What do you propose as the solution, then? Without any up-front disclosure of the triggering content being present, how can anybody make the choice whether or not to expose themself to it?

There’s evidence that trigger warnings actually worsen anxiety and are counterproductive

I'd be interested in seeing these studies.

The way to treat anxiety is to face the source of anxiety to try and change your relationship and reaction. The best way to do this is via controlled access that exposes one to the trigger gradually in a context that has no risk of harm (eg a media depiction, discussing the concept, building up to discussing the source of trauma that led to the phobic response if applicable)

Trigger warnings enable active avoidance. This sensitizes one to the aversive stimuli and makes the phobic response stronger. As a result when one encounters the stimulus (eg a friend, family, celebrity etc commits suicide, suffers an eating disorder, etc) your resilience to the trigger is now even lower and the response is more likely to be more significant than it was before.

These two paragraphs seem to contradict each other. Controlled access in a safe setting like a media depiction sounds great. That's exactly what trigger warnings are for. How can you possibly do controlled exposure without knowing if the content is there or not?

Trigger warnings enable active avoidance.

Incorrect. Trigger warnings inform you that the content is present in the media you're about to watch. What you do with that information is up to you.

Mark Richard Shuttleworth (born 18 September 1973) is a South African and British entrepreneur who is the founder and CEO of Canonical, the company behind the development of the Linux-based Ubuntu operating system.[1] In 2002, Shuttleworth became the first South African to travel to space, doing so as a space tourist.[2][3][4] He lives on the Isle of Man and holds dual citizenship from South Africa and the United Kingdom.[5][6] According to the Sunday Times Rich List in 2020, Shuttleworth is worth an estimated £500 million. --Wikipedia

This explains so much.

Unearthed for GBC. It's a fun little block-pushing puzzle game that just came out last month.

(Full disclosure, I'm one of the beta testers, but I didn't get paid or anything. I just really like the game.)

I was reading Matt Parker's new trigonometry book and they made some remark about triangles in spherical geometry and I went "wait, what if you did this"

They're not curved; the space they're embedded in is curved.

I didn't even think of that. Another good question!

I'm not asking about a Dorito shape.

I don't think that can be a thing.

A tip: "You got me, I actually [complete opposite of what I've been saying for the rest of this thread]" is typically sarcasm.

My dude, I'm as autistic as the next person on this website, but even I gotta say: You will not make it on the internet if you don't learn to recognize sarcasm.

At this point it's clear you're just trolling.

At some point you have to take responsibility for your own actions.

You got me, I don't give a shit about the environment, unlike you, the biggest tree-hugger in the world.

Oh, well, if others are worse then I guess you're not doing anything wrong.

If you know there's going to be a traffic jam at 5PM on the I-Fuckit, aggravated by your presence, is that not intent or, at the very least, gross negligence?

At what point do carbrains become liable for destroying the environment?

a non-hispanic/latina actress

She's a white American Latina. If you mean "a non-South American actress", say that.

You didn't care that people were attacking her for being trans until she had a dumb take about a bad song?

I'm serious. I want to know exactly what OP is imagining would happen.