My girlfriend is an English major, and a fair few of the works she's had to study have had very explicit material. She's in France at the moment without any internet, otherwise I'd ask for her to weigh-in on this conversation. In any case, if Greek/Roman texts aren't part of the English course then my apologies. Change my analogy from 'Sandra the English student' to 'Sandra the Classics student' and the analogy still holds. In any case the discussion isn't only limited to rape scenes, I have heard this brought up with regards to 'violence' in literature, which brings a whole new dimension of complication. I agree that the professor having to give a warning wouldn't be a big issue, but the problem is that people will then begin to avoid those themes. It would be inevitable that a proportion of students will be graduating who simply don't know about a certain themes/subjects in literature. I'm an engineering student, and I would say it would be similar if an engineering graduate managed to go through their full 4 years of their undergrad without studying any calculus. There are gaps in their knowledge that put them at a distinct disadvantage. My argument is that simply by studying a subject in university you are consenting to be taught about certain things. If you don't want to learn about certain topics in English/Engineering/Underwater Basketweaving, surely you wouldn't be there in the first place?
Well sure, but I'm also rejecting certain things - for instance, I rejected all mathematics by virtue of choosing to study English. I also rejected studying the Classics by choosing a major where I wouldn't have to read them. I'm also not suggesting that it's possible to avoid all uncomfortable material, or that one should. But it's entirely possible to know oneself enough not to choose a course specifically on the horror genre, or to see a book on the syllabus you know is replete with, say, racial violence, that you think you might respond badly to and have a discussion with the professor about alternatives (if this is a class you must take to fulfill your major requirements, that is). I also think it's a little different to say "This topic is difficult, I'd rather not learn it" and "This particular lecture might give me panic attacks and make the rest of my classes today impossible to attend." I'm arguing in the case for the latter that there be a little leeway, that's all. Additionally, I think something like English or History is a little different from engineering or mathematics, where disregarding a period or only briefly touching on it is not the same as skipping an entire topic like calculus, primarily because what now counts as "canon" and what a professor thinks is worth teaching is very subjective. Two different professors teaching the same period of English in an introductory level class at my university taught completely different works (e.g. my friends studied James Joyce in that class and I didn't; we studied play manuscripts and they didn't - in fact I don't think we had any overlapping authors at all). And the fact that I never read Middlemarch doesn't really change the substance of my education, I would argue, but that's pretty tangential.
Whoa, what college did you go to? At mine we had breadth requirements which meant that even if you majored in the liberal arts, like English, you had to take so many math, science/lab, language requirements and so on. I would agree with what you present about the variability of what's being taught in a given English class depending on the professor to a pretty significant extent. While I don't think that an instructor should completely change their lesson plans and syllabus to avoid an uncomfortable subject, it would be possible to plan an entire course gently avoiding certain topics if the professor had that as a goal when they sat down to plot it all out. However I think that generally speaking, especially if you are likely to be the only person disturbed by a topic, the onus is on the student (or the person likely to be triggered) to privately approach their teacher (or other authority figure) during an appropriate time to talk 1:1, like during office hours, to raise the potential issue/communicate that the student is sensitive to certain topics, and instead of asking the professor to change their plans to accomodate the student, I think the student should come prepared with suggestions or ideas for how they will manage their issue. While in an ideal situation you might have a professor who will alter reading material and discussion items in order to be sensitive to a student's needs, I think it is kind of arrogant and self-centered for one person who has an issue to expect and ask that the course experience for all students be changed just to accomodate them. I also think that such topics, and potential triggers, should only be brought up pre-emptively when it looks like that might be necessary. For instance there was a question recently, "If someone has triggers, should they let other people know about their triggers and ask that their friends refrain from discussing them?" basically asking the etiquette on such a situation. That question made me think about the subject and in short I concluded that one should try and only bring up the fact that [x] is an area of discomfort and triggering, if there's a reasonable expectation or past history that indicates that [x] is probably going to come up. If I walked around telling everyone I met, immediately, that "rape triggers me, please don't talk about it," that would come across very off-putting-ly. In addition it serves to try and make everyone bow to accomodate *me" - when frankly who knows if rape would have even come up otherwise? It is drawing more attention to the whole issue/event, and I think that's part of why some people view those who talk about triggers dismissively. Because it can seem like an attention grab. I think if you have an issue it is up to you to manage it; much like diabetes, while I can be aware of your sensitivity and try to accomodate it, at the end of the day, the person who needs to fully manage the problem is the person whose problem it is. If something is triggering for a person in a university class and it comes up in class, the triggered person should excuse themselves as politely as possible and return when the discussion is over or they are more composed. Personally, needles make me pass out. I've been in a psychology class watching a video when suddenly there was an injection on the screen. I immediately began to feel ill and lose consciousness. I had to be carted out of the room on a stretcher actually as I wasn't able to make it to the door, haha. But point of the matter is that I didn't expect anyone else to know of my sensitivity, I didn't blame the teacher for putting the video on, and I didn't suggest we no longer watch such videos in class. I tried to manage my condition as much as possible and when I could not I removed myself. If I had expected the situation to repeat I would have spoken with the professor quietly and we would have reached a solution. It certainly doesn't require me to run around and tell everyone I know that I have a tendency to pass out in certain situations. And I can't ask others to refrain from normal behavior "in the off chance" it'll make me pass out. My health is my responsibility. I can't blame someone else if I do not manage it properly.I rejected all mathematics by virtue of choosing to study English
I only had to take two science courses, all the other breadth requirements I'd satisfied with high AP and SAT scores. I still took a language for fun, but I didn't need to. Also, I was responding to someone in Ireland, where those breadth requirements don't exist at university level. I'm not sure exactly which point you're trying to make - you say at first that a student should talk to their professor at the outset to say they're sensitive to a given topic, and then later that bringing it up is rude or attention-seeking. If I'm taking an introductory class, and the name of the class is a time period (British Literature from 1880-1970, for instance) I may expect to see certain works, being familiar with the period, or I may see on the syllabus a work I've never come across. Usually a professor will describe a work at the end of the lecture before you read it, to point out certain things to pay attention to, and I think at that moment it would be worth pointing out whether there is graphic material. That would prompt someone with potential triggers in that material to come talk to the professor privately, and either ask to skip that particular chapter or read an alternative work by that author or similar (usually professors have several other works they wish they had time to teach that they can suggest quickly anyway). That way there's at least a heads up, and an individual looking out for his or her own mental health doesn't have to share personal triggers unnecessarily, or in a way you might see as attention-seeking. I see it as something that can be handled sensitively but casually. For your needle story, it doesn't seem unreasonable that a more sensitive professor might have stated before watching the video that there would be needles, and allow you to excuse yourself before causing a bigger distraction for the rest of the class (passing out and needing to be carried out on a stretcher). I'm not saying it's the teacher's fault, but the teacher knows what you're watching/reading/whatever, and you don't, so it doesn't seem like a terrible idea for the teacher to be the one to say hey, there's a gory part about 5 minutes in, close your eyes or leave and come back in 10 minutes. It's more of a courtesy than anything else, and helps the class run smoothly. I took a history class that covered WWI, and the day we talked about chemical warfare, the professor warned us that there would be graphic photos before he clicked over to that slide. He's not going to avoid showing them, but it's fair to give warning to allow those who know they'd be triggered to take care of themselves. I don't see how he would gain anything by trying to surprise us with them, so why not? How long does it take to say "The next slide will have graphic photos"? It's not a disruption, and might help avoid a disruption. right?
The needle example is an interesting one. I think if a student declared that they had a phobia of x at some point, I would absolutely warn them that x will be shown in class/present in a text on a particular week. But it's difficult to account for all phobias. What if there was a movie with a spider in it? Or a book? Should the professor warn people with arachnophobia to leave/shut their eyes at a particular point, or skip a particular chapter of the book? _refugee_ mentioned being warned about death being discussed in a text. I've seen course syllabi where every single week could be marked with "Trigger warning: death". It's really difficult to predict how people will react to certain texts, and trying to put in trigger warnings can quickly become a strange guessing game of figuring out (and sometimes spoiling) challenging aspects of texts.
I think it just depends on the context, and the type of class. Like I said, in my mind, it's just a courtesy, not something I would suggest mandating. Now that that professor has had the experience of a student fainting in class, he or she might consider mentioning it in the future before showing the video. I'm not suggesting that we all have to be mindreaders, or that everyone always has to announce to strangers and acquaintances all the things that might trigger them. I guess I'm just saying that there are better ways of addressing this particular type of experience outside of either "it's your problem, shut up and deal with it" or "everyone has to walk on eggshells and cater to every issue". I think those responses are simplistic and immature, and it's not absurd to look for understanding somewhere in the middle.