As a student at a liberal arts college, I hear a lot about trigger warnings. I’ve had professors who’ve given them at the beginning of class, and I’ve had professors who’ve led discussions about them. They’re often met with derision, especially from older folks. I’ve heard them likened to censorship, and described as part of “PC culture.” But trigger warnings get a bad rap, and they make far more sense than some people think.

According to Oxford Dictionaries, a trigger warning is “a statement at the start of a piece of writing, video, etc., alerting the reader or viewer to the fact that it contains potentially distressing material (often used to introduce a description of such content).” Its primary use is among people with PTSD or similar conditions, who might otherwise have a strong reaction to their trigger.

A trigger is not an opinion you don’t agree with. It’s not something that makes you feel sad or upset. It’s not an opposing viewpoint in a classroom. It is a visceral reaction that’s the result of serious trauma, and it’s not something to joke about. A trigger is not an excuse to get out of class, or to avoid dealing with something that makes you feel a little bit uncomfortable.

A trigger is not a way to shut down an argument. Unless you legitimately are triggered and have to excuse yourself, don’t do it. On the flip side, there’s no reason to ask “are you triggered?” in an argument. I once made the mistake of engaging with a homophobic troll on the anonymous social media app Yik Yak. During this brief conversation, if I can even call it that, this troll’s response to my comment was “are you triggered?” I wasn’t. Not even close. I was pointing out the troll’s bigotry. This troll was trying to delegitimize my argument by likening it to an emotional (and therefore irrational) response. This kind of stigma negatively impacts the people who truly do benefit from trigger warnings.

I can’t stand when people say “there aren’t trigger warnings in the real world,” because of course there are. Have you ever seen a label on food that says “warning: may contain peanuts?” What about a wet floor sign? Or movie/video game ratings, that come with warnings if a movie contains nudity or graphic violence? All these things are part of real life, and they’re meant to protect people. They’re not part of “PC culture,” they’re results of common sense and common courtesy. Can you imagine if food labels didn’t include the allergens they contain?

But just like allergen labels, trigger warnings protect people. Just like allergen labels, trigger warnings are not necessary for everyone. Just like allergen labels, the people who know they don’t need a trigger warning can skip right over them. And just like allergen labels, trigger warnings can prevent a severe, harmful reaction.

Trigger warnings don’t and shouldn’t impact what is taught in classrooms. Personally, I think it’s essential to teach about topics such as genocide, slavery, and war. All these topics can be triggering for some people, but that doesn’t mean we should get rid of them. Instead, these topics must be taught with compassion. When a teacher or professor gives a warning about the content of a reading or a lecture, it allows students with triggers to brace themselves for what is to come or, if they really need it, leave the classroom. I’ve seen a teacher give an alternative assignment to a student who didn’t want to dissect a frog in high school biology. I know that compassionate assignment changes can be easily made for students who truly need it, and that this compassion does, can, and should continue to extend to other parts of “real life.”