(no subject)

[doomhamster]

One of the things I just can’t understand re: antis and their ilk:

How can anyone NOT get that consuming or creating depictions of a form of trauma you yourself were the victim of can in fact be cathartic and comforting?

“I can be in control of an event that was wholly out of my control IRL. I can have everything come out so much better… or I can have my favorite character go through the same thing I did and end up totally broken, and that will make me feel a little bit less ashamed of how I broke when it happened to me.”

This isn’t DIFFICULT, folks.

And no, not all people work like this. Some traumatized people are indeed better off just never being reminded of their trauma or seeing it depicted. But here’s the thing: you won’t find darkficcers demanding that such people read our stuff, or write traumatic things into their own stories! We don’t tend to go around denying someone else’s experience based on “trying to avoid any mention of your trauma is not a valid coping mechanism~!”

Comments

[virtualvoyages]

There's also the odd logic that if it's bad for anybody, it's bad for everybody. Which isn't how most (any?) things work. Peanuts are bad for you if you're allergic to them, but a perfectly fine part of your diet if your not. Just to use one really obvious example. If they applied the same logic they use for fiction to food, they'd die. I don't think there's any food that isn't bad for someone.

[doomhamster]

YES THIS EXACTLY. Some people like peanuts! Some do not! Or they like roasted peanuts but not if they're salted, for ex. And there are those who are allergic, and then there are ALSO malnourished people for whom peanuts can be a life saver because of all the fat and protein!