Hofstra University Provides 'Trigger Warning' sign for Presidential Debate - Polidicks

[quote]Hofstra University has posted a “trigger warning” sign to warn students about the potentially disturbing content that may be discussed during Monday night’s presidential debate. According to CBS New York reporter Tony Aiello, a sign inside of the student center at Hofstra reads, “Trigger warning: The event conducted just beyond this sign may contain triggering and/or sensitive material. Sexual violence, sexual assault, and abuse are some topics mentioned within this event. If you feel triggered, please know there are resources to help you.”[/quote] [img]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CtTOYpWWEAAKLRQ.jpg[/img] [url]http://www.mrctv.org/blog/hofstra-university-provides-trigger-warning-presidential-debate[/url]

I wonder if I can self diagnose like some people and get a trigger warning for trigger warnings to have them banned.

[quote]Sexual violence, sexual assault, and abuse[/quote] You could just outright say "The electorate is getting fucked in the ass", you know.

This just seems like common sense.

I can't help it. Even if this is a legit term, the fact that said term's been basically stolen and bastardized by Tumblr hugboxes makes me cringe whenever I see it used. Why not say 'This event may contain upsetting language for some people, please exercise discretion." or whatever. That's how TV does it.

These safe zones pretty much hurt the cause more than helping it. Usually when you are a group of people, you want to look like you are emotionally strong, can go against anything, and etc. But these safe zones, it just stereotypes you into being a emotional wimp that can easily get "triggered" and be offended.

[media]https://twitter.com/kyletblaine/status/780513699803045888[/media] [media]https://twitter.com/kyletblaine/status/780514048781746177[/media]

Regardless of why the sign was there, a simple content warning which read "may contain x, proceed with caution" would be better than a trigger warning

I really cannot comprehend anyone who has a problem with this, at the absolute worst it's completely irrelevant to you how can anyone possibly have a problem with making other people comfortable at absolutely no cost to anyone and no downside at all?

[QUOTE=archangel125;51124534]I can't help it. Even if this is a legit term, the fact that said term's been basically stolen and bastardized by Tumblr hugboxes makes me cringe whenever I see it used. Why not say 'This event may contain upsetting language for some people, please exercise discretion." or whatever. That's how TV does it.[/QUOTE] Because for people with actual ptsd, trigger is the appropriate word

The problem with trigger warnings (can we use a different word? The name is so soiled at this point) is that they have been abused to try and restrict political speech. The theory of them at their best is completely harmless. At their worst, they have banned, for example, a debate from taking place on abortion at Oxford. And ultimately, their main proponents are basically modern day Stalinists. They wouldn't hesitate to abuse them to silence opposition and as such I am inherently suspicious of them regardless of potential good use.

[QUOTE=fruxodaily;51124568]Regardless of why the sign was there, a simple content warning which read "may contain x, proceed with caution" would be better than a trigger warning[/QUOTE] so a trigger warning but without a word that offends you

[QUOTE=Judas;51124577]I really cannot comprehend anyone who has a problem with this, at the absolute worst it's completely irrelevant to you how can anyone possibly have a problem with making other people comfortable at absolutely no cost to anyone and no downside at all?[/QUOTE] Going to college should be already be a gigantic trigger warning that you will encounter different ideas. That and using the actual meme term is cringey and loaded. Just put a typical "Viewer Discretion" line.

[QUOTE=Shadaez;51124594]so a trigger warning but without a word that offends you[/QUOTE] ye kinda like how you need a sign to warn you you might be offended

Presidential debate always have the best bullshit surrounding them. In 2012 Mitt Romney's handkerchief was alleged to be a set of secret smuggled notes, and this year Hillary Clinton's lavalier microphone cable [url=http://www.snopes.com/clinton-secret-earpiece-debate/]has been cited as evidence of a hidden earpiece[/url] and she's been [url=http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/09/breaking-poker-pro-agrees-hillary-sending-hand-signals-debate-moderator-holt/]accused of sending secret hand signals to Lester Holt[/url].

[QUOTE=Shadaez;51124594]so a trigger warning but without a word that offends you[/QUOTE] I believe the only trigger warnings you need are those on boxes that have a classification code which states why it was rated that. You know what it's got, you can safely avoid it I think tw are dumb bc they literally state the crux of what's gonna happen which could trigger someone where something as simple as a content warning wouldn't

[QUOTE=FlashMarsh;51124593]The problem with trigger warnings (can we use a different word? The name is so soiled at this point) is that they have been abused to try and restrict political speech. The theory of them at their best is completely harmless. At their worst, they have banned, for example, a debate from taking place on abortion at Oxford. And ultimately, their main proponents are basically modern day Stalinists. They wouldn't hesitate to abuse them to silence opposition and as such I am inherently suspicious of them regardless of potential good use.[/QUOTE] I don't like them because they're used in a such a way that it erases or even coddles people with PTSD or other such issues. Confrontation is how you move on, that's why many soldiers are told to play Call of Duty or ARMA. Running or avoiding creates debilitating paranoia. And I'm not making this up, some of the best experts in field of abuse and PTSD that have stated this time and time again, the way its used helps makes things worse and the only people who should be applying Trigger Warnings are psychologists of the patients themselves.

I get a rape might trigger emotions on a victim but, race? wtf?

Why can't they just use something along the lines of "Rated R for adult audiences, may contain adult/explicit content." Trigger warning just seems like a sillier version of something we already had. "This content may not be appropriate for all viewers" is perfect, why change it?

[QUOTE=Judas;51124577]I really cannot comprehend anyone who has a problem with this, at the absolute worst it's completely irrelevant to you how can anyone possibly have a problem with making other people comfortable at absolutely no cost to anyone and no downside at all?[/QUOTE] It's silly to assume that the world is going to bend to avoid mentioning things that make you uncomfortable. I don't have a problem, but the thing is that most things that I think actually deserve trigger warnings are literally illegal to show (Recorded rape, murder, etc) and their fake and legal analogs have content warnings regardless. Shielding yourself from ideas, words, especially in University, shouldn't be supported. If you don't feel comfortable with what someone is saying, you can leave if it truly becomes too much for you but to give people the opportunity to opt out of discomfort is not the correct approach.

Trigger warnings aren't inherently about censorship. They're a tiny note a professor can give at the start of semester or a blurb before showing genocide. It's ironic that other people are legit offended about the existence of trigger warnings. Regarding safe spaces, I think people are critisizing the most extreme forms of it. The essense of a safe space is not far from being able to talk to a therapist and not have Donald Trump bust in and call you a slut. They have known beneficial results for people sufferings from violence, rape, bullying, abortion etc. I believe many arguments against it are either slippery slope statements that this will result in fascism, or strawman arguments where someone picks some extreme tabloid case not representative of the concept and disproves that. [url]http://womensenews.org/2015/10/multiracial-girls-open-up-about-getting-bullied/[/url]

I'm finding more and more that if we literally rename trigger warnings and safe spaces there would be a lot less opposition. You know, like before we had the name "trigger warning" and "safe space." But please don't, the irony is hilarious. [QUOTE=phygon;51124899]It's silly to assume that the world is going to bend to avoid mentioning things that make you uncomfortable. I don't have a problem, but the thing is that most things that I think actually deserve trigger warnings are literally illegal to show (Recorded rape, murder, etc) and their fake and legal analogs have content warnings regardless. Shielding yourself from ideas, words, especially in University, shouldn't be supported. If you don't feel comfortable with what someone is saying, you can leave if it truly becomes too much for you but to give people the opportunity to opt out of discomfort is not the correct approach.[/QUOTE] Okay, I agree, trauma victims (people who have been raped, beaten by lovers, killed people in wars, etc.) should just suck it up. I don't care if the human brain doesn't work that way ! Aside from my shitty tone. My point is there is many traumas people can go through that they CAN'T just let go of. Those are the people trigger warnings are generally for. In the real world, you can avoid a lot of that stuff if you want to. If it's in a conversation, you can often just walk away, if it's on the Internet/TV, you can just close it out.

if you unironically need trigger warnings just to get around and live in society you need a physiologist to help you tbh, I mean this in a sincere way though if you need them because you're an oversensitive tit, then you need a slap in the face

[QUOTE=J!NX;51124955]if you unironically need trigger warnings just to get around and live in society you need a physiologist to help you tbh, I mean this in a sincere way though if you need them because you're an oversensitive tit, then you need a slap in the face[/QUOTE] That's not an answer. Almost everyone with this kind of trauma would have seen a psychologist/therapist if they are able, not to mention safe spaces are designed to be therapeutic in their nature. The only other implication is that they should not leave their house.

I'll be picky here about the creator's intentions for that sign. These content warning signs used to be more inclusive. While this sign fulfils the same purpose of describing the content, the audience it aims to address is now narrowed down to traumatised and "traumatised" people rather than being a general warning for [I]anyone [/I]who would feel uncomfortable.

[QUOTE=smurfy;51124555][media]https://twitter.com/kyletblaine/status/780513699803045888[/media] [media]https://twitter.com/kyletblaine/status/780514048781746177[/media][/QUOTE] Title of the thread should be changed then.

[QUOTE=DoctorSalt;51125021]That's not an answer. Almost everyone with this kind of trauma would have seen a psychologist/therapist if they are able, not to mention safe spaces are designed to be therapeutic in their nature. The only other implication is that they should not leave their house.[/QUOTE] Trigger Warnings were not designed by experts with extensive knowledge with PTSD and other similar issues. They were designed by sociologists and unrelated psychologists.

There's nothing wrong with this. Those of you freaking out over the word 'trigger' need to get real. Tumblr is not indicative of real life. Just because some tumbleristas use the word trigger doesn't mean that it's not a real thing. Putting up this sign is no different than having a movie rating at a theater.

[QUOTE=RG4ORDR;51124507]I wonder if I can self diagnose like some people and get a trigger warning for trigger warnings to have them banned.[/QUOTE] Say that the word trigger is a trigger for you because of gun violence or something. Checkmate

[QUOTE=Swilly;51124763]Confrontation is how you move on, that's why many soldiers are told to play Call of Duty or ARMA.[/QUOTE] In a controlled environment, not just ambient exposure. You have them play Call of Duty or ARMA in the comfort of their home, a familiar, comfortable, relaxed setting, and allow them to stop whenever they feel like. They're exposed to the trigger on their terms. It's therapeutic. You [I]don't[/I] assault them with it randomly in public and without warning, let alone deliberately hiding warnings because you think they'll avoid your unsolicited exposure therapy if they know it's coming. I've lived in communities with a lot of veterans and when they start putting up fliers for 4th of July parades, they [I]always[/I] disclose if they're going to feature fireworks, because it can be a PTSD trigger for veterans. By your logic, they shouldn't, because you want to play psychiatrist and force vets with PTSD to confront their triggers unexpectedly and in public. That's not helping, that's being a dick. Trigger warnings for sensitive content don't harm anyone by their presence. If someone insists that their trigger sensitivities be catered to (like students refusing to read material with 'triggering' themes), then that's another issue entirely. But if, say, a rape victim doesn't want to see a televised sexual assault because it's an actual legitimate honest-to-god PTSD trigger, you are [I]not[/I] helping their condition by deliberately refusing to warn them and surprising them with it, and I don't see any reason why it would be unreasonable to provide that warning so they can decide for themselves whether they want to be exposed to it or not.