Item — HN Reader

No expert, and fully expect to be flamed, but we are now living in a society that has discouraged "sucking it up" or "burying your emotions" for 30 years. It not really possible to study, at macro level, the impact of that thinking.

A lot of people just want to be a victim. They want to be special. They want sympathy.

4 comments

> A lot of people just want to be a victim. They want to be special. They want sympathy.

I dunno, in my experience, not really a lot of people?

And the people that did - and yes, they absolutely exist - seem to have some kind of disorder. They all probably would have benefited from therapy and/or medication. They probably do need sympathy (maybe not the way they wanted), may or may not have been victims, and are sort of special cases.

Most people just want to be normal, to have a job, to go see movies, to play games, to spend time with friends, partners, lovers, family.

This is just my life's experience though. Maybe I'm the weird one.

I think you might look harder, it's not necessarily overt. I'd bet it underpins a lot of peculiar political behaviors. I'd also say not always sympathy but sometimes revenge.

It's not about wanting sympathy. In peace and prosperity times, people has more time to reach adulthood and explore themselves, they don't have to suppress pain in order to survive. Not saying everyone, but many.

I'm no expert either, but for sure there are psychology and sociology studies about generational differences, openness, and things like that.

who has discouraged "sucking it up"? what systemic policies have changed to accommodate this? as far as I can tell, someone can explain how they're the victim to anyone and everyone they come across and no one will care. I can't see how anyone emotionally or materially benefits from saying they're a victim. they may want sympathy but they will not get it.

that said, I don't live in a coastal city where there might be more accommodations for such things. where I live, people are generally on their own to find the means to survive. but, in line with the theme of the post, I'm fairly certain people here have a lower life expectancy and generally lower health than people in places where there is a more robust support network. in which case, the body must, in fact, keep the score.

> who has discouraged "sucking it up"? what systemic policies have changed to accommodate this?

When I reported being assaulted, I was vigorously encouraged to attend counselling, and it was suggested to me that if I felt fine I should allow myself to be persuaded otherwise.

I have heard anecdotes of e.g. rape victims not being believed because they don't seem to be traumatised enough.

This is part of the "persecution of conservatives", where they "can't say a thing anymore". They obviously can, and still do, but feel their voices are being suppressed. The reality is that their opinion isn't popular anymore, and they're used to being listened to unconditionally, and can't stand that people don't agree with them anymore.

The annoying thing here is that it's simply not true, especially in regards to men. It's still the norm to be told to suck it up, or you're not a real man. It's toxic masculinity, and it's obvious that's taken on a massive rise in popularity, thanks to folks like Joe Rogan and the like.

> The annoying thing here is that it's simply not true, especially in regards to men. It's still the norm to be told to suck it up, or you're not a real man.

It's also the norm to be told that you need to be vulnerable and share your trauma and you're lesser if you don't. Men get shamed for both not being enough of a victim and being too much of a victim, and have no winning move.

> It's also the norm to be told that you need to be vulnerable and share your trauma and you're lesser if you don't.

I think the norm now is that you should share your trauma with a therapist, to help heal. I can't imagine telling anyone to share their trauma, regardless of gender.

> and have no winning move.

This is a common incel talking point, and to be honest I don't think it has basis in reality. It's totally fine to share with a therapist and I don't know who would criticize someone for it. If a friend criticizes you for going to therapy, they aren't a friend.

Should you be able to also share with your friend? Yeah, but there's also the concept of trauma dumping, where you use your friends as a therapist, and that has its own problems. Sometimes folks aren't in the right mental space to hear your problems, especially depending on the context (like, were you abused as a child? maybe they were too).

> This is a common incel talking point, and to be honest I don't think it has basis in reality. It's totally fine to share with a therapist and I don't know who would criticize someone for it. If a friend criticizes you for going to therapy, they aren't a friend.

> Should you be able to also share with your friend?

Why did you leap from talking about incels to talking about friends? It's not friends that are the problem, it's partners, for whom it really does seem to be normal to both expect and demand that you share your weaknesses with them, and then get the ick when you do.

> Why did you leap from talking about incels to talking about friends? It's not friends that are the problem, it's partners

Because most of the people saying this kind of stuff tend to be incels, who famously don't have partners.

But my point about friends also applies to partners. Some stuff you need to work out in therapy. Your partner isn't your therapist, and treating them that way gives them the ick, especially early in a relationship.

You're forcing them to bear your trauma. You can expect people really far into a relationship to do this to a point (like nearing engagement, already engaged, or married), but even then it's more fair to share your trauma after you've learned how to bear it yourself, with the help of a professional. Partners should know about your past, especially as it may affect your behavior, but they shouldn't be forced to help you resolve your emotional issues.

That pressure is largely coming from other men. I don't know many women who want to date a guy who's unable to be vulnerable. I think if men made more space for each other to be something other than angry y'all would find life a lot more pleasant.

> That pressure is largely coming from other men.

Not my experience.

> I don't know many women who want to date a guy who's unable to be vulnerable.

Indeed, at least in theory. Unfortunately they also don't want to date a guy who's shown actual vulnerability to them.

> Men get shamed for both not being enough of a victim and being too much of a victim, and have no winning move.

Can you expand on that? When you say that they get shamed, who or what is causing it?

> as far as I can tell, someone can explain how they're the victim to anyone and everyone they come across and no one will care. I can't see how anyone emotionally or materially benefits from saying they're a victim. they may want sympathy but they will not get it.

This is true for a man, not true for a woman. Women in general get a lot of sympathy and things for saying they are a victim. Men just benefit from hiding it as you say though, there is no reason for men to show this.

> No expert, and fully expect to be flamed, but we are now living in a society that has discouraged "sucking it up" or "burying your emotions" for 30 years. It not really possible to study, at macro level, the impact of that thinking.

> A lot of people just want to be a victim. They want to be special. They want sympathy.

It doesn't really seem like claiming victimhood is a broadly-repeatable way to make a living for the masses more than 30 years ago... many things that were intended in the 60s and 70s to try to make up for historic victimization have been rolled back in recent decades. But I suppose this could apply to Rush Limbaugh and such - beating the "white males are the persecuted ones, actually!" drum of anger leading to the much-aggrieved whiny MAGA brigade.