The more I write about it in this thread the more I agree that “nonviolent communication” implies “violent communication” which feels like an equivalence between words and physical assault.

I’m all for people communicating in a way that is civil, unambiguous, and direct, but this lexical appropriation sure sounds like manufactured fragility at best, or—as you say—a trivialization of physical violence.

(And I sure hope — shows as an em-dash)