Published on 12, July, 2020
“What doesn’t kill you makes you stronger” is an outdated statement that has no basis in reality. I don’t think damaging someone’s mind with something like trauma is making someone stronger but impairing them for the rest of their lives. Stress eventually does kill people because it weakens a person’s body by increasing their heart rate and weakening their immune systems making them more susceptible to infection or other diseases like cancer, teeth decay, etc. and that sure isn’t making anyone stronger.
The truth is that what doesn’t kill can either eventually kill you in the end or leave you mentally damaged for the rest of your life. I know the statement is a manipulation tactic that is forced upon the population to try and make everyone the same by making having emotions and being upset and hurt by something as a weakness due to toxic masculinity, misogyny and racism that was created by cis white straight male supremacy.
Honestly a lot of our social “norms”, like not holding people accountable, and stuff like this all can be pinpointed back to cis white straight male supremacy and as an Autistic who’s also Hispanic (I’m half Puerto Rican so not only have I dealt with discrimination for being gay and Autistic, I have also had to deal with racism), I see this a lot more clearly than allistics, neurotypicals and even white Autistics that a lot of ideologies in both the UK and the US (where I am from) come from white colonizers who forced their way of thinking onto those who didn’t conform to what they think is how people should function.
Indigenous and Hispanics have pretty much had their history erased. With Puerto Ricans, for example, our original Indigenous ancestry has gone extinct due to colonization by the Spaniards so there’s no way to know how Indigenous people of the Americas once lived before being forced to live with cis white straight male supremacy ideologies on how a society should be. For all we know the indigenous people of America held people accountable for their actions and had them make things right.
I mean seriously when you look throughout history with cis white straight male supremacy its always about not holding cis white men accountable for their actions, whether that’s colonization, the enslavement of an entire ethnic group, forcing their religious beliefs on everyone and so on and so forth.
My point is a lot of our “social norms” are cis white straight male supremacy ideologies that have always been for the benefit of anyone but minority groups, things like “what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger” has a deep ties to racism and misogyny when you look at our history. Think about it, before women had to be married to a man and couldn’t divorce him at all for any reason, regardless of if they were r*ped, beaten, cheated on, etc. women had to be “strong” housewives and sit there and endure and conform to that despite the mental harm and trauma they endured and I wouldn’t be surprised if many ended up dead because of it, whether by murder or stress eventually killing them.
So yeah the whole “what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger” is just outdated and has heavy ties to cis white straight male supremacy. As an Autistic person who’s also two other minority groups (gay and Hispanic), particularly one that has to deal with racism and white supremacy, this gets used to justify racism, homophobia and even the bigotry and mistreatment of Autistic people, and they can lead to other mental health problems such as anxiety, depression due to low self-esteem, fear for ones life, mistrust in authority figures like police or the justice systems in majority white countries, most, if not all, are rigged against BIPOC and mentally disabled people, and when you Autism into the mix, yeah just none is a good combination to deal with…
Yes, I agree with you that the saying 'what doesn't kill you makes you stronger' has been abused by either individuals or groups in order to sustain their sense of superiority, power and control over others that they believe are different to them. It is downright mental bullying, and a euphemistic way to say 'look at you, you are weak, you will never be one like us, so it is your fault that you can't cope with us and suffer'. In the same way people used to say 'big boys don't cry', 'grow a thick skin', or where I grew up in Germany 'an Indian (sic! Native American) knows no pain'
I am saddened that some readers take offence. Yes, you have lashed out onto those in generalised terms who have robbed or denied you of your identity, and the acts of those who have done this are unforgivable. Your hurt is more than obvious.
So is the hurt of those who feel offended, and unfortunately it seems to me that the camp of readers here is deeply divided between those who are deeply hurt and those who are for whatsoever reason unable to put themselves into the others' hurt.
I am white, 3rd generation immigrant British, straight and come from a monotheistic background. During my mid-life crisis I gradually added another label to my identity - Autistic. I grew up in Germany and was ostracised (sometimes aggressively but most often passively) for non being German. I was ostracised (more aggressively than passively) for my Autistic traits and behaviours. I had to learn the lesson that you cannot change others and make you accept or like you. A lot of people are caught up in their hectic lives that they don't give their brains time to readjust to those who are different - neurodivergent, gay, different cultural or ethnic background or the way they dress, speak, walk etc. And besides, as long as such people brain-tagged as 'different' remain in the minority, what's the point of adjusting? There are plenty of other people brain-tagged as 'normal' around to engage with. And that's the cruel dark side of human community and society.
Your response is admirable however we are a community of people who come from every ethnicity, gender and religion. We are all marginalized by every ethnicity, gender and religion.You are trying to play mediator to a group of victims from the majority of society in every possible reality.How can you defend someone trying to claim victim-hood to the majority on a site that understands society is against them?
The OP is WRONG. One does not come to the victims of reality to complain about the victims being perpetrators.Someone else with logical skills please correct me if I'm wrong!Would you call a person jumping out of the Twin Towers a coward because dying from falling was less painful than being burned alive?This whole thread is utter trash to any Autistic person with a brain. This is far left BS in which everyone is a victim without context or knowledge of history by the OP, coming to a place of victims trying to blame victims for their reality.The OP is either delusional or brainwashed by society. Who comes to a tower of people about to be burned by incendiary, who chose to jump to escape the reality of their fate?That is exactly what they did. They came to a site of every ethnicity and gender, marginalized by ALL of society, tried to divided them on race and gender and make themselves a victim of the 3rd degree.It's not only wrong, it's ABUSIVE.The people here are already victims of society. We are not going to sit by and let some vampire come along to try to suck our hellish lives into their victim-hood by dividing us by ethnicity, religion or whatever else and pander to their self imposed victim-hood.If I'm wrong, vote me down. Regardless I stand against this BS of a post where someone is coming here to seek victim-hood of the FAR FAR FAR left on a site that does not judge others because WE ARE ALL in this together.
I am not too sure about your reply to be totally honest.
The OP definitely colludes two thought processes, his own suffering for being different in multiple ways, and cultural suffering for being non-white, non-male, non-cis. It is definitely food for thought and should be given time to digest, rather than choosing to take personal offence and becoming emotive.
Looking into history, white male Christian cis controllers have fucked up a lot. Cultures were annihilated, people prosecuted and murdered in a sporting fashion. Our understanding of ethics and morality today have fortunately changed for the better, however the point that the OP is making, in that a lot of irreversible damage has been done, is valid.
Today we know that tolerance, inclusion and acceptance are highly valued, but this was not so for the vast majority of the past 2000 years. And so I think your allegory of the Twin Towers and the political rhetoric are misplaced.
The point I that was making was the issue of colluding individual suffering and using generalised terms. And taking the following allegory from applied psychology I find the OP has a valid reason, although it is debatable. Take a dog that has been mistreated by his owner. The owner is an adult male. The dog gets rescued, and the rescue centre give it all the TLC that can be offered and prepares it for rehoming. Despite all the love and nurture given the dog still has the trauma which is triggered by any adult male it encounters. It adopts the behaviour commonly known as 'once burnt twice shy and better safe than sorry', and although it was mistreated by just ONE male adult, it applies its passive-aggressive behaviour towards ALL male adults.
I personally have full understanding for the dog, not for the male adults that take personal offence and think 'wtf is wrong with that dog'
well to be accurate, written history started with the development of written language, which dates way before the Romans. Just to mention a few... Accadic, Sanskrit and Early Egyptian, besides Early Chinese. :)
its kinda more human civilisation than white civilisation though as every single ethnicity commits to wars all the time... just that written history is roman, it started with rome, and charts european history... other groups didnt write history, aside from china, which was like the rome of the east, so we see huge wars in chinese history... much bigger and vaster than european wars.... china had wars with battles of 1 million men on each side when europe was having tiny field wars of 50 men per side lol
Where did I write that I hate every white person? Direct reference please?
Au contraire, please reread.
'Yes I am against racism, in fact any ideology that divides people into hierarchical structures of superiority and inferiority - racism, ableism, sexism, whatever-ism. ' - I am against any ideology that writes on their flag 'we are better then them, and based on this claim it is ok for us to have more rights, privileges and power'.
' Not personally and individually , but identifying with a greater collective, we have historical dirt on our shoes, or blood on our hands. ' - You actually agree, as yes, leaders of white groups drawn their people in wars to fight not just against non-white but also against other white groups. It's still nothing to be proud of. Blood is blood. If you then think that the opposite of being proud of something is hating it, and therefore I hate every white person, then you are mistaken. I don't hate every white person, but I am certainly not proud of every aspect of the history of white civilisations, I am indeed ashamed of quite a few, even if I did not commit those atrocities myself.
'And of course not all Muslims are terrorists, that's ludicrous! There are close to 2 billion Muslims living in the world, five of which are my loving kind neighbours and their Biryani is to die for. Those five alone invalidate such idiocy.' - Not all Muslims are terrorists, equally not all White people are blood-spillers. My point is, once an argument is generalised and over-simplified it technically loses its validity, it is in fact a false statement. Sadly thought, it has not stopped a minority people to use for propaganda purposes in order to lead a larger number of their group and instigate against another group.
So if you see the OP like a rescue dog with a history of abuse, based on which it is highly cautious about any person he identifies as a possible next abuser, how would you progress? Blame the dog for its behaviour? Or encourage it to see the world through other eyes?
then in that case TikTok doesn't exist either because it was founded after 2010, is that your way of explaining the world?
NAS64261 said:And no, 'cis' short for 'cisgender' is a word.
no it isnt, because it was only made in recent times, and it didnt exist at all until 2010 and onwards.