You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

2
5

[–] SkepticalMartian 2 points 5 points (+7|-2) ago 

....really? she starts the conversation with trigger warnings?

2
-1

[–] leaffur 2 points -1 points (+1|-2) ago 

It would be irresponsible for her to talk about sensitive subjects without giving a warning. Also mental health issues like anxiety can be seriously compounded for social outcasts like the people who come to PAX. She directs them to the AFK room which is a really cool thing to help people who suffer from social anxiety to get away from the craziness of the crowd. While I personally don't have an issue with that sort of thing, I have many friends who can't handle this kind of event for a few hours, let alone 3 days. The AFK room is great for that (it is a "safe space" though)

1
2

[–] SkepticalMartian 1 point 2 points (+3|-1) ago 

It would be irresponsible for her to talk about sensitive subjects without giving a warning.

Every discussion about human behaviour/nature is a sensitive subject these days. Fuck people who need their "safe spaces". These people should be confronted with the truth more often instead of being directed to bury their heads in a sandbox.

3
-1

[–] Jourdy288 [S] 3 points -1 points (+2|-3) ago 

So? She just gave a quick heads up in case anybody might be offended. It was about thirty seconds and I'm pretty sure it didn't ruin the panel.

1
7

[–] SkepticalMartian 1 point 7 points (+8|-1) ago 

It didn't. It just bothers me that a psychologist can't see the damage in pandering to the PC crowd - even if only for 30 seconds. Don't validate those toolsheds.

1
-1

[–] BeautifulInside 1 point -1 points (+0|-1) ago 

30 wasted seconds. If it was someone stalling at a green light you would be annoyed.

2
-1

[–] IIII--------IIII 2 points -1 points (+1|-2) ago 

... you dont? /s