system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
CMV: There is nothing wrong with the idea of trigger warnings

I'm usually very skeptical of concepts related to intersectionality, such as mansplaining, safe spaces or cultural appropriation. 

However, perhaps the most mocked aspect of the movement (and the origin of the often abused term "triggered") is an entirely benign and overall positive concept that really benefits everyone.

Trigger warnings are of course nothing new. Typically they have been attached to age restrictions, for example indicating that an R-rated movie includes violent or sexual content. This does not prevent anyone from seeing the movie (well, no adult anyway), but rather equips the potential viewer or parent with information on what to expect from the film. 

You might say that these measures exist to help parents protect their children from potentially harmful content, and that adults are expected to be strong enough to handle these subject matters. But I'd argue adults are expected to know what's right for them. A rape victim might not want to read a graphic description of a sex scene, a war veteran might not want to hear the gory details of a battle. Indicating that a work of fiction, a public speech or a comedy show will involve "triggering" subjects such as sexual violence, disease, disability, war, torture, car accidents or drugs puts the onus on the audience to decide whether to consume a piece of media or not. Not only are potential audience members properly informed, but the author or communicator has the freedom to talk about sensitive topics without restrain, as anyone listening will have consciously chosen to do so.
gpt
The question becomes, does the sentence "the following contains depictions" increase or decrease the likelihood of an adverse reaction. 

You can have people read about graphic murders with or without the warnings, and even with PTSD victims or rape victims, they are no better off with the warnings, and arguably worse off -modest increases in anxiety prior to reading the passage. 

All you are doing, is making people fear the worst, and not avoiding any issues with the passage itself. 

If the warning, doesn't mitigate anything, and arguably just needlessly raises anxiety levels, what are we actually doing??