essence-ofme - Tumblr blog

[essence-ofme]

"To be beautiful means to be yourself. You don’t need to be accepted by others. You need to accept yourself." - Thich Nhat Hanh

[essence-ofme]

Columbia College Chicago, Saturday, May 14, 2022

Officially graduated from Columbia College Chicago with a BFA in Creative Writing 🖊👩🏽‍🎓

[essence-ofme]

Check out my Salute to Grads profile! 🤗🎓

https://news.colum.edu/salute-to-grads-hollings/index.html

[essence-ofme]

April 1, 2022, The Alice in Wonderland Experience 🍄💕

[essence-ofme]

La Esperanza Restaurant, March 30, 2022 / somewhere by Lake Michigan, June 10, 2016

Caught up with my good old friend Amanda over breakfast! 😋💖

[essence-ofme]

Just out here being #blessed ✨

[essence-ofme]

February 27, 2022, 2:37 PM

Brunch @ 80 Proof for my friend Chyna’s birthday 🥂💕

[essence-ofme]

Chicago, IL, Chase Tower, September 6, 2016

Throwback to the first day of senior year. 17 years old, omg! 😭 I looked cute, but was definitely a lil spicyy with that dress 💀

[essence-ofme]

Black Lit Essay I Wrote in High School

Native Son/Fruitvale Essay

In both Richard Wright’s Native Son and Ryan Coogler’s Fruitvale Station, Black masculinity is characterized in similar ways. In both works, Black male characters Bigger Thomas and Oscar Grant are portrayed as having no choice but to be aware of their race and because of that, they are constantly fearful, even when they go about their normal everyday lives. Black masculinity is also characterized as feeling like one has to go through drastic measures such as lying, stealing, and the use of violence in order to protect themselves and what is closest to them. However, there are slight differences between Native Son and Fruitvale Station as well. Both exemplify what it is like to be a Black man in America, but Fruitvale Station is a more contemporized version of that. Despite the different and similar ways that Black masculinity is portrayed in these works, both Native Son and Fruitvale Station send a clear message that Black men often struggle in this world to coexist with White people.

For one thing, both Native Son and Fruitvale Station depict their main characters as young Black men who have no choice but to be aware of their skin color. This awareness of their racial identities causes them to be constantly fearful. In Native Son, Bigger accidentally kills Mary Dalton, a wealthy young white woman (Wright). He automatically panics, knowing that no one will believe that it was accidental. Because of his fear of what will happen to him, he goes through extreme measures of exterminating Mary and getting rid of any evidence that could possibly incriminate him for his crime (Wright). Wright portrays Bigger in this light to show that he knows that the simple component of his skin color will automatically deem him guilty in the eyes of others. In Fruitvale Station, there are several instances where Oscar gets an apprehensive feeling. One of them is when the police get called after the train incident (Coogler). Coogler does this to subliminally show Oscar’s fear through the way Oscar tries to get back on the train and lay low once the police arrive. This shows how both of these characters have this innate awareness of their skin color and how it could potentially harm them.

In addition, Bigger Thomas and Oscar Grant are portrayed in a way in which it seems that they are desperately trying to cling to their manhood and sense of security though their drastic actions. For example, in Native Son, Bigger sends a ransom note to Mary Dalton’s wealthy family in order to cast potential suspicion off of himself and onto the “Reds” (Wright). He does this extreme thing in order to not only extort money from the Daltons, but to also feel sure of himself, like he has gotten one over on White people, and they did not know it. Although these efforts fail, it is clear that Bigger wanted to convince himself that he took something from them, which is the reverse of what he has been going through his entire life. It is almost representative of some type of revenge or justification that Bigger needs for what he has been through. In Fruitvale Station, Oscar Grant is shown as being close to having a violent altercation while his mother is visiting him in prison (Coogler). When one of his fellow inmate makes a remark saying “Is this bitch a snitch, too?” Oscar gets angry and stands up to the antagonist (Coogler). Coogler does this to show that Oscar, along with many other Black men, feel that it is necessary to fight physically in order to establish control or dominance and also protect their loved ones.

Furthermore, both Native Son and Fruitvale Station portray Black masculinity in slightly contradicting ways. For instance, in Native Son, Bigger Thomas is a young Black male who has a family to support. However, he does not want to take a job that will undoubtedly help out his family (Wright). Bigger’s unwillingness to take the job portrays Black masculinity in a negative light because of his laziness and selfishness. On the contrary, in Fruitvale Station, Oscar Grant is a young Black man who loses his job and fights to get it back in order to continue supporting his family. Here, Black masculinity is cast in a positive light because of a seemingly hard working Black man who puts the needs of others before himself. With these two contradictory depictions of Black masculinity, there is an inevitable gray area that is formed between these two works. That is perhaps because one work is more modern and contemporary than the other, so similar themes are at work, with different motives. Wright probably writes Bigger in this way to show a young Black man who is not necessarily lazy, but does not want to feel a burden put upon him in order to survive. Coogler probably portrays Oscar the way he does in order to show a young Black man who recognizes the need to survive and provide for his family, therefore doing everything he possibly can to do so.

In conclusion, Richard Wright probably characterizes Bigger Thomas in the way that he does because of the era and the way that black people were treated during that time period. He creates Bigger as this sort of angry boy who wants to know what is beyond his limitations, and because of that he ends up committing an awful deed. Wright also characterizes Bigger as being self-conscious of himself when he is in the presence of white people, not wanting to say or do the wrong thing. Wright probably wrote Bigger’s character in this manner in order to fully give the reader an idea that Black masculinity during that time period was being aware of the color of one’s self and how it affected what happened to them. In Fruitvale Station, Oscar Grant is characterized as this modern-day young Black man who has a daughter with a woman he is not married to, has been incarcerated at least once in his life, and is ultimately harassed and gunned down by police after an incident that was blown out of proportion. Ryan Coogler most likely portrays Oscar in this way because the character is a representation of the lives of most typical Black men in today’s time. He also depicts Oscar as being aware of everything that could possibly go wrong through the carefully thought out decisions that he makes throughout his everyday life, and Coogler most likely portrays him in this way as a representation of a typical Black male. 

[essence-ofme]

Howl at the Moon, November 18, 2021, 9:22 PM

#23 💝

#jordanyear

[essence-ofme]

What an angel 😇

October 31, 2021

[essence-ofme]

Critical Reading Analysis of "The Invisible Man" by Ralph Ellison

I thought that the Prologue began with sort of a contradiction: “I am an invisible man” (3). In the Prologue, Ralph Ellison introduces himself as an invisible man, but then contradicts that by claiming: “I am a man of substance, of flesh and bone, fiber and liquids- and I might even be said to possess a mind. I am invisible, understand, simply because people refuse to see me” (3). After learning that he is really using the concept of invisibility to talk about white supremacy, it is a bit easier to understand some parts of this text. For example, it seems to me that he would make this statement that he possesses all these things as a way to say that he is not only intelligent (despite whatever associations there may be about his skin color), but that he is also human, just like white people. He then goes on to say, “When they approach me they see only my surroundings, themselves, or figments of their imagination- indeed, everything and anything except me” (3). I thought that this could possibly mean that when white people see him, they see him as below them and perhaps they see anything bad or negative that they could possibly think or imagine about him. Ellison then goes on to say, “It is sometimes advantageous to be unseen, although it is most often rather wearing on the nerves” (3). Here I think he is saying that while it might sometimes be beneficial to fly under the radar, as he discusses more about in the following pages, it is more annoying on a deeper level because his entire skin color causes him to be ignored in some ways. He goes on to say, “you often doubt if you really exist. You wonder whether you aren’t simply a phantom in other people’s minds” (4). It seems as if here he is saying that being treated in this invisible way so often makes him feel like an alien in this world, and it causes him to doubt his existence and whether or not people even see him as human in their minds. I thought that he included the anecdote about the guy he had accidentally bumped into in the alley as a way to show how in that one particular instance he demanded to be seen, but it seemed as if he was not: “I sprang at him, seized his coat lapels and demanded that he apologize. He was a tall blond man, and as my face came close to his he looked insolently out of his blue eyes and cursed me, his breath hot in my face as he struggled” (4). He says later on, “I remember that I am invisible and walk softly so as not to awaken the sleeping ones. Sometimes it is best not to awaken them; there are few things in the world as dangerous as sleepwalkers” (5). Here I thought that he was possibly saying that he was enlightened, compared to the “zombies” around him. His example that he gives about how he managed to gain free lights from Monopolated Light and Power seemed to be his way of communicating his main point of how he is invisible and manages to fly under the radar (and in some way even receive what may be the slightest reparations), while at the same time, in a contradictory sense, being hypervisible and having to be aware of his own self and skin color all of the time.

[essence-ofme]

Response to "The Hate U Give" by Angie Thomas

In the book “The Hate U Give” there are a lot of details and character relationships that are drawn out and heightened. In the movie, these details and character relationships aren’t drawn out as much— I suppose due to them wanting to get to the essential plot quicker of Khalil’s death and the overall theme of police brutality. The scenes in the books were drawn out as far as adding jokes, ongoing arguments and explanations that continued throughout the story, whereas the movie kind of quickly jumped from scene to scene and we weren’t immediately aware of how much time had passed or what events were happening until we actually saw them. I think that both the book and the movie did a good job at portraying the intense emotion that is tied into the subject at hand. Starr’s voice in the book was very strong and I thought the actress that portrayed her in the movie had a pretty moving performance as well.

I really enjoyed reading The Hate U Give. I think that it read really easy and natural. My favorite aspect of the book had to be the popular culture references. I enjoyed the fact that the book took on a contemporary approach and the narrative took on a current issue that has sparked so much outrage in recent years. The pop culture references were implicated very naturally and made me light up whenever I see them because I’ve never really read any other books that refer to things of today in that manner. Also, the use of Starr’s voice in first person narration really added to the book’s relatability and made it easy to follow (for me). Reading the way the first person was written in this story really reminded me of what the point of first person is and how first person is really about telling the story through the perspective of this one specific character, including their personal thoughts and everything. And I think Starr’s voice and perspective is definitely a unique one. She is a sixteen year old black girl who just saw her best friend get killed by a white cop and her uncle is a cop and she herself is dating a white boy. She’s in the middle of this complicated and distressing situation and she’s juggling two different worlds (which can sometimes be a bit cliche when book/movies go that route, but in this case I think it was used in the perfect situation. Starr and her brothers attend a good (majority white) school, while on the contrary, their neighborhood/home situation is in shambles. I really resonated with the part about how Starr presented two different versions of herself. It reminded me of myself, and I think that something a lot of people can relate to, whether they like it or not. I also thought it was interesting that she started questioning and doubting herself (and wondering if she was betraying her racial identity) because she was with Chris. But I think the fact that she said she still mostly felt like she could be herself with him shows that skin color matters, but it doesn’t have to when it comes to who you love and who knows you. Chris definitely showed his whiteness/white guilt/ lack of knowledge at certain times, though. Like when he asked Starr if her dad’s anger about them dating was some “black thing” he wouldn’t understand. Starr even told him if he was someone else, she’d side-eye the hell out of him for saying that. I feel like if he hadn’t realized that that was ignorant he should have at least realized that it was rude to say. It annoyed me how in the book (and especially in the movie), Chris was acting like race just didn’t matter at all. In the movie, when he hit Starr with the “I don’t see color”, I heavily rolled my eyes. And then Starr even said, “If you don’t see my blackness, then you don’t see me.” because that’s literally a part of her identity. I thought that it showed how white people don’t really have to think too much about being white and sometimes get confused when black people harp on race/racial matters so much because they (we) have to be aware of skin color.

[essence-ofme]

I Remember...

I remember when the daughter of one of my mom’s friends would come over and we would mix glitter together on paper and pretend that we were creating makeup shades.

I remember when I had just moved to a new neighborhood in fourth grade and how one day Courtney and I had ridden our bikes up and down the block, past each other, until we eventually introduced ourselves. I remember how our friendship quickly snowballed. I remember us riding our bikes together and hanging out at her house, the two of us imitating Aly and AJ Michalka’s “Potential Breakup Song” music video. I remember us hanging out in the pool in her backyard. I remember joining her at her karate class. I remember the handshake we created and did every time we would say goodbye, us smacking hands and bumping our hips together on each side numerous times.

I remember in the fifth grade when me, Capree, Staci, and Evelyn had all snuck to chairs that were off on the side when we were in our library prep, leaning into each other as we whispered and laughed. I remember how afterwards we had formed a group which we called the Tigerlillies. I remember the “symbol” of our group- these cute little sketch notebooks with colored pages that Staci had given each of us.

I remember how Staci and I would always talk for hours on end on our house phones. I remember telling her that I’d seen a cute boy while I was out with my granny and that he was my “type” because he was black, cute, wearing a red shirt, and had glasses (like me). I remember us coming up with “popularity points” which we would give or take away from ourselves and our classmates. I remember our singing contests (over the phone)- how we would pick out a song on On Demand, sing along with it, and then rate each other out of ten.

I remember how weak I was with Evelyn. I remember how I would say sorry every time her and I would argue. I remember thinking that I had to or I would lose her as a friend.

I remember Capree pulling me around on the skateboard in gym. I remember when I had tried to sneak popsicles into the teachers lounge for us to eat after school, only for them not to have fully frozen and then I ended up spilling them on the both of us. I remember us going to the “Center” after school to hang out and use the computers they had there. I remember us holding each other’s hand as we barreled down on the Superman at Six Flags.

I remember when Jocelyn invited me to her house. I remember us taking selfies with headbands on in her room. I remember her mom buying us burgers from Checkers. I remember her mom making pancakes for us when she brought me over one morning when we had an early dismissal. I remember her and her older sister teaching me and some other friends from school a dance that we were all doing at an assembly. I remember going to her birthday party in the summer. I remember how excited we both were when we were both going to Jones College prep. I remember when me, her, and Capree took the train together to Freshman Connection in the summer and how nervous I was when we split up. I remember how we got lost on our way there.

I remember these friendships being really great and fun while they lasted, but eventually fading and falling apart.

[essence-ofme]

Response to "Carnival at Bray" by Jessie Ann Foley

What makes this novel stand out as a full movement is the manner in which Jessie Ann Foley takes us on Maggie’s journey from beginning to end. She gives us just enough details about the events that take place in Maggie’s life, both big and small. She transitions naturally from scene to scene and chapter to chapter. Each scene and chapter contributes to the constant changes in Maggie’s life, as well as her complex teenage emotions. From her move to Ireland to her relationship with her mother, Kevin’s death, falling in love, and going to the concert, Maggie experiences a lot all at once, and this novel does a great job at showing how these major milestones bring about a wide range of conflicting feelings that a lot of teenagers have to deal with simultaneously.

What makes the short story version stand out as a full movement is that even though it is significantly shorter than the novel, it takes the very first chapter and gives us the perfect amount of details to give the reader a picture of Maggie’s life and then it is wrapped up in the end in a way that ties up that specific portion of the story (stands alone), but also suggests that there is quite literally “more to the story” and leaves the reader wondering where this story would go if it were to continue. This is done with a lot of telling. Since it is a shorter piece, the author used telling, which in some cases is more effective than showing), in order to relay the backstory of Maggie’s life faster. The short story takes us from the beginning of it, where Maggie is at the carnival with her sister and feels out of place, to the middle where her backstory is given and the reader gets a decent picture of Maggie’s life and the type of person she might be, to the end where Maggie is on the Ferris wheel by herself feeling lonely and having a somewhat dramatic and teenager-like thought.

[essence-ofme]

Response to "The Bluest Eye" by Toni Morrison

The character/POV shifts are very subtle and natural. Morrison shifts POV in a way that allows us to get bits and pieces of individual accounts and then, it seems without us even really being aware, she brings it all together to craft the whole story. One example of this that I thought was interesting was how ‘The Maginot Line’ was revealed to be Miss Marie. We see Pecola’s own personal experience with this woman through her perspective, and then completely different through the outsider lens of Claudia and Frieda’s perspective. I also loved seeing things from the point of view of some of the parents and adult figures in the novel as well. By showing these unique backstories, I as the reader got a chance to realize that the story is not just about Pecola and her insecurity about her beauty, but also about events that happened to her parents when they were children that would eventually pave the way for her to feel like this herself. Also, Morrison employs the tactic of briefly mentioning certain details early on in the story, and then expanding on them later on. For example, Morrison opens the book with the simple detail of how Claudia and her sister Frieda planted seeds that didn’t grow that particular summer, as well as how Pecola’s father Cholly was caught having sex by two white men. If another reader found themselves in a similar position as me, they might have been wondering why these specific details mattered and how they would contribute to the story later on. I definitely think that Morrison delivered in terms of giving the reader a snippet or two here and there and then showing the bigger picture later on at the appropriate time.

I thought that Morrison also did a very good job at drawing the reader in, in terms of making the reader care about the characters by what is happening to them or has happened to them. She does so by allowing us a glimpse into the minds of these different characters so that we are able to see their secret thoughts and thus understand their actions, even if we may not agree with them. One example of this was the scene in which Cholly is contemplating his love for his daughter while watching her wash dishes and then he decides to rape her, seemingly the only way he can really show his “love.” Ultimately, if this scene had been told in a different way, let’s say in a neutral third person, it would not be as powerful in terms of really giving us as the readers a chance to understand why Cholly engaged in this action. We get a unique glimpse into the mind of the person who is doing something very depraved and this allows up to see what was going through his mind in the moments leading up to this action. Morrison does a good job at foreshadowing what’s about to happen next when she brings up his early memories of meeting Pauline. Another example of this is done through the telling of Pauline’s story.

This book also shows the distance between blacks and whites at that time, as well as distance between some blacks within their own race. One example of distance between blacks and whites is how even though Maureen Peal started off as being nice to Pecola, Claudia, and Frieda, things immediately went south went Maureen began to subtly poke fun at Pecola’s home life. She teased Pecola for having seen her father naked and then when Claudia and Frieda intervened and tried to defend Pecola, Maureen attacked them too, calling herself cute and them ugly: “I am cute! And you ugly! Black and ugly black e mos. I am cute!” In my opinion, she had to put the three of them down in order to raise herself up. Another example this book demonstrates regarding the distance between blacks and whites at the time is how Pecola went to the candy store to get Mary Janes and the white man displayed a great deal of discomfort at her presence. The book quotes, “How can a fifty-two-year-old white immigrant storekeeper with the taste of potatoes in his mouth, his mind honed on the doe-eyed Virgin Mary, his sensibilities blunted by a permanent awareness of loss, see a little black girl?” I found this line to be extremely powerful in terms of showing the separation between blacks and whites at the times. Regarding the distance between blacks within their own race, the book made it clear that there were two different kinds of black people: “She had explained to him the difference between colored people and niggers. They were easily identifiable. Colored people were neat and quiet; niggers were dirty and loud.” One specific example of this distance was how Claudia personally did not like white baby dolls, being creeped out by their appearance, while everyone else around her sort of fetishized them. In fact, she would specifically go out of her way to destroy them: “I destroyed white baby dolls.” And then juxtaposing that specific opinion, we have Pecola, who we of course know her main goal in the book is to acquire blue eyes.

Morrison also does a really good job with characterization in her novel. The reader is able to get a sense of who the different characters are through their words and action. Likewise, we get a sense of the characters through Morrison just plain telling us as well: “Cholly Breedlove, then, a renting black, having put his family outdoors, had catapulted himself beyond the reaches of human consideration.” This sentence alone is very powerful and effective in terms of its wording, giving the reader a good sense that this is not a good man (which we eventually see later on for ourselves through his actions.) Also, the way Morrison describes the actions of Claudia and Frieda’s mother and the things she says initially makes her seem kind of passive aggressive and abrasive (in my opinion.) I say this based on Claudia’s description of how she would continuously fuss to herself, without specifically naming anyone: “My mother’s fussing soliloquies always irritated and depressed us. They were interminable, insulting, and although indirect (Mama never named anybody- just talked about folks and some people), extremely painful in their thrust.” I also get the sense of her slight harshness when she just automatically starts whipping Claudia, Frieda, and Pecola based on Rosemary’s accusation, instead of taking the time to ask her own daughters what was going on.

For me, this book was enjoyable to read because of the way Morrison added so many interesting and unique aspects of her storytelling. Complete with model-telling, descriptive narrative, and point of view shifts, the character anecdotes that she provided within this story were absolutely compelling, drawing me in and keeping me intrigued the whole time. They were also very funny, heartbreaking, and shocking. The book brings up tough subject matters of race, rape, and incest that might cause discomfort, but still draws the reader in spite of that. Also, the fact that the story kind of jumps around all over the place and I wasn’t really sure what’s going on caused me to pay even more attention, until I was finally able to put the pieces together like a puzzle. I thought it was interesting that the book began with the imagery of a house, a family, and a dog, and then framed certain chapters around each of those parts. I wasn’t really sure at first what that part was intended for and where Morrison would tie that in at, but she definitely didn’t disappoint. I also found it interesting how Pecola was used twice in the story to kill an animal: first when Junior blamed Pecola for the death of his mom’s cat and then when Soaphead Church had her poison the dog with the rancid meat. These were both cases in which two morally-corrupt individuals used an innocent little girl to do their dirty work because they hated an animal. I did have a few question after having read this book. For one thing, I was wondering if Pauline was talking to someone in her quotes, but this seemed to have been answered in class when someone suggested that they read like journal entries. Also, I was wondering what made Pecola physically see herself as having blue eyes? I know that the book mentions that she went mad, and it is a complex mental state to describe, but I was just wondering what exactly caused her to see something that she didn’t have. Was it because she was promised that it would happen that she assumed it had? Either way, I was kind of happy for her that she got her wish in the end.

[essence-ofme]

Political Correctness- More or Less Sensitive?

Ever since the beginning of Trump’s presidency in 2016, political correctness has been a more present issue in the media. Likewise, the matter of trigger warnings have been present as well as far as professors being required to use them more and more on college campuses. I want to contribute to this conversation by offering perspective about the probability of whether or not political correctness and trigger warnings will cause increased or decreased sensitivity on both sides of the spectrum in the future. When I say both sides of the spectrum, what I am referring to is those being victimized, either allegedly or actually, as well as those who are in positions to be doing the victimizing. This is an important aspect of this argument worth taking into account here because time and time again it has been proven that America is rooted in its backbone, overall how much we are able to take personally, professionally, and politically. These categories often overlap as well, and it is worthwhile to assess just how much we may be causing offense to others (with or without realizing it), as well as just how much we may be magnifying our emotional responses at times. What is the outlook of these devices, or lack thereof, in the future?

In the past years, political correctness has been on the rise, but has not been rooted in nearly so much grandiosity since Donald Trump started his campaign for presidency. Before, political correctness was used amongst leftists to call out the potentially self-righteous ideas amongst those in their circles. However, since Trump became President, the very idea of political correctness has been challenged and rebranded by the right. A lot of people were surprised, but ultimately pleased, at the idea of their new president saying these “outrageous” things that a president usually would not dare to say because it was ultimately encouraging them to do the same in the future, and then place blame on those who couldn’t take it. This rhetoric is harmful, however, because our society is becoming increasingly aware of self and others: “What liberals might have seen as language changing to reflect an increasingly diverse society— in which citizens attempt to avoid giving needless offence to one another— Trump saw a conspiracy” (Weigel 1). Because Trump has successfully attempted to twist the idea behind what political correctness is, the overall well-being of society’s minority groups can be threatened greatly. Over the years, society has progressed phenomenally to a point where most people are more considerate and accommodating of others who belong to disadvantaged groups. If the rhetoric that someone like Trump is currently enforcing continues to persist, the very fabric of what America has come so far to embody, that being modifying our behavior and speech as not to cause offense to others, can very well fall apart. However, I would say that the outcome does not look completely grim regarding the decreased sensitivity of victimizers. As Aimi Hardy points out in the article “The Importance of Being Politically Correct”, “nonetheless, freedom of speech goes both ways: if we have the right to speak our minds in ways that may be considered harsh or insensitive, we also have the right to correct and try to educate those who use speech that could be construed as offensive” (“The Importance of Being Politically Correct”). Although there will always be people that do not wish to take the time to spare offensive behavior and language to others, there will also always be people who will be there to correct and call out harmful speech and actions.

Similarly, it is worthwhile to take into account the use of trigger warnings in the educations of college students. Our generation today unfortunately has so many challenges facing anxiety and mental illness that when placed in a space that sometimes seems to contribute to the distress of adolescence, it can be tempting to expect the worse of certain situations, even from those in positions of authority, whom one is supposed to trust. However, developing the habit to expect the worse can cause today’s youth to grow even more sensitive in the future. In the article “The Coddling of the American Mind”, Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt state, “This new climate is slowly being institutionalized, and is affecting what can be said in the classroom, even as a basis for discussion” (Lukianoff and Haidt 3). Because people hold certain identities it can often feel like everyone and everything may be biased against them, including the very education that they receive. Trigger warnings are deemed necessary in the sense that they provide students with a certain level of expectation of what’s to come of their material, in the event that students may experience any emotional discomfort. However, they are a device that may at times possibly be detracting from their purpose, contributing more toward the decline of mental health: “campus culture devoted to policing speech and punishing speech is likely to engender patterns of thought that are surprisingly similar to those long identified by cognitive behavioral therapists as causes of depression and anxiety. The new protectiveness may be teaching students to think pathologically” (Lukianoff and Haidt 5-6). Essentially, the use of trigger warnings can sometimes encourage students to think less of themselves, even more so than they might already. Although trigger warnings are meant to aid students in terms of preventing potential emotional episodes, more often it seems that they are providing a contradictory element by confirming and enabling the negative mindsets of students. Furthermore, it is possible that trigger warnings could teach students to dwell in their discomfort, even though being uncomfortable is sometimes an inevitable part of learning. In “The Downside of Trigger Warnings” Elwood Watson lists several examples of historical events that he has referenced in his classes, including the lynching of Black men, the genocide of Jewish prisoners, the raping of women, and the violent harassment of lesbians and homosexuals. Watson states specifically, “debating, discussing, engaging in critical thinking, reading complex or controversial material and writing essays is “too hard” or unacceptable. The level of emotional fragility among some young people is troubling” (“The Downside of Trigger Warnings”). He also states, in regards to what he tells his students, “I inform them that none of us will be totally comfortable with everything we encounter or hear and that as human beings we must be expected to acclimate to various situations and environments” (“The Downside of Trigger Warnings”). This example shows how a lot of students have been emotionally coddled to the point where they supposedly cannot engage properly in work regarding factual historical events. With trigger warnings becoming more popular in today’s society, it is a possibility that not only students, but people in general, will start to develop thin skin and be able to take less emotionally.

All things considered, I am of the opinion that there will continue to be a balance of both increased and decreased sensitivity in people in the future. As our society changes and progresses, there will always be people who change and progress with it, as well as those who are determined to see the world from a limited perspective. Both sides of the spectrum are inevitable and necessary. Without negative views, there would not be any opportunities for learning or contribution to a greater good. We need people who do not care for political correctness and as a result make offensive comments because it only further encourages growth and the desire to educate and rise above. Likewise, it may be necessary to engage with more sensitive individuals as a means to consciously evaluate our words and actions and once again educate ourselves for the future on what may or may not be appropriate. The element of sensitivity is one that is either engrained in people who have had traumatic experiences of some sort in the past or lost in people who don’t believe they have to adhere to expectations of political correctness, and because of that there lies some grey area that will most likely continue for a long time.