From what I've read, it is something similar to the "triggering" of a post traumatic panic attack. Akin to how veterans from war can be "triggered" by loud soun

From what I've read, it is something similar to the "triggering" of a post traumatic panic attack. Akin to how veterans from war can be "triggered" by loud sounds or environments similar to what they experienced while at war, the term is used in the context of social triggering. Basically, if you trigger someone, you're bringing up undue trauma for them, such as forcing them to reminisce about a prior rape or other similarly shocking event. I'll be the first to admit that I think the use of the term gets out of hand, as many people use it as an excuse to shut down discourse or browbeat opponents such that they do not say anything that could possibly agree with a reality that contains triggering or disagreeable thoughts. In the context of the article, I imagine it's an attitude that's viewed as being used as a political tool against professors to stop them from teaching or using material that contains content outside of what the author prescribes as a "liberal agenda." I'll admit, I've seen similar problems with the undergrads at my own university (hell, I was an undergrad not too long ago and interacted with some of these people myself) , but I'm unsure if the problem is as tumorous as the author indicates. I'd argue that for the most part, ideologies such as acceptance and "not consciously trying to distress or harm other people" are good ones. However, this appears to be the logical extreme of such ideas. Only Siths etc... The biggest problem with this though, is that if somebody _does_ make a claim against you for "triggering" or offending them, it is taken far more seriously than it often should. It appears people seem much more quick to jump to lawyers and litigation than I think was previous, but that is likely just a bias in what I see daily. At a systemic level, the best way to deal with such situations is to remove the mob mentality behind situations where discourse is shut down for the sake of political correctness (e.g. calling people out on social media), and to resolve the issue with some form of arbiter to ensure that neither side engages in petty tactics. The problem is that it is much, much easier said than done.