“Everyday Feminism,” Trigger Warnings, And The Duty Not To Be Stupid



I have long posited the idea that we have a duty to be competent in the act of living, since incompetent members of society make the rest of us miserable. This means not rising beyond your own ability to be competent: an idiot who aspires to be Senator and who achieves his goal is not inspiring, but unethical.

Of course, people who don’t know they are stupid should be exempt from an unethical label: ironically, you can’t be an ethics dunce if you are truly a dunce. We also have a duty not to make our children, family members, friends, associates, fellow citizens and the culture dumber by reckless dissemination of idiocy.

Which brings us to this, from the earnest, apparently certifiably insane blog, Everyday Feminism. Trigger warnings, the recent progressive invention designed to shield overly sensitive members of our species from any idea, word, concept, thought, memory or theory that troubles them in any way lies right on the cusp of unethical, as it is at the threshold to censorship and thought control, as well as to stupidity itself. Everyday Feminism, however, charges over that line with hilarious excess. This could have easily been published by The Onion, but Everyday Feminism apparently means it.

The article was about triggering, so it had to have this warning:

This article discusses triggering in detail and mentions common topics of triggering (sexual assault, anxiety, health anxiety, depression, death, non-specific fears and phobias).

But the blog felt warning itself needed a trigger warning, and so it began with this:

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.”

It really did. Of course, “warning” itself is a word that alarms people, certainly more that a lot of the other words that trigger warning devotees feel might damage one’s psyche. So a “content warning” about “trigger” needs a “content advisory” about “warning.” This would also suggest that any Roy Rogers movie or TV episode requires an advisory about his horse, Trigger.

Mostly it suggests, however, that such people are trying to make open discourse and minds as difficult to achieve as they possibly can, even to the extent of slapping a theoretically infinite chain of warning about warnings about warnings on their own screeds. That’s unethical, and so is taking anyone seriously about any substantive topic who sees nothing stupid about a trigger warning about the use of the word “trigger.”

There is a point at which an ideologue forfeits the right to be respected, and this is it.


Pointer: National Review

30 thoughts on ““Everyday Feminism,” Trigger Warnings, And The Duty Not To Be Stupid

  1. Ah ha ha ha ha!! You know I lean left, but this trigger bullshit is truly beyond the pale. This is a great sendup. Courtesy of the group itself, mainly. Self-inflicted stupid wounds. You can’t make this stuff up.

  2. “the word “trigger” relies on and evokes violent weaponry imagery”

    Not necessarily. From an on-line dictionary discussion of “trigger:”

    “1615-25; earlier tricker < Dutch trekker, equivalent to trekk (en) to pull + -er -er."

  3. “an idiot who aspires to be Senator and who achives his golal is not inspiring, but unethical.” A typo? and a spelling error in a sentence deriding idiots.Tsk Tsk. I know you are capable of much better.

    • You mean better typos? Oh, believe me, I’ve done MUCH better. The best typos are the ones you can’t even tell are typos, and that make me look like an idiot rather than a bad typist who’s a lousy proof-reader.

      Fixed it, thanks.

  4. “We have a duty to be competent in the act of living, since incompetent members of society make the rest of us miserable.”

    Thank you sir for my new motto by which I’ll be trying to live.

  5. I once dated a woman for awhile who fully bought into this pc bs. She seemed very nice at first and was majoring in a “woman’s studies program” at a local college. After awhile I knew I was in trouble when she began correcting me on terms I used such as history. No, she complained “it’s herstory, not history!” The use of history was sexist according to her and her “woman’s studies” profs who were all women. She had some sort of a senior project to do in her program based on her feelings according to the guidelines. When I suggested that projects for a degree are usually based on facts, evidence and conclusions she became very angry and told me “that I was invalidating the feelings of women”. Needless to say, the relationship didn’t last long after this incident.

  6. How are they going to survive in the real world? Their first dressing down from a supervisor at work? People occupying the same space who don’t think like them? I fear for them, I really do.

    • No need – they’re the ones in charge these days. They’ll just complain louder until the real world/supervisor/wrong-thinking people either back down or are shut down by the other, right thinking people around them, or by the government.

  7. ” an idiot who aspires to be Senator and who achieves his goal is not inspiring, but unethical.”
    Please note that this idiot achieves his goal by being elected. This implies he/she was elected by idiots ( benignly termed “low information voters”). So are the voters unethical because they are idiots who elected an idiot. And thus, is the whole election process with the resulting elected idiots also unethical. To support this, I maintain that unethical elected idiots are in abundant supply and that the aforementioned cycle endlessly repeats.

    • Presumably, the voters don’t know he’s an idiot, just as any employer doesn’t know when a job applicant who is incompetent at his chosen profession IS incompetent. Ignorant, ill-informed, low-information citizens who vote and do so incompetently are also unethical, and for the same reason.

      • The question is “can an idiot recognize an idiot?” In my opinion, smart people are not breeding as much as dumb people. In addition any reputable psych will tell you that there are far more people at the low end of the intelligence scale than at the high end.

          • By definition, no. The mean IQ of 100 pretty much reflects a standard bell curve, but the lower end of the scale is much more obvious than the upper.

              • To phrase it differently and, perhaps more succinctly, genius can be hidden…intellectual disabilities cannot. The state spends a great deal of money supporting and protecting people whose intellect is not conducive to viability.

          • I’m not saying that. Due to modern medical technology, the percentage of individuals below the 2% who survive into adulthood has dramatically increased over the years. Consequently, they breed and their numbers are increasing while the percentage of people with superior intelligence has remained stable. A person who cannot identify different colors at the age of 18 is unlikely to contribute to society in a meaningful way. I offer no solutions, am just laying out the facts.

            • Also, very unlikely to “breed” and, if they do, genetics would predict via regression to the mean, that the offspring would likely be of “normal” (whatever that is) intelligence.

  8. Good one, Jack. As a female who is sick almost unto death with “trigger warnings” and “safe spaces” and “invalidating feelings,” and “rape culture” the way it is defined today, I am accused of being a “rape culture enabler” and a “traitor to my sex” when I comment on those types of articles or when I comment favorably on one, like this one, that tries to bring some sense into the equation. Much of this nonsense is taking place on college campuses. If these females cannot bear to hear any opinion that differs with the ones they already hold, I don’t know why they even go to college. They will not expose themselves to anything they don’t already agree with; therefore, they will learn nothing they didn’t already know. It is a non-intellectual stance, which totally redefines the purpose of a university education–or any education.

  9. I am a liberal feminist who sees way more ridiculousness in Everyday Feminism than in The Onion. I would love to see a parody blog lampoon these condescending, victimizing, wimpy twits.

    Trigger warnings and euphemisms foster feelings of weakness and entitlement. This is Life, folks. You will have painful experiences. Everyone does, not just you. For the rest of your life, you will see and hear things that remind you of the bad times. You will be offended – by people who don’t know “your story” and sensitivities, along with plenty of friends, family and acquaintances who do know them but have no filter.

    You must learn to face and power through whatever horrible feelings, thoughts and/or memories that come to mind. It’s called survival, and – with enough practice – resilience. If you are too fragile to see stuff without having a freakout or flashback, then maybe it’s time to take a break from the internet and get some professional help.

  10. “Of course, people who don’t know they are stupid should be exempt from an unethical label: ironically, you can’t be an ethics dunce if you are truly a dunce.”

    Therefore all contributors to Everydayfeminism should be exempt.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.