You must log in or register to comment.
According to my licensed psychiatrist, trauma is anything hurtful or harmful that impacts your behavior or patterns of thinking. The clinical term is actually more broad than the general public conception of the word.
Why do they censor ‘aubsive’?
Act*al psychology
Because two of the big platforms might cut off your traffic for using any of a long list of arbitrary words.
It’s pretty fucking disgusting to self censor inoffensive language because an app might stop showing your memes to other mouthbreathers.
It’s pretty fucking disgusting to self censor inoffensive language
It’s disgusting to need to do it. I won’t blame poster/commenter for doing it so that their shit doesn’t get deleted.
They don’t need to do it, their post wont get deleted. It will only not get promoted by the platform, it can still be shared and viewed directly by users.
Or disgusting that algorithms with arbitrary rules comtrol so much of what so many people see.
On some platforms OCR reads it and filters.
Fuck th*se pl*tforms, th*n.
**** ********* *** ********?
**** ******* ******** *******!
**** ******* ***.
Jeez, right in the *********? Brutal.
** shreds, *** ***?
Because they’re annoying.
You mean anno*ing?
I can’t be the only one, so:
Narcissistic personality disorder is a mental health condition in which people have an unreasonably high sense of their own importance. They need and seek too much attention and want people to admire them. People with this disorder may lack the ability to understand or care about the feelings of others.
Worth keeping in mind the reason NPD happens is when a child is abused and does not develop an inherent sense of their own self worth, one possible coping mechanism is to create a false ego, which by necessity is bigger than a healthy person’s ego so it can have resilience and redundancy. It’s brittle, fragile, so they build it bigger. If a pwNPD had a normal size ego, being delicate as it is it would shatter in an average day from all the normal ego damage that people naturally need to endure.
The narcissism of NPD isn’t a disorder. It’s more like a blood clot, a scab. If you tear a scab off, you’ll just make someone bleed again. It’s the same with NPD. Damage to the ego is what causes the actual damage to the person. That, and discrimination. The disorder is the state of the brain being injured and needing that barrier in place to be functional. We consider narcissism part of the disorder of NPD in the same way we consider a scab to be a part of a wound.
A lot of people say “stop being narcisstic! Get a smaller ego, and your disorder will go away!” That isn’t how mental disorders work. It’s dangerous advice that can and does get people seriously hurt. A person living with NPD who loses their grandiosity can suffer trauma, can self harm, can take action that results in loss of relationships and jobs, and can even attempt suicide.
The only issue I have with this is people like Trump who actively harm others because they do not seek treatment for their disorder. I very much want people like them to suffer trauma over a loss of grandiosity. And I want it to happen in public and be excruciating.
Who told you Trump has NPD? If it was some rando joe schmoe, they’re not qualified to make that judgement because they’re not an expert. And if it was a qualified psychiatrist, they were breaking the APA’s rules. The APA forbids psychiatrists from diagnosing celebrities with mental disorders. It’s called the Goldwater rule. You can’t just do psychiatry at random people on the street, celebrity or no celebrity. You have to talk to a patient before you can diagnose them. And if a psychiatrist has spoken to Trump, then doctor patient confidentiality applies and revealing a diagnosis would be a massive breach of professional ethics.
This is even from the Wikipedia article on the Goldwater rule:
In 2016 and 2017, a number of psychiatrists and clinical psychologists faced criticism for violating the Goldwater rule, as they claimed that Donald Trump displayed “an assortment of personality problems, including grandiosity, a lack of empathy, and ‘malignant narcissism’”, and that he has a “dangerous mental illness”, despite having never examined him.
That could be a reason, but I wouldn’t say that is the reason.
In the absence of scientific consensus, I trust my own lived experiences and those of other people with the disorder I know. Science is so behind on personality disorders. Modern psychologists have about the same amount of understanding of personality disorders that Isaac Newton had of chemistry. And Newton was an alchemist.
Dear Americans: Psychotic doesn’t mean what you think it means. Stop using it please.
Yeah it does, you sound psychotic.
Stop gaslighting me you narcissist, or I’ll report you for ab*se!
You just triggered my trauma of when I was gaslighting my grill.
I agree with the other three, but this is wrong about “narcissists”. “Narcissistic Personality Disorder” is a diagnosis, but calling someone a “narcissist” isn’t. That’s just a description of someone’s personality. It’s much older than the diagnosis, going back to the Greek myth of Narcissus. The diagnosis doesn’t get to co-opt the much older usage.
You’re not speaking ancient Greek, mate, you’re speaking English, and your use is informed by the history of the English language. The use of Nar******t in pop culture is largely informed by Christopher Lach’s 1979 book The Culture Of Narcissism, which made the argument that contemporary American culture was normalising clinical NPD. You didn’t learn to call people nar******ts by reading ancient Greek myths, and I know that for a fact because the ancient greeks didn’t go around using the word. To them, it was just some guy’s name. You learned the word from someone who learned the word from someone who learned the word from Lasch’s book, and from the ableist books that came after. Your folk etymology explanation that the pop culture use comes directly from Greek is missing a lot of important and relevant intermediate steps.
Well, at least people were saved from terrible tra*ma by cl*verly h*ding the “u” in “ab*sive”. Can’t tell that’s what it says at all…
Oh this word might hurt someone, lets skewer it so not only does it bring all the focus to the word itself, but forces people to think about the word specifically and how big of a deal it should be!
Whoever did this really needs a smack upside the head
Trigger warning: the word tra*ma
I like to think of myself as pretty supportive, but is there really any evidence that specifically reading the word “trauma” is traumatic? And if so, is the removal of the “U” really a solution to that?
Because it seems like asterixing one letter is more of a performative measure to signify ones support for the overall cause rather than an actually means to reduce suffering.
How close can the “U” be before it starts to upset someone?
“Tra u ma”
Uuuuuuuuuuuuu Tra ma Uuuuuuuuuuuuuu
I don’t believe that someone who is affected by the word “trauma” would view the above examples with a complete non-reaction because the U is vaguely obfuscated.
Like, we can agree that the asterix is just a display of consideration to someone, rather than an actually effective measure, right?
It’s actually counterproductive! People who want to screen stuff about abuse from their internet experience can set up filters. Those filters are broken when you censor the relevant words!
Yeah but does that matter if using the asterisk helps those not the victim of abuse feel better about their day? They are the real victims 🤣
Err… The phrase “Gaslighting” came from the movie Gaslight.
The idea of being “Triggered” came from Trigger Warnings.
Psychology may have their own understanding of those terms, but I don’t think it has the original usages or widest popularization.
Trigger warning came from the psychological term for situations or stimuli that bring on panic attacks or obsessive thoughts.
Okay, but didn’t what happen in that movie in line with the actual psychology column?
Look this is an art imitating life imitating art discussion that I don’t think its going to go anywhere, I’m just saying, on the one hand I appreciate the post trying to clarify things for people misusing these terms but on the other hand I don’t think it’s being honest with how they’re being misused.
If someone doesn’t lie to you and pretend it’s not a lie, that can still be the start of Gaslighting and should be called out as quickly as possible so people know they can’t do that.
That’s not a misuse or problem that needs to be corrected just because it’s not exactly what happened in a 1930s movie. Which is by the way still pop-culture not “actual” psychology.
A psychologist didn’t come up with it, an artist/writer did. Science doesn’t get to claim all authority all the time and humanity should be relearning the fact that art and culture DOES produce knowledge.
Posts like this, the dismissal of cultural or “pop” phenomena as less authoritive is part of why we don’t - that’s my problem with it, okay?
- Take a learners dictionary and pair it with an advanced one.
- Pic some controversial words.
- Compare verbs against nouns, nouns against adjectives so the definitions aren’t actually the same but look like they should be.
- Completely make up the last “simple” definition so it seems like you are making some profound point that’s actually just a dumb comment.
- Call the side with the stupid comment you made up “pop psychology” so people can see in plain sight what gaslighting actually looks like.
It’s the wojack/Chad meme of “your side is represented as crying wojack, my side is represented with chiseled Chad version, therefore I win”
And the “umm akshyully this is what gaslighting REALLY is” just makes me think someone made this whole thing just to try and prove to another person they aren’t a gaslighting narcissist who doesn’t believe someone has ptsd and has lasting issues stemming from it.
Besides, There doesn’t have to be some elaborate ongoing scheme for something to be gaslighting.
Ab*sive
