If there is one thing to know about me, is that I am a big Red vs Blue fan. I have probably watched most episodes 3 or 4 times, and some up to 6 times. I bring this up, because of a PSA video RoosterTeeth recently uploaded, dealing with the topic of trigger warnings.
Before we discuss the episode, let me explain a few things. SJW’s seem to have the motto that anything that can be said or done is offensive, except when they themselves do it. In that case, it’s OK, but for anyone else it’s offensive. For them, it’s not a double standard as they already believe to be right. This effort of casting others as being offensive is all to a greater measure to maintain they are victims of a ‘great oppressor’. I, of course, am referring to the Patriarchy, which by extension, is really about men.
The great part about their self-victimization is how they maintain their threat narrative. Simply put, if you disagree with them or criticize them, you are oppressing them. It sounds ludicrous, but that is what they have done. Their whole identity is surrounded by being victims, and anyone who doesn’t agree with them are the ones oppressing them. They employ a number of measures to maintain said narrative, by calling people misogynists and rape apologists, in an effort to silence them. They have even pulled fire alarms at public discussions and blocked an entryway into a talk.
One method they employ is trigger warnings. A trigger is an emotional response to stimuli that reminds someone of a powerful traumatic event, often associated with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. Severe Triggers are rather uncommon, often related to the ravages of war or a series of traumatic events. Those people who have legitimate triggers are counseled into learning to handle their trauma and cope within society; to the point that they are not shielded from trauma or triggers, but encourage to endure them.
SJW’s, on the other hand, has hijacked the term ‘triggers’ and applied it to anything that they feel oppresses them. They use it as a means to keep people as victims and fuel their agenda, to get things to be how they want them to be. Anything that reminds anyone of anything bad or traumatic in any way should be listed with a trigger warning or possibly not done in the first place. To further this, many SJW have claimed they developed PTSD over a variety of ways, including Twitter.
What are some things that have been made into a trigger? Well, the most obvious one is Rape. Any depiction of rape reminds rape victims of their own rape and possibly puts them in a bad place. Now yes, rape is bad. In no way am I being an apologist here and saying that it is not bad. I firmly believe it to being one of the worst things that can be done to a person, next to being murder (as there is no recovery from death). If we really look at it, it seems logical to let people know of the depictions of rape. From what I hear of Game of Thrones, it seems like a good idea to do that. However, Rape as a trigger is being seen in other places, such as academia.
In law school, SJW demand that any discussion of rape, such as laws in relation to rape, be met first with warnings that it could be traumatic, or even that Rape Laws shouldn’t be taught. As I mentioned above, I could understand needing it in a movie or TV show that depicts it in a graphic way. But a Criminal Law class requiring a trigger warning? It’s a Criminal Law class… which discusses the worst elements of mankind, and guess what is considered a crime? You guessed it: Rape. But because a select few might be triggered means a school shouldn’t teach it. My stance, if you can’t handle a discussion related to criminal law, you probably shouldn’t be a lawyer.
Other things that need a trigger warning (beyond the usual things you’d expect):
- Clapping hands – The idea that if you clap your hands, it can cause people anxiety.
- Fruit – If fruit looks like gore, it should be tagged as gore.
- Consensual Sex
- Slimy Things
While on one hand trigger warnings seem like legitimate safety measure, as you begin to look at Tumblr and Twitter, it is used as a means to get things done the way SJW’s want for no other reason than: they want them. But even if we could agree on a few listed items that are not ridiculous, this would be more of an element of censorship.
Let’s say a syllabus at a university has a trigger warning, a student may protest that they shouldn’t have to go through that just to learn the subject, such as Rape Law in a Criminal Law classroom. As we see, media and university cater to SJW’s for fear of being seen as misogynistic. In turn, the school decides that it shouldn’t be taught because of it’s trigger warning, and thus removed from the curriculum. AKA: Censorship.
For example, Violet Blue wanted to give a talk on the effects that drugs has on sexual performance. On the day of her talk, she was told that she couldn’t give her presentation on the possibility that it would address the topic of rape (which it didn’t). Because of a perceived notion that it could talk about something that could trigger a person, she was unable to give her talk. This is what it looks like when a trigger warning is used to censor someone.
In essence, rather than deal with a world that has these elements, SJW’s require the world to change to their needs. Refusing to do so makes you a misogynist and an oppressor, even if you can logically explain why changing your methodology would be a loss to many others, or even be detrimental to those who may have a trigger warning. It doesn’t matter, so long as the SJW’s are happy. As we see, SJW’s will use every dirty trick in the book to maintain their happiness.
This becomes an issue with visual media, especially video games, because one day, we might be required to list possible trigger warnings to a video game. We already have the ESRB, but this would likely be added to it that lists specific warnings, or quite possibly lead to banning certain types of games based on the warnings they have. With the vast lists of trigger warnings I’ve seen, it would make for a very boring video game.
So now to Red vs Blue. RvB has been offensive since the first episode, with constant swearing, violence, and overall meanness to everyone within earshot. Hell, the name Rooster Teeth comes from the phrase, “Cock Bite”, which was said a lot in the first season. After 13 years, when one comes to watch Red vs Blue, they know what they’re getting. There’s no surprises here.
One of the extras they do is the Public Service Announcement. Mostly it is just talking about random crap that rarely addresses any issue of importance, and if they do, it is usually in a comedic way. Once such PSA was on Trigger Warning, discussing the importance of said warnings for their show.
It starts off with Doc, who hasn’t been seen since last season, begins the episode with possible triggers that this episode might contain. Grif is very dismissive, arguing that Doc is instead insulting people’s intelligence. As Doc explains the trigger warnings, Grif has issues with them as he feels that people need to learn how to deal with shit rather than be coddled. Doc wants to have trigger warnings for the show so that people can decide if they want to watch it or not.
With the help of Simmons, a system that tells people what triggers they may see based on what you tell the system. More than that, they developed an additional system to scan you for possible triggers you don’t know about. In Grif’s case, his trigger is snack cakes. He loves snack cakes, but as Doc explains, the system knows that it is not good for him; thus he shouldn’t have it, which is why it determined it was a trigger.
Now a point is brought up when someone makes reference to a rather absurd trigger, and Doc states that while they seem silly; you might as well include it. Grif states that if you do that, you would have to make everything a trigger, to which Doc states the others don’t understand and changes the subject. Classic deflection. Doc says there are no ridiculous triggers, which is addressed when Doc speaks about making the world a more loving and peaceful existence, triggers Sarge. As Sarge says, he’s a career military officer, and him and war go together. He is triggered by the aspect of peace.
So Doc wants trigger warnings to make the world peaceful, but in doing so triggers Sarge. Is he then compelled to cater to those triggers?
They are unable to explore that ethical dilemma, as Grif has had enough and decided to make trigger warnings a form of triggers. We are then greeted with the screen filling up trigger warnings. Take a moment and pause the screen to check it out.
As things are getting out of hand, Donut comes in and unplugs the computer. Donut explains to Doc that his idea sounds good but is unnecessary as people who come to watch RvB already know what to expect. Then invites everyone to go eat popcorn as they watch the comment section of their video erupt with complaints.
Now this is satire, and it is going a bit overboard to address a point. But it’s RvB, we come to expect that. It does, however, address some valid points, about conflicting triggers and about identifying triggers people may not have. Also that if you start down that road to include triggers for minor things, you might very well include everything as a trigger.
Interesting that Donut is the sound of reason, or that Grif has a valid point. Many were outraged by this, feeling that RvB really insulted them. Let’s not forget the previous PSA making fun of Simmons emotions and being a nerd. No outrage there, but there is outrage for trigger warnings.
To add to their talking points, I think we can agree that triggers are an issue of concern, but the way to handle triggers is to teach people how to get a grip on them to function with day-to-day life. Protecting people from them does more harm than good. However, SJW’s are demanding that anything with a potential trigger must be known beforehand and can be a means of pushing for something not to be done simply because of a potential trigger. The effort will cause more harm than good because it coddles people from said harm rather than give them steps on how to deal with it. Imagine if life was built around avoiding all harms in the world. Might sound good, but then realize that you would be prohibited from most fun things as it is triggering for someone.
The idea of using trigger warnings for TV, Movies, and Video Games does sound good on paper, that you simply want to give warning to those who might be taken back to a traumatic event, and lets face it, none of like feeling bad. However, when you really analyze it, you realize that almost everything can be considered a trigger warning and that this is nothing more than an effort of censorship and control by the SJW camp.
We all want to have fun and be left alone, but if we don’t address this issue, the thing you love now may be outlawed because of a potential trigger warning to some person you have never met. That in the end, it is better to cater to a minority of the people who refuse to get themselves the proper mental health they need, than the majority of people who can handle tough subjects, whether in playing video games, or a learning institute.
He's an easy going guy who loves deep analytical thought, enjoys gaming, and being goofy.
- The Worst Crime - December 3, 2016
- Feminists Inject Shame Into Male Contraception - November 2, 2016
- Is there Racism While Driving? - September 22, 2016
by 
>rape is bad. In no way am I being an apologist here and saying that it is not bad. I firmly believe it to being one of the worst things that can be done to a person, next to being murder (as there is no recovery from death)
Next to? Like right after? Number two worst thing?
Rape is worse than being shot in the spine and being unable to walk the rest of your life? Worse than someone killing your pet? Torching your home? Sending you to prison over a false rape allegation? Taking decades of income over children you did not consent to? Burning your face with acid? Stabbing you in the pancreas? Mutilating your genitals?
Acknowledging death is worse is a good first step but you have a long way to go, Padawan. You are still pandering.