[cauterized]

People can be thrown into paralysis or panic by PTSD. Giving a warning that something is about to be discussed in depth that might trigger such an attack, allowing someone who knows they would experience one to absent themselves while the lecture or discussion continues, isn't censorship. It's courtesy.

[rdlecler1]

Most of the article was about none of this.

[cauterized]

Fair enough. Most of the comments are, though! ;-)

[GabrielF00]

I think it's reasonable for a professor to give some notice to students that they're about to be exposed to something graphic. If students want to avoid reading a particular piece or going to a particular event, then that's their choice as adults. I don't think it's reasonable to insist that things that might be upsetting should be removed from one's environment.

[cauterized]

Context matters there, IMO. If an image that someone finds incredibly disturbing is printed at 4x8 feet and hung in the lobby of a building a student has to enter every day to get to classes, it's not unreasonable for them to ask that it be moved. If that same image is in an exhibit in a gallery of the campus museum where it can be easily avoided, it's unreasonable to ask for its removal.