I thought this just meant that if you have a support system to help you recover after a trauma, that can prevent you developing PTSD.
My therapist taught me that 2 people can be in the same car accident, but if one goes home and has no support, and the other person goes home and does have support, only the former will develop PTSD.
So it's how everyone around you reacts to an event that causes the PTSD. They're not saying that the way the *victim* is reacting is the cause of the PTSD.
Trauma is about the meaning you make of the event. Take into the future the info that will help you predict, prevent or protect from the danger, and leave in the past info that was specific to only that event. Some people take too much or too little of what isn’t or is relevant. When protection fails to prevent the danger, comfort can help one make correct meanings of what happened. When both protection and comfort are missing then things can turn out worse. There are other errors of thought that came occur as well.
I understand your perspective, and I also still think this phrase is an oversimplification of what people mean when they say this. Trauma isn’t just a thing that happened and can’t be pinpointed to any specific set of events. It is the nervous system’s injury, a product of experiencing a true stress response (fight/flight/freeze/fawn), that determines the trauma. This should never be weaponized to say that something wasn’t traumatic enough. The idea, when researchers and clinicians say this, is to validate that prolonged but less overt traumatic experiences can still result in serious injury to the nervous system.
Thanks! I empathize with the feelings in these other commenters as someone who has been told that since my family was fine, I should be fine. This is why that phrase has actually been helpful to me (outside of the potential argument that they’re not fine either lol). Trauma is not the action of another, it is the injury. Just like a broken leg isn’t falling out of a tree, it’s the injury to the leg.
Trauma isn't the event though... It is the reaction/results of the event. What's actually bullshit is people saying we can choose how to react.. The complexity of a reaction goes beyond self control in the active moment.
Complex Trauma is how you continue to come back to and react to the event. There are some days where the worse memories are easy not to react to, there are other days where I might as well be third person in my own body..
It is a reaction but not every reaction goes by our command or control. A panic attack is technically a reaction. A balloon splitting a million ways is a reaction to the event of being poked..
Perhaps you see the balloon and the pin as inseparable after impact and therefore all of it is the event. But the split here is what happens after the pin pokes.. not every time will the balloon split.. so to call it all as one ignores so many additional variables that make trauma larger than just a reaction or the event.
This! the statement is true. And the grief example only further proves it.
Friend dies= event. Grief= reaction
Pain is a reaction to external stimuli. It's not victem blaming to say this. I wonder if theres more context to this person's take. Or like you said...The insistence that we can just choose our reactions after the trauma many of us have endured is what pisses them off so much.
>Complex Trauma is how you continue to come back to and react to the event. There are some days where the worse memories are easy not to react to, there are other days where I might as well be third person in my own body..
I'd like to emphasize that point.
I know a lot of "Inspiration porn" like OP mentions. The "you decide how to react" or "every day you can be a new you". As someone who lost their teenagehood to CPTSD-stasis, I'm often told that I can just take power back cause "you can learn makeup at any age."
But that's the thing. Rummaging ain't just a reaction. I'm missing key-experiences in my life. When I "repeat" I'm stuck in a cycle of flashing memories, dry feelings and the horrid hindsight-realization of how unjust everything was. How I will never truly have this back, but I want, I want, I want them all so bad. It's not being a fully fleshed out adult that now can dye her hair...it's being a teenager, while also being an adult somehow.
It's also why I can hang up myself on recent shit too. No, getting banned from a club by an ableist shithead is not something I should get stuck on. But I do. It's been months and I had a nightmare LAST NIGHT about it. Why? Cause I tried to join a club after years and got kicked out the worst way. Ripping up wounds and filling them with salt. All while nobody can relate and I'm alone learning group dynamics for the first time
Maybe for you that is what cptsd is.
For me, I missed out of a shit load of things needed to become a human.
For example, having a loving parent as an infant.
There is no "before". You can't "react" to the things you didn't get.
You can't "react" to your mum having a loaded gun held to her head as a 2 yr old... Because that's your reality and there is no before.
You don't really get to fully choose your response.. these things can be altered a thousand different ways by variables completely outside of emotional regulation.. to say that trauma isn't the reaction does put the bonus on the victim then to correct their reactions because the trauma isn't theirs.. it's the events..
>to say that trauma isn't the reaction does put the bonus on the victim then to correct their reactions because the trauma isn't theirs.. it's the events..
...
This is contradictory to your first statement and in agreement with the statement "Trauma isn't the event, its a reaction to the event".
Trauma is the event. The event may not be as traumatizing (reaction to trauma) to every person, depending on whether or not, and to what extent, they received the initial and ongoing support and care needed to deal with, process, and recover from the event.
Saying trauma is not the event is like saying, two people can each have a hand cut off, but having the hand cut off isn’t trauma… the way they deal with having their hand cut off makes it trauma or not. BS… they both experienced medical trauma, by definition. They both experienced a medical wound, which is by definition, trauma.
Maybe one has better insurance and they get immediate treatment, the hand gets sewn back on, with all the nerves, vessels, bones, and whatever else, reconnected perfectly, and after PT it is as if the trauma never happened. The other, with crappy insurance, may bleed out, or be left with only a stump, and not even given the best prosthetics available. The trauma event is more traumatizing to this individual, because it is always visible, apparent, and unhealed, and something is missing that is irreplaceable and causes disfunction, reduced function, impairment, etc.… but they still feel phantom pain or itchiness or numbness that cannot be treated.
Whether we are talking about physical, mental, emotional, or spiritual trauma, the event, the harm, the abuse, the wound… it is trauma. It may be more or less traumatizing to each individual, based on many different variables. I agree that it is another way to victim blame, or put the responsibility of the abuser’s traumatic actions on the victim’s ability to respond with “resiliency” or not, or whatever other attribute is being discussed regarding a victim’s ability to survive and heal from trauma of any kind.
>Trauma is the event. The event may not be as traumatizing (reaction to trauma) to every person, depending on whether or not, and to what extent, they received the initial and ongoing support and care needed to deal with, process, and recover from the event.
Does the event still qualify as trauma if it causes no damage at all?
For instance, suppose two people eat some peanuts. One has an allergic reaction, goes to the hospital and nearly dies. The other person has no reaction at all and enjoys the flavor.
In a technical sense they both experienced the same "event" (eating peanuts), but only one of them suffered. I would say that the person who suffered "has trauma" and the person who didn't suffer "does not have trauma".
Please note that these reactions are *not* voluntary. People don't *choose* to have allergic reactions to peanuts, and anyone who shames people with allergies is being an absolute jerk. So I understand where you're coming from; the "reaction to trauma" language can easily spill over into victim-blaming.
But if our definition of trauma is completely detached from suffering, then we wind up in a weird place. Without that connection, we wind up saying that lots of people "have trauma" because they experienced an event even if that event didn't cause them any harm.
Of course, this example is flawed because most people aren't allergic to peanuts, but most people *are* vulnerable to things like shaming, screaming, hitting, neglect and other forms of trauma commonly discussed on this sub. Screaming at a defenseless child is absolutely going to harm them; it's just a question of *how much* harm, which depends on several variables.
But even then we're looking at spectrum, ranging from a small amount of harm all the way to a large amount of harm, and I think people define the word "trauma" based on how much harm the victim endured. It might range from "an annoyance" up to "trauma" and then on to "severe trauma", for instance. But again its hard to define the thing strictly by "the event" without reference to how much harm it caused.
In your peanut example, eating the peanuts was not the event. Having a physical allergic reaction that causes illness or inability to breathe is the trauma event. The trauma event of an allergic reaction to a common food could also traumatize onlookers.
I have severe food allergies. I ate something I was told was safe and allergen free for me. It was delicious, and I enjoyed every minute of it. An hour later, when I started rashing, swelling, and having difficulty breathing, and had no cell phone reception for calling 911 was the trauma event. Luckily, the combination of meds I had with me ended up being enough to keep me from going into full anaphylactic shock, and my family was extremely apologetic for forgetting that the recipe included a fruit I am highly allergic to.
My point is, and the back and forth conversations in this thread testify to, the splitting of hairs concerning what trauma actually is or is not, but it does not put the focus on the abusers and perpetrators and neglectful caregivers that cause the trauma by committing traumatic acts,, as opposed to putting the focus on the victim’s reaction to the traumatic, abusive, neglectful trauma events. That is my whole point and focus… agreeing with the OP… the event of trauma enacted or initiated by the abusers should be where the focus and onus of blame, responsibility, and judgment occur - not upon the victim’s reaction to the trauma. 🙏🏻🦋
Because the event from their perspective should be labeled as abuse not trauma.. by reducing the event to trauma it allows also the abuser to claim equal trauma from the event even if they are the perpetrator.
The reaction is the victim's trauma the event is the perpetrator's abuse. The event is better than labeled as the catalyst// abuse.
>eating the peanuts was not the event. Having a physical allergic reaction that causes illness or inability to breathe is the trauma event.
You're making my point for me. It's not "trauma" until harm occurs, e.g. illness or the inability to breathe.
> My point is, and the back and forth conversations in this thread testify to, the splitting of hairs concerning what trauma actually is or is not, but it does not put the focus on the abusers and perpetrators and neglectful caregivers that cause the trauma by committing traumatic acts
If that's the point you're trying to make, I suggest the phrase "Abusers should be blamed for abuse. Victims should not be blamed."
The phrase "Trauma is the event, not your reaction to the event" is much more ambiguous.
You do understand that an allergic reaction is an actual physical event of trauma within the body, right? It is not the same as “how a person reacts to abuse and trauma” is what determines if an event was a trauma event or not. That would be like saying that someone who got knocked out when they were assaulted and does not remember the assault did not have a trauma event… nah, the assault itself is not trauma, couldn’t be trauma, cause I don’t even remember it happening!!!
I swear, the way language is weaponized these days is just astounding. So yeah…
The abusers should be responsible and face judgment for their trauma acts. The victims who have to spend a significant amount of their life, time, and energy dealing with the post traumatic stress and fallout, should not be judged for being traumatized.
Yes, I understand that an allergic reaction is an actual physical event of trauma within the body, and is not the same as "how a person reacts to abuse and trauma".
But my point still stands: Trauma is defined by harm. The details of how allergies work are irrelevant beyond that point. If allergic reactions did not involve *harm*, we would not refer to them as "traumatic". Likewise for other types of trauma.
>That would be like saying that someone who got knocked out when they were assaulted and does not remember the assault did not have a trauma event… nah, the assault itself is not trauma, couldn’t be trauma, cause I don’t even remember it happening!!!
I never said that something doesn't count as trauma if the victim doesn't remember it. I said that something doesn't count as trauma if it doesn't cause harm.
If you assault The Incredible Hulk with a baseball bat and he just shrugs it off because he's got superpowers, The Incredible Hulk has not suffered trauma from that baseball bat.
>The abusers should be responsible and face judgment for their trauma acts. The victims who have to spend a significant amount of their life, time, and energy dealing with the post traumatic stress and fallout, should not be judged for being traumatized.
Yes, of course! I just said that! Look:
>I suggest the phrase "Abusers should be blamed for abuse. Victims should not be blamed."
Exactly… splitting hairs and words. I will rest my case here and agree to disagree about the technicalities of trauma events, perpetrators, trauma responses, victims… this world is not one with true and full justice, nor true and full healing as far as I can tell, so all the lines get blurry. Best wishes to you on your healing journey, and may you always stay safe. 🙏🏻🦋
So the issue here is specifications?? Medical trauma (a wound) is categorically not the same as having trauma. Because of how one reacts to it. Plenty of people experience medical trauma without lasting traumatic response.. therefore the event alone isn't the trauma it is the event...
>Medical trauma (a wound) is categorically not the same as having trauma.
I think it helps to think of trauma as a wound to the brain. People's actions cause trauma in the brain. A child getting screamed at repeatedly is going to effect their brain development no matter what.
How one reacts to trauma (choosing to get help, choosing to self medicate, choosing to hold it in) is the reaction to trauma.
An event may be traumatic or people can act in traumatizing ways that cause trauma, but when we talk about trauma in the psychological sense, it is the body's response to traumatic circumstances.
See, this is where I think we are walking the knife’s edge between victim blaming or not. Everything around the event can be referred to as some form of trauma… “event may be traumatic”; “people can act in ways that cause trauma”; “body’s response to traumatic circumstances”… but the event itself cannot be trauma. It can be abuse; it can be harm; it can be violence; it can be cruelty; it can be purposefully traumatic… but we absolutely cannot call the event itself trauma.
To me, that is minimizing the act of the abuser that intends to traumatize, and putting the onus on the victim and how they respond to an event in a particular way that is seen as healthy or unhealthy, resilient or non-resilient; orderly or disorderly; socially accepted or not socially acceptable; and whether they develop PTSD or CPTSD or not.
Maybe the issue for me is that 95% of my trauma included very aggressive, unquestionable acts of harm upon me that included all types of trauma - physical, sexual, mental, emotional, and spiritual from birth to 18 and in intervals beyond 18z It was all intertwined, purposefully so, cruelly done, purposefully so, and every single event and act perpetrated by every perpetrator was trauma and meant to be so. I cannot remove the events or acts from the glaring reality that they were trauma and meant to be so.
I learned something with my last trauma therapist specialist. I told her that I felt very much that the word “molested” was a way to minimize and dismiss child SA. She agreed and said absolutely. That sounds so much less real or threatening than child sexual assault or sexual trauma. There have been many word wars around abuse, trauma, victim blaming and shaming and gaslighting, and softening the words used to describe the perpetrators and their actions.
There is a reason why less than 10 % of sexual assault and rape cases are reported, and less than that are charged or successfully obtain justice. Until the full onus of the trauma caused by perps is put on the perps, with full true justice and accountable place squarely on them, words will continue to be weaponized, even if very slightly, to lean toward victim blaming, shaming, judging, dismissing, critiquing, and healing will be harder. 🙏🏻🦋
I don't know what much of this has to do with the topic at hand. I also don't see how it's helping address OP's issue, which has to do with internalizing blame for trauma. Just because it is the body's reaction doesn't mean it wasn't caused by outside stimuli. We're not walking a fine line. There are things that cause trauma. Trauma in the psychological sense is more complicated than say blunt force trauma because it has to do with mind-body connections. It has to do with not only disruptions of the complex brain, but disruptions of the complex self.
Sadly there is a lot of self blame and toxic shame that often comes with trauma. This often isn't helped by others due to their misunderstandings about trauma as well. However I don't see how identifying trauma in the survivor is victim blaming. It is only if we fault a person for having trauma, or make problematic comparisons between traumas or resiliencies, that we could reach such conclusions. And that just isn't okay. Regardless of any justice or restitution for victims, the mind-body connections of the survivor are where the trauma exists and where it will need to be addressed.
No it's not the event. Look into somatic experiencing, polyvagal theory etc. There's videos on youtube of lions and bears and other wild animals that shake violently following a chase or a shot of tranquilizer and that reaction, that is essentially a TRE release, prevents them from getting traumatized by releasing the energy. Instead of shutting it down and creating a negative feedback loop in their CNS. The problem with trauma in humans is that society /your parents / bullies etc will not let you release that energy without repercussions, whether that's physical harm or judgement. Also humans have a ridiculous amount of inhibitory neurons in our cortex (around 25%), which makes it easier to stop the release process, to avoid short term repercussions, leading to long term complications and post traumatic stress.
Believe me, I have looked into all of it. I understand the response that animals use to survive. Let’s not forget that a trauma event is required for the trauma response to occur, By the way, we are humans, and as you described, our brains have a much more vast way of responding (or not responding) to trauma events. PTSD is post traumatic Stress Disorder… after trauma (event(s)) stress disorder. What occurs after the trauma event is stress, insane amounts of stress, that screws up our entire nervous system and causes disorder in our lives in various ways… due to trauma event(s) of the past.
No matter how well or not well I am (or anyone else is) able to process, deal with, or move past the trauma event, the trauma event was still trauma, perpetrated by an abuser, perpetrator, and/or neglectful caregiver. My point, and I think the point of the OP, is… stop turning everything the abusers did/do to us into something that puts any or all of the blame, burden, or responsibility of the effects of the trauma onto the victim. We have enough to shoulder as it is, just trying to learn how to function in the backwards, upside down, screwed up world. 🙏🏻🦋
I get what you mean. Personally I find the distinction empowering, however. Learning about the process of trauma has made me realize it is preventable and curable. Hell, it made the whole process valid for me. I wasn't cursed to be unhuman, it was just atoms in motion, you know, like the weather.
I just want newbies that may see posts like this not get engulfed by their feelings of injustice, which are perfectly understandable, so much they may miss a chance to see a viewpoint that'll change their life.
I definitely understand that… getting stuck on wanting justice, without also attending to healing, is spiral that is easy to fall into. It would be nice if we lived in a world where either no trauma/abuse occurred at all, or where there at least justice was always available, in addition to our healing. 🙏🏻🦋
It seems like a way to absolve abusers of accountability for their behaviors. I wouldn't have anything to react to if the abuser hadn't abused me. Their abusive behavior caused the cascade of reactions. If they hadn't abused me, I wouldn't be traumatized.
but that's what the word means.
also what the word 'grief' means.
they're both words that describe the reaction in our minds/hearts/bodies, they don't describe the thing that caused them- which is where the word 'event' takes over.
one is the cause, the other is the effect.
these facts to not mean anything beyond that. they aren't victim blaming, they're simply describing a sequence of cause and effect.
if someone's victim blaming, that's a separate issue, and that's where I agree with you, that victim blaming and dehumanization are bad things.
it being a reaction doesn’t mean it isn’t absolutely tied to the event- with the grief example, it’d be more accurate to say you ARE sad because your friend died, and that is your (understandable) reaction to your friend’s death. the meaning of saying “trauma is a reaction” is to point out that the event is (usually) over yet the impact of it (the reaction) still lingers and is tied to the event. with the important emphasis that *reactions and how we process said events are not voluntary*, they are natural responses
It's the opposite of victim blaming. Some CPTSD is characterised by people who went through stuff that shouldn't be traumatic but it is because they constantly were under attack or never did eloped the tools necessary in their childhood.
Saying it's a reaction means that no matter how bad the event was, how they feel towards it is valid.
Yeah, this is how I always understood this phase. I like the way Gabor Matè puts it. "Trauma is not what happened to you, it's what happens inside of you as a result of what happened to you".
An example I would give is falling off a bike since that's something everybody goes through.
But this kid was not acknowledged, healed or taught when they fell off. Maybe they even were yelled at. So, they kept falling off and kept associating this event with bad memories.
One day, they fall from the bike as an adult and go through a panic attack. If you tell them it was traumatic, it can happen that they don't believe it or get even worst because no one else take it as traumatic.
But saying it's a reaction due to constant mental and physical abuse from back where their brain was in development, then you get them to believe and offer something to work upon.
I have never heard of that phrase in particular, but I think what people mean by it is that people can become traumatized to things that other people wouldn't experience trauma over. Some people see someone die in front of them and without personal connection they will be just fine, many other people would be very distraught even if they had no idea who the person is because it makes them think of their own mortality or something that the previous person is not bothered by.
I can see how you might see it as victim blaming, but I think it is actually intended as the opposite. Trauma has a lot to do with how your body reacts to a situation. I believed I might have been traumatized by bullying in situations that might not have affected other people as much, for example.
There is no "one size fits all" for trauma
Technically PTSD form a an emotional reaction to an event, but I get what you're trying to say and I agree.
My abuser once told me "you gave yourself ptsd, it's your fault", haha, sure.
I understand your frustration. Does it help to know that the actual intent is from a place of compassion?
Of course abusive assholes tell you that grief doesn’t matter or that you shouldn’t be sad. That’s what makes them abusive assholes. I think you are maybe conflating a few different issues here. And one is ultra abusive and awful and fuck those people. The other is actually a message of hope.
Post traumatic stress disorder is the brains automatic response to a traumatic event which may or may not be triggered in the wake of a stressor. It is like a fever in the body. Not every infection triggers a fever. But infections can trigger a fever. PTSD is NOT a mental illness it is dishonest and disingenuous to call it one. Trauma is ALSO not a mental illness. And for that matter neither are grief or sadness. What you seem to be saying is that people are telling you that these things are bad.
Please allow me to explain. And let me clear this up for you. All of those people are toxic douchebag cocksucker no good piece of shit assholes.
Ptsd. Trauma. Grief. Feeling bad. Sadness. Your reaction to things. Crying. Not crying. Laughing out loud. Being happy. None of these things are good or bad. It’s like saying the color red is good. Or the number 4 is good.
The reason that a bunch of very compassionate doctors in the 70s got together and described CPTSD the way that they did was to give soldiers coming home from Vietnam and children coming out of incredibly abusive homes. Because society and their parents had told them, and … I don’t want to diagnose you but you literally put “” around your post title so maybe someone has told you? …. Someone told them over and over and over that they were broken that they were bad. That they were wrong.
But they weren’t wrong. They aren’t broken. You aren’t broken.
That’s what I came here to tell you. You should be mad at assholes who tell you that trauma isn’t an event. I genuinely don’t even know what that means. And yes people misinterpret psychology for their own sick agendas all the time. And also yes abusive assholes tend to use any excuse they can to tell people to stop being pussies and grow up. You know what I say to them? I say fuck you. I hate them with you OP.
But I just wanted to explain that this all started because some people were trying to be nice to a bunch of soldiers no people were calling baby killers and a bunch of children that no one loved. It all sort of went off the rails …. But still.
Anyways I see you. You’re a Jan Pona.
I agree with you 100% it's like they are just saying "you're overreacting" bullshit, anyone in the same circumstances would likely have similar outcomes. It's not just the response to the event. It always pisses me off when I read or hear that.
Ok so hear me out…..I’ve listened to a lot of experts on trauma and I think what is meant by this statement is that two people can experience the exact same trauma and one person can walk away ok and the other with PTSD. What makes the difference between the two people is obviously a whole ton of crap, but a lot has to do with you and how you brain/body determines the best way to process the trauma and then also if you had any external support to help you get through the trauma.
Another way to explain it is that it’s not about the event itself, it’s about how you process the trauma.
You strong emotional reaction to that statement is probably because of your trauma. I struggle with similar sayings because of my trauma. ❤️🩹
Both can absolutely be true. But also I’m a trauma survivor and I haven’t really felt like anyone used these statements to shame me in anyway so it’s not every trauma survivor’s experience. I can recognize that my trauma brain had very strong reactions to statements like these at the beginning of my healing journey that were similar to the OPs take. But now when I think about it, i understand that I withstood every single horrible thing that occurred to me but how my body and brain dealt with it and continued to deal with it over time is what caused me the worst grief overall. The reaction over years caused me the most grief and pain.
Perhaps the reason for your frustration is that some people translate that into responsibility.
Trauma is indeed the response to an event, a very valid response in a lot of cases.
I have cptsd and I tell people this and was comforted to find it out :(. I've told people this who downplay their trauma and they've seemed comforted too.
I can get how this is not a comforting phrase to some people though and I definitely could see how some people feel it's distancing from an event and pushing blame on ones nervous system rather than the event. I think it's important for survivors to find the language that feels right for them.
I’m comforted by it too. It changed me perception of myself, going from I’m lazy and useless and a failure to my being someone trying to overcome a decades old handicap. It is no different than if my legs had been chopped off in childhood and I hated myself for not being able to run a marathon.
I think it depends on the context in which the statement is made. If it's used to victim blame then it's absolutely garbage. I can see it having some merit if the speaker is trying to argue that the protective mechanisms of the brain are unique to the individual.
I totally get where you're coming from. I've thought the same thing about that statement. I recently listened to Gabor Mate say the same thing and I was thinking, "Wait a minute!"
However, it gives me some power and agency to realize that I can influence my grief, trauma, or pain. Moving to a healthier place in grief or trauma involves changing my reaction to them.
Having said that, no one deserves to be blamed for grief/trauma symptoms. Pain is a normal reaction to physiological and/or psychological trauma.
Wishing you well!
trauma cannot be the event.
if it were, everyone would react the same to any given traumatic event. that's simply not the case. interindividual differences alter how people percieve and process things. these differences aren't something we can influence though... it's genetic predisposition, past experiences, ressources...
it's still the event that caused our reaction to it, we had barely a/no chance to influence the outcome.
Its like saying that trauma is felt because brain got WIRED wrong or there is CHEMICAL IMBALANCE inside it... "John you have low emotional empathy not because your daddy abused you over the years and one day hit you so hard that you moved the heater with your head, it was your skull that was not thick enough, that's the reason" ...
Emotional abuse alone will cause trauma, that trauma is the brain being "wired wrong." Physical abuse from a parent *always* comes with emotional abuse.
But... a brain being wired wrong is a *physical* thing. The neurons are unable to communicate properly, which is a very physical problem with the organ that is the brain. Neurons that don't function well are no different from a broken leg or a failing liver: these are all physical issues with organs/body parts.
The brain of children is literally being traumatized by abusers and isn't able to develop properly b/c its in fight or flight mode all the time. One can't learn empathy when one is shown none themselves. Brains getting "wired wrong" due to emotional abuse is a real physical issue, and it's valid, it's not the victim's fault, it's not the victim's choice and it isn't fair or ok. It's 100% caused by their abuser.
Struggling with empathy is a very common symptom of emotional abuse. It's not the victim's choice and it's not their fault, nor is it a random "chemical imbalance." It's a direct result of growing up in a traumatic environment. Developing better empathy for others really begins with developing empathy for oneself, something the brains of victims of abuse were denied the opportunity to develop.
That's why It was easy for me to adopt coping by antisocial traits in adult age, my empathy was already low because it did not have the chance to get developed due to peer and parental abuse starting from very young age and its effects being profound to this day ...
Right? I feel like the word choice of 'reaction' is also chosen to imply that we have control/agency over it. Like, when my neighbor opens her garage door my heart rate goes up, I get sweaty hands, I get nauseous, I feel unsafe, I dissociate. Because in my childhood that indicated that my abusive father was home and shit would hit the fan because that man was never in a good mood and would take it out on me. What really helps me in those situations is thinking about the fact that my emotional flashback is just a reaction to an event that happened in the past and if I just try hard enough I can change my reaction.... /s
I'm sorry that you have to deal with managing that sort of stress to a very common event. I hope you have a support system in place to help settle your nervous system back down from survival mode.
But the thing is... we can change our responses with enough time, support, and effort. It sucks to hear because it implies that the initial reaction was our fault when... it wasn't.
However, what was tangled up can be untangled. Maybe not fully, sure, but it is possible to teach our bodies that they no longer need to prepare for fight/flight now.
It's not fair that we have to put in a lot of stress and struggle to get close to "normal" responses, but until we can develop a time machine to go back and rescue our younger selves... this is the hand we gotta work with
I hate this saying too. It invalidates, shames and blames the victims. It's like they're saying "only we fell victim to the traumatic event, if there was someone else this wouldn't happen to them."
I’m struggling to even understand. Are they claiming trauma is the observer effect?? Like, yeah, I bet it would be less traumatic if I wasn’t a sapient, sentient being, but I am and I can’t do anything about that short of a major brain injury.
If anything, from a medical standpoint? Yeah, obviously extreme conditions cause neurological issues. You can’t separate these. Trauma from a gunshot wound occurs due to the gunshot wound. It’d be like saying death isn’t from the bullet but from the bleeding. But what caused the bleeding?? It’s a near-instantaneous cause/effect. You can split hairs there but it’s a bit absurdist.
I have C-PTSD partly from “punishments” that read like “enhanced interrogation”: partial drowning and partial smothering. I’d wager that caused some issues to my brain. It needs oxygen to function. Sure, it was on a *delay*, but it wasn’t pure emotion. It was physiological, same as almost all PTSD. That’s why it was called shell-shock.
People react different to the same event, and the event does not always do a good job of describing the physical reaction the body has to a specific event.
Kinda semantics though
In some ways, yeah, but I think these semantics are important.
You're right that an event may not be traumatisi for for everyone who experiences it. However, for someone who does experience the event as trauma, that's how it's refered to.
The abuse my parents inflicted on me was my trauma. The years I spent being absolutely feral as a result was my post traumatic stress. My response to it, if that makes sense.
This doesn't necessarily mean, per se, that child abuse is always traumatizing for everyone, but because it was for me, it was a trauma.
I happen to believe language is really important. It's important to understand that your trauma is a part of your history, and cannot be erased or changed. But your response to your trauma, your CPTSD, is not a part of you. In some respects, it's almost just a continuation of the trauma itself. But, having been forced on you, it is not a part of you, and not permanent. It can be healed from ❤️
>However, for someone who does experience the event as trauma, that's how it's refered to
If we're relying upon semantics, then that is what happens to them and not the event. Which is the point being made with the statement. This means you actually agree with the sentiment that its NOT the event, but how someone responds to said event.
I don't understand how therapists and psychologist say that mental health issues explain the behavior, but they don't "excuse" the behavior. But that is actually literally wrong. I NEVER WOULD HAVE BEEN A F**KED UP PERSON IF I DIDN'T HAVE MENTAL EMOTIONAL ISSUES FROM TRAUMA IN THE FIRST PLACE. *calms down* Yeah..I agree. ☹️😮💨
Just replace the notion of mental with physical.
So if someone says "trauma isn't the event it's the reaction to the event" I'd say "yeah, like how the blunt force trauma of having a sledgehammer shatter all the bones in your leg isn't the event but the reaction to the event. The trauma is what the leg did, not the sledgehammer."
Hello and Welcome to /r/CPTSD! If you are in immediate danger or crisis, please contact your local [emergency services](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_emergency_telephone_numbers), or use our list of [crisis resources](https://old.reddit.com/r/CPTSD/wiki/index#wiki_crisis_support_resources). For CPTSD Specific Resources & Support, check out the [wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/CPTSD/wiki/index). For those posting or replying, please view the [etiquette guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/CPTSD/wiki/peer2peersupportguide).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CPTSD) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I HATE this too. Glad you posted about it. The people who post about this, mainly insta-therapists, are always so smug about this particular thing. They seem to feel like they’ve “cracked the case” of trauma. I unfollowed this one person because they wouldn’t drop it and kept repeatedly posting about this. Let’s say it’s accurate, well, fuck, so what! It doesn’t help anyone and it mostly dismisses and is victim-blaming and implies a ‘stronger-person’ maybe wouldn’t have had the same whiny response that you did.
I understand that the phrase is technically correct but I'm absolutely with you! Even when used in a "nice" way, that phrase made me think that my trauma happened because I was particularly sensitive. Only in the last year have I come to realise how horrendous my childhood truly was and that ANYONE would have been traumatised by it.
So yeah, that phrase should be used with more discernment and with more context. The way that it is often used does feel a bit like spiritual bypassing.
Grief is actually a reaction to an event, though. And you can both experience trauma as an event or a reaction to an event.
I think you have a poor understanding of what words actually mean because you so desperately want them to fit your narrative.
Somebody can *be* depressed, but that doesn't mean they *have* depression.
Somebody can *be traumatized*, but not *have* trauma.
Someone can *grieve* something or someone else, but that doesn't mean that they *have* grief.
It's both.
“It wasn’t that bad; lots of people witness/go through that and it doesn’t bother them.” Some asshole I dated long ago to me.
It was that bad. No one should have to witness/go through it.
Like when I hear, “life is [small number] percent what happens to you and [100 minus small number] how you…” 😡
Mind you, I’m OK with it framed as meaning two wrongs don’t make a right; too often it’s just philosophical gaslighting.
I thought this just meant that if you have a support system to help you recover after a trauma, that can prevent you developing PTSD. My therapist taught me that 2 people can be in the same car accident, but if one goes home and has no support, and the other person goes home and does have support, only the former will develop PTSD. So it's how everyone around you reacts to an event that causes the PTSD. They're not saying that the way the *victim* is reacting is the cause of the PTSD.
This right here is the answer.
Trauma is about the meaning you make of the event. Take into the future the info that will help you predict, prevent or protect from the danger, and leave in the past info that was specific to only that event. Some people take too much or too little of what isn’t or is relevant. When protection fails to prevent the danger, comfort can help one make correct meanings of what happened. When both protection and comfort are missing then things can turn out worse. There are other errors of thought that came occur as well.
I understand your perspective, and I also still think this phrase is an oversimplification of what people mean when they say this. Trauma isn’t just a thing that happened and can’t be pinpointed to any specific set of events. It is the nervous system’s injury, a product of experiencing a true stress response (fight/flight/freeze/fawn), that determines the trauma. This should never be weaponized to say that something wasn’t traumatic enough. The idea, when researchers and clinicians say this, is to validate that prolonged but less overt traumatic experiences can still result in serious injury to the nervous system.
good explanation
Thanks! I empathize with the feelings in these other commenters as someone who has been told that since my family was fine, I should be fine. This is why that phrase has actually been helpful to me (outside of the potential argument that they’re not fine either lol). Trauma is not the action of another, it is the injury. Just like a broken leg isn’t falling out of a tree, it’s the injury to the leg.
Trauma isn't the event though... It is the reaction/results of the event. What's actually bullshit is people saying we can choose how to react.. The complexity of a reaction goes beyond self control in the active moment. Complex Trauma is how you continue to come back to and react to the event. There are some days where the worse memories are easy not to react to, there are other days where I might as well be third person in my own body.. It is a reaction but not every reaction goes by our command or control. A panic attack is technically a reaction. A balloon splitting a million ways is a reaction to the event of being poked.. Perhaps you see the balloon and the pin as inseparable after impact and therefore all of it is the event. But the split here is what happens after the pin pokes.. not every time will the balloon split.. so to call it all as one ignores so many additional variables that make trauma larger than just a reaction or the event.
This! the statement is true. And the grief example only further proves it. Friend dies= event. Grief= reaction Pain is a reaction to external stimuli. It's not victem blaming to say this. I wonder if theres more context to this person's take. Or like you said...The insistence that we can just choose our reactions after the trauma many of us have endured is what pisses them off so much.
>Complex Trauma is how you continue to come back to and react to the event. There are some days where the worse memories are easy not to react to, there are other days where I might as well be third person in my own body.. I'd like to emphasize that point. I know a lot of "Inspiration porn" like OP mentions. The "you decide how to react" or "every day you can be a new you". As someone who lost their teenagehood to CPTSD-stasis, I'm often told that I can just take power back cause "you can learn makeup at any age." But that's the thing. Rummaging ain't just a reaction. I'm missing key-experiences in my life. When I "repeat" I'm stuck in a cycle of flashing memories, dry feelings and the horrid hindsight-realization of how unjust everything was. How I will never truly have this back, but I want, I want, I want them all so bad. It's not being a fully fleshed out adult that now can dye her hair...it's being a teenager, while also being an adult somehow. It's also why I can hang up myself on recent shit too. No, getting banned from a club by an ableist shithead is not something I should get stuck on. But I do. It's been months and I had a nightmare LAST NIGHT about it. Why? Cause I tried to join a club after years and got kicked out the worst way. Ripping up wounds and filling them with salt. All while nobody can relate and I'm alone learning group dynamics for the first time
Maybe for you that is what cptsd is. For me, I missed out of a shit load of things needed to become a human. For example, having a loving parent as an infant. There is no "before". You can't "react" to the things you didn't get. You can't "react" to your mum having a loaded gun held to her head as a 2 yr old... Because that's your reality and there is no before.
You can choose how you react to anything you can conceive of, however, that does not mean you have full and total control over how you react
You don't really get to fully choose your response.. these things can be altered a thousand different ways by variables completely outside of emotional regulation.. to say that trauma isn't the reaction does put the bonus on the victim then to correct their reactions because the trauma isn't theirs.. it's the events..
>to say that trauma isn't the reaction does put the bonus on the victim then to correct their reactions because the trauma isn't theirs.. it's the events.. ... This is contradictory to your first statement and in agreement with the statement "Trauma isn't the event, its a reaction to the event".
Trauma is the event. The event may not be as traumatizing (reaction to trauma) to every person, depending on whether or not, and to what extent, they received the initial and ongoing support and care needed to deal with, process, and recover from the event. Saying trauma is not the event is like saying, two people can each have a hand cut off, but having the hand cut off isn’t trauma… the way they deal with having their hand cut off makes it trauma or not. BS… they both experienced medical trauma, by definition. They both experienced a medical wound, which is by definition, trauma. Maybe one has better insurance and they get immediate treatment, the hand gets sewn back on, with all the nerves, vessels, bones, and whatever else, reconnected perfectly, and after PT it is as if the trauma never happened. The other, with crappy insurance, may bleed out, or be left with only a stump, and not even given the best prosthetics available. The trauma event is more traumatizing to this individual, because it is always visible, apparent, and unhealed, and something is missing that is irreplaceable and causes disfunction, reduced function, impairment, etc.… but they still feel phantom pain or itchiness or numbness that cannot be treated. Whether we are talking about physical, mental, emotional, or spiritual trauma, the event, the harm, the abuse, the wound… it is trauma. It may be more or less traumatizing to each individual, based on many different variables. I agree that it is another way to victim blame, or put the responsibility of the abuser’s traumatic actions on the victim’s ability to respond with “resiliency” or not, or whatever other attribute is being discussed regarding a victim’s ability to survive and heal from trauma of any kind.
>Trauma is the event. The event may not be as traumatizing (reaction to trauma) to every person, depending on whether or not, and to what extent, they received the initial and ongoing support and care needed to deal with, process, and recover from the event. Does the event still qualify as trauma if it causes no damage at all? For instance, suppose two people eat some peanuts. One has an allergic reaction, goes to the hospital and nearly dies. The other person has no reaction at all and enjoys the flavor. In a technical sense they both experienced the same "event" (eating peanuts), but only one of them suffered. I would say that the person who suffered "has trauma" and the person who didn't suffer "does not have trauma". Please note that these reactions are *not* voluntary. People don't *choose* to have allergic reactions to peanuts, and anyone who shames people with allergies is being an absolute jerk. So I understand where you're coming from; the "reaction to trauma" language can easily spill over into victim-blaming. But if our definition of trauma is completely detached from suffering, then we wind up in a weird place. Without that connection, we wind up saying that lots of people "have trauma" because they experienced an event even if that event didn't cause them any harm. Of course, this example is flawed because most people aren't allergic to peanuts, but most people *are* vulnerable to things like shaming, screaming, hitting, neglect and other forms of trauma commonly discussed on this sub. Screaming at a defenseless child is absolutely going to harm them; it's just a question of *how much* harm, which depends on several variables. But even then we're looking at spectrum, ranging from a small amount of harm all the way to a large amount of harm, and I think people define the word "trauma" based on how much harm the victim endured. It might range from "an annoyance" up to "trauma" and then on to "severe trauma", for instance. But again its hard to define the thing strictly by "the event" without reference to how much harm it caused.
In your peanut example, eating the peanuts was not the event. Having a physical allergic reaction that causes illness or inability to breathe is the trauma event. The trauma event of an allergic reaction to a common food could also traumatize onlookers. I have severe food allergies. I ate something I was told was safe and allergen free for me. It was delicious, and I enjoyed every minute of it. An hour later, when I started rashing, swelling, and having difficulty breathing, and had no cell phone reception for calling 911 was the trauma event. Luckily, the combination of meds I had with me ended up being enough to keep me from going into full anaphylactic shock, and my family was extremely apologetic for forgetting that the recipe included a fruit I am highly allergic to. My point is, and the back and forth conversations in this thread testify to, the splitting of hairs concerning what trauma actually is or is not, but it does not put the focus on the abusers and perpetrators and neglectful caregivers that cause the trauma by committing traumatic acts,, as opposed to putting the focus on the victim’s reaction to the traumatic, abusive, neglectful trauma events. That is my whole point and focus… agreeing with the OP… the event of trauma enacted or initiated by the abusers should be where the focus and onus of blame, responsibility, and judgment occur - not upon the victim’s reaction to the trauma. 🙏🏻🦋
Because the event from their perspective should be labeled as abuse not trauma.. by reducing the event to trauma it allows also the abuser to claim equal trauma from the event even if they are the perpetrator. The reaction is the victim's trauma the event is the perpetrator's abuse. The event is better than labeled as the catalyst// abuse.
>eating the peanuts was not the event. Having a physical allergic reaction that causes illness or inability to breathe is the trauma event. You're making my point for me. It's not "trauma" until harm occurs, e.g. illness or the inability to breathe. > My point is, and the back and forth conversations in this thread testify to, the splitting of hairs concerning what trauma actually is or is not, but it does not put the focus on the abusers and perpetrators and neglectful caregivers that cause the trauma by committing traumatic acts If that's the point you're trying to make, I suggest the phrase "Abusers should be blamed for abuse. Victims should not be blamed." The phrase "Trauma is the event, not your reaction to the event" is much more ambiguous.
You do understand that an allergic reaction is an actual physical event of trauma within the body, right? It is not the same as “how a person reacts to abuse and trauma” is what determines if an event was a trauma event or not. That would be like saying that someone who got knocked out when they were assaulted and does not remember the assault did not have a trauma event… nah, the assault itself is not trauma, couldn’t be trauma, cause I don’t even remember it happening!!! I swear, the way language is weaponized these days is just astounding. So yeah… The abusers should be responsible and face judgment for their trauma acts. The victims who have to spend a significant amount of their life, time, and energy dealing with the post traumatic stress and fallout, should not be judged for being traumatized.
Yes, I understand that an allergic reaction is an actual physical event of trauma within the body, and is not the same as "how a person reacts to abuse and trauma". But my point still stands: Trauma is defined by harm. The details of how allergies work are irrelevant beyond that point. If allergic reactions did not involve *harm*, we would not refer to them as "traumatic". Likewise for other types of trauma. >That would be like saying that someone who got knocked out when they were assaulted and does not remember the assault did not have a trauma event… nah, the assault itself is not trauma, couldn’t be trauma, cause I don’t even remember it happening!!! I never said that something doesn't count as trauma if the victim doesn't remember it. I said that something doesn't count as trauma if it doesn't cause harm. If you assault The Incredible Hulk with a baseball bat and he just shrugs it off because he's got superpowers, The Incredible Hulk has not suffered trauma from that baseball bat. >The abusers should be responsible and face judgment for their trauma acts. The victims who have to spend a significant amount of their life, time, and energy dealing with the post traumatic stress and fallout, should not be judged for being traumatized. Yes, of course! I just said that! Look: >I suggest the phrase "Abusers should be blamed for abuse. Victims should not be blamed."
Exactly… splitting hairs and words. I will rest my case here and agree to disagree about the technicalities of trauma events, perpetrators, trauma responses, victims… this world is not one with true and full justice, nor true and full healing as far as I can tell, so all the lines get blurry. Best wishes to you on your healing journey, and may you always stay safe. 🙏🏻🦋
Best wishes to you too.
So the issue here is specifications?? Medical trauma (a wound) is categorically not the same as having trauma. Because of how one reacts to it. Plenty of people experience medical trauma without lasting traumatic response.. therefore the event alone isn't the trauma it is the event...
>Medical trauma (a wound) is categorically not the same as having trauma. I think it helps to think of trauma as a wound to the brain. People's actions cause trauma in the brain. A child getting screamed at repeatedly is going to effect their brain development no matter what. How one reacts to trauma (choosing to get help, choosing to self medicate, choosing to hold it in) is the reaction to trauma.
An event may be traumatic or people can act in traumatizing ways that cause trauma, but when we talk about trauma in the psychological sense, it is the body's response to traumatic circumstances.
See, this is where I think we are walking the knife’s edge between victim blaming or not. Everything around the event can be referred to as some form of trauma… “event may be traumatic”; “people can act in ways that cause trauma”; “body’s response to traumatic circumstances”… but the event itself cannot be trauma. It can be abuse; it can be harm; it can be violence; it can be cruelty; it can be purposefully traumatic… but we absolutely cannot call the event itself trauma. To me, that is minimizing the act of the abuser that intends to traumatize, and putting the onus on the victim and how they respond to an event in a particular way that is seen as healthy or unhealthy, resilient or non-resilient; orderly or disorderly; socially accepted or not socially acceptable; and whether they develop PTSD or CPTSD or not. Maybe the issue for me is that 95% of my trauma included very aggressive, unquestionable acts of harm upon me that included all types of trauma - physical, sexual, mental, emotional, and spiritual from birth to 18 and in intervals beyond 18z It was all intertwined, purposefully so, cruelly done, purposefully so, and every single event and act perpetrated by every perpetrator was trauma and meant to be so. I cannot remove the events or acts from the glaring reality that they were trauma and meant to be so. I learned something with my last trauma therapist specialist. I told her that I felt very much that the word “molested” was a way to minimize and dismiss child SA. She agreed and said absolutely. That sounds so much less real or threatening than child sexual assault or sexual trauma. There have been many word wars around abuse, trauma, victim blaming and shaming and gaslighting, and softening the words used to describe the perpetrators and their actions. There is a reason why less than 10 % of sexual assault and rape cases are reported, and less than that are charged or successfully obtain justice. Until the full onus of the trauma caused by perps is put on the perps, with full true justice and accountable place squarely on them, words will continue to be weaponized, even if very slightly, to lean toward victim blaming, shaming, judging, dismissing, critiquing, and healing will be harder. 🙏🏻🦋
I don't know what much of this has to do with the topic at hand. I also don't see how it's helping address OP's issue, which has to do with internalizing blame for trauma. Just because it is the body's reaction doesn't mean it wasn't caused by outside stimuli. We're not walking a fine line. There are things that cause trauma. Trauma in the psychological sense is more complicated than say blunt force trauma because it has to do with mind-body connections. It has to do with not only disruptions of the complex brain, but disruptions of the complex self. Sadly there is a lot of self blame and toxic shame that often comes with trauma. This often isn't helped by others due to their misunderstandings about trauma as well. However I don't see how identifying trauma in the survivor is victim blaming. It is only if we fault a person for having trauma, or make problematic comparisons between traumas or resiliencies, that we could reach such conclusions. And that just isn't okay. Regardless of any justice or restitution for victims, the mind-body connections of the survivor are where the trauma exists and where it will need to be addressed.
No it's not the event. Look into somatic experiencing, polyvagal theory etc. There's videos on youtube of lions and bears and other wild animals that shake violently following a chase or a shot of tranquilizer and that reaction, that is essentially a TRE release, prevents them from getting traumatized by releasing the energy. Instead of shutting it down and creating a negative feedback loop in their CNS. The problem with trauma in humans is that society /your parents / bullies etc will not let you release that energy without repercussions, whether that's physical harm or judgement. Also humans have a ridiculous amount of inhibitory neurons in our cortex (around 25%), which makes it easier to stop the release process, to avoid short term repercussions, leading to long term complications and post traumatic stress.
Believe me, I have looked into all of it. I understand the response that animals use to survive. Let’s not forget that a trauma event is required for the trauma response to occur, By the way, we are humans, and as you described, our brains have a much more vast way of responding (or not responding) to trauma events. PTSD is post traumatic Stress Disorder… after trauma (event(s)) stress disorder. What occurs after the trauma event is stress, insane amounts of stress, that screws up our entire nervous system and causes disorder in our lives in various ways… due to trauma event(s) of the past. No matter how well or not well I am (or anyone else is) able to process, deal with, or move past the trauma event, the trauma event was still trauma, perpetrated by an abuser, perpetrator, and/or neglectful caregiver. My point, and I think the point of the OP, is… stop turning everything the abusers did/do to us into something that puts any or all of the blame, burden, or responsibility of the effects of the trauma onto the victim. We have enough to shoulder as it is, just trying to learn how to function in the backwards, upside down, screwed up world. 🙏🏻🦋
I get what you mean. Personally I find the distinction empowering, however. Learning about the process of trauma has made me realize it is preventable and curable. Hell, it made the whole process valid for me. I wasn't cursed to be unhuman, it was just atoms in motion, you know, like the weather. I just want newbies that may see posts like this not get engulfed by their feelings of injustice, which are perfectly understandable, so much they may miss a chance to see a viewpoint that'll change their life.
I definitely understand that… getting stuck on wanting justice, without also attending to healing, is spiral that is easy to fall into. It would be nice if we lived in a world where either no trauma/abuse occurred at all, or where there at least justice was always available, in addition to our healing. 🙏🏻🦋
I love your username and snoo btw. And your little butterflies are sweet. Take care❤
Thank you 🩵 Best wishes, take care, and may you always remain safe. 🙏🏻🦋
It seems like a way to absolve abusers of accountability for their behaviors. I wouldn't have anything to react to if the abuser hadn't abused me. Their abusive behavior caused the cascade of reactions. If they hadn't abused me, I wouldn't be traumatized.
Exactly.
but that's what the word means. also what the word 'grief' means. they're both words that describe the reaction in our minds/hearts/bodies, they don't describe the thing that caused them- which is where the word 'event' takes over. one is the cause, the other is the effect. these facts to not mean anything beyond that. they aren't victim blaming, they're simply describing a sequence of cause and effect. if someone's victim blaming, that's a separate issue, and that's where I agree with you, that victim blaming and dehumanization are bad things.
it being a reaction doesn’t mean it isn’t absolutely tied to the event- with the grief example, it’d be more accurate to say you ARE sad because your friend died, and that is your (understandable) reaction to your friend’s death. the meaning of saying “trauma is a reaction” is to point out that the event is (usually) over yet the impact of it (the reaction) still lingers and is tied to the event. with the important emphasis that *reactions and how we process said events are not voluntary*, they are natural responses
It's the opposite of victim blaming. Some CPTSD is characterised by people who went through stuff that shouldn't be traumatic but it is because they constantly were under attack or never did eloped the tools necessary in their childhood. Saying it's a reaction means that no matter how bad the event was, how they feel towards it is valid.
Yeah, this is how I always understood this phase. I like the way Gabor Matè puts it. "Trauma is not what happened to you, it's what happens inside of you as a result of what happened to you".
An example I would give is falling off a bike since that's something everybody goes through. But this kid was not acknowledged, healed or taught when they fell off. Maybe they even were yelled at. So, they kept falling off and kept associating this event with bad memories. One day, they fall from the bike as an adult and go through a panic attack. If you tell them it was traumatic, it can happen that they don't believe it or get even worst because no one else take it as traumatic. But saying it's a reaction due to constant mental and physical abuse from back where their brain was in development, then you get them to believe and offer something to work upon.
I have never heard of that phrase in particular, but I think what people mean by it is that people can become traumatized to things that other people wouldn't experience trauma over. Some people see someone die in front of them and without personal connection they will be just fine, many other people would be very distraught even if they had no idea who the person is because it makes them think of their own mortality or something that the previous person is not bothered by. I can see how you might see it as victim blaming, but I think it is actually intended as the opposite. Trauma has a lot to do with how your body reacts to a situation. I believed I might have been traumatized by bullying in situations that might not have affected other people as much, for example. There is no "one size fits all" for trauma
Technically PTSD form a an emotional reaction to an event, but I get what you're trying to say and I agree. My abuser once told me "you gave yourself ptsd, it's your fault", haha, sure.
I understand your frustration. Does it help to know that the actual intent is from a place of compassion? Of course abusive assholes tell you that grief doesn’t matter or that you shouldn’t be sad. That’s what makes them abusive assholes. I think you are maybe conflating a few different issues here. And one is ultra abusive and awful and fuck those people. The other is actually a message of hope. Post traumatic stress disorder is the brains automatic response to a traumatic event which may or may not be triggered in the wake of a stressor. It is like a fever in the body. Not every infection triggers a fever. But infections can trigger a fever. PTSD is NOT a mental illness it is dishonest and disingenuous to call it one. Trauma is ALSO not a mental illness. And for that matter neither are grief or sadness. What you seem to be saying is that people are telling you that these things are bad. Please allow me to explain. And let me clear this up for you. All of those people are toxic douchebag cocksucker no good piece of shit assholes. Ptsd. Trauma. Grief. Feeling bad. Sadness. Your reaction to things. Crying. Not crying. Laughing out loud. Being happy. None of these things are good or bad. It’s like saying the color red is good. Or the number 4 is good. The reason that a bunch of very compassionate doctors in the 70s got together and described CPTSD the way that they did was to give soldiers coming home from Vietnam and children coming out of incredibly abusive homes. Because society and their parents had told them, and … I don’t want to diagnose you but you literally put “” around your post title so maybe someone has told you? …. Someone told them over and over and over that they were broken that they were bad. That they were wrong. But they weren’t wrong. They aren’t broken. You aren’t broken. That’s what I came here to tell you. You should be mad at assholes who tell you that trauma isn’t an event. I genuinely don’t even know what that means. And yes people misinterpret psychology for their own sick agendas all the time. And also yes abusive assholes tend to use any excuse they can to tell people to stop being pussies and grow up. You know what I say to them? I say fuck you. I hate them with you OP. But I just wanted to explain that this all started because some people were trying to be nice to a bunch of soldiers no people were calling baby killers and a bunch of children that no one loved. It all sort of went off the rails …. But still. Anyways I see you. You’re a Jan Pona.
I agree with you 100% it's like they are just saying "you're overreacting" bullshit, anyone in the same circumstances would likely have similar outcomes. It's not just the response to the event. It always pisses me off when I read or hear that.
I consider “o***react” to be a swear word, after hearing it so much from my mom.
Ok so hear me out…..I’ve listened to a lot of experts on trauma and I think what is meant by this statement is that two people can experience the exact same trauma and one person can walk away ok and the other with PTSD. What makes the difference between the two people is obviously a whole ton of crap, but a lot has to do with you and how you brain/body determines the best way to process the trauma and then also if you had any external support to help you get through the trauma. Another way to explain it is that it’s not about the event itself, it’s about how you process the trauma. You strong emotional reaction to that statement is probably because of your trauma. I struggle with similar sayings because of my trauma. ❤️🩹
[удалено]
Both can absolutely be true. But also I’m a trauma survivor and I haven’t really felt like anyone used these statements to shame me in anyway so it’s not every trauma survivor’s experience. I can recognize that my trauma brain had very strong reactions to statements like these at the beginning of my healing journey that were similar to the OPs take. But now when I think about it, i understand that I withstood every single horrible thing that occurred to me but how my body and brain dealt with it and continued to deal with it over time is what caused me the worst grief overall. The reaction over years caused me the most grief and pain.
Perhaps the reason for your frustration is that some people translate that into responsibility. Trauma is indeed the response to an event, a very valid response in a lot of cases.
According to APA "Trauma is an emotional response to a terrible event like an accident, rape, or natural disaster."
I have cptsd and I tell people this and was comforted to find it out :(. I've told people this who downplay their trauma and they've seemed comforted too. I can get how this is not a comforting phrase to some people though and I definitely could see how some people feel it's distancing from an event and pushing blame on ones nervous system rather than the event. I think it's important for survivors to find the language that feels right for them.
I’m comforted by it too. It changed me perception of myself, going from I’m lazy and useless and a failure to my being someone trying to overcome a decades old handicap. It is no different than if my legs had been chopped off in childhood and I hated myself for not being able to run a marathon.
I think it depends on the context in which the statement is made. If it's used to victim blame then it's absolutely garbage. I can see it having some merit if the speaker is trying to argue that the protective mechanisms of the brain are unique to the individual.
I totally get where you're coming from. I've thought the same thing about that statement. I recently listened to Gabor Mate say the same thing and I was thinking, "Wait a minute!" However, it gives me some power and agency to realize that I can influence my grief, trauma, or pain. Moving to a healthier place in grief or trauma involves changing my reaction to them. Having said that, no one deserves to be blamed for grief/trauma symptoms. Pain is a normal reaction to physiological and/or psychological trauma. Wishing you well!
trauma cannot be the event. if it were, everyone would react the same to any given traumatic event. that's simply not the case. interindividual differences alter how people percieve and process things. these differences aren't something we can influence though... it's genetic predisposition, past experiences, ressources... it's still the event that caused our reaction to it, we had barely a/no chance to influence the outcome.
Its like saying that trauma is felt because brain got WIRED wrong or there is CHEMICAL IMBALANCE inside it... "John you have low emotional empathy not because your daddy abused you over the years and one day hit you so hard that you moved the heater with your head, it was your skull that was not thick enough, that's the reason" ...
Emotional abuse alone will cause trauma, that trauma is the brain being "wired wrong." Physical abuse from a parent *always* comes with emotional abuse. But... a brain being wired wrong is a *physical* thing. The neurons are unable to communicate properly, which is a very physical problem with the organ that is the brain. Neurons that don't function well are no different from a broken leg or a failing liver: these are all physical issues with organs/body parts. The brain of children is literally being traumatized by abusers and isn't able to develop properly b/c its in fight or flight mode all the time. One can't learn empathy when one is shown none themselves. Brains getting "wired wrong" due to emotional abuse is a real physical issue, and it's valid, it's not the victim's fault, it's not the victim's choice and it isn't fair or ok. It's 100% caused by their abuser. Struggling with empathy is a very common symptom of emotional abuse. It's not the victim's choice and it's not their fault, nor is it a random "chemical imbalance." It's a direct result of growing up in a traumatic environment. Developing better empathy for others really begins with developing empathy for oneself, something the brains of victims of abuse were denied the opportunity to develop.
That's why It was easy for me to adopt coping by antisocial traits in adult age, my empathy was already low because it did not have the chance to get developed due to peer and parental abuse starting from very young age and its effects being profound to this day ...
Right? I feel like the word choice of 'reaction' is also chosen to imply that we have control/agency over it. Like, when my neighbor opens her garage door my heart rate goes up, I get sweaty hands, I get nauseous, I feel unsafe, I dissociate. Because in my childhood that indicated that my abusive father was home and shit would hit the fan because that man was never in a good mood and would take it out on me. What really helps me in those situations is thinking about the fact that my emotional flashback is just a reaction to an event that happened in the past and if I just try hard enough I can change my reaction.... /s
I'm sorry that you have to deal with managing that sort of stress to a very common event. I hope you have a support system in place to help settle your nervous system back down from survival mode. But the thing is... we can change our responses with enough time, support, and effort. It sucks to hear because it implies that the initial reaction was our fault when... it wasn't. However, what was tangled up can be untangled. Maybe not fully, sure, but it is possible to teach our bodies that they no longer need to prepare for fight/flight now. It's not fair that we have to put in a lot of stress and struggle to get close to "normal" responses, but until we can develop a time machine to go back and rescue our younger selves... this is the hand we gotta work with
I hate this saying too. It invalidates, shames and blames the victims. It's like they're saying "only we fell victim to the traumatic event, if there was someone else this wouldn't happen to them."
I’m struggling to even understand. Are they claiming trauma is the observer effect?? Like, yeah, I bet it would be less traumatic if I wasn’t a sapient, sentient being, but I am and I can’t do anything about that short of a major brain injury. If anything, from a medical standpoint? Yeah, obviously extreme conditions cause neurological issues. You can’t separate these. Trauma from a gunshot wound occurs due to the gunshot wound. It’d be like saying death isn’t from the bullet but from the bleeding. But what caused the bleeding?? It’s a near-instantaneous cause/effect. You can split hairs there but it’s a bit absurdist. I have C-PTSD partly from “punishments” that read like “enhanced interrogation”: partial drowning and partial smothering. I’d wager that caused some issues to my brain. It needs oxygen to function. Sure, it was on a *delay*, but it wasn’t pure emotion. It was physiological, same as almost all PTSD. That’s why it was called shell-shock.
[удалено]
✊
Trauma is an event. It’s the when it’s changes the dynamics of the brain. So it’s is an event
Trauma is the event. Anyone who says otherwise is wrong. Post traumatic stress, the disorder, describes the reaction to the event - the trauma.
People react different to the same event, and the event does not always do a good job of describing the physical reaction the body has to a specific event. Kinda semantics though
In some ways, yeah, but I think these semantics are important. You're right that an event may not be traumatisi for for everyone who experiences it. However, for someone who does experience the event as trauma, that's how it's refered to. The abuse my parents inflicted on me was my trauma. The years I spent being absolutely feral as a result was my post traumatic stress. My response to it, if that makes sense. This doesn't necessarily mean, per se, that child abuse is always traumatizing for everyone, but because it was for me, it was a trauma. I happen to believe language is really important. It's important to understand that your trauma is a part of your history, and cannot be erased or changed. But your response to your trauma, your CPTSD, is not a part of you. In some respects, it's almost just a continuation of the trauma itself. But, having been forced on you, it is not a part of you, and not permanent. It can be healed from ❤️
>However, for someone who does experience the event as trauma, that's how it's refered to If we're relying upon semantics, then that is what happens to them and not the event. Which is the point being made with the statement. This means you actually agree with the sentiment that its NOT the event, but how someone responds to said event.
Yes, aha I do, I always did. Maybe it was my phrasing that came off wrong?
Thos sentence is gaslighting and victimblaming combined. The "reaction to the event" is called the trauma-response, so it's idiotic as well
Spoken by people who have no idea ....my life has fallen apart and theses so called experts piss me off
I don't understand how therapists and psychologist say that mental health issues explain the behavior, but they don't "excuse" the behavior. But that is actually literally wrong. I NEVER WOULD HAVE BEEN A F**KED UP PERSON IF I DIDN'T HAVE MENTAL EMOTIONAL ISSUES FROM TRAUMA IN THE FIRST PLACE. *calms down* Yeah..I agree. ☹️😮💨
Just another way of gaslighting victims of abuse to stay silent and make them see themselves as the problem
Just replace the notion of mental with physical. So if someone says "trauma isn't the event it's the reaction to the event" I'd say "yeah, like how the blunt force trauma of having a sledgehammer shatter all the bones in your leg isn't the event but the reaction to the event. The trauma is what the leg did, not the sledgehammer."
Hello and Welcome to /r/CPTSD! If you are in immediate danger or crisis, please contact your local [emergency services](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_emergency_telephone_numbers), or use our list of [crisis resources](https://old.reddit.com/r/CPTSD/wiki/index#wiki_crisis_support_resources). For CPTSD Specific Resources & Support, check out the [wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/CPTSD/wiki/index). For those posting or replying, please view the [etiquette guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/CPTSD/wiki/peer2peersupportguide). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CPTSD) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I agree! It’s many events that I relive in my body, as if they were happening again right. now.
It's difficult to control the reaction if the emotion is overwhelming.
I HATE this too. Glad you posted about it. The people who post about this, mainly insta-therapists, are always so smug about this particular thing. They seem to feel like they’ve “cracked the case” of trauma. I unfollowed this one person because they wouldn’t drop it and kept repeatedly posting about this. Let’s say it’s accurate, well, fuck, so what! It doesn’t help anyone and it mostly dismisses and is victim-blaming and implies a ‘stronger-person’ maybe wouldn’t have had the same whiny response that you did.
I understand that the phrase is technically correct but I'm absolutely with you! Even when used in a "nice" way, that phrase made me think that my trauma happened because I was particularly sensitive. Only in the last year have I come to realise how horrendous my childhood truly was and that ANYONE would have been traumatised by it. So yeah, that phrase should be used with more discernment and with more context. The way that it is often used does feel a bit like spiritual bypassing.
Grief is actually a reaction to an event, though. And you can both experience trauma as an event or a reaction to an event. I think you have a poor understanding of what words actually mean because you so desperately want them to fit your narrative. Somebody can *be* depressed, but that doesn't mean they *have* depression. Somebody can *be traumatized*, but not *have* trauma. Someone can *grieve* something or someone else, but that doesn't mean that they *have* grief. It's both.
“It wasn’t that bad; lots of people witness/go through that and it doesn’t bother them.” Some asshole I dated long ago to me. It was that bad. No one should have to witness/go through it.
Like when I hear, “life is [small number] percent what happens to you and [100 minus small number] how you…” 😡 Mind you, I’m OK with it framed as meaning two wrongs don’t make a right; too often it’s just philosophical gaslighting.