Honestly at that point we’re hitting a really messy intersectional thing, because an awful lot of the people hitting that pit are mentally ill or are abuse/trauma survivors, and now we’re playing “whose disprivilege/trauma/pain is more important than whose” - and the thing is there isn’t an answer for that and mental illness (anxiety disorders, PTSD, depression, etc) is one of those lovely areas that very much plays “two people on the same side can be harming each other horribly” stuff as noted about survivors.
And it’s quite complicated to figure out, and people like to default to Oppression Points Picking (“okay you have severe major depressive disorder but this person is queer AND has severe major depressive disorder so clearly their pain is bigger and more important!”) however much people like to insist they don’t.
(And I’m saying this as a feminist and mentally ill person who thinks most feminists are absolutely shite at handling interactions with disabled/mentally ill men, because we like leaning on “BUT THEY HAVE MALE PRIVILEGE! So we don’t even have to think about that other angle! WOMEN HAVE MENTAL ILLNESS TOO HOW DARE YOU IMPLY IT’S IMPORTANT.”)
And I don’t think there’s an easy answer to that, because that being a problem doesn’t erase the institutional oppression problems of any group and those also need to be addressed and it’s all very complicated. But I actually kind of think that realizing there’s no way to apply rigid “you’re not allowed to be upset about the thing” across the board but that situations will inevitably be different is a first step.
no subject
Honestly at that point we’re hitting a really messy intersectional thing, because an awful lot of the people hitting that pit are mentally ill or are abuse/trauma survivors, and now we’re playing “whose disprivilege/trauma/pain is more important than whose” - and the thing is there isn’t an answer for that and mental illness (anxiety disorders, PTSD, depression, etc) is one of those lovely areas that very much plays “two people on the same side can be harming each other horribly” stuff as noted about survivors.
And it’s quite complicated to figure out, and people like to default to Oppression Points Picking (“okay you have severe major depressive disorder but this person is queer AND has severe major depressive disorder so clearly their pain is bigger and more important!”) however much people like to insist they don’t.
(And I’m saying this as a feminist and mentally ill person who thinks most feminists are absolutely shite at handling interactions with disabled/mentally ill men, because we like leaning on “BUT THEY HAVE MALE PRIVILEGE! So we don’t even have to think about that other angle! WOMEN HAVE MENTAL ILLNESS TOO HOW DARE YOU IMPLY IT’S IMPORTANT.”)
And I don’t think there’s an easy answer to that, because that being a problem doesn’t erase the institutional oppression problems of any group and those also need to be addressed and it’s all very complicated. But I actually kind of think that realizing there’s no way to apply rigid “you’re not allowed to be upset about the thing” across the board but that situations will inevitably be different is a first step.