First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
Post Reply Oxford law students given 'trigger warnings' before traumatic material
Posted 5/11/16
This type of coddling is what enables the younger generation to become entitled brats who think they can demand the same from everyone else in the real world. I'm sorry, but there are no trigger warnings and safe spaces in the real world. These kids need to learn to toughen up and face adversity on their own, not to be coddled into spineless human beings who crumble under any little issue. Seriously... When will the dumbing down end?

27595 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
51 / M / Inside the Anime...
Offline
Posted 5/11/16

ZavinRoyalheart wrote:


Rujikin wrote:


ZavinRoyalheart wrote:

I'm more worried about that woman's joke not being funny.
I imagine she came up with both parts of the joke and it isn't an actual case but If that's true than I don't see why she would come up with something so obscure as foot and mouth disease which is an actual infectious disease that bovid animals contract. It had the elements of a good joke but it totally misses. I know that not every joke I make is a knee slapper but Laura needs to step up her game.


I think the joke is that she is warning them about something common that they have all dealt with.

I suppose it would be similar to giving athletes a trigger warning that they are going to talk about athletes foot.


Yeah but a joke should be clearer than that and should cover a wider audience. I don't think too many farmers are going into law and people who aren't farmers most likely won't get the joke. I had to look up foot and mouth disease. She gave me homework instead of a laugh. That's just like a professor. A joke is like a frog. You can dissect them and find out how they work but they both die in the process.

Probably not the first response you were expecting but to be fair it's late at night and I'm probably not thinking straight.


Are you serious? You don't know what anthrax is? Wow....
19480 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / NYC Metro Area
Offline
Posted 5/11/16
Wow, talking about coddled, we are probably being laughed at on the international stage and rightfully so....
27595 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
51 / M / Inside the Anime...
Offline
Posted 5/11/16 , edited 6/7/16

goodman528 wrote:

chill bro. most of them will go into corporate / financial law, and very few will ever complete any law suits. settlements, taxes and compliance for big corporations is where the money is.


every movie you have ever watched has a "trigger warning" about violence / sexual content / offensive language, as well as an age rating. are you upset over that as well?


this is typical blend of tabloid journalist sensationalizing a none-story to sell news and white men who have never experienced institutional discrimination crying about an issue that doesn't affect them.


Hmm... what do old white guys have to do with the general weakness of the general younger population? Does this non issue bother you that much? Discrimination? Hmm... Did you ever think that when you call out a bunch of old white guys that you are being discriminatory against the elderly? Is it ok for you to say such things because you are entitled to a double standard? Do two wrongs make a right? Sorry I just have to call you out. You started off reasonably well. Then you went all ageism. Do you hate your grand parents?
42262 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
The States
Offline
Posted 5/11/16

Steelmonk wrote:


goodman528 wrote:

chill bro. most of them will go into corporate / financial law, and very few will ever complete any law suits. settlements, taxes and compliance for big corporations is where the money is.


every movie you have ever watched has a "trigger warning" about violence / sexual content / offensive language, as well as an age rating. are you upset over that as well?


this is typical blend of tabloid journalist sensationalizing a none-story to sell news and white men who have never experienced institutional discrimination crying about an issue that doesn't affect them.



Hmm... what do old white guys have to do with the general weakness of the general younger population? Does this non issue bother you that much? Discrimination? Hmm... Did you ever think that when you call out a bunch of old white guys that you are being discriminatory against the elderly? Is it ok for you to say such things because you are entitled to a double standard? Do two wrongs make a right? Sorry I just have to call you out. You started off reasonably well. Then you went all ageism. Do you hate your grand parents?



Nowhere in what you quoted did that poster make a disparaging comment about age. The only mention of age was in age ratings for movies, as in "you should probably be this old to view this movie". The post wasn't edited either.
42262 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
The States
Offline
Posted 5/11/16 , edited 5/11/16

maxgale wrote:


machinaprecis wrote:


maxgale wrote:

And people wonder why I loathe SJWs.


I'm not surprised you think that they're wrong, because on many counts they are, but I think that it's pretty silly and counterproductive that you loathe them.

It seems like this really upsets you, but to be fair, the topic was in the subject field, so maybe you shouldn't have read it if you were going to get so ... triggered?




If someone shits in your backyard, would you loathe them too?


You are getting upset about communication between people who have literally nothing to do with you. Trigger warnings are not an attempt to stop sensitive material from getting discussed, they're an out so that people who don't want to deal with them don't have to. If communication between individuals who have nothing to do with you and aren't talking about you feels like a personal attack on the same level as laying a flat deuce in your yard, you're making the same mistake as certain SJW types.

They see something they don't agree with and want to pretend it doesn't exist.
You see something you don't agree with and pretend you have the right for it not to exist.

Who's overreacting more?
15177 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 5/12/16
THEY SELFISH, THEY REALLY CANT HANDLE THEIR CONTENT.
knowing law(in Mexico), is something they ve to face.
so deal with it, BRAINIAC, THEY SUFFER MORE BRAIN DAMAGE THEN ME
WHEN I DRINK.
18323 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 5/12/16

Steelmonk wrote:


goodman528 wrote:

chill bro. most of them will go into corporate / financial law, and very few will ever complete any law suits. settlements, taxes and compliance for big corporations is where the money is.


every movie you have ever watched has a "trigger warning" about violence / sexual content / offensive language, as well as an age rating. are you upset over that as well?


this is typical blend of tabloid journalist sensationalizing a none-story to sell news and white men who have never experienced institutional discrimination crying about an issue that doesn't affect them.



Hmm... what do old white guys have to do with the general weakness of the general younger population? Does this non issue bother you that much? Discrimination? Hmm... Did you ever think that when you call out a bunch of old white guys that you are being discriminatory against the elderly? Is it ok for you to say such things because you are entitled to a double standard? Do two wrongs make a right? Sorry I just have to call you out. You started off reasonably well. Then you went all ageism. Do you hate your grand parents?


I don't know what post you read, but the one I wrote and you quoted (never edited) doesn't mention old people anywhere. All I'm saying is this is another case of people who are not affected by the issue shouting at people who are affected: "Get over it! I'm not affected so why should you be?" Which is an argument that makes no sense whatsoever. If you don't get offended by anything, then good for you, but some people do get offended or affected by some materials and they may want to have a trigger warning, why should you care whether or not such a trigger warning is provided for them? Do you also rage against disabled parking spaces because you can't accept the fact that some people are different to you?
24251 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 5/12/16
Well they are students after all. I don't think and client would stand for that once they are actually on the case.
Posted 5/12/16

goodman528 wrote:

I don't know what post you read, but the one I wrote and you quoted (never edited) doesn't mention old people anywhere. All I'm saying is this is another case of people who are not affected by the issue shouting at people who are affected: "Get over it! I'm not affected so why should you be?" Which is an argument that makes no sense whatsoever. If you don't get offended by anything, then good for you, but some people do get offended or affected by some materials and they may want to have a trigger warning, why should you care whether or not such a trigger warning is provided for them? Do you also rage against disabled parking spaces because you can't accept the fact that some people are different to you?


Personally, I find that the issue is not about people being offended. Hell, be offended as much as you want. That's perfectly fine. Just don't expect or demand that the rest of the world cater to your every insecurity. The main issue is really about what kind of adults these kids are pretty much being trained to be. There is a big difference between reasonable accommodations such as disabled parking spaces for people who physically are unable walk the length of half a parking lot and these "trigger warnings" that are more about pandering to the over-sensitivity of the younger generation than about helping them. Besides, disabled parking spaces do not indulge or enable people to keep being disabled. Trigger warnings, especially the ones enforced in colleges and universities nowadays, teach kids to run away from things that scare, hurt, or offend them as opposed to helping them learn coping skills and giving them the strength to overcome anything. They enable the younger generation's view that the world and everyone else in it should change to fit their needs as opposed to the opposite which is the reality. Anyone who is that heavily traumatized or suffering from any serious psychological illness would either be in hospital or have a therapist who would advise them not to pursue anything that would obviously not be good for them. If they are sane enough and have enough sense to know what they want to pursue, then I'm pretty sure they should already have an idea of they are getting themselves into. I don't think the professor or the university owes them any kind of special treatment or exception just because they are emotionally stunted and unable to deal with certain subject matters.
18323 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 5/12/16

Rinrinrinn wrote:


goodman528 wrote:

I don't know what post you read, but the one I wrote and you quoted (never edited) doesn't mention old people anywhere. All I'm saying is this is another case of people who are not affected by the issue shouting at people who are affected: "Get over it! I'm not affected so why should you be?" Which is an argument that makes no sense whatsoever. If you don't get offended by anything, then good for you, but some people do get offended or affected by some materials and they may want to have a trigger warning, why should you care whether or not such a trigger warning is provided for them? Do you also rage against disabled parking spaces because you can't accept the fact that some people are different to you?


Personally, I find that the issue is not about people being offended. Hell, be offended as much as you want. That's perfectly fine. Just don't expect or demand that the rest of the world cater to your every insecurity. The main issue is really about what kind of adults these kids are pretty much being trained to be. There is a big difference between reasonable accommodations such as disabled parking spaces for people who physically are unable walk the length of half a parking lot and these "trigger warnings" that are more about pandering to the over-sensitivity of the younger generation than about helping them. Besides, disabled parking spaces do not indulge or enable people to keep being disabled. Trigger warnings, especially the ones enforced in colleges and universities nowadays, teach kids to run away from things that scare, hurt, or offend them as opposed to helping them learn coping skills and giving them the strength to overcome anything. They enable the younger generation's view that the world and everyone else in it should change to fit their needs as opposed to the opposite which is the reality. Anyone who is that heavily traumatized or suffering from any serious psychological illness would either be in hospital or have a therapist who would advise them not to pursue anything that would obviously not be good for them. If they are sane enough and have enough sense to know what they want to pursue, then I'm pretty sure they should already have an idea of they are getting themselves into. I don't think the professor or the university owes them any kind of special treatment or exception just because they are emotionally stunted and unable to deal with certain subject matters.


I said it in my first reply post. Very very few of them will go into criminal law in their careers, almost none. But if they are interested in the subject a trigger warning doesn't exclude them from learning about it. All it says is if they don't want to learn about it, then they have the choice to not learn about it. So what is the problem?

You have some very fanciful ideas about what kind of men end up as leaders. Do you think George Bush knew how to check out at a supermarket? Do you think Lien Chan (Taiwan major party presidential candidate) ever ate a bento or a sandwich before? Do you think David Cameron ever cooked a meal before? People like Thatcher and Trump are the exception, not the rule. Most of the judges and senators and leaders don't live in the same world as you and me. But you know what, that is OK.

The only person who attempted to do what you just suggested was Chairman Mao. He had the great idea that future leaders should come from a representative cross section of the Chinese society, and intellectuals should not run away from the sufferings and difficulties of life. So when you see the news stories like Queen (UK) says Chinese officials were rude at meeting (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/may/11/queen-chinese-officials-very-rude-xi-jinping-state-visit), don't be surprised, because chairman Xi spent a good number of years of his youth working as a peasant farmer picking manure and growing crops and probably getting into fights over the meaning of communism, while the Queen had a very sheltered upbringing.
122 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / F / US
Offline
Posted 5/12/16
It does serve a purpose, but I feel leaving a lecture or class because it's too depressing is kinda messed up.

I remember being really angry in 6th grade because kids were laughing at the pictures of death camp survivors. I was so lost for words as to how kids could laugh at misery so powerful it was turning my stomach..

People really scare me sometimes...
Posted 5/12/16
I'm a walking trigger hazard, my college tried to force me to wear a t-shirt with trigger warning on it.
146 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Airdrie, Alberta
Offline
Posted 5/12/16
They should just watch Elfen Lied!
5019 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M
Offline
Posted 5/12/16

Hail_King_Kakao wrote:

I'm a walking trigger hazard, my college tried to force me to wear a t-shirt with trigger warning on it.



I'd wear that shit with pride.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.