Part of life is doing hard things once in a while. If you can't handle a five letter word like "bitch" without coming unglued, how are you supposed to discuss something even remotely touchy?
Why is the small part of the population that overreacts to everything allowed to dictate what's acceptable for everyone else?
As opposed to you, who is definitely not overreacting to a word game.
edit: To expand on that, today it's a word game. Before that, it's Joe Rogan. Before that, it's Dr. Seuss books. There is ALWAYS something to be outraged about.
And I did not speak out
Because I was not Joe Rogan
Then they came for Dr. Seuss
And I did not speak out
Because I was not Dr. Seuss
Then they came for Wordle
And I did not speak out
Because I was not Wordle
Then they came for me
And there was no one left
To speak out for me
Besides becoming blacklisted topics in a number of circles, some of which perhaps you haven't been exposed to?
Spotify has removed a bunch of episodes from his podcast. Some Dr. Seuss books got pulled because "racism".
Those who forget (or maybe just don't know) history are doomed to repeat it. It always starts with silencing dissenters. Just look at what happened in Canada.
But hey, I guess in stnmtn's world there is nothing worth complaining about unless people end up in the gulag. But by then it is too late.
In order for a word to truly have meaning, it needs to be applied to a discoursal context.
If a word appears in a game, it's just a combination of 5 letters which follow typical spelling patterns.
Actually taking the time to blacklist words is downright pathetic, and is an attitude which is a bit of a cancer on society; being offended by individual words regardless of context, as opposed to taking the time to understand the context/nuance/arguments. The NYT should aim to inform, educate and inspire. Reinforcing such lazy attitudes doesn't achieve this.