[Kizzy]

Define 'emotional robustness'...

As I said earlier this 17yr old young woman is eloquent, reasoned, articulate and more than capable of participating in an academic debate... So where is the issue?

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Define 'emotional robustness'...

As I said earlier this 17yr old young woman is eloquent, reasoned, articulate and more than capable of participating in an academic debate... So where is the issue?

Like I said, it's not a judgement, but to fully engage in certain subjects at a high academic level you have to be prepared to encounter distressing and potentially emotionally triggering subject matters. It can't simply be that certain parts of the course are optional for those who can't. Examples being child abuse issues being covered in a psychology degree, or sexual assault cases being discussed in a criminal law degree. I did mention, though, that I think Universities should be clearer with prospective students BEFORE they start a course, if that course contains any potentially distressing subject matters. Once someone begins a course of education with that knowledge, though... I don't think it's feasible or reasonable to provide warnings at every lecture... mainly because I don't think it should make any difference. You can't just say "oh well then I'll skip those lectures / that entire portion of the degree" ... it would basically be "Trigger warning for this lecture but you have to come anyway so...".

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Like I said, it's not a judgement, but to fully engage in certain subjects at a high academic level you have to be prepared to encounter distressing and potentially emotionally triggering subject matters. It can't simply be that certain parts of the course are optional for those who can't. Examples being child abuse issues being covered in a psychology degree, or sexual assault cases being discussed in a criminal law degree. I did mention, though, that I think Universities should be clearer with prospective students BEFORE they start a course, if that course contains any potentially distressing subject matters. Once someone begins a course of education with that knowledge, though... I don't think it's feasible or reasonable to provide warnings at every lecture... mainly because I don't think it should make any difference. You can't just say "oh well then I'll skip those lectures / that entire portion of the degree" ... it would basically be "Trigger warning for this lecture but you have to come anyway so...".

Yeah, if they later on think they can't handle certain subject areas then they need to ask themselves if studying (and potentially gaining a career in) that field is really what they should be doing.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Like I said, it's not a judgement, but to fully engage in certain subjects at a high academic level you have to be prepared to encounter distressing and potentially emotionally triggering subject matters. It can't simply be that certain parts of the course are optional for those who can't. Examples being child abuse issues being covered in a psychology degree, or sexual assault cases being discussed in a criminal law degree. I did mention, though, that I think Universities should be clearer with prospective students BEFORE they start a course, if that course contains any potentially distressing subject matters. Once someone begins a course of education with that knowledge, though... I don't think it's feasible or reasonable to provide warnings at every lecture... mainly because I don't think it should make any difference. You can't just say "oh well then I'll skip those lectures / that entire portion of the degree" ... it would basically be "Trigger warning for this lecture but you have to come anyway so...".

These trigger warnings are for people who may require them, not everyone therefore this logic is flawed that young people are more sensitive because they have trigger warnings, because at present they don't.... Which is why the young lady is debating their usefulness for those who may be affected to be warned as an important psychological tool is preparedness, if you want to challenge your feels you have to be mentally aware and receptive.

Should you have say, a fear of spiders and someone just plopped a spider on the table you might have an extreme response... whereas if someone were to say, 'here is a spider' we are going to look at this today, delivered in a safe way you would feel more comfortable to confront it.

So basically as you say I think all that is being suggested as yet is the students be made aware prior to commencement of a lecture but that's not to say that that would be sufficient reason to miss that lecture in it's entirety.
Should it say be in relation to a topic such as rape, and there were images to be shown of the scene, that may require a warning for example?
It's respectful, to blurt on about the need for PTSD sufferers to just in essence 'get over it' as this guy does is questionable.