No, seriously. That headline is not a joke. At Oxford, as in the really famous school in England, as in one of the most prestigious institutes of the entire higher learning world... Students can now walk out of lectures over "trigger warnings" if they decide the topic is too sad. Yes, educational lectures in their chosen subject of interest are no longer mandatory... because "feels".

They are destined to be barristers and judges – but undergraduates studying law at Oxford are being told before lectures on cases involving violence or death that they can leave if they fear the content will be too ‘distressing’.

The revelation marks the arrival from the US of ‘trigger warnings’ – the politically correct notion that students should be warned before they encounter material that could elicit a traumatic response.

Lecturers have been asked by the director of undergraduate studies for law to ‘bear in mind’ using trigger warnings when they give lectures containing ‘potentially distressing’ content.

One law student explained: ‘Before the lectures on sexual offences – which included issues such as rape and sexual assault – we were warned that the content could be distressing, and were then given the opportunity to leave if we needed to.’

Yes. Our best and brightest, who will go on to represent us in court or in government, can't be expected to sit through lectures that may make them feel sad, or angry, or oppressed, or some slight form of aggravating disagreement or *INSERT IRRATIONAL REASON HERE*

You know where we stand (see HILARIOUS: Comedy Central Skewers Sensitive Liberal ’Trigger Warning’ Culture and Liberal Columbia University Students Now Demand Trigger Warnings From Professors) Of course, guess who defends it? I'll give you a hint, we destroyed him over the 2nd Amendment...

Oh Cenk. We can always count on you.

Now, to Ana's credit, she wasn't a fan here. And Cenk did go on to ultimately kind of try to sort of, maybe balance his remarks. But still...

"Firt, I want to acknowledge why they do it in the first place. It's not out of nowhere. If you were severely assaulted, or a victim of rape, you may have a different view of it. So I don't object to it as much as other people do..."

No. No, Cenk. These precious little snowflakes deserve no understanding. Should we be understanding toward victims of rape? OF COURSE. Does allowing all students the right to walk out on "triggering" lectures at any given moment equate to "understanding"? Absolutely not.

Good lord, talk about conflating the issues. As seen at UMass, this isn't about "understanding." It isn't about "compassion". This is about the regressive left ensuring that no dissenting viewpoints are ever discussed, nor even allowed to be present in academia. That's why the recent UMass protests and bully tactics sparked outrage from both the left as well as the right. People are tired of it.

But conflating the issues is what "The Young Turks" do best. See my previous debunking of Cenk's "Second Amendment" arguments.