Scott Alexander defends trigger warnings as tools for informed choice, not censorship, and criticizes arguments against them, especially those based on non-consensual exposure therapy. Longer summary

Scott Alexander argues in favor of trigger warnings, stating they are not censorship but rather provide information for informed choices. He suggests a compromise for implementing warnings unobtrusively, and criticizes arguments against trigger warnings based on exposure therapy, emphasizing that therapy should not be forced on people without consent. The post has an ironic tone when discussing social justice and media criticism, but becomes more serious when addressing mental health considerations. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander debunks misleading statistics about euthanasia in the Netherlands, showing claims of widespread non-consensual euthanasia are false and not supported by careful analysis of the data. Longer summary

Scott Alexander debunks misleading statistics about euthanasia in the Netherlands. He analyzes the original Remmelink Report and more recent studies to show that claims of widespread non-consensual euthanasia are false. The post explains how opponents misinterpret data, conflating end-of-life care practices with euthanasia. It presents evidence that legalization of euthanasia in the Netherlands did not lead to a 'slippery slope' or disproportionate impacts on vulnerable groups. The post concludes that responsible research shows euthanasia in the Netherlands is applied consensually and in accordance with guidelines, with no evidence of misapplication. Shorter summary