Over the past several years, members of academia and the public at large have been introduced and become aware of the one of latest issues to roil many college campuses – trigger warnings. Gender oriented blogs, influential cultural critics; politicians from all ends of the political spectrum as well as many private citizens have weighed in on the issue. Anyone who has followed the abundant level of commentary that has ensued knows that the discussion has been anything but calm. Intense, emotional, spirited, and in many cases polarizing discourse has dominated the debate.

Supporters believe that implementing such a policy will serve as a sort of psychological refuge or “safe space” for those students who are inclined to be less emotionally resilient as their more psychologically formidable peers. Detractors see such a movement as a potential dismantling of free speech that could result in the severe curtailment or eventual eradication of academic freedom.

While neither concern is likely to reach full fruition, I would argue that critics and skeptics have more validity. To be sure, the debate has cooled somewhat recently, the cold, hard truth is that we are entering dangerous and precarious territory when we start allowing college campuses and classrooms to become dictated by emotions and feelings. Students are a diverse and pluralistic group. In any given course ranging from small seminars to mid-size classes to large lecture halls, there are likely to be a number of young people who have face some form of trauma, discomfort or injustice in their lives whether it be racism, sexism, violence, poverty, a broken, dysfunctional home, depression or a number of other physical, social, emotional, economic and similar indignities.

For example, should students and professors prohibit themselves from discussing the brutal and violent history of American slavery if their course is disproportionately made up of African American students? The inhumane and horrific atrocities committed during the Holocaust if the class is composed of predominately Jewish students? The violent, sexist and misogynist treatment of American Women in a class where female students are in the majority? Are you selective in what you discuss? Do you censor what you discuss?

Attempting to psychologically navigate an entire group of young adults would be a futile exercise in unqualified altruism that could encroach upon all students’ opportunity to receive an intellectually vibrant experience where uncensored discussion and spirited (hopefully respectful) debate dominated the discourse. Employing trigger warnings in the classroom would more than likely throw a monkey wrench or at the very minimum, diminish the level of intellectual inquiry and curiosity that students could or would gain from such a stifled atmosphere devoid of impassioned ideas.

To an early middle aged Generation X academic like myself, it does seem that a funny thing has indeed happened on the way to the college campus for a number of millennials. A considerable number of them (certainly not all) seem to believe that professors and other groups of people on campus are supposed to tailor their lives around their (students) sexual, athletic and social schedules. This includes syllabi and course content as well. Anything that causes them the slightest emotional and other sort of inconvenience has to be corrected immediately. Their injured feelings and fragile egos included.

To be sure, there were baby boomers, fellow Gen X’ers and students of previous generations who embodied an “it’s all about me and my emotions” attitude as well. However, it is highly unlikely such entitlement and emotional fragility was as intense and rampant as it is with this current generation. I adopt a “take no prisoners” position in my courses and make it clear to my students in no uncertain terms that I do not incorporate trigger warnings on my syllabi. The majority of them have now legally reached adulthood (whether they have emotionally and psychologically or not is irrelevant), have made an adult decision to pursue postsecondary education and they should be expected to be treated as such. That includes hearing, debating or discussing issues, ideas, events and situations that may cause them a degree of discomfort. Interestingly, such a contrarian, devil’s advocate approach has actually endeared to me to some students.

The fact is that life is can be and is often filled with unanticipated and unpredictable situations. None of us are immune to this fact. If there is any institution where free, open and unfiltered debate should take place, it is higher education. The college campus is the citadel for the rational examination and exchange of ideas. Regardless of their intent, trigger warnings are a dangerously reactionary policy that can be perversely manipulated by those with impure agendas and ulterior motives resulting in a possible chilling effect for all involved. It is a semi-Orwellian, retrograde form of dogma that must be dismantled or severely minimized. Free speech. Either you have it or you don’t. I will fight to the death to preserve it.