some people use it to express their needs, some people use it to find people with similar conditions, and some people do it out of pride for overcoming them.
however, i developed the theory that it also has partly to do with the aggression people experience and dish out online. people so often feel the need to have to justify and defend their words and actions by validating them with these conditions, and by showing off these buttons, they can point to them and be like "yeah but i have [CONDITION]." it could also come from the need to have people give more attention to their words by validating them with conditions; everyone has so many needs to be met, that sometimes people think they have to preface their wants with "please help me, i have [condition]" in order to get people to look at it.
for example, very recently i had to put up a fund for a need i have, but in order to feel more secure about asking for it and raise my chances of getting the help i need, i felt i had to justify it with my own conditions.
i don't think it's smart to broadcast information unless necessary and should only be done when it is needed and only as much as is needed. i also think that people shouldn't feel so stressed that they feel they have to give this information in order to justify their existence and their stances. there's so many awful people online who use every scrap of info they can to hurt people, and it just makes it so much easier to get that information. it's the same with DNI lists; while the intention is genuine (an attempt to ward off people they don't want to associate with), it's just giving people more ammo to hurt you, and the internet is not a safe place to be doing that.
the buttons have good intentions but have gone way too far; what was initially just pronouns and LGBT+ identification has spiraled far out of control.
"however, i developed the theory that it also has partly to do with the aggression people experience and dish out online. people so often feel the need to have to justify and defend their words and actions by validating them with these conditions ... sometimes people think they have to preface their wants with "please help me, i have [condition]" in order to get people to look at it"
This is very insightful, and have come to the same conclusion as you. I have unfortunately found it to be true sometimes: someone's admission of trauma or identification with a marginalized identity lends them authority or validity in a certain situation. It shouldn't have to be that way, and I would argue social spaces with such (unusually unspoken) requirements are harmful. Unfortunately there are a lot of pockets like this on the internet, from subreddits to Discord servers and even group texts among friends.
It dilutes the word trauma if people use it to describe things that don't quite meet a certain threshold, and it encourages people to make their traumas/marginalization a larger part of their identity than is probably healthy. It also leads to strange phenomena like relatively privileged people who REALLY want to be oppressed and attempt to claim victimhood in unexpected ways, as well as people applying the perpetrator/victim dynamic in situations where it is not really appropriate.
I do worry about super online young people, especially lgbtq kids who primarily find community/friends online, internalizing this kind of thinking into adulthood. I don't think it's healthy to learn to use your marginalization as a social defense and I don't think it contributes to personal growth; after all, being disabled or mentally ill (or lactose intolerant lol) isn't an excuse if you treat someone poorly.
I read an essay a while back that I thought was interesting and was related to this subject. Warning, it's pretty long, and apologies if you like Hannah Gadsby as the author really rips into her, but the author is an older queer activist who shares a different perspective I don't see often. I don't agree with everything in it, but the general idea rings true for me. I highly recommend it! :)
ayrt I'm so glad you like her stuff!! I just find her so interesting because she's commenting on modern issues/activism but with the weight of all her decades of activism experience (as well as being from a non-Western background) so her opinions are often fresh and not always even in line with modern social justice norms (which I find refreshing).
She has more writing here: https://www.currentaffairs.org/author/yasmin-nair
Thanks for that link, anon. I don't agree with everything the author says, but it's a really thought-provoking take (and as an older lesbian who is lucky enough not to have a backstory full of severe trauma, it really touches on feelings of inauthenticity I've had ever since I realized I was queer, back in the 80s. More often than I like there's a little voice in the back of my head whispering how can I be Really Queer (tm) if I haven't been beaten up/raped/disowned/fired/whatever and =suffered= for it?)
I have seen people use it this way, but I have also seen people use it as a 'get out of trouble free' card (or try to), though not necessarily on FR (though I think there have been a few people who have done it).
Which is one reason why I tend to avoid people who have many of those identifiers, especially on a website that has nothing to do with them, because it often does come across more as 'I have this, so you can't chastise me for my actions' than truly 'sorry if I misunderstand something! I have X and sometimes have trouble!' (again, this is mainly with those who have multiple mental illness identifiers)
I definitely agree with the good intentions, but have always agreed with the 'the path to hell is lined with good intentions'. They can so often go wrong, and as you said, those identifiers can be used to harm the people that are using them.
Along with the idea that the other post brought up, about people using them and NOT having the condition, but only a basic understanding (OCD = obssessive cleaning of hands, or needing everything symmetrical, or being intensely clean) of the mental illness. It perpetuates the stereotypes.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
Re: Unpopular Opinion...
(Anonymous) 2023-08-04 06:13 am (UTC)(link)however, i developed the theory that it also has partly to do with the aggression people experience and dish out online. people so often feel the need to have to justify and defend their words and actions by validating them with these conditions, and by showing off these buttons, they can point to them and be like "yeah but i have [CONDITION]." it could also come from the need to have people give more attention to their words by validating them with conditions; everyone has so many needs to be met, that sometimes people think they have to preface their wants with "please help me, i have [condition]" in order to get people to look at it.
for example, very recently i had to put up a fund for a need i have, but in order to feel more secure about asking for it and raise my chances of getting the help i need, i felt i had to justify it with my own conditions.
i don't think it's smart to broadcast information unless necessary and should only be done when it is needed and only as much as is needed. i also think that people shouldn't feel so stressed that they feel they have to give this information in order to justify their existence and their stances. there's so many awful people online who use every scrap of info they can to hurt people, and it just makes it so much easier to get that information. it's the same with DNI lists; while the intention is genuine (an attempt to ward off people they don't want to associate with), it's just giving people more ammo to hurt you, and the internet is not a safe place to be doing that.
the buttons have good intentions but have gone way too far; what was initially just pronouns and LGBT+ identification has spiraled far out of control.
Re: Unpopular Opinion...
(Anonymous) 2023-08-04 02:51 pm (UTC)(link)"however, i developed the theory that it also has partly to do with the aggression people experience and dish out online. people so often feel the need to have to justify and defend their words and actions by validating them with these conditions ... sometimes people think they have to preface their wants with "please help me, i have [condition]" in order to get people to look at it"
This is very insightful, and have come to the same conclusion as you. I have unfortunately found it to be true sometimes: someone's admission of trauma or identification with a marginalized identity lends them authority or validity in a certain situation. It shouldn't have to be that way, and I would argue social spaces with such (unusually unspoken) requirements are harmful. Unfortunately there are a lot of pockets like this on the internet, from subreddits to Discord servers and even group texts among friends.
It dilutes the word trauma if people use it to describe things that don't quite meet a certain threshold, and it encourages people to make their traumas/marginalization a larger part of their identity than is probably healthy. It also leads to strange phenomena like relatively privileged people who REALLY want to be oppressed and attempt to claim victimhood in unexpected ways, as well as people applying the perpetrator/victim dynamic in situations where it is not really appropriate.
I do worry about super online young people, especially lgbtq kids who primarily find community/friends online, internalizing this kind of thinking into adulthood. I don't think it's healthy to learn to use your marginalization as a social defense and I don't think it contributes to personal growth; after all, being disabled or mentally ill (or lactose intolerant lol) isn't an excuse if you treat someone poorly.
I read an essay a while back that I thought was interesting and was related to this subject. Warning, it's pretty long, and apologies if you like Hannah Gadsby as the author really rips into her, but the author is an older queer activist who shares a different perspective I don't see often. I don't agree with everything in it, but the general idea rings true for me. I highly recommend it! :)
https://yasminnair.com/your-trauma-is-your-passport-hannah-gadsby-nanette-and-global-citizenship/
Re: Unpopular Opinion...
(Anonymous) 2023-08-04 03:50 pm (UTC)(link)Re: Unpopular Opinion...
(Anonymous) 2023-08-04 04:23 pm (UTC)(link)She has more writing here: https://www.currentaffairs.org/author/yasmin-nair
Re: Unpopular Opinion...
(Anonymous) 2023-08-04 11:03 pm (UTC)(link)Re: Unpopular Opinion...
(Anonymous) 2023-08-04 03:28 pm (UTC)(link)very poignant, thank you for your perspective (genuine)
Re: Unpopular Opinion...
(Anonymous) 2023-08-04 03:55 pm (UTC)(link)Which is one reason why I tend to avoid people who have many of those identifiers, especially on a website that has nothing to do with them, because it often does come across more as 'I have this, so you can't chastise me for my actions' than truly 'sorry if I misunderstand something! I have X and sometimes have trouble!' (again, this is mainly with those who have multiple mental illness identifiers)
I definitely agree with the good intentions, but have always agreed with the 'the path to hell is lined with good intentions'. They can so often go wrong, and as you said, those identifiers can be used to harm the people that are using them.
Along with the idea that the other post brought up, about people using them and NOT having the condition, but only a basic understanding (OCD = obssessive cleaning of hands, or needing everything symmetrical, or being intensely clean) of the mental illness. It perpetuates the stereotypes.