i think i have figured out the problem: i’m not lying about my disability.
i have ptsd, which manifests in many ways including extreme anxiety and keeps me from functioning.
i can’t turn things in on time. i get freaked out when i have to do anything on a schedule. i lose things, especially when they’re important. i can’t usually talk to people and get help. and i’m multiple (have d.i.d), which is not my disability but contributes to the overall confusion and inability to get things done when i am supposed to.
the problem is: this is actually the case and i’m not making it up (which is in no way to suggest that anyone else is, i am not a big fan of invalidating experience or identity).
so i have big problems when i have to turn in papers for disability, or pay rent on time (my building doesn’t accept electronic payment and i have to use this special slip that comes like 3 days before the 1st and i have to keep it without losing it, find/buy/borrow an envelope and stamp, find and write a check, and get it all sent by like the 5th or pay a fine and possibly get a condescending lecture on the importance of paying rent on time), or anything else that involves skills that i don’t have access to which is part of why i am disabled in the first place.
and then i get in trouble and get punished for not making these deadlines, many if not all of which are connected (directly or indirectly) to the disability that prevents me from making them.
and so when i get yet another “helpful” suggestion or scary letter, i just want to reply:
“i’m sorry, i am actually disabled. since i’m not lying about my abilities, i can’t get these done on time usually. if i were making my disability up, this would be no problem. but since i am not, fuck you”.
but somehow that never goes over that well.
1. not examining your own emotional shit doesn’t make you a better person, it makes you unaware of the damage you both cause and endure(d)
2. it is the opposite of narcissistic to examine and admit your own psychological frailties and baggage.
3. when you are on the side of telling people to “keep quiet” about their experience and story, you are on the side of the powerful and privileged
4. you can quite easily be a narcissist who fulfills their own needs by always “focusing on others”
5. it is incredibly ableist and a slap in the face to survivors and everyone with psychological issues/disorders to say that emotional exploration is self-indulgent
6. stop being jerks. seriously. just fucking stop it.
thank you. you may now go back to your coping mechanisms of self-righteous, hypocritical judging and denial and subsequent projection of painful feelings.
i have little tendrils of adrenaline running up and down my body from reading the comment thread on this post, so it occurred to me that i could write something of my own. i’m scared to, i’m scared i won’t know what to say, i’m scared the words will slip away from me. i never do say what i want to. but in the end it doesn’t matter, just speaking is something.
i think it is a privilege to have an avoidance response to something that triggers you, as opposed to a fascination response. in particular, with sexuality, there are problems that happen in our lives with both ends; avoidance can mean that you don’t get to have sex and feel less fulfilled; fascination can mean that you get drawn into dangerous situations. and i know that both responses happen with all people, and with different triggers, and that avoidance can cause a sudden binge of fascination, etc. but i do think that many people tend towards one end of the spectrum with a particular trigger. and when your impulse is to avoid things that remind you of your sexual abuse, then… it seems to me that you win. you stay “pure”, you stay safer, you aren’t the object of as much scorn from the kyriarchy – at worst you might be called ‘frigid’, which is absolutely a misogynist term, but if your impulse is to seek things out… then you are a whoreslutcunt, you are sullied, you are a disposable body, people say that you deserve to be assaulted and raped, and it takes constant effort to get a minimum level of safety. again, not saying that both don’t happen with both, but i am trying to speak about tendencies.
in what i read, the author was very angry that some people act on the fascination rather than practice avoidance as she does. that her experience could be reduced, mocked, and perpetuated because other people play out their own experiences. and i think it’s valid for her to feel angry. but it really triggered me and made me sad and angry.
why can’t we acknowledge that some of us will always want to play out the sexuality and abuse that we’re taught as children, and acknowledge that our impulses to play it out would not happen without the abuse and harm and privilege and prejudice and hatred we were exposed to, without having to say that playing with our sexuality is in every case perpetuating the rape culture? yes, ideally none of us would be exposed to this stuff and develop these kinks. and yes, having been exposed to this stuff, we need to watch and grow and monitor all our lives so that we can acknowledge our privileges and prejudices, and work on dismantling them; but i do not think that working with our sexuality is what is perpetuating the culture. i’m not saying it automatically doesn’t, either. but just like any other area of life, it is something to work with.
it’s not good and it’s not bad that we have these kinks that reflect horrific violence. it’s really just the human skill of adaptation. claiming to be part of the s&m community does not give us a free pass; but it also does not have to mean that we are making light of another’s experience when we do our best to work with our sexuality, including sexual expression with partners of our kinks. and in particular, those of us who respond with fascination to the violence that we are victim to, have a right to safely consider and express our sexuality. and i do think that to say we are sick for doing so is incredibly ableist and almost willfully blind to the spectrum of ptsd and variety of human responses to trauma.
I was recently talking to my therapist about being observant as opposed to critical as opposed to judgmental. I was saying that I (this particular part in the system) am very judgmental but I can work with people who are critical because I can just add “and they’re bad!” to the end of their sentences. But in thinking about the differences, I wanted to try to write them out. Perhaps to better help me understand them and identify which one(s) I am engaging in.
Observing
Gathering information using the senses and processing it, with or without drawing conclusions
Criticizing
Observing + Evaluating that which is observed using chosen standards
Judging
Criticizing + Ruling on Inferior/Superiority based on standards used (equating the standards with deciding who is good or bad, better or worse)
I think it is interesting how often criticism and judgment are so woven into observation that people don’t even notice. I also think, though, that determining the difference is obviously subjective and interpretive since, to make sense of information, we must process it, which inevitably has judgment and criticism woven in. So this is, by no means, a perfect idea.
But it certainly bears on the idea of there is no should. Should being a term involving judgment, because it is telling you one course of action/event is superior or more “right”.
i really bristle when people say “don’t take it personally.” and it seems people think that saying this is somehow helpful or mitigates the hurtfulness of their words. and so far as i can tell it doesn’t really. so it made me think: what does it really mean to say?
don’t take things personally means don’t react emotionally as if you are personally affected. so it basically means to not act as if you are affected. but what if you are affected? what’s wrong with having a reaction? and why is it your responsibility to hide it?
it seems odd that it would be the responsibility of someone who is affected by something to hide that from someone who wasn’t.
it is easy not to take things personally when you aren’t affected by them. and that is a privileged position to be in. a position where you can choose not to take things personally. and that choice is a privilege.
when you are affected, it’s a whole different ballgame. you don’t necessarily have that choice. and if you do, it is much much harder. you don’t have the luxury of not being emotionally invested.
it is personal, unless you’re lucky enough for it not to be. and please don’t use that luck as an excuse to censor my reactions.
so i guess what i mean to say is “you mean it personally”.
i think it is very hard for someone who likes to rescue to admit that, in order to take care of themselves, they have to leave someone who is in unbearable pain. even if leaving hurts the person being left. i think it is hard to admit that you are doing something for your own good instead of theirs. even though it is healthy to take care of your needs first. it can be really shameful to admit.
a rescuer can find themselves feeling acutely helpless when they try to save a borderline person and can’t. i think that helplessness is so painful that to avoid it they need to demonize the person they are leaving/unable to help.
treatments often aren’t accessible for someone with bpd, for many reasons: some emotional, some financial, some physical, some spiritual, some situational. people often seem to assume that treatments are always accessible, because it is way too upsetting to admit that sometimes people are in intense pain that cannot be fixed (at least right now) and interferes strongly with their emotions and stability. so they blame people with bpd for not getting help or changing, and make it out to be a failing or weakness on their part.
as in “a person who has bpd” instead write “unbearable and intractable pain”. then relook at the sentence.
I taks it really seriously when people say awful, judgmental things about “those people” who are borderline and dehumanize them by talking about them like they are an issue/problem to be dealt with.
and I take it more seriously when they act like words that they would be insulted and demeaned by are perfectly neutral when applied to people with bpd.
such as…
people with bpd are manipulative: engaging in theatrics such as self-harm or being suicidal
self-harming and being suicidal are not “theatrics.” they are signs of being in unbearable pain. to call them theatrics is invalidating and cruel.
the only reason someone would use self-harm or suicide to manipulate others is if they had no other choice and were in intense pain. that is nowhere near being a form of theatrics. to call it that is just demeaning.
borderliners aren’t just bad people or people who do crazy things you would never do. if you were in that pain, you would do the same. damn. thing.
it is a privilege not to be in that kind of pain. and it is … really weird … to brag about how you have that privilege and others don’t. it is a position where you can safely can throw around words like “manipulative” without being hurt by them.
the word manipulative is negatively-charged. and it is meant to be invalidating. it is meant to say that someone is trying to steal something (an emotional response) instead of getting it “fairly”. i don’t know anyone in real life and few online who would not be hurt by being called manipulative. it is an inherently insulting word.
and frankly, it’s an empty and misleading word unless you mean it so cruelly. because otherwise you are refering to someone who is actually unable to meet their needs directly and – so debilitated – struggle to make due using indirect means.
if someone is being raped, and they yell “fire!” to get help, is that theatrics? is that manipulative? at what point does it become so? when it involves purely emotional pain desperation instead of physical? when the bondage is mental instead of physical?
emotional immaturity is the definition of bpd
No. emotional instability, emotional turmoil, lack of ability to regulate emotions yes. this is something you might find true of anyone in extremeextreme emotional crisis (such as a parent whose child has been taken hostage). that isn’t immaturity in that situation either. it’s pain.
to people who do NOT have bpd: you can NOT determine what is and isn’t cruel, judgmental, or blaming to say about bpd. because it doesn’t hurt YOU to say it. also, you are NOT the experts or more objective and people with bpd are not just immature children.
i used to be functional and productive. since getting on government assistance, i have become less and less so. therefore government assistance is damaging because it encourages laziness.
the above conclusion rests on all of the following assumptions except:
(a) the inability to be productive is always due to laziness
(b) i would have been more functional had i not gotten government assistance
(c) it is always better for me to be functional and productive
(d) what i call laziness might be what i and my body need to be doing right now
(e) monetary pressure helps people be more productive and functional