[–] SamuraiGhostCat 18 points (+18|-0) Edited

No. And as someone who has CPTSD, I find this insulting. TIMs are fetishists/perverts and they traumatize women and give us PTSD.

I do think that many TIFs have had trauma. But TIMs are most often narcissists and perpetrators, with women as their victims.

I just... wow. I don’t think we should be armchair diagnosing anyone.

don’t think we should be armchair diagnosing anyone.

Yep. Sex dysphoria / body dysmorphia, if present, can be a result of or comorbid with PTSD and depression, but that's not for laypeople to diagnose, and also it wouldn't be an excuse for abusive behavior.

[–] goneharolding [OP] 7 points (+9|-2) Edited

Not making excuses, but if we had a working explanation it would go miles toward helping us create an effective method of countering them. Bc I don’t think our current approach is working very well :/

And we’re all traumatized, but it plays out differently for different people.

Edit: And as far as armchair diagnosis, that’s what we’re doing here - Trans people say they’re the opposite sex (or whatever) and we’re over here saying no, you’re perverted/mentally ill/ delusional. That’s far from a professional diagnosis, and a big part of the problem is that psychology has failed to help them and, thus, also failed those of us they abuse in their craziness.

and we’re over here saying no, you’re perverted/mentally ill/ delusional.

I'm not saying that specifically, I'm saying we shouldn't discount mental health problems as possible causes for believing one should be the opposite sex, and I'm also saying that feeling like you are something/should be something doesn't automatically make you what you say you are, if that feeling has no basis in observable reality. I struggle with depression and anxiety and I know having a panic attack doesn't mean I'm actually in danger, even though it definitely feels like that in the moment. Also, I wouldn't have a problem with people claiming they are whatever sex, if they didn't also try to force women to participate in their own erasure to confirm those claims.

I’m sorry to have offended you, struggling with mental health is not a joke and it wasn’t my intention to make it worse for any of you wonderful people on here.

But I think what you’re saying actually supports the hypothesis, in that abusers are often victims first. And I definitely agree that narcissism is a problem! The grand theme is that we’re all messed up bc it’s a really messed up world, but everyone pretends they’re not affected and we’re busy passing the same bullshit right down.

Who knows what kind of crap the next generation will fall for, as our collective trauma deepens and our collective mental health continues to slide?

[–] SamuraiGhostCat 15 points (+15|-0) Edited

Most male abusers are not victims first. And I have no sympathy for them.

I don’t think “trauma” is a word that should easily/carelessly be thrown around. In another comment, you said we all have trauma. That is simply not true.

Do you have PTSD?

Yeah, and I may be overgeneralizing. For argument’s sake I’ll give you that and specify to those of us engaged in this debate.

But I’m wondering how you know that some people are walking around trauma-free. They must have it pretty good.

[–] sosorreal 1 points (+2|-1)

Idk. There’s been talk that borderline personality disorder is a form of PTSD, and I had BPD and see a lot of similarities with trans behavior.

It’s always helpful for me to remember “hurt people hurt people”. It doesn’t excuse behavior but it provides context from which to understand harmful behavior.

It’s so hard to remember when they’re in your face tho!

But that’s very interesting! Do you remember where you read that about BPD?

[–] sosorreal 2 points (+2|-0)

I actually think my therapist told me. And I've read other things somewhere, but I don't remember where. Basically people want to reclassify BPD since "borderline" isn't very descriptive, but I actually think it's a perfect name—on the border of psychosis and neurosis. Described me to a 't', but I guess most people don't get it. I've heard "emotion dysregulation disorder" proposed as well, but I don't think that quite covers it. Idk!

And yeah of course it is. I mean, I don't like the current TRA rhetoric or how these people act. I never got away with that shit, which kinda pisses me off. Like, I was suicidal for years and no one celebrated me because of it. It's not something to be celebrated, and I hate how they use it to get what they want—they're manipulative, which a lot people say is a BPD trait but I never "identified" with that one, ha. Who fucking knows. I'm better now lol, but I do have empathy for those with similar struggles because it's very difficult being in that amount of pain all the time. It's easy to get desperate for any kind of relief. Doesn't excuse behavior though. But these people do need help, just like I did. Ignoring that it's a mental illness just keeps them in pain (and inflicting pain) for longer.

[–] GenderCriticalHit 10 points (+11|-1) Edited

It is known that long term exposure to trauma can lead to disassociation. It stands to reason that disassociation from biological sex would be a possible variation. Especially of that trauma coincides with puberty.

Exactly. We’re all traumatized, and it plays out differently for different people.

[–] dixiechick547 7 points (+7|-0)

TIMs are almost all pornsick pervs. It’s obvious with even a brief encounter with them. Every TIF I’ve ever met has been a victim of sexual abuse of rape, so there is definitely a trauma component, but there’s also the social contagion aspect as well. If Trans wasn’t the hot thing, these girls would be self-harming in other ways.

Definitely, we did back before this weirdness. It’s a different form of the same thing. The same thing that makes them so susceptible to social contagion, lack of foundational connections that form the foundation of internal identity.

That’s the theory I’m going with, anyway.

[–] SarahTheGreen 3 points (+4|-1)

There are a lot of things to unpack here.

As someone said, it's not cPTSD. I would be perfectly happy to believe that the most sympathetic of the homosexual variety of transwomen, the ones who support radical feminism, grew up in nasty environments, but not everyone. That's a stretch. We already know there's a hereditary component to erotic cross-dressing and other paraphilias, plus all that porn. Porn isn't going to give most men any kind of trauma, just warped perceptions. That's grooming, not trauma.

Neglect is not abuse. Kids who are emotionally neglected may well end up lost, acting out, or just drifting through life, without enough structure. (Babies who are fed, clothed and otherwise ignored will fail to thrive, but that's not what you're talking about.) Outcomes will depend on individual differences and on how much warmth there is when parents are there. Either way, it's a big difference from actual life-threatening experiences combined with the betrayal of those who are supposed to protect us, which is where actual trauma comes from.

I don't know what it's like for young people today. There are still plenty of stay-at-home mothers and they appear to be doing a good job, probably a much better one than previous generations, as we accrue wisdom about better parenting, which parents can access through books, classes, and online support groups. (Check out Alice Miller's For Your Own Good: Hidden Cruelty in Child-Rearing and the Roots of Violence for how horrifying parenting used to be.) It also depends on maternity leave and the affordability of staying home with young children, which varies from country to country but is particularly bad in the US.

At the same time, young people may feel angry and lost. And some parents may put their kids in daycare too quickly when it isn't really necessary, because they think they're supposed to. I do think children should be with their primary caregivers for the first 2.5 years of life, with other family helping out. It can be a grandmother (and often is in some cultures), but then grandma becomes mom.

My own personal explanation for the craze's source is a form of arrested development. Previous generations mostly did not go to university, so there weren't that many people going off the rails intellectually. (I'm thinking logical errors a la Piaget, who for some reason isn't fashionable right now.) Now we have tons of people absorbing theory before they're really ready for it, and going out into the world applying it, not realizing they don't really understand the world as well as they think they do. I think if university were reserved for people over 25, and that everyone got some sort of technical training, work experience, and possibly seeing the world while being paid first (you can already do this in some countries with working holiday visas), fewer people would go off the rails with bad theory, because they'd understand more about how the world worked first and would have better perspective. Multiple gap years for everyone. (It would only work if everyone did it. Someone said on a previous post I did on this that it would mean that lower income people could miss out on uni completely, but if employers could no longer require a university degree for non-professional jobs it wouldn't matter, would it? And talented low-income people do sometimes go to uni after a break, if they haven't found another outlet for their talent already.)

I could be wrong, too, but it is important to brainstorm, and many ideas will end up wrong. The problem with trans ideology is it doesn't have that oh-so-necessary reality check.

Thank you for your detailed response! Brainstorming is extremely important, and I love the discussions on Ovarit.

But neglect absolutely is a form of abuse! I have been watching over the past 30 years as the idea that emotional abuse is abuse slowly trickled into the mainstream (suddenly wondering if it’s related to that whole words-as-violence thing... sigh) and it has opened up a whole new side of mental healthcare.

What do you think is behind the arrested development? Is it just the education being out of whack?

And I chose C-PTSD bc it appears to me to fit what we’re looking at quite well. But then, my general social theory is that the vast majority of people are wounded in some way, just bc life is fucking hard. Even if you had amazing parents, the adult world will happily eat you for breakfast if you make the wrong mistake.

Sadly I have to run, but I’ll come back later to give this more of the time it deserves.

[–] SarahTheGreen 1 points (+2|-1)

Neglect is not the same as emotional abuse. Emotional abuse is an active thing, e.g. gaslighting, derogatory comments, etc. Neglect is just not being there. They're not on the same scale. Neglect is something you're not doing that you should; abuse is something you do that you shouldn't have done.

I think ideas are being introduced at a stage where people don't have the tools to solve complex problems yet, so they use ideologies instead. Essentially, you shouldn't introduce problems to solve in education until it's developmentally appropriate. Concepts are built from simpler concepts, and these take time to learn. In the past (before so many people went to uni), the toolkit for complex problems didn't exist. Since then, it's been invented/discovered by people in the sciences, but the humanities is bypassing that. So one solution would be gap years, while people learn from the real world. Another would be making people study the natural sciences first before going on to humanities and social sciences, so they grasp the logic of living systems first.

[–] Stealthygal 3 points (+3|-0)

I think we have definitely become a society of over-analysing and over-diagnosing, and I say that as a person who benefits from a chronic depression diagnosis that some new doctor might challenge. Everyone is traumatised, everyone is self-diagnosed with a mental health condition, everyone you don't like is a narcissist, everyone who disagrees with you is gaslighting and a Karen....

[–] SarahTheGreen 0 points (+1|-1)

I want to add: have you read Mary Pipher's books? I think you'd like her. The Shelter of Each Other is about kids whose parents aren't around enough. She'd have kids come into her therapy practice who were depressed, eating too much junk/snack food and watching too much TV, and one of the things she'd do is have the family (all of them, no exceptions) spend a few hours together every week just doing something (e.g. a walk in nature), and this would be an unbreakable date every week.

I totally get what you're saying about latchkey kids, now that I think back to some of what I've read. I can see it's a big problem, and probably contributing to all sorts of dysfunctions. We really need to make it easier/safer for women to stay home with their kids more. It's just that it isn't trauma. That's a whole other ball game.

I don't think this can be blamed on young people and students. Young people are not the ones sitting in positions of power teaching this stuff. I remember being 20-21 and even back then, people MUCH older than 20s were jumping on the bandwagon.

I think it's that when people think they're doing the right thing, standing up for a downtrodden group, logic goes right out the window.

[–] SarahTheGreen 0 points (+0|-0)

Yeah, it's being led by the wave of boomers who went to university back in the '70s. Young people today aren't creating the script, but they're following it. They should be rolling their eyes and choosing other professors when they can, but they don't have the experience to do that.

Except tons of people with plenty of life experience don't know better either. Grown adults old enough to run schools and youth centers all jumped right on the 'girls can have penises/boys can have vaginas' bandwagon.

[–] jelliknight 1 points (+1|-0)

I really like your idea about introducing abstract concepts before the brain/experiences have developed fully and going off the rails. Totally makes sense. Also, as we've become increasingly online we're encouraged to believe that the abtract is real and the real is abstract, I.e. your online family is your real family. Not those people who look after and provide for you every minute of the day - they're just a regressive social concept.

I think a lot about the "the world is an advanced simulation" concept a lot of the "intellectuals" are behind these days. You have to spend a lot of time indoors online and not a lot of time e.g. chopping wood to believe that is a possibility. (If anyone doubts this, try using some of our most leading edge virtual reality. It looks and sounds realish but it doesn't FEEL any realer than Pong did.) So maybe its not just about introducing them too early but also about what these abstract concepts and experiences are replacing?

In terms of uni, we need a massive shift in how we think about higher education. Does no one realise we're still using a higher education system invented when the best method of mass communication was shouting? It literally predates the printing press. We have the internet now. Use Khan Academy, we already have personalised learning available free in your home and we're still using a system from the shouty years? We need to radically rethink it. Higher education should be extremely cheap, probably free. Unlike childhood education you shouldn't need people to supervise you and teach you how to learn. Here's the material, here's the discussion forum, come back in a year and we'll test if you've achieved a qualification level of understanding. It doesn't work as well for physical learning like medicine and trades but a significant amount of those could still be done very cheaply and in a decentralised way.

I went straight to university after highschool (no gap year) because I was poor and needed to get into real financial stability ASAP. It was the best choice but I agree its not a GOOD choice. A ubi would solve that problem. I agree gap years are good and should be encouraged/supported.

[–] feathersofaduck 1 points (+1|-0)

From what the comments say here, this is quite clearly an example of Betteridge's law of headlines that "any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no" in action.

Yes I guess it’s possible to refuse to engage in discussion of just about anything.

The most interesting thing to me has been the different things people project onto a single sentence.