I hope that makes sense, but even if you still disagree with my sentiment, I promise that I won't suggest that it causes me any kind of trauma.
Well this feels needlessly passive aggressive. I understand that this is a snarky one off, but this is pretty dismissive of basically everyone that has PTSD speaking up about triggering events.
To me, it "feels" remarkably on point because it isn't dismissive of *everyone* that has PTSD; just the those riding the recent internet trend of claiming to have PTSD and insisting that everyone else tip-toe around their (frequently arbitrary and convenient-at-the-moment) triggers at all times.
Y'know, instead of doing the responsible thing and not engaging media where they KNOW they are likely to be exposed to their 'triggers'. (and if they don't know that, why are they making a big deal about triggers in the first place?)
A close friend of mine had a stillbirth a long time ago. One of the results is that since then, she really hates dead baby jokes. Instead of telling her "It's never ok to tell me what kind of jokes I should find funny", I did a brief amount of self reflection, and decided that her request to not hear dead baby jokes was a reasonable on
And that was your (emphasis) *PERSONAL* decision. You know not to tell those kinds of jokes around her because she does not find them funny (for good reason), and that's fine because you have a vested interest in her well-being, as her friend.
But that is between you and her, not because she has special privilege or righteous authority over you.
You have the choice to limit your speech for her benefit. I bring this up because the moment you stop treating it as your choice, is the moment you stop thinking for yourself in that regard.
I get that having PTSD sucks; really. I'm not unfamiliar with the condition, and have some real life experience.
I have a friend with PTSD, caused when he and his best friend were shot in gang-related violence. He survived, but his friend died right in front of him. For years after the event (I met him about two years after), he had full-traumatic flashbacks, complete with phantom pains. I've seen full episodes at least three times.
Now his "trigger" is mainly event-associated (around his late friend's birthday), so every year he has to take special care around the first week of August. During which he avoids reading news from his homeland (he immigrated to the U.S. from Wales), and watching or playing anything with "realistic" firearms.
Yet, never once has he demanded anyone; be it online or in real life to never reference August 6th, or the suburbs of Wales, or pistols because it might trigger him. He takes responsibility for his affairs, rather than foisting it upon everyone else and getting mad at complete strangers when they don't comply.
And while I take extra care around him at that time, that's because he's my friend, not because he had special privilege bestowed upon him by the Progressive Stack Fairy or whatever.
Beyond that, I've done work with the disabled and mentally challenged including victims of PTSD (mostly foster care and former abuse victims). And not a single one of them has *ever* acted as though their being "damaged" or "disabled" in some way is a badge of honor that gave them the righteous authority to dictate to others what they can/cannot express, and especially THINK.
Because while they're people that have been hurt or damaged, they still just want to get on with their lives.
So forgive my pretense here, but in my limited experience and understanding, people with real psychotic trauma DON'T openly complain ("speaking up"), brag or demand warnings of their "triggers" in public, because in doing so they risk causing themselves an episode, and those aren't worth ANY amount of pity or attention.
Personally, I find it fucking scary just to watch someone unravel; I can only imagine how awful it feels for them.
And that's why I get a bit riled up when someone blathers on about their "triggers", plays the pity-shame-game or (especially) if they start going on about their bullshit self-diagnosis. (psychological trauma cannot be reliably self-diagnosed because the thing you're using to assess the damage IS damaged)
Why is someone saying "this shouldn't be for anybody" never ok? Do you understand the conundrum you're falling in here? By saying "this is never ok", you're placing the same sort of limitations on criticism you're denouncing her for.
Because the limitations aren't actually the same.
Sarkeesian: "Stop liking what I don't like!"
Encaen: "Telling others what they should not like when they clearly like it is not cool."
You are correct in that this creates a conundrum, but realize that your condemnation cuts both ways: That there is no scenario where Sarkeesian can be reasonably criticized, even when she is denouncing others. By simple continuity, she is the one that cast the first stone.
However, it's just not the act of denouncement that is wrong, but the reasoning why. Other people enjoying their ultra-violent FANTASIES has absolutely NO real or reasonable impact on Sarkeesian's life, so her position is pretentious bullshit.
Encaen's position is a response to that, since such hollow pretense is wrong.
"Troubling and depressing" could easily just be interpreted as "disappointing". When the Saints lose a game, and I say "Man that was depressing to watch", I don't mean that I'm literally depressed. I'm disappointed.
You know, it's funny.
Recently, in another overblown Sarkeesian topic the primary defense for her premise invoked absolute literalism (in particular, revolving around the word "reinforcement"). Basically, any attempt to interpret her words in any other way but the most literal manner there was construed as "misrepresentation".
And now, in this topic, Sarkeesian is defended directly by interpretation of her words.
It's not something I pin specifically on you, but rather, this trend in Sarkeesian topics where the defense either deflects towards arbitration ("it's just her opinion") or overly reductionist literal meaning of her statements (orthodoxy).
I only point that out, because no other public figure in gaming gets that kind of treatment as regularly as Sarkeesian.