Since the shootings at the University of California Santa Barbara carried out by Elliot Rodgers, the internet has been pretty much inundated with opinions on what happened to make a young man go on such a vicious rampage. The hashtag #yesallwomen was born, and I’ve spent a decent amount of time reading the responses, realizing that I can relate to many. News outlets, conservative and liberal alike, have responded to the tragedy, positing their theories for why it happened or what to do next. We’ve even had substantial chatter here at Law Street, including from our new blogger Allison Dawson who talked about it in her excellent post “The Shooter Alone is to Blame for Santa Barbara Slayings.”

I don’t want to discuss this tragic event, because in the past three days I’ve read dozens of different takedowns, analyses, and examinations of the event and I, quite frankly, don’t feel like I have anything else to add. And no matter what we blame it on, and my personal feelings aside, we’ll never be able to figure out exactly why it happened. It’s probably some combination of all the different root causes that analysts have mentioned — but it’s not going to bring back the people that Rodgers murdered.

Now I’ve always been a supporter of substantive online discussion. A few months back I wrote about the power of hashtag discussions, and I stand by the fact that they can add real value to our cultural and societal discourse. But part of me also feels really sad, because as great as the discussion has been, I’ve seen it all before. Every single time something like this happens, we talk about it, we dig into societal concerns and gun laws, and then nothing ends up changing.

I love words, but actions speak louder. And we need to start taking action. I don’t want to politicize the issue because it was a genuine tragedy and those who lost loved ones deserve their time to grieve. But it’s already been politicized over and over and over again because this is all anyone will talk about. For god’s sake the politically irrelevant dusty relic that is “Joe the Plumber” has chimed in, telling parents of the victims that “your dead kids don’t trump my constitutional rights.” Great.

So now that this discussion (and hashtag) has been talked to death and there’s really nothing left to say, I am going to tell you all in a vaguely hypocritical fashion, that I think we need to all shut the hell up unless we’re going to do something about it.

I don’t care what you do about it. Go with whatever theory you have for why you think that tragedies like this happen and do something.

So if you think it’s about misogyny and cultural problems, fine, understandable. Go raise your sons to be better than some of the men of this generation. Open up discussions with the men in your life. Teach women to stand up for themselves.

If you think it’s a mental health issue, encourage more investment into mental health services at your university or at your child’s school. Fight to end the stigma of talking about mental health issues.

Or guns, If you think it’s about guns, lobby for stricter regulations. Encourage the development of technologies that make guns safer. Vote for candidates who attempt to implement legislation restricting gun access.

I don’t care what you do. I don’t care why you think this happened. But I’m begging you, do one of these things or come up with your own. I already did mine. I just donated a few dollars to a candidate whose views on this whole issue I support. And I know politicians aren’t going to solve all problems and probably will barely make a dent. But at least I’m taking an action I can believe in. And I want you to all do it with me, no matter how big or small it is.

I’m tired of being scared that I will someday senselessly be targeted by someone like Elliot Rodgers. It seems like every other week there are mass shootings, or attempted mass shootings. And I don’t care what we do to fix it, I don’t care if my theories about what happened are vindicated or not. I would just like it to stop.

—

Anneliese Mahoney (@AMahoney8672) is Lead Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Ryosuke Yagi via Flickr]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post It’s Time to Stop Talking About Gun Violence and Do Something appeared first on Law Street.

Even casual consumers of online media have probably noticed the now-ubiquitous trend  of the ‘trigger warning.’ Usually right at the beginning of a piece, the short blurb warns readers of potentially disturbing or sensitive information — rape, eating disorders, shootings, etc. — before they stumble upon it unprepared. As a recent Buzzfeed article points out, some sites, such as Shakesville, add warnings to nearly everything, including a photograph where the writer’s dogs are baring their teeth in a way that could be perceived as aggressive. Other sites, such as Jezebel, purposely do not include trigger warnings.

Trigger warnings are pretty much everywhere on the internet, but now they’ve started to creep into the real world. A number of colleges have received requests from students that trigger warnings be added to syllabi to indicate troubling material, and the issue has sparked debate across college campuses.

I know that I have heard the conversation myself a few times at my own university, but I have very mixed feelings about trigger warnings when it comes to college material. Should people be able to prepare themselves for difficult content? Sure. Are there certain topics that can be emotionally damaging? Yes. But should trigger warnings be required on college syllabi? I don’t think so.

Trigger warnings on syllabi could force optional content and make courses unbalanced: There are two reasons that trigger warnings exist: 1) to allow someone time to mentally and emotionally prepare for a difficult read; and 2) to allow someone to back away from the content because they make the choice not to read it. While the first could be an appropriate use of a warning on college syllabi, the latter is problematic.

How might a professor fairly teach a subject that is perhaps controversial if she is mandated to include trigger warnings? She includes the warnings and as a result student A claims he can’t participate in a certain triggering reading; student B won’t participate in another; and students C-Z all say the same thing. The professor is left with a hodgepodge of students who all covered different material. How does one design a final around that? Non-tenured professors especially would worry about the ramifications of their jobs.

Professors have been dealing with tough subjects since the dawn of academia, and if they’re not dealing with them properly, that’s something to fix.  I was an International Affairs major with a concentration in security studies, which meant that I took a lot of very disturbing classes. Security studies focuses on war and conflict: civilian victimization, terrorism, gender violence, etc. I ostensibly had people in some of those many classes who could have found some of the material triggering, and in my opinion, every time, my professors handled it properly. Whether it was a video, or a reading, they provided fair warning but explained how it was essential to our discussion and lesson. They exhibited sensitivity, and compassion. And pretty much every time I was involved in a class discussion regarding a difficult topic, students were fairly respectful of each other because of the serious and appropriate environment our professors created.

Academia is a space that requires the discussion of difficult topics. Rich Lowry’s National Review op-ed, though highly inflammatory, makes the fair point that anything can be triggering to anyone. Focus on providing the resources to have productive, sensitive, and safe discussions about such topics, because at the end of the day, that is one of the purposes of academia.

Life doesn’t have trigger warnings: I wish it did, but it doesn’t. There’s no trigger warning to stop you from turning on the news at an inopportune moment and seeing something that invokes traumatizing memories. There’s no trigger warning to stop something terrible from happening in front of you, or to avoid an acquaintance’s disparaging remark, or to stop some asshole from yelling something disgustingly racist, sexist, homophobic, or harmful at you on the street. I know because all of those things have happened to my friends.

Academia has a rare opportunity to help discuss these issues in a safe place. It provides the opportunity for students to test the boundaries of what triggers them and then if they want to, get help to work on those issues.

—

Anneliese Mahoney (@AMahoney8672) is Lead Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Openclips via Pixabay]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Trigger Warnings Creep Off the Web and Into the Classroom appeared first on Law Street.