we do not allow for any type of conversation to be had. Zakaria argues, “at the heart of liberty in the Western world has been freedom of speech. From the beginning, people understood that this meant protecting and listening to speech with which you disagreed” (King). Not allowing for disagreements to be had hinders the progress society is trying to make, as it doesn’t allow for any common ground to be found. Everyone is just supposed to feel how they feel, and not have an open mind to any other viewpoints, which is an ineffective way of thinking. This goes for the classroom as well. High school and college are the foundations of the way we think, and trigger warnings promote the mindset of not allowing for any differing opinions and of being closed-minded, which is highly illogical.

Safe spaces and trigger warnings illustrate that words are forms of violence that college campuses must completely control, and while they can be beneficial for students suffering from PTSD, and they potentially have more benefits, it’s essential to realize how unrealistic it is to attain to all student’s traumas and needs. There are MILLIONS of college students, and the decision to regulate potentially sensitive content would be detrimental. This is because protecting people from what makes them uncomfortable won’t prepare them for the real world, and also there will be no progress in society because a close-minded approach to various topics is being encouraged on these college campuses.