In another 10 years, a good chunk of their current "Consider using" suggestions will also be "problematic"

Using their line of thought "intersex person" will become problematic as "inter" means "between" which presumes two fundamental sexes and that "intersex" therefore isn't a fundamental sex.

Retarded people like to come up with a new word for retarded people all the time. It’s retarded.

Neury people like to come up with a new word for neury people all the time. It’s neury.

That's already a euphemism.

It's not going to take 10 years.

>So "trigger warning" is now problematic and the proper alternative is "content note". And "Preferred pronouns" is hate speech, because you imply that pronouns are merely a preference, as if the person can choose their identity.

The woke shibboleth to discriminatory slur pipeline is real.

> And "Preferred pronouns" is hate speech, because you imply that pronouns are merely a preference, as if the person can choose their identity

But their position has been that gender is socially constructed and thus malleable, so it follows that pronouns would be too.

...just like gender being a social construct but gender affirming surgery exists.

I wonder if “trigger warning” has been labeled offensive because those doing the labeling have realized it’s become a joke, almost pejorative term in the eyes of the rest of the world. I think 80% of the time when I hear someone use the phrase these days, it’s through some layer of satire.

> I wonder if “trigger warning” has been labeled offensive because those doing the labeling have realized it’s become a joke

No, the discourse about the problematic nature of the “trigger warning” as a flag for advisories of potentially-offensive content and the way it (and some other related terminology adopted around the same time) was grounded in a misapplication of terminology and concepts surrounding PTSD in specific and trauma in general began very shortly after the term began popular and had nothing to do with the insensitive dismissal of what the term is a label for (in fact, it is largely diametrically opposed, which is why that the kind of people who dismiss the need for the concerns about content have embraced the misapplication of “trigger” that it involves for their own attacks.)

Probably because “trigger warning” itself can be a trigger so that dangerous language has to be replaced: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32010941

Also there is a high turnover of PC words - every few years the “correct” word changes to something else, because reasons.

These people continue to swallow themselves through the ratchet of cancellation.

They are like the Star Bellied Sneetches. Except instead of applying and removing stars from their bellies until no one knows who is in or out or good or bad, they include and exclude by ever more tortured use of language.

This is all part of the plan. Only those on the frontier of nu-speak are untouchable. The faster the frontier advances, the greater the concentration of power in the hands of those coming up with this language.

When people can (and have) lost their livelihoods by using the wrong language, being in charge of new language is a powerful thing indeed.

This is good, the madness has begun to eat itself.

Madness is now a forbidden word. The non-harmful word is "surprising/wild",

The term "wild" has been used to refer to indigenous peoples for centuries; it has also been used to describe foreigners, and people with mental health issues, for even longer.

The term "surprising" has a lot of connotations too.

Safer to just not speak

The funny thing is that the replacement word inevitably becomes insulting. For example, when you say to your friend that he's very "special", we all know what's up.

Could be a fun game to create social media accounts just for the purpose of problematizing terminology popular with self described progressive people until they are speaking jargon incomprehensible to anyone else.

Or maybe it already happened.

Isn’t this basically what 4Chan did with the “OK” hand symbol?

There's a surprising/wild girl I know, the security guard at the library explained the smashed window with one word - her name.

As the website doesn't work for me, I genuinely cannot tell if your examples are sarcasm or come from the website.

Quoted from site:

> Instead of: trigger warning

> Consider using: content note

> Context: The phrase can cause stress about what's to follow. Additionally, one can never know what may or may not trigger a particular person.

So the examples are not sarcasm, they are literal.

Referring to literature and scientific works as "content" triggers a negative emotional response in me because I associate it with the corporatization and commoditizstion of speech.

Please use the phrase: "Words that describe subsequent words may follow this disclaimer."

(Except "follow" could have negative religious connotations.)

"Word" as well. Better "sequence of characters", although that might discriminate against ideogram centric cultures. Wow, this is though!

I was surprised this wasn't because it could evoke thoughts of gun violence.

I actually like “content note.” I’m pretty unfazed by offensive content so I don’t need your spoiler alert to be called a warning.

I think they are entirely over used whatever one chooses to call them, but these don't mean the same thing at all. Content note could mean anything. For people with PTSD though, for whom psychological triggering is a real thing (not just something they don't like), a "trigger warning" means something pretty specific (or at least, it did before it became overused).