Merriam-Webster's defines resilience as the ability to become strong, healthy, or successful again after something bad happens.
With the current discussion of the need for trigger warnings and safe spaces on college campuses, I grow increasingly distressed at what I believe is a very slippery, inflexible slope. Once again, we are policing so much of what we say that we are forgetting to address the very underpinnings of the cultural/ethical problems we are protecting students from. Triggers are triggers because they pose a threat; they are actually making those who encounter them fearful, anxious, and distressed. but it is entirely impossible to remove those threats from daily life.
Before I go any further, I want to stress that I am in NO way saying triggers aren't a real problem. As a survivor of trauma, I know perfectly well the power and unpredictability of those moments that put you back in that vulnerable state. No matter how much logic you apply, it's insanely difficult to override the visceral certainty of immediate and impending doom once triggered. Furthermore, I am not trying to diminish the very real fact of microaggressions in daily life against marginalized groups, people who've experienced (or not) certain events, or anyone who's ideals and opinions differ from those of the prevailing standard.
What's at issue for me is the collateral damage we do by not having open, honest discourse, and our culture's growing aversion to the notion of grappling with personal and interpersonal difficulties. It seems more and more that we worry about merely policing words without addressing concomitant attitudes that make them dangerous. So, we have a bunch of people who know what they can and cannot say to save face, but are spared the discomfort of examining their prejudices or bringing them into direct conflict with someone else's experiences that make them uncomfortable. If we're going to make changes to systemic cultural problems like racism, homophobia, sexual violence, and so many others, we can't keep stepping around them, we must hold our ground to hear/experience/confront things we'd likely rather not. In the end, it works kind of like aversion therapy, right? Yes, we have to create safe space for this kind of interaction, but that space is not avoidance, it's taking the crazy leap to trust and be trustWORTHY.
Now Kindra, I hear you saying, you sound like a hippy dippy unrealistic idealist. Well, all I can tell you is that I have collected sixteen years of anecdotal evidence attesting to the resiliency of people having difficult conversations. I should also say here that I use trigger warnings in the classes and workshops I teach, but what I don't do is offer them as an excuse to walk away from conversations or exercises or materials that might be upsetting. I let the participants know what we'll tackle, I'll acknowledge that if they need to step out for a moment that's not a problem, and if they do, I send a peer to check on them. Often that person looks at me like I'm insane, but no one has ever refused to offer comfort to the triggered person. I will tell you that the end result to that, as evidenced by the myriad of self-reflective, positive emails I've received over the years is that the mere act of moving into, and through the tough stuff, together, increases resilience, belief in self, and belief in, and respect for, community.
We are way more elastic than we think. This is not only a conversation for academia. All you have to do is look around our communities, our political stage, our social media to know that if we continue on the path we're on we're doomed. So, do we want to say whatever we feel like saying with impunity? Of course not. We still owe it to one another to be sensitive to history, injustice, inequity, and experience, but when people are not having conversations because words or content MIGHT offend or trigger them, and the underlying issues don't get addressed, we are all rendered mute.
