American University Student Govt Demands Trigger Warnings in Course Syllabi
“trigger warnings are necessary in order to make our academic spaces accessible to all students”
The faculty at American University passed a resolution against Trigger Warnings in 2015. However, some members of the student government not only want Trigger Warnings, they want them to be mandatory.
Inside Higher Ed reports:
Pushing Trigger Warnings
The University of Chicago has received considerable attention for Dean John Ellison’s letter to incoming students about free speech. He warned freshmen not to expect safe spaces or trigger warnings, setting off a national debate about their value and prevalence. A different kind of debate is going on at American University, where students are demanding mandatory trigger warnings — despite the Faculty Senate’s 2015 resolution against them.
“There’s a difference between our students and our faculty about the necessity of trigger warnings on syllabi and the importance of centering student trauma in academic spaces,” Devontae Torriente, president of American’s student government, says in new YouTube video introducing the group’s #LetUsLearn campaign in favor of such warnings. “The fact of the matter is, trigger warnings are necessary in order to make our academic spaces accessible to all students, especially those who have experienced trauma.”
Torriente adds, “In doing so, we uphold [American’s] commitment to academic freedom and allow all students to participate in the exchange of ideas and discussion.”
The assertion is something of an inversion of the logic the Faculty Senate used last year in its resolution against mandatory trigger warnings, which it shared again this fall via email with students, faculty and staff. The debate is also exemplary of the larger national discussion about trigger warnings, in which proponents — including survivor advocates and many students — say they increase participation and therefore contribute to academic freedom, and critics — including the American Association of University Professors — say they may limit free speech and inquiry.
Here’s the video message Devontae Torriente uploaded to YouTube:
Heat Street has more on this:
Student government will soon meet with American University’s faculty senate, pushing it to reconsider its stance and embrace trigger warnings for each class. The meetings will focus on “creat[ing] a campus-wide definition to continue to make academic spaces accessible to all students,” Torriente said.
But that’s easier said than done. A reporting project published by American University students last semester illustrates how on campus, there’s little agreement on the definitions of terms like “safe space” or “trigger warning.”
Of course, you could say that Trigger Warnings are just another way for the left to control the speech of others.
You could also say that if you need Trigger Warnings, you don’t belong in college.
Featured image via YouTube.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
“Of course, you could say that Trigger Warnings are just another way for the left to control the speech of others.”
It IS control! That is why the words make no sense logically.
“You could also say that if you need Trigger Warnings, you don’t belong in college.”
An adult protects children because children need protection.
UFB.
College students are old enough to vote. They are NOT children.
You could also say that if you need Trigger Warnings, you don’t belong in college.
You could also say that if you need Trigger Warnings, you won’t make it in the real world.
Liberal Syllogisms 101:
A ‘trigger’ is part of a gun.
Guns scare me.
Therefore, I can’t got to college because I am scared to death of trigger warnings.
This is what you get with a policy of “everyone goes to college”, even the emotionally retarded…
The whole deal is irrational, as Torriente expresses it.
He asserts that trigger warnings are to be provided to assure student participation. But by their nature, they are given so students can self-select topics that “traumatize” them and bail out of participation.
So that can’t be the REAL reason for them…
Maybe someone will have the balls to sue under the 1st Amendment.
to the United States Constitution prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble,
It wouldn’t take “balls”.
It would take an empty skull. There is no 1st Amendment issue here. None.
Maybe AU might be able to hid under their private institution cover, but Title IX is pushed, so why not the 1st Amendment. Especially in regards to safe space. Censored speech is against everything the founders believed in.
But here, nobody is ‘censoring’ any speech. In fact, they’re asking for some compulsory speech in the form of warnings.
May a university compel instructors to issue syllabi? I do believe they can. May local, state, and federal governments compel warnings concerning products or services? I do believe they can.
The “trigger warning” thing is silly, and it certainly reflects badly on the academe, but it isn’t a 1st Amendment violation for students to ask for/demand them. The administration can say no. So can individual instructors, if their institution does not mandate them. I wouldn’t find them any kind of restriction on my speech, were I teaching a class. In fact, I’d use them as “sorters” to weed out potential enrollees who were idiots/too delicate for adult education.
Another approach… “TRIGGER WARNING: The instructor of this section considers the entire ambit of ‘trigger warnings’ an insult to college-aged people, and the class is conducted accordingly.”
Trigger warnings compelled by the government are abridgments of freedom of speech because they increase the effort it takes to speak. Imagine you were required to give trigger warnings on race, sex, country of origin, rape, violence, sexual preference, transgender status, and religion. You wouldn’t be able to speak extemporaneously because it would take too much effort to police everything you were saying along dozens of possible categories, many of which you simply don’t know very well.
This entire “Trigger Warning” spree is fraudulent.
I make it my business to know what input these kids are getting because I have some in college.
These are kids who were raised on “Buffy the Vampire Slayer” and “Bones.” They know the details of different episodes of “Game of Thrones” and “Spartacus.” Also available are “Hit & Miss” and the currently-trending “Penney Dreadful.”
The alleged basis for “trigger warnings” is that some people are traumatized, and so mention of intense emotional topics can cause them harm. And yet, they gobble up entertainment of exactly that sort.
None of this upsets them.
What does upset them is suggesting that their heroes have feet of clay, or that something they have been indoctrinated to believe is not quite true. Then they get all excited and lose their ability to think and speak coherently.
The whole point of the topic of “trigger warnings” is to teach young people that it is acceptable to attack other people who have different political opinions from their own.
“The whole point of the topic of “trigger warnings” is to teach young people that it is acceptable to attack other people who have different political opinions…”
I don’t see how you rationally derive “attack” from a request/demand for a ‘trigger warning’…
OR how it matters what a political position might be.
If a kid worries about being “triggered” by a discussion of the law of rape, how is that an attack on an instructor OR their political POV?
You see where it is going. Oh, I was not warned and I am now emotional damaged. Since I now can’t function because of your neglect, you owe me. By creating warning, you create a false expectation. I consider the warning 18 years as an adult. Your are responsible for yourself.
My trigger finger is itchy most all the time now. Maybe that’s a warning of some sort, I dunno.
A trigger warning would be the click when the gun is taken off safe? They must have extraordinary hearing.
I think…. no, I DEMAND…. that Legal Insurrection provide trigger warnings on every article.
You are SUCH a snowflake, Hawkins…
Halp! I’m being oppressed! See the violence inherent in the comment system!
If I am upset by trigger warnings, should LI provide a trigger warning that there is a trigger warning following?