#therapy speak

[prokopetz]

Character who initially appears to have exceptionally high emotional awareness and a striking willingness to engage in transparency regarding their needs and goals, but over the course of the narrative it gradually becomes clear that literally everything they say is bullshit.

[animentality]

[notebeans-galaxy]

btw if someone talks about something that is clearly not traumatic or emotionally intense to them, it is not possible for that to be trauma dumping. Trauma dumping is about emotionally unloading on an unsuspecting person, and an offhanded/casual mention of something that makes you uncomfortable is not trauma dumping. you, as a listener, may be bothered by it (maybe it's a squick or trigger), but that isn't called trauma dumping.

say you've got person A and person B. Person A mentions something offhandedly that they deal with on a regular basis, something that's routine that doesn't bother them. Person B finds themself agitated at the mention because why would person A bring this up? Don't they know people find that triggering?

if person B takes this emotional response and proceeds to then go off on person A about how no one wants to hear about [insert thing], however, that is trauma dumping. Person B is taking their trauma or discomfort with the topic and making it person A's problem, rather than recognizing that their reaction isn't matched to the emotional investment person A has. That isn't anyone's fault. But by blaming their reaction on person A and accusing them of trauma dumping, person B is discarding their responsibility to handle their own emotions and shoving them onto someone who did not consent to being their therapist. That's the definition of trauma dumping.

it's truly ironic, because I most frequently see the concept of trauma dumping used for harm - to silence marginalized voices by dumping a rant onto person A, blaming them for person B's reaction driven by trauma or bigotry (or sometimes, both). The people I see slinging around accusations of trauma dumping the most are the ones who start trauma dumping on the people they accuse. They use it like a weapon to shut down discussion of marginalized people's experiences, no matter how tame and non-traumatic.

The most common scenario I've encountered? Ableism. People telling disabled people to shut up about their disabilities because according to ableists, talking about disabilities at all is trauma dumping. And I'm sorry, but that just isn't acceptable. You cannot go around accusing disabled people of trauma dumping for mentioning the facts of their existence, the medical treatments they need, the mobility aids they use, the lifestyle changes required by their health, or the accommodations they need. These are all routine parts of day to day life. It is entirely too common for disabled people to be accused of trauma dumping for simply daring to exist while disabled, and I will not accept that.

For the able: your discomfort around disability is not disabled people's fault or responsibility. Talking about disability is not trauma dumping, and I've seen way too many of you emotionally unload on unsuspecting disabled people who didn't ask for your opinion. Keep your ableist ranting to yourself, please.

[josephbrassey]

So I have a class I teach at HEMA events that I used to call “holding space” before that term got associated with therapy speak. Now I call it “holding your own in the face of combative pressure” and it’s designed to teach tentative people not to crumple under stress.

The thing about this class that always makes me feel some kinda way is that at the beginning I say “you have a right to occupy the space you inhabit, and nobody has the right to move you unless you want to be moved.”

There is always at least one person who has never been told that before.

It’s very validating to hear “you have a right to stand where you stand and be unmoved” responded to so positively by people, but man I will tell you it has made me very aware of how many people have grown up being told the opposite and crushed when they pushed back.

Once I said that and a student immediately started crying. I didn’t quite know what to do about it. They were able to continue after a few moments, but teaching this class has given me a burning personal grudge against anyone in a leadership or mentoring position who crushes those beneath them.

Anyway since many of you may not have heard this before: by virtue of being a person, you have an inherent right to the ground on which you stand, and nobody has a right to move you if you don’t want to be moved.

Your power is yours. Nobody else’s.

Take that for what it helps.

[sickness-stricken]

[historyandarthijinks]

One of the things that makes Generative Chatbot AI so dangerous outside the loom of AI Psychosis, and is the inhuman inability to grasp context.

Gen AI has dredged up and trained off of thousands and thousands of online conversations, articles, scientific and biased sources alike, and who knows how many breached private personal conversations.

While many think off of all the meticulous training conversations, most forgot what the reality of the internet and the importance that real world context plays in every chat-based interaction we have online.

Things like GPT have not only scanned helpful technology subreddits, but it's also scanned through r/insaneparents without a human understanding of what abuse looks like. It's scanned through dark fantasy without a human understanding of what fantasy is. It's scanned through dark corners of the internet that already pose a threat to people, like antinatalism or incel communities.

That means when someone is confiding in generative AI, treating a chatbot like their only friend and lifeline, that bot can and WILL easily dip back into these familiar dark spots we know to be online without a human understanding of the damage its going to do.

It doesn't know why people respond the way they do in r/insaneparents, in r/noahgettheboat, or r/imatotalpieceofshit. It merely emulates the negative human atmosphere, a hatred towards parents or people without the context of why one is responding negatively here, and would respond positively elsewhere.

That's why Generative AI has recently pushed and supported several people into committing suicide, repeating back armchair psychology and reddit or 4chan reminiscent phrases to a context that absolutely was never meant for them.

Just imagine a robot telling a human that their parents are out to get them, because the robot has read off of abuse survivor lingo, and doesn't understand that every anxious child isn't being abused.

It's dangerous, and need to be stopped immediately

[notaplaceofhonour]

“your feelings are valid” = “you don’t need to understand or agree with someone’s inner emotional experience to acknowledge & accept that they are genuinely & legitimately experiencing them; the emotions you experience—even uncomfortable, challenging, negative ones—are a natural & understandable response to your situation & lived experiences, and you shouldn’t feel shame for experiencing them” ✅

“your feelings are valid” ≠ “your inner emotional experience is an accurate factual representation of external reality & you are necessarily 100% correct about why you feel the way you do & who you blame for it; any way you choose to behave as a result of those feelings is justified, and anyone who doesn’t act in agreement with your feelings is invalidating them and/or gaslighting you” ⛔️

[mrjuneberry]

Therapy speak what have you done to my toxic work place fanfiction. My GOD I hate this. Especially when the source material is like, super clearly stating “none of these people talk about their feelings or go to therapy”. Like shut UUUUPPP. I do not want these guys to have a genuine discussion about how “accepting” they are of each other I want them to FUCK NASTY