Recently, there has been a lot of controversy over safe spaces and trigger warnings on college campuses. The debate has been ongoing at various schools and online for a while now, but the University of Chicago’s recent letter to freshmen has gained particular attention. This article is not a direct reaction to that letter, but rather a general defense of these practices, which many people and institutions protest.
If you’re unfamiliar with either term, here are descriptions:
- A safe space refers to an environment in which people can feel comfortable regardless of their identity or experiences, and either are free to express their opinions without being attacked on the grounds of those identities or experiences, or can be at ease knowing triggering subjects won’t be brought up. Safe spaces might exist at universities in the form of certain clubs, groups, or programs that aim to cultivate discussion while ensuring that members are comfortable.
- Trigger warnings are just what they sound like – warnings that triggering material will be shown or discussed. People currently dealing with or recovering from specific phobias, depression, anxiety, eating disorders, PTSD, or other issues may be triggered into distressing thoughts or impulses by sudden exposure to something that reminds them of their trauma or other issue. Professors might provide trigger warnings during class or on the syllabus so that students can prepare.
To me, these things sound not only reasonable, but important. It seems like many people who push back against them don’t have a clear understanding of them.
I posted a question on Facebook, asking people for their opinions on this subject. One commenter said, “while the intent may not be to silence opposition, that is often what they are used for… a safe space only serves to reinforce ideological bias by creating echo chambers where opposing views are not welcome”.
This highlights a major critique of safe spaces; one that says that they (supposedly) inhibit free speech. On the surface, that seems like a good argument – college is supposed to expose students to new and challenging ideas, not contradict one of our nation’s strongest values. But that’s not what safe spaces are! Of course I can’t speak for every person who requests a safe space, but the majority of supporters appear to be looking for an environment that does in fact encourage free discussion and debate. This might seem like an automatic guarantee on a college campus, but it isn’t true for all students. For many women, and for many students who belong to minority groups, some places aren’t welcoming. In some communities, people who are not part of a marginalized group might not realize that this is still a problem, but it most certainly is. Institutions of higher education should absolutely be aware of the fact that not everywhere is a welcoming environment to some people, and they should provide spaces where everyone, regardless of identity, can express their ideas.
Another use of safe spaces is to create a place that is free of certain topics or triggers, but not in the sense of limiting all free speech always and forever across the whole campus. For example, it should go without saying that a club that promotes the wellbeing of LGBT students should not have anyone using homophobic or transphobic slurs. As Ryn Winner said in another comment, “Safe Spaces are not about banning people who you don’t agree with. It is about having a place that you know your identity will be respected and that you don’t feel on edge, which, for many students of various marginalized groups, is a very real concern”.
Another reason people have for pushing back against safe spaces and trigger warnings is that some interpret it as coddling. If you haven’t personally dealt with trauma or mental illnesses, or if you have but have been lucky enough not to experience triggering incidents, you might assume that people are just trying to avoid anything they disagree with or anything that makes them slightly uncomfortable. Again, I can’t speak for everyone, but this is not true in the majority of cases. People ask for trigger warnings so that they are not blindsided by something that is more difficult for them to deal with than for most people.
Everyone deals with things differently, but for many it can be quite helpful to have a heads up. That way, they can “better manage their reactions,” as Kate Manne says in her article “Why I Use Trigger Warnings”. Triggers can sometimes incite self-harm tendencies or extreme panic responses, posing danger to students in the worst case scenario and at the very least making it very hard or impossible to continue concentrating and properly engaging with the class material for the time being. A warning that a certain subject will come up enables students to do whatever they need to deal with it. In some cases, when the curriculum allows for it, a student could even arrange with a professor to complete a comparable assignment if the main assignment deals heavily with triggering material that isn’t vital to whatever they are learning.
Everyone deserves to be able to learn, communicate, and explore freely, without being harassed or excluded for their identity or sidelined by something they could have prepared for. No one is asking for special treatment or for the censorship of ideas they dislike. It’s really not a big deal to put these things into practice, and it would vastly improve the academic experience and wellbeing of countless students.