OTM #1 -

OTM #1:

This week’s On the Media discussion was especially an interesting and thought provoking discussion. It talked in large part about trigger warnings, coddling, and “safe spaces” on college campuses. This discussion starts out in talking about a welcome letter that the University of Chicago sent out to new students stating that they do not support . It’s interesting to hear that they did not support trigger warnings, and they do not condone safe spaces, just because I feel like so much of the rest of the world is trying so hard to not offend anyone. It’s kind of refreshing, really.

Sometimes I really feel like a lot of people have just set out on each day to try and be offended. It’s something that comes so easily to us. Whether someone has a certain opinion, belief, or looks at us a certain way, we choose to be offended. My question is, why should we ever take offense just because someone’s beliefs or opinions don’t align with our own? Are we all supposed to have the same beliefs and opinions? That would make for a pretty boring world.

It’s sad to see that so many in our generation rarely take the blame for anything. We are constantly seeking to blame something or someone else for our problems and our feelings. But the funny thing is, we’re in charge of ourselves and our own emotions. Only we can choose the way we are going to feel and if we are going to let other people’s actions and thoughts affect the way we feel and carry ourselves. Toughen up and shake it off, people!

I understand that our great grandparents were not as catered to, and were probably expected to suck up their feelings a lot more than we are today. But on that note, our world has changed a lot since their time too. Sensitive topics like drugs, sex, race, and abortion were mostly avoided in conversation, and spoken about rarely in more private conversations if talked about at all. So with that, I can understand that there is definitely more potentially offensive conversation nowadays, and why coddling and trigger warnings have become so common.

The explanation further into the discussion of what the University of Chicago’s letter was supposed to mean, seemed like they were completely going back on what they had said. It just goes to show that even when we make statements, it’s almost like there is an unwritten rule in our society that you need to take it back if you have offended someone and they’ve made a big fuss. The professor later in the discussion simply said, “Well the letter was basically meant to suggest…” and then he goes on to say something entirely different than what the letter said… I guess that guilt maybe played a part in this and the dean of students felt bad for what he had said, but even then, I don’t think that response makes much sense.  I don’t have a problem with the letter itself, but I don’t feel that the University’s response to the outrage was done very well. I think they would have done better to simply stand by their word and further explain the reasoning, instead of going back on what they said to say something different. If they had meant to say something else, I think they would have said something else in the first place.