No, I don't really.
I'm note exactly claiming that feelings should dictate every decision a person makes, but making every decision from a rational perspective is 1. Not normal and 2. Basically impossible
Given that then, can you really say that this generation has avoidance issues?
A lot of protests are organized by college students, so given the amount of activism on campus, it should then be evident that safe spaces have little to no effect on a student's ability to handle discomfort.
Both of these are extreme examples of mental illness that are hardly prevalent in society and certainly not the case when dealing with safe spaces.
Honestly, where would you rather be studying: A bar, or a cafe? Generally, a cafe is much more quieter and helpful when learning, and certainly less stressful than a bar.
Some people, sure. But those people are generally in a very tiny minority.
"Threat" really isn't the quite right word to use. It's entirely possible that they simply don't want to deal with something because they are doing something else at that moment. Of course, there are some situations with marginalized groups where, due to conditioning (not avoidance though), some situations can be perceived to be threatening.
Not really, no. While the two situations can be constructed to operate on similar logic, given the large degree of variance between them, I see no need to treat them in the same way.
Coming off heroin requires one to actually stop taking heroin, which therefore implies withdrawal.
Dealing with phobias/isms, the situation itself can be avoided while still being able to learn about how to deal with it.
Relief, especially when dealing with what I'm talking about, isn't inherently a good thing. It effectively removes any motivation towards change and improving the quality of a person's life, and instead attempts to shift the goal to being someone being content with their life, which changes nothing in the long term.
I fail to see why not. It seems perfectly reasonable to me to assume that safe spaces can exist, and people can still learn how to handle certain situations of discomfort. What you are suggesting is that the goal should be to remove such discomfort by means of becoming numb to it, rather than addressing the underlying causes of that discomfort.
Safe spaces generally exist in an environment where people are expect to act in a certain way. While such behavior can be expected of people outside, it is no longer looked down upon in the same capacity from a social standpoint, thus leading to a greater deviation from that expected behavior.
The reason the authorities would need to be constantly present is because you are suggesting going to the authorities is a better alternative to safe spaces. So, in order to enforce the same type of behavior that would otherwise be enforced socially in a safe space, officers would need to be present to exert that force.