In a welcome letter addressed to the University of Chicago’s class of 2020, Dean of Students Jay Ellison stated that “trigger warnings” and “safe spaces” will no longer be utilized in the university community.

The University of Chicago advocates for the idea that members of their community can “speak, write, listen, challenge and learn, without fear of censorship,” and that they can “expect members of [their] community to be engaged in rigorous debate, discussion, and even disagreement. At times this may challenge [students] and even cause discomfort,” as said in the letter.

Actions taken by the University of Chicago allegedly promotes a greater sense of free speech without the fear of censorship and will create a community containing varied and contrasting backgrounds and opinions.

Safe spaces gave students an opportunity to discuss sensitive topics with individuals in similar situations in their academic lives or to avoid classes covering delicate subjects. They provided a platform for students in need to connect with others and share experiences; these groups can discuss subjects ranging from religion to sexual identification to race. However, safe spaces do not shelter, but equip individuals with a community serving as a safety net that comprehends difficulties others may not.

Similarly, professors and other faculty members frequently posted trigger warnings prior to lectures covering difficult topics. The absence of trigger warnings means more forced class participation within the student body as well as not cancelling controversial speakers. For instance, last year, DePaul University, located in neighborhood of University of Chicago, cancelled Ben Shapiro talk after protests had broken out against his conservative views.

The letter promotes the concept that “fostering the free exchange of ideas reinforces a related University priority – building a campus that welcomes people of all backgrounds,” and that “the members of our community must have the freedom to espouse and explore a wide range of ideas.”

While diversity may be achieved to an extent, if an educational institution wants to foster a variety of perspectives, individuals require a comfortable and supportive environment.

As an example, if the University of Chicago encourages students struggling with gender identity or sexual orientation to attend classes dealing with backlash on issues relating to these, some individuals will only feel safe knowing they have a community based on similar matters in question to rely on.

The university emphasizes the exchange of freely-flowing ideas in its environment; however, the nature of sensitivity obstructs this ideal as with the absence of individuals connected to a difficult topic, students discussing it will be able to convey ideas freely, without the burden of possibly offending others. However, conversation outside a safe space between a diversified group of individuals suppresses certain perspectives, due to the risk of upsetting other members of the community.

These recent changes will serve as an example of the struggle for speech freedom and academic equality in the present and precedent in the future to the world outside of the University of Chicago. In light of equality in the 21st century, University of Chicago should have kept these safe spaces and trigger warnings to halt the increase in problems of speech and academic freedom as well as the ever increasing gap between the homogenic majority and the minority beliefs, ideals, and systems.

While the University of Chicago struggles with creating equality within their academic environment, communities worldwide should not only support the affected students in University of Chicago but also protect the minorities and vouch for equality in our own society.