InsaneJournal

Tweak says, "Blame OHIO!"

Willow (the_willow) wrote,
@ 2009-06-24 18:42:00

Current mood:	upset
Entry tags:	+ ijay, +deewee, heads up!, online: journaling systems

Heads Up
DW doesn't have viewing filters and I just read something in my general going down my reading list that upset me all over again. So for right now I will only be checking my iJay reading list, where I can filter things. Because I don't actually want to drop people off my reading list (at least I don't think so at this time)

Look, it's more 'keeping myself safe' like a good little survivor. Though however would I have thought of this, without others to tell me what to do. /end sarcasm.

(Yep, still pissed).

(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)

my tl:dr reply - Pt1

the_willow
2009-06-24 09:34 pm UTC (link)

I don't know that Zvi specifically believes posting words of warning to be onerous and troublesome. I think a grand sweep/collection of the otherside has been made and everyone there is now being painted with the same brush.

My understanding of Zvi's position is that she personally doesn't like spoilers and she therefore understands people who find warnings to be spoilers of what happens in a fic. That she also believes warnings to involve spoiling the fic and she dislikes that. Disliking it, however, doesn't mean she thinks warnings are bad. It's a personal opinion.

The hump/hurdle/knot that Zvi doesn't seem to understand (as far as how people are viewing her words - and this is of course all my opinion) is that she's come across as saying that there are all these other tools out there (reviews, asking a friend to read a fic, emailing the author, etc) so why are people not utilizing those when a fic doesn't have a warning on it. Why are they reading it and then being upset if it did have something triggery. It might not have, but there was a chance it did. And if it did, boom, they've been hurt and it could have been avoided.

And I personally don't believe she understands that an author warning for a fic, gives those who might be triggered autonomy to make a decision. They don't have to depend on a third party to speak up. It's like a curb cut, it's there and it can be used. There's no need to contact the local government and ask for one, thus involving more of one's time and energy.

I don't think she (and several others), understand that there are so many things and so many ways survivors have to be vigilant. And putting warnings on fic is so simple compared to what would be needed to counter-act the vigilance in the rest of a survivor's life. That the comparison is being made about how simple a warning is, compared to; avoiding commercials and tv shows and books and comics and and magazines and talk radio and the beach with bikinis or certain foods, colours, odors, shapes, situations, people, people in uniform, types of people ... (the list goes on).

It seems to me that survivors understand boundaries and respect of boundaries in a way non survivors don't. And many non survivors are NOT hearing survivors say 'You are disrespecting my boundaries / my ability to form my own boundaries when you neglect/decide not to put a warning on your fic'.

The fact that many survivors are constantly having to reaffirm their rights and ability to make a choice for themselves is being totally lost - if it was ever recognized in the first place.

I've said before that non survivors do not have the same concept of boundaries that survivors do and don't seem to understand (without it being explained at length) why those boundaries are important, why they are safe, why people respecting boundaries mean so much.

Not putting up warnings is, quite simply, not putting up boundaries on your fic. It is lessening the importance of boundaries for everyone, because the general you writer, doesn't need them for hirself.

But in general, the media that doesn't have boundaries on it? Are general fare. And that definition is everywhere. PG-13? Is a boundary. G says no boundaries are needed, there are no limitations, restrictions or prerequisites needed in order to enjoy the product.

And yes, in FANDOM when it comes to FICTION, that product may involve sex or sexual relationships, or darker themes. But a survivor cannot determine if the fic is something they can handle/something within their boundaries/their personal boundaries for what they can handle, without a warning.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

my tl:dr reply - Pt 2

the_willow
2009-06-24 09:40 pm UTC (link)

It's the second wtf cry among survivors, I think, that has them going 'WTF Shaming?!' - Because so many on the other side have very much come across as "Why if you've been raped, are you reading about sex in the first place?" And then that side not understanding they're pulling the same shaming and derailing that gets pulled on them by people who're anti-erotica.

Which is why I called them a bunch of hypocrites. It's apparently wrong for mainstream society to try and determine their sexuality, but they're coming across as if it's perfectly valid for them to question and label and determine the sexuality of survivors.

What you reading sex for?

What business you have reading about Real People In Fictionalized Situations?

And the concept that fandom might be a safe place for survivors to explore things, just like everyone else in fandom is -poof- a mystery of gigantic proportions. They need scientists to break out the 10year studies and explain how that could possibly be.

I'm not even gonna get into the 'It's Oppression' crackweeds, cause I just want to cut those mofos.

But yeah, I think it's a matter of not understand the importance of personal autonomy made available by simple consideration that has the otherside looking like selfish dillholes. And it's also why those involved in disable activism have been picking up on what's been going on and been further appalled, because this is something they fight daily.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	Re: my tl:dr reply - Pt 2 impertinence 2009-06-24 11:20 pm UTC (link)
	Thank you so much for posting this. It's lucid, to the point, and really really relevant in this ongoing conversation. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Re: my tl:dr reply - Pt 2

the_willow
2009-06-24 11:24 pm UTC (link)

It kind of just came out when I started to reply to Sami. All the stuff in my head had had time to percolate. I'm gladdened it could give someone a breathing moment and a place to point to.

Thank you, for being honest in your journal (though I couldn't read the entry) and for swinging back each lob of bs that's been flung, to the best of your ability. I've been on the frontlines and the object of all the rage when privilege gets called out and I know how exhausting it is.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Re: my tl:dr reply - Pt 2

impertinence
2009-06-24 11:32 pm UTC (link)

I'll be honest with you: I couldn't reread it. I tried and ended up having to stop.

Hell, you've been on the frontlines when I'm one of the people being an epic dickbag. Thank you for your continued strength in all this. I'm lucky to be in a position where the only people who are disagreeing with me are people I don't know well. You'll be in my thoughts as this continues; I hope stuff works out for you.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: my tl:dr reply - Pt 2

sami.dreamwidth.org
2009-06-24 11:46 pm UTC (link)

I second Willow's appreciation. It's such a relief, when there's a fight that needs to be fought that you can't handle, that someone else is taking it up.

Also, Willow, thanks for your explanation. I'll try not to come to conclusions that are too negative towards Zvi (although there are a number of people who don't get any more of an out on being deemed total dicks than insistent racefailers did, with me - I don't care if "they're a nice person" in other ways, if you fail on the internet you FAIL IN REAL LIFE).

I've had at least one person unsubscribe from my DW journal after I made my last post - and I don't, even slightly, regret that, because if you're the kind of asshole who sides with the latest round of Forces of Evil, then frankly I don't want you reading my journal, you know?

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

the_willow
2009-06-24 11:57 pm UTC (link)

How people respond to and interact with Zvi about this is something she has to handle and something I have to handle. I'm not going to insist people not be mad at her because it hurts me. I'm mad at her myself. It's valid.

What's extra upsetting is when it feels like things have moved beyond discussing facts to making suppositions or assumptions about her or what will happen next (vent gossip - which I'm not claiming you did) I don't have the energy find all the places where that's happening and make a comment there. I'm not even sure if it'd matter if I did.

But in my space, if someone brings up how hurt they are about it, if there's something I can clarify, I will.

As for someone unsubbing you - DW doesn't have filters. They could be trying to avoid all conversation to keep themselves safe. But if that's not the case, yeah - I wouldn't want someone who didn't see, understand or comprehend my life, reading about it.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

sami.dreamwidth.org
2009-06-25 01:57 am UTC (link)

*nods* It's not that I think it's up to (either of) you to police reactions to her, etc - it's more that, when someone has done something that pings badly for me, but someone whose judgement I respect and who is in a position to speak with reasonable authority tells me, "No, I don't think they meant it like that, I think it's more [x]," then I'll reserve opinion on them pending further evidence. Like, in my head, she's currently tagged: mostly awesome / can be less thoughtful than is ideal / unlikely to intend malice. Whereas, in the absence of better information, liviapenn is currently tagged can be awesome / bitch can still kiss my ass. For now, at least.

At the same time, I'm not reading her until this has all blown over, for obvious reasons.

Chas just got up, and I was talking to him about this a bit, because it has me a little stressed out today and that is relevant to his interests. He thinks that possibly a big part of it is that thing where people screw up, get called on it, and get defensive, and then end up entrenched in untenable positions because they can't admit they were just wrong.

Not saying this is where Zvi is coming from, btw - other people.

He has a point, but it's not a position I really understand, if only because I know that admitting fault is in one's own self-interests. If you screw up, and people call you on it, and you say, "Yeah, you're right. That there was wrong. I'm sorry. I'll try not to do that again," then people forgive. People recognise that there can be miscommunication and there can be honest mistakes with no ill intentions. Everybody wins, that way, because you learn a way to be a better person, and you stop perpetuating harm, and maybe make new friends.

Defensiveness means you keep hurting people, and you make yourself more of a jerk.

You know as well as just about anyone that I myself can fuck up in grand style, but I really don't get the impression that you lost all possible respect for me when I said that yes, I was in fact wrong.

I've been wrong elsewhere recently and I'm still discussing that with someone - I think that would have gone nowhere if I'd just said, "No, I'm right."

What I can't get over most of all in this, though, is the attitude that it's okay if something is *causing people harm* because it's their responsibility to try and deal with stuff, no matter how much harder they're making it.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: my tl:dr reply - Pt1
(Anonymous)
2009-06-25 05:03 am UTC (link)

I kind of wandered here from elsewhere and this bit in particular hit a nerve for me:

I don't think she (and several others), understand that there are so many things and so many ways survivors have to be vigilant. And putting warnings on fic is so simple compared to what would be needed to counter-act the vigilance in the rest of a survivor's life. That the comparison is being made about how simple a warning is, compared to; avoiding commercials and tv shows and books and comics and and magazines and talk radio and the beach with bikinis or certain foods, colours, odors, shapes, situations, people, people in uniform, types of people ... (the list goes on).

I have PTSD, not as a result of sexual trauma. Most of my triggers are luckily not things that it's THAT common to run into in daily life. (The one that is I mostly manage to handle when I need to if I get a chance to prepare myself for it first.)

Even with that - with my triggers not being things I'm likely to just run into walking down the street or going to the supermarket - when I started college recently I had to make special arrangements with the disability office Just In Case a trigger came up in some way in a class. Since several of my triggers are visual, I have to pre-vet tv, movies, and other forms of entertainment.

On top of that, I have to keep a constant mental check running on the way I'm interacting with the world to make sure I'm not falling back into unhealthy habits of behavior (avoidance, depression, etc.) in response to stress, and to watch for 'warning signs' of a bout of depression or frequent anxiety.

It's *exhausting*. And it never occurred to me that part of the issue for some people may be they just don't understand the reality of that sort of thing. (Note that this is all AFTER I've had some therapy and developed some coping mechanisms and so on.)

Thanks for making that connection in my head for me.

(quiet000001 on lj, quiet1 on dw. can't remember my ij password. :) )

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

the_willow
2009-06-25 05:11 am UTC (link)

This whole conversation illuminated for me the fact that if I'm using the words raw and overwhelmed to describe my reaction to fandom, I was quite likely being triggered and coping on autopilot and not realizing until I started paying attention, that this was a trigger I could just avoid.

Being in therapy is no guarantee that all the pieces of one's behavior will click immediately - especially if one is just used to having to adjust against the rest of the world.

As for the running daily mental checklist being exhausting, I've discovered that the only people who nod 'Yes!' when I go through the list, are others dealing with PTSD. Many are boggled by what's in the list, the length of the list, or the fact that some things are deeper than they think of and break down even further. I have a hard time remembering myself sometimes until my therapist breaks it down for me and I realize that some days I'm juggling 10 emotiona/mental things before breakfast.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

(Anonymous)
2009-06-25 10:38 pm UTC (link)

Being in therapy is no guarantee that all the pieces of one's behavior will click immediately - especially if one is just used to having to adjust against the rest of the world.

Some of the comments that got the biggest 'wtf?' responses from me were the ones talking about therapy as if you go in and the therapist waves a magic wand or gives you some medication and says 'bippity-boppity-boo' and you're fine.

I mentioned therapy mainly because I think one of the things it can do fairly effectively (at least for some people) is help you come up with decision rules and develop techniques to keep those mental checklists to what's actually necessary - so the fact that I'm doing all these things even AFTER a therapist has helped me maximize my ability to cope is quite telling as to the real 'cost' emotionally and mentally, even when I haven't been triggered by something.

Like, I could see someone dismissing my list as "oh, you're just being paranoid and overly cautious if you're doing all of that!" and no, actually, that behavior is actually what a therapist agrees is sensible and necessary for me to function to a reasonable degree in daily life - it's already been pruned of the stuff that is unrealistic or unreasonable when weighed against the cost to my quality of life.

(quiet1/quiet000001 again. :) )

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

the_willow
2009-06-26 08:13 am UTC (link)

I'm just nodding. Just. nodding.

My former therapist (of 9 years) called it 'Tools For The Toolbox'. And my therapy experience with her was all about acknowledging and creating the best tools for the tool box.

Because the truth is, some of what you do before becoming involved in therapy is helpful and there isn't actually something better a therapist can suggest. Therapy, to me/for me, has been about honing things down for my tool box and gaining confidence in my toolbox and myself.

The amount of cluelessness going on as regards therapy, especially in fiction fandom is one of my larger dislikes (it is seriously too big to be called a peeve). And many of the times I've started to writer (often not finishing) darker themed fic was because I was so fed up with FANDOM UR DOIN IT RONG!

They get abuse wrong, frequently. Mental abuse wrong, frequently. Emotional abuse wrong, 90% of the damn time - at least when I was more freely reading fic. These days I'm more careful for myself and too damn disgusted. Verbal abuse? Wrong wrong wrong wrong.

The Lifetime Channel is NOT the Discovery Channel!

And I'm just going off on a rant in reply to you - my total bad there. But yes, no concept at all that therapy is work. I have noted for myself that the general feeling seems to be that therapy and those needing it/unable to work or function without it is some kind of mental health equivalent of 'the welfare queen' myth.

Invisible disabilities get no respect.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

(Read comments) -