Total Posts:123|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

What is a trigger warning 2

Semiya
Posts: 405
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2016 6:17:11 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
Since the last post was apparently too complicated, I will simplify it.

A trigger warning is: "Hey, I'm about to discuss this issue/show images of this thing/etc. please take a moment to prepare yourself before I do." The end. That's all a trigger warning is. Preparation.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

I hope the point is clear now.
Stymie13
Posts: 2,162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2016 6:33:42 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/3/2016 6:17:11 PM, Semiya wrote:
Since the last post was apparently too complicated, I will simplify it.

A trigger warning is: "Hey, I'm about to discuss this issue/show images of this thing/etc. please take a moment to prepare yourself before I do." The end. That's all a trigger warning is. Preparation.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.


Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

I hope the point is clear now.

There is nothing wrong with those. In the last op, however, triggers were invariably linked with safe places which ARE used for censorship.

Good job this time focusing on only one. Since I have no issue with them, it's my only comment.
Semiya
Posts: 405
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2016 8:01:45 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/3/2016 6:33:42 PM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 9/3/2016 6:17:11 PM, Semiya wrote:
Since the last post was apparently too complicated, I will simplify it.

A trigger warning is: "Hey, I'm about to discuss this issue/show images of this thing/etc. please take a moment to prepare yourself before I do." The end. That's all a trigger warning is. Preparation.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.



Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

I hope the point is clear now.

There is nothing wrong with those. In the last op, however, triggers were invariably linked with safe places which ARE used for censorship.

Good job this time focusing on only one. Since I have no issue with them, it's my only comment.

They were only brought up as a point of reference, as Burzamil said. But glad you agree.
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,285
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2016 11:05:49 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/3/2016 6:17:11 PM, Semiya wrote:
Since the last post was apparently too complicated, I will simplify it.

A trigger warning is: "Hey, I'm about to discuss this issue/show images of this thing/etc. please take a moment to prepare yourself before I do." The end. That's all a trigger warning is. Preparation.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

I hope the point is clear now.

I mean, repeating an untrue thing more than a dozen times is a really convincing argument. I'm not sure how anyone will counter that one.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,295
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2016 11:06:33 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/3/2016 11:05:49 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:

I mean, repeating an untrue thing more than a dozen times is a really convincing argument. I'm not sure how anyone will counter that one.

I am interpreting your statement as a trigger. You have been warned.
Semiya
Posts: 405
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/4/2016 8:11:07 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/3/2016 11:05:49 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 9/3/2016 6:17:11 PM, Semiya wrote:
Since the last post was apparently too complicated, I will simplify it.

A trigger warning is: "Hey, I'm about to discuss this issue/show images of this thing/etc. please take a moment to prepare yourself before I do." The end. That's all a trigger warning is. Preparation.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

I hope the point is clear now.

I mean, repeating an untrue thing more than a dozen times is a really convincing argument. I'm not sure how anyone will counter that one.

If repeating the literal definition of what something is rather than the fictional strawman of what it is is unconvincing to you, then you are more interested in a fantastical narrative with no basis in reality rather than the actual issue.
kevin24018
Posts: 1,893
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2016 3:01:17 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
why do people always try to reinvent the wheel? there is NO such thing as a trigger warning, it's called a disclaimer, unless someone can show how it's different stop using the term to muddy the waters even more. btw there is no spoon.
Stymie13
Posts: 2,162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2016 3:23:52 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/7/2016 3:01:17 PM, kevin24018 wrote:
why do people always try to reinvent the wheel? there is NO such thing as a trigger warning, it's called a disclaimer, unless someone can show how it's different stop using the term to muddy the waters even more. btw there is no spoon.

When I first saw the original, I thought they meant trigger guards on firearms. Lol

I agree on the use of verbiage but if people need to call a spade a shovel I'm not going to quibble to much. Disclaimer is more universally recognized and the target audience would probably have less pushback if that term was used.
kevin24018
Posts: 1,893
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2016 3:57:17 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/7/2016 3:23:52 PM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 9/7/2016 3:01:17 PM, kevin24018 wrote:
why do people always try to reinvent the wheel? there is NO such thing as a trigger warning, it's called a disclaimer, unless someone can show how it's different stop using the term to muddy the waters even more. btw there is no spoon.

When I first saw the original, I thought they meant trigger guards on firearms. Lol

I agree on the use of verbiage but if people need to call a spade a shovel I'm not going to quibble to much. Disclaimer is more universally recognized and the target audience would probably have less pushback if that term was used.

exactly, when I see these type issues rise up, the term that jumps to mind is "attention whore" Let's add a catching phrase or term to draw attention even though a well understood and long standing word already exists. And let's indulge them so they don't get their feelings hurt and it will look like we are really doing something when in fact we aren't. What it does is polarize people, create strife where there shouldn't be any and generally cause bad feelings and accomplishes nothing.
kevin24018
Posts: 1,893
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2016 3:59:47 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
spade vs shovel
http://gardeningproductsreview.com...

Can anyone show how a disclaimer is different than a trigger warning? I have yet to see anyone differentiate the two. The example above shows how they are similar yet different.
Stymie13
Posts: 2,162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2016 4:06:07 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/7/2016 3:59:47 PM, kevin24018 wrote:
spade vs shovel
http://gardeningproductsreview.com...

Can anyone show how a disclaimer is different than a trigger warning? I have yet to see anyone differentiate the two. The example above shows how they are similar yet different.

I do think they should be used... Like the beginning of the walking dead, lol, but continual rephrasing to sound, however, gets tedious.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,295
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2016 4:23:42 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
The main problem is that there is no objective limit to trigger warnings, so that all of academia can be peppered with excuses to disengage from the subject matter, relevant or not.

Here is a good clip on the arbitrariness and ineffectiveness of the inundation of excuses:

Issuing caution on the basis of potential harm or insult doesn't help us negotiate our reactions; it makes our dealings with others more fraught. As Breslin pointed out, trigger warnings can have the opposite of their intended effect, luring in sensitive people (and perhaps connoisseurs of graphic content, too). More importantly, they reinforce the fear of words by depicting an ever-expanding number of articles and books as dangerous and requiring of regulation. By framing more public spaces, from the Internet to the college classroom, as full of infinite yet ill-defined hazards, trigger warnings encourage us to think of ourselves as more weak and fragile than we really are.
Stymie13
Posts: 2,162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2016 4:36:42 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/7/2016 4:23:42 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
The main problem is that there is no objective limit to trigger warnings, so that all of academia can be peppered with excuses to disengage from the subject matter, relevant or not.

Here is a good clip on the arbitrariness and ineffectiveness of the inundation of excuses:

Issuing caution on the basis of potential harm or insult doesn't help us negotiate our reactions; it makes our dealings with others more fraught. As Breslin pointed out, trigger warnings can have the opposite of their intended effect, luring in sensitive people (and perhaps connoisseurs of graphic content, too). More importantly, they reinforce the fear of words by depicting an ever-expanding number of articles and books as dangerous and requiring of regulation. By framing more public spaces, from the Internet to the college classroom, as full of infinite yet ill-defined hazards, trigger warnings encourage us to think of ourselves as more weak and fragile than we really are.

That's a valid point but, let's go back to the walking dead example: viewer discretion is advised. There is nothing inherently wrong with that blurb. It's just a bit of cya. What would be wrong is, after the blurb, if a complaint about the content was listened to and actioned on.

I'm a contractor and usually end up reporting to cio's, cto's, and depending on structure, ceo's. It's not always good news. So I have a standard disclaimer that what I'm about to report may offend you but it is the reality of my findings. Cya.

I've always stated that disclaimers are fine but the individual must also hold them self responsible for what they can or can't handle. If a rape victim is traumatized by discussions of sex offenders, don't take those courses in school. But the prof saying 'today we are talking about pedophiles', with a 15 second pause before beginning the discussion, that's not a speech limiter. Nor should it be.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,295
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2016 5:08:33 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/7/2016 4:36:42 PM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 9/7/2016 4:23:42 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
The main problem is that there is no objective limit to trigger warnings, so that all of academia can be peppered with excuses to disengage from the subject matter, relevant or not.

Here is a good clip on the arbitrariness and ineffectiveness of the inundation of excuses:

Issuing caution on the basis of potential harm or insult doesn't help us negotiate our reactions; it makes our dealings with others more fraught. As Breslin pointed out, trigger warnings can have the opposite of their intended effect, luring in sensitive people (and perhaps connoisseurs of graphic content, too). More importantly, they reinforce the fear of words by depicting an ever-expanding number of articles and books as dangerous and requiring of regulation. By framing more public spaces, from the Internet to the college classroom, as full of infinite yet ill-defined hazards, trigger warnings encourage us to think of ourselves as more weak and fragile than we really are.

That's a valid point but, let's go back to the walking dead example: viewer discretion is advised. There is nothing inherently wrong with that blurb. It's just a bit of cya. What would be wrong is, after the blurb, if a complaint about the content was listened to and actioned on.

I'm a contractor and usually end up reporting to cio's, cto's, and depending on structure, ceo's. It's not always good news. So I have a standard disclaimer that what I'm about to report may offend you but it is the reality of my findings. Cya.

I've always stated that disclaimers are fine but the individual must also hold them self responsible for what they can or can't handle. If a rape victim is traumatized by discussions of sex offenders, don't take those courses in school. But the prof saying 'today we are talking about pedophiles', with a 15 second pause before beginning the discussion, that's not a speech limiter. Nor should it be.

Trigger warnings are not about disclaimers. They are about empowering the students of the future with excuses to disengage from challenging academia.

As I stated before, there are no limits to the amount of these acceptable excuses to disengage. That's not serving our young brains of the country.
Stymie13
Posts: 2,162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2016 5:14:24 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/7/2016 5:08:33 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 9/7/2016 4:36:42 PM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 9/7/2016 4:23:42 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
The main problem is that there is no objective limit to trigger warnings, so that all of academia can be peppered with excuses to disengage from the subject matter, relevant or not.

Here is a good clip on the arbitrariness and ineffectiveness of the inundation of excuses:

Issuing caution on the basis of potential harm or insult doesn't help us negotiate our reactions; it makes our dealings with others more fraught. As Breslin pointed out, trigger warnings can have the opposite of their intended effect, luring in sensitive people (and perhaps connoisseurs of graphic content, too). More importantly, they reinforce the fear of words by depicting an ever-expanding number of articles and books as dangerous and requiring of regulation. By framing more public spaces, from the Internet to the college classroom, as full of infinite yet ill-defined hazards, trigger warnings encourage us to think of ourselves as more weak and fragile than we really are.

That's a valid point but, let's go back to the walking dead example: viewer discretion is advised. There is nothing inherently wrong with that blurb. It's just a bit of cya. What would be wrong is, after the blurb, if a complaint about the content was listened to and actioned on.

I'm a contractor and usually end up reporting to cio's, cto's, and depending on structure, ceo's. It's not always good news. So I have a standard disclaimer that what I'm about to report may offend you but it is the reality of my findings. Cya.

I've always stated that disclaimers are fine but the individual must also hold them self responsible for what they can or can't handle. If a rape victim is traumatized by discussions of sex offenders, don't take those courses in school. But the prof saying 'today we are talking about pedophiles', with a 15 second pause before beginning the discussion, that's not a speech limiter. Nor should it be.

Trigger warnings are not about disclaimers. They are about empowering the students of the future with excuses to disengage from challenging academia.

As I stated before, there are no limits to the amount of these acceptable excuses to disengage. That's not serving our young brains of the country.

And that goes back to Kevin's point: has the rephrase changed the meaning of the disclaimer resulting in a limiting of speech? It is a valid concern. To me, as long as the 2 are synonymous, I don't have a quibble. If a trigger warning begins to bleed into the safe place territory, well, I'm going to trigger the f.ck out of it.
slo1
Posts: 4,353
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2016 5:28:34 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/3/2016 6:33:42 PM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 9/3/2016 6:17:11 PM, Semiya wrote:
Since the last post was apparently too complicated, I will simplify it.

A trigger warning is: "Hey, I'm about to discuss this issue/show images of this thing/etc. please take a moment to prepare yourself before I do." The end. That's all a trigger warning is. Preparation.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.



Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

I hope the point is clear now.

There is nothing wrong with those. In the last op, however, triggers were invariably linked with safe places which ARE used for censorship.

A place where people are not welcomed to spout any nonsense while others are in other spaces where any nonsense can get get spoken is not an affront to the freedom of speech. It is called a home, a work place or even a college dorm room, the safest of safe spaces.

Please provide an example of a safe space or safe space event which censored a campus speaker or event.

Good job this time focusing on only one. Since I have no issue with them, it's my only comment.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,295
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2016 5:40:52 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
A clip on safe spaces:

You're not a victim if someone disagrees with you. You don't have a right to be protected from ideas. Safe spaces remind me of the dystopian society depicted in the novel Fahrenheit 451 in which books were burned because they contained ideas that were contrary to the message of the oppressive state. The single greatest benefit that I have had while attending college is hearing a plethora of ideas and opinions that I had never been exposed to before. That's diversity. It isn't the color of someone's skin or the nationality of someone's ancestors. It is the culmination of different ideas, opinions, and experiences that challenge you to examine your own. The most boring and unproductive conversations are the ones I have with people who agree with me. You need to hear things that offend you, not be protected from them. You don't need to be protected, you need to be torn down, intellectually humiliated, challenged, and mentally distraught by ideas and opinions of others. From that comes personal and intellectual growth.
Stymie13
Posts: 2,162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2016 5:41:51 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/7/2016 5:28:34 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 9/3/2016 6:33:42 PM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 9/3/2016 6:17:11 PM, Semiya wrote:
Since the last post was apparently too complicated, I will simplify it.

A trigger warning is: "Hey, I'm about to discuss this issue/show images of this thing/etc. please take a moment to prepare yourself before I do." The end. That's all a trigger warning is. Preparation.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.



Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

I hope the point is clear now.

There is nothing wrong with those. In the last op, however, triggers were invariably linked with safe places which ARE used for censorship.

A place where people are not welcomed to spout any nonsense while others are in other spaces where any nonsense can get get spoken is not an affront to the freedom of speech. It is called a home, a work place or even a college dorm room, the safest of safe spaces.

Please provide an example of a safe space or safe space event which censored a campus speaker or event.


Good job this time focusing on only one. Since I have no issue with them, it's my only comment.

Condoleeza rice, Rutgers, commencement.

Honestly, a simple search will literally bring up more than dozens. But you want to believe safe places aren't a form of censorship?

By the way, private property such as you mentioned with a home, there is no freedom of speech. Private property can censor as much as the flipping want.
kevin24018
Posts: 1,893
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2016 6:04:42 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/7/2016 5:41:51 PM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 9/7/2016 5:28:34 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 9/3/2016 6:33:42 PM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 9/3/2016 6:17:11 PM, Semiya wrote:
Since the last post was apparently too complicated, I will simplify it.

A trigger warning is: "Hey, I'm about to discuss this issue/show images of this thing/etc. please take a moment to prepare yourself before I do." The end. That's all a trigger warning is. Preparation.



There is nothing wrong with those. In the last op, however, triggers were invariably linked with safe places which ARE used for censorship.

A place where people are not welcomed to spout any nonsense while others are in other spaces where any nonsense can get get spoken is not an affront to the freedom of speech. It is called a home, a work place or even a college dorm room, the safest of safe spaces.

Please provide an example of a safe space or safe space event which censored a campus speaker or event.


Good job this time focusing on only one. Since I have no issue with them, it's my only comment.

Condoleeza rice, Rutgers, commencement.

Honestly, a simple search will literally bring up more than dozens. But you want to believe safe places aren't a form of censorship?

By the way, private property such as you mentioned with a home, there is no freedom of speech. Private property can censor as much as the flipping want.

excellent point, I can do what I wish in my home, but if you are in my home you can only do what you want if I let you. Huge difference between private and public. So if I'm at a food court and wish to engage in a conversation with a friend do I have to issue a "trigger warning"? What if I'm standing in line at a store? Where does it begin and where does it end? If someone doesn't like what they hear, if it's bad enough for them, they can always and I mean always walk away, there maybe repercussions but it's still a choice never the less. So either tough it out or walk. Much like American football, lines are established, but then they move.
Burzmali
Posts: 1,310
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2016 6:14:33 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/7/2016 5:08:33 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 9/7/2016 4:36:42 PM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 9/7/2016 4:23:42 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
The main problem is that there is no objective limit to trigger warnings, so that all of academia can be peppered with excuses to disengage from the subject matter, relevant or not.

Here is a good clip on the arbitrariness and ineffectiveness of the inundation of excuses:

Issuing caution on the basis of potential harm or insult doesn't help us negotiate our reactions; it makes our dealings with others more fraught. As Breslin pointed out, trigger warnings can have the opposite of their intended effect, luring in sensitive people (and perhaps connoisseurs of graphic content, too). More importantly, they reinforce the fear of words by depicting an ever-expanding number of articles and books as dangerous and requiring of regulation. By framing more public spaces, from the Internet to the college classroom, as full of infinite yet ill-defined hazards, trigger warnings encourage us to think of ourselves as more weak and fragile than we really are.

That's a valid point but, let's go back to the walking dead example: viewer discretion is advised. There is nothing inherently wrong with that blurb. It's just a bit of cya. What would be wrong is, after the blurb, if a complaint about the content was listened to and actioned on.

I'm a contractor and usually end up reporting to cio's, cto's, and depending on structure, ceo's. It's not always good news. So I have a standard disclaimer that what I'm about to report may offend you but it is the reality of my findings. Cya.

I've always stated that disclaimers are fine but the individual must also hold them self responsible for what they can or can't handle. If a rape victim is traumatized by discussions of sex offenders, don't take those courses in school. But the prof saying 'today we are talking about pedophiles', with a 15 second pause before beginning the discussion, that's not a speech limiter. Nor should it be.

Trigger warnings are not about disclaimers. They are about empowering the students of the future with excuses to disengage from challenging academia.

As I stated before, there are no limits to the amount of these acceptable excuses to disengage. That's not serving our young brains of the country.

Please, show us an example of a trigger warning in academia that encourages people to avoid the content rather than face it. They are not excuses to disengage. They are for preparing yourself for what you're about to see or discuss.
Stymie13
Posts: 2,162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2016 6:24:21 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/7/2016 6:04:42 PM, kevin24018 wrote:
At 9/7/2016 5:41:51 PM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 9/7/2016 5:28:34 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 9/3/2016 6:33:42 PM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 9/3/2016 6:17:11 PM, Semiya wrote:
Since the last post was apparently too complicated, I will simplify it.

A trigger warning is: "Hey, I'm about to discuss this issue/show images of this thing/etc. please take a moment to prepare yourself before I do." The end. That's all a trigger warning is. Preparation.



There is nothing wrong with those. In the last op, however, triggers were invariably linked with safe places which ARE used for censorship.

A place where people are not welcomed to spout any nonsense while others are in other spaces where any nonsense can get get spoken is not an affront to the freedom of speech. It is called a home, a work place or even a college dorm room, the safest of safe spaces.

Please provide an example of a safe space or safe space event which censored a campus speaker or event.


Good job this time focusing on only one. Since I have no issue with them, it's my only comment.

Condoleeza rice, Rutgers, commencement.

Honestly, a simple search will literally bring up more than dozens. But you want to believe safe places aren't a form of censorship?

By the way, private property such as you mentioned with a home, there is no freedom of speech. Private property can censor as much as the flipping want.

excellent point, I can do what I wish in my home, but if you are in my home you can only do what you want if I let you. Huge difference between private and public. So if I'm at a food court and wish to engage in a conversation with a friend do I have to issue a "trigger warning"? What if I'm standing in line at a store? Where does it begin and where does it end? If someone doesn't like what they hear, if it's bad enough for them, they can always and I mean always walk away, there maybe repercussions but it's still a choice never the less. So either tough it out or walk. Much like American football, lines are established, but then they move.

The patron can't do s.it but the property owner of the food court can.

Public campuses, courthouses, truly public land, we can spout off as much as we like as long as it's not 'incitement to riot' or 'fighting words' which has been legally defined.
YYW
Posts: 36,305
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2016 6:25:21 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/3/2016 6:17:11 PM, Semiya wrote:
Since the last post was apparently too complicated, I will simplify it.

A trigger warning is: "Hey, I'm about to discuss this issue/show images of this thing/etc. please take a moment to prepare yourself before I do." The end. That's all a trigger warning is. Preparation.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

Trigger warnings are not avoidance.

I hope the point is clear now.

This is hilarious, and also partially incorrect.
Tsar of DDO
Stymie13
Posts: 2,162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2016 6:28:57 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/7/2016 6:14:33 PM, Burzmali wrote:
At 9/7/2016 5:08:33 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 9/7/2016 4:36:42 PM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 9/7/2016 4:23:42 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
The main problem is that there is no objective limit to trigger warnings, so that all of academia can be peppered with excuses to disengage from the subject matter, relevant or not.

Here is a good clip on the arbitrariness and ineffectiveness of the inundation of excuses:

Issuing caution on the basis of potential harm or insult doesn't help us negotiate our reactions; it makes our dealings with others more fraught. As Breslin pointed out, trigger warnings can have the opposite of their intended effect, luring in sensitive people (and perhaps connoisseurs of graphic content, too). More importantly, they reinforce the fear of words by depicting an ever-expanding number of articles and books as dangerous and requiring of regulation. By framing more public spaces, from the Internet to the college classroom, as full of infinite yet ill-defined hazards, trigger warnings encourage us to think of ourselves as more weak and fragile than we really are.

That's a valid point but, let's go back to the walking dead example: viewer discretion is advised. There is nothing inherently wrong with that blurb. It's just a bit of cya. What would be wrong is, after the blurb, if a complaint about the content was listened to and actioned on.

I'm a contractor and usually end up reporting to cio's, cto's, and depending on structure, ceo's. It's not always good news. So I have a standard disclaimer that what I'm about to report may offend you but it is the reality of my findings. Cya.

I've always stated that disclaimers are fine but the individual must also hold them self responsible for what they can or can't handle. If a rape victim is traumatized by discussions of sex offenders, don't take those courses in school. But the prof saying 'today we are talking about pedophiles', with a 15 second pause before beginning the discussion, that's not a speech limiter. Nor should it be.

Trigger warnings are not about disclaimers. They are about empowering the students of the future with excuses to disengage from challenging academia.

As I stated before, there are no limits to the amount of these acceptable excuses to disengage. That's not serving our young brains of the country.

Please, show us an example of a trigger warning in academia that encourages people to avoid the content rather than face it. They are not excuses to disengage. They are for preparing yourself for what you're about to see or discuss.

Overlain college Ohio 2012
Uc Santa Barbara 2014

http://signsjournal.org...
kevin24018
Posts: 1,893
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2016 6:34:03 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
I think it's interesting that they (whoever they are) are trying to invent a "duty" to inform. Right now it's an "ask" but the push is to make it mandatory aka a duty where no duty should exist. If "Police Have No Duty To Protect Individuals" https://www.firearmsandliberty.com... then there is NO duty to protect your feelings.
If it was a simple ask there wouldn't be so much push when people say, I appreciate you asking, but sorry my answer is no, I'm not going to, sorry.
Stymie13
Posts: 2,162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2016 6:36:16 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/7/2016 6:34:03 PM, kevin24018 wrote:
I think it's interesting that they (whoever they are) are trying to invent a "duty" to inform. Right now it's an "ask" but the push is to make it mandatory aka a duty where no duty should exist. If "Police Have No Duty To Protect Individuals" https://www.firearmsandliberty.com... then there is NO duty to protect your feelings.
If it was a simple ask there wouldn't be so much push when people say, I appreciate you asking, but sorry my answer is no, I'm not going to, sorry.

You are actually getting at the crux of the matter: when disclaims/triggers bleed into safe places. That leads to censorship
Burzmali
Posts: 1,310
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2016 6:38:23 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/7/2016 6:28:57 PM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 9/7/2016 6:14:33 PM, Burzmali wrote:
At 9/7/2016 5:08:33 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 9/7/2016 4:36:42 PM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 9/7/2016 4:23:42 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
The main problem is that there is no objective limit to trigger warnings, so that all of academia can be peppered with excuses to disengage from the subject matter, relevant or not.

Here is a good clip on the arbitrariness and ineffectiveness of the inundation of excuses:

Issuing caution on the basis of potential harm or insult doesn't help us negotiate our reactions; it makes our dealings with others more fraught. As Breslin pointed out, trigger warnings can have the opposite of their intended effect, luring in sensitive people (and perhaps connoisseurs of graphic content, too). More importantly, they reinforce the fear of words by depicting an ever-expanding number of articles and books as dangerous and requiring of regulation. By framing more public spaces, from the Internet to the college classroom, as full of infinite yet ill-defined hazards, trigger warnings encourage us to think of ourselves as more weak and fragile than we really are.

That's a valid point but, let's go back to the walking dead example: viewer discretion is advised. There is nothing inherently wrong with that blurb. It's just a bit of cya. What would be wrong is, after the blurb, if a complaint about the content was listened to and actioned on.

I'm a contractor and usually end up reporting to cio's, cto's, and depending on structure, ceo's. It's not always good news. So I have a standard disclaimer that what I'm about to report may offend you but it is the reality of my findings. Cya.

I've always stated that disclaimers are fine but the individual must also hold them self responsible for what they can or can't handle. If a rape victim is traumatized by discussions of sex offenders, don't take those courses in school. But the prof saying 'today we are talking about pedophiles', with a 15 second pause before beginning the discussion, that's not a speech limiter. Nor should it be.

Trigger warnings are not about disclaimers. They are about empowering the students of the future with excuses to disengage from challenging academia.

As I stated before, there are no limits to the amount of these acceptable excuses to disengage. That's not serving our young brains of the country.

Please, show us an example of a trigger warning in academia that encourages people to avoid the content rather than face it. They are not excuses to disengage. They are for preparing yourself for what you're about to see or discuss.

Overlain college Ohio 2012
Uc Santa Barbara 2014

http://signsjournal.org...

Neither of those are about trigger warnings encouraging people to avoid content. In fact, trigger warnings would be a way to circumvent the problem at Oberlin college. Trigger warnings are supposed to make topics more accessible, not less.

Also, I agree that the UC Santa Barbara example is a problem. The proper way to handle trigger warnings is to simply allow students the opportunity to inform faculty if they have any triggers, and then provide warnings as needed. Blanket trigger warnings would be nonsensical and ineffective.
kevin24018
Posts: 1,893
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2016 6:47:46 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/7/2016 6:38:23 PM, Burzmali wrote:
At 9/7/2016 6:28:57 PM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 9/7/2016 6:14:33 PM, Burzmali wrote:
At 9/7/2016 5:08:33 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 9/7/2016 4:36:42 PM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 9/7/2016 4:23:42 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
The main problem is that there is no objective limit to trigger warnings, so that all of academia can be peppered with excuses to disengage from the subject matter, relevant or not.

Here is a good clip on the arbitrariness and ineffectiveness of the inundation of excuses:

Issuing caution on the basis of potential harm or insult doesn't help us negotiate our reactions; it makes our dealings with others more fraught. As Breslin pointed out, trigger warnings can have the opposite of their intended effect, luring in sensitive people (and perhaps connoisseurs of graphic content, too). More importantly, they reinforce the fear of words by depicting an ever-expanding number of articles and books as dangerous and requiring of regulation. By framing more public spaces, from the Internet to the college classroom, as full of infinite yet ill-defined hazards, trigger warnings encourage us to think of ourselves as more weak and fragile than we really are.

That's a valid point but, let's go back to the walking dead example: viewer discretion is advised. There is nothing inherently wrong with that blurb. It's just a bit of cya. What would be wrong is, after the blurb, if a complaint about the content was listened to and actioned on.

I'm a contractor and usually end up reporting to cio's, cto's, and depending on structure, ceo's. It's not always good news. So I have a standard disclaimer that what I'm about to report may offend you but it is the reality of my findings. Cya.

I've always stated that disclaimers are fine but the individual must also hold them self responsible for what they can or can't handle. If a rape victim is traumatized by discussions of sex offenders, don't take those courses in school. But the prof saying 'today we are talking about pedophiles', with a 15 second pause before beginning the discussion, that's not a speech limiter. Nor should it be.

Trigger warnings are not about disclaimers. They are about empowering the students of the future with excuses to disengage from challenging academia.

As I stated before, there are no limits to the amount of these acceptable excuses to disengage. That's not serving our young brains of the country.

Please, show us an example of a trigger warning in academia that encourages people to avoid the content rather than face it. They are not excuses to disengage. They are for preparing yourself for what you're about to see or discuss.

Overlain college Ohio 2012
Uc Santa Barbara 2014

http://signsjournal.org...

Neither of those are about trigger warnings encouraging people to avoid content. In fact, trigger warnings would be a way to circumvent the problem at Oberlin college. Trigger warnings are supposed to make topics more accessible, not less.

Also, I agree that the UC Santa Barbara example is a problem. The proper way to handle trigger warnings is to simply allow students the opportunity to inform faculty if they have any triggers, and then provide warnings as needed. Blanket trigger warnings would be nonsensical and ineffective.

hmm sounds a lot like personal responsibility. But wouldn't have the person inform someone of their trigger, make them think about their trigger and therefore be triggered? Besides people will rage at the thought of "why should I have to reveal personal stuff!?!?!" The responsibility will be shifted away from the individual to the collective.
The wonderful thing about Triggers
Is Triggers are wonderful things
Their tops are made out of rubber
er wait, that doesn't sound right....hhmm
Semiya
Posts: 405
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2016 8:11:24 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/7/2016 3:01:17 PM, kevin24018 wrote:
why do people always try to reinvent the wheel? there is NO such thing as a trigger warning, it's called a disclaimer, unless someone can show how it's different stop using the term to muddy the waters even more. btw there is no spoon.

I don't know, but language evolves. People today don't recognize the "Moral Majority" anymore.