While I am otherwise 100% in agreement with the notion that distress tolerance is important to have and practice, I am wondering where you're supposed to draw the line between what you should and shouldn't be expected to put up with.
Your post is obviously pro-trans, for example, but I have previously seen arguments from a radfem perspective that objecting to being referred to using certain pronouns/gendered language, or generally being categorised as your birth sex for admin/social purposes, represents poor distress tolerance. The argument being that nobody is actually hurting you by doing that, and any distress comes from being unable to control people's opinion of you, which is unhealthy. That kind of "you're only unhappy about this thing because you're too immature to endure it" version puts me off the notion somewhat.
Do you think there's a clear-cut distinction between unreasonable distress and objectionable distress? Or is it more vibes-based?
Hi! I love this ask, it's excellent, thank you for sending it. That post frankly went viral in whole new ways (I have never gotten this many notes before, wtf) and I can't address every reaction but this one covers a really important point.
Distress tolerance does not equal tolerating bad behaviour. It is about lowering your instinctual reaction to bad behaviour so you can address it.
So regarding the aforementioned trans example - the idea of just putting up with being misgendered is the shitty resilience narrative most of us are taught. This is the narrative that says being upset is ruder than the thing that upset you, or that putting up with bad behaviour makes you "the bigger person". Fuck that.
Being misgendered/deadnamed is upsetting! It is a completely reasonable reaction to be upset!
What isn't great is having that upset take over your thoughts, well-being, and ruin your day. Or, on the extreme side, have it trigger panic attacks, anxiety attacks, or volatile anger. That's not great. That royally sucks.
Discomfort tolerance is about being able to handle the discomfort without it taking you over. Being able to hear your deadname without melting down. Being able to be upset without losing control.
It does not mean being a doormat.
In this case, discomfort tolerance goes something like: "This is wrong and mean of this person. I am angry/upset/sad. I don't deserve to be treated this way." And then using discomfort tolerance round 2 (electric boogaloo) to follow up with the hard conversations. At work that may mean speaking to a manager/HR. At home that may be telling a relative, "I will no longer respond to that name, so if you call me by it, don't expect me to hear you."
I have seen a lot of people in the notes who are upset that I equated things like sensory issues (misophonia) to bigotry (racism), and I think it may be because they assume I'm telling them to just suck it up or they're just as bad as a racist. That is not what I am saying. I am saying that learning how to tolerate a level of discomfort gives you room to breathe and think clearly.
Some discomfort is irrational (racism). Learning discomfort tolerance means someone can feel uncomfortable about a race but, crucially, *not act on that discomfort with bigoted behaviour*. Not only that, but discomfort tolerance is step one to dismantling that type of discomfort. You have to be able to sit with it and deconstruct why you feel uncomfortable and how to address it.
Some discomfort is inescapable, or comes from external sources you can't control (other people's bigotry, or chronic illnesses/disabilities). Learning discomfort tolerance in these scenarios helps you set clear boundaries, tolerate hard conversations (confrontation is so so uncomfortable!), and not have your day ruined by insensitive assholes.
Hopefully this answers your question!
discoholicmusic
origamiaround
kaledo-art
titsay
izzy806
gummygunk
