“Pain points” is a UX term of art referring to steps in a process or workflow that users typically dislike, find problematic, or even seek to avoid or work around.
Basically all UX practitioners understand that this idiom doesn’t necessarily mean the user literally experiences pain, only that the user finds some aspect of the experience to be negative and, presumably, desirable to change or eliminate.
Pain points can of course be very serious, for example if an emergency worker has to spend an extra minute fidgeting with a tricky latch in order to access some life-saving piece of equipment.
But due to the nature of UX work, the vast majority of pain points identified in user workflows are trivial: they are sometimes little things that irk or inconvenience people (e.g. having to orient a key a certain way so it can be inserted into a lock), and other times they are problems most people are not even aware they have until there is a solution (e.g. many people say they did not realize being disconnected from the internet while out and about was a problem until they owned a smartphone).
Does the use of this dramatic-sounding phrase introduce or reinforce a bias on the part of the UX practitioner? Specifically, I am referring to a bias in which we are inclined to escalate the stated seriousness of problems, or to solve problems that did not need solving. I’m not sure whether this is happening; the names we give things are important and transformative—but sometimes they aren’t. The aforementioned escalation could be happening for plenty of other reasons, but this doesn’t rule out bias resulting from our language being one of them.
So, I often add scare quotes to the term “pain points” as a way to exercise caution and remind myself not to become biased.