Trigger warnings are important. A rape survivor may have braced themselves for a textual story on rape, but have been completely unprepared for the images.

Do we have trigger warnings for people who have been through other horrible things in life? That would be a lot of warnings on a lot of posts. Saying the post is NSFW should be enough.

Why would you argue against this reason for a warning in a discussion thread where the primary complaint is "but I'm at work" ?

I am not against an NSFW tag, of course.

Don't underestimate the strength of the response to such a trigger.

That's true for any survivor of any kind of horrible experience. Why single out rape?

the headline as it's now "Rape of Iraqi Women by US Forces as Weapon of War (asiantribune.com)" does not in any way suggest that pictures of said rape are present in the page.

As your sibling poster mentioned, and I hadn't quite realized, a "trigger warning" is a legitimate context for this complaint. The not-safe-for-work crowd has no truck here, regardless of what time or day it is.

NSFW is generally used as a synonym for "potentially inappropriate". And yes, they do have truck here.

I clicked the article expecting some further developments or prosecution over Abu Ghraib, I wasn't expecting to see graphic rape images. A NSFW tag would have been very welcome.

Not what I wanted to see when having breakfast with my family and reading the news...

I was expecting an article about the subject, which would be safe work work.

Besides that reading about such a topic is bad enough.

(I didn't follow the link.)