The humble trigger warning has been used for several years by feminists and lefties of all stripes. The original purpose was ostensibly to warn people that a post or article contained content that might be upsetting to some people. Sort of like the "viewer discretion is advised" warning that comes on cable TV.
|Rated R for "Retarded."|
Of course lefties being lefties, they've used the trigger Warning as a method of censoring content they disagree with (here's a link if you're wondering what I think about trigger warnings). Students at Columbia University, for example, called for trigger warnings after they were "forced" to read Ovid's "Metamorphoses". Feminist writer Christina Hoff Sommers was hit with trigger warnings when she spoke at Georgetown. There are many more examples, but the theme is always the same. Fascist kiddies get a bug up their collective asses about something, and demand trigger warnings to protect them from the ensuing "microaggressions."
It seems, however, that the very phrase "trigger warning" has itself become...err...triggering? Worry not if you're confused, because the blog Everyday Feminists clear up your trigger warning confusion:
Editors Note: Like this phenomenal article, Everyday Feminism definitely believes in giving people a heads up about material that might provoke our reader’s trauma. However, we use the phrase “content warning” instead of “trigger warning,” as the word “trigger” relies on and evokes violent weaponry imagery. This could be re-traumatizing for folks who have suffered military, police, and other forms of violence. So, while warnings are so necessary and the points in this article are right on, we strongly encourage the term “content warning” instead of “trigger warning.”
Wow. I have no words here. I mean seriously, what has the world come to when the phrase you use to warn people about violent imagery can no longer be used BECAUSE IT EVOKES VIOLENT IMAGERY? Do these people even realize how freaking ridiculous this whole concept is? If you were to write a sitcom episode with this very same plot it would be rejected as being utterly and completely stupid.
The really insane part of this whole thing? Everyday Feminism tells you that they're swapping out "trigger warning" for "content warning" because it's safer. Yet in the very same warning they use the word "trigger" several times. Hell the entire article talks about "trigger warnings." If you're trying to make the point that "trigger warning" is needlessly violent and should not be used, why the hell would you post an old article where that phrase shows up CONSTANTLY? Isn't that a little inconsiderate and, dare I say, dangerous for folks that might be "triggered?"
Oh, shit, I said "triggered" didn't I? Shit, I just said it again! Sorry, folks, sorry.
H/T Katherine Timpf at National Review: The Phrase "Trigger Warning" Is Now Also A Trigger
Share your thoughts and comments below. Or follow me on Twitter @trigwarnblog, or check out my Facebook page.