You know…… How shallow is your support/allyship/solidarity/whatever the in-crowd is calling it, when it doesn’t even seem to occur to you that the person you’re talking to might well be a trauma survivor themselves*? How limited is your willingness to understand the stories of survivors beside yourself, when you think it’s “insulting” for a trauma survivor bring up the #seriouslysurvivor and #actuallytraumatized tags as a point of reference, in a way that’s genuinely relevant to the argument being made — because the argument being made would be say that those are bad and wrong and stealing?
What use is that, to finally concede “I’m not saying there isn’t overlap” [between being ace & being traumatized and/or abused] but to persist in treating designated online ace tags as an Offense — while pretending that isn’t an invalidation to some survivors in and of itself?
What good is that? Why act like having trauma and wanting designated ace safe spaces can’t possibly be related, as if there’s anything trauma can’t be related to?
Just… blows my mind, that someone, ostensibly thinking they’re standing up for/prioritizing trauma survivors, can think they have the moral high ground by placing that ideal second to criticizing those dirty, icky aces.
*I checked and yes, at least one of the people I’m reacting to w/ this is a survivor themselves. Doesn’t change my mind, since that doesn’t make anyone infallible, but yes I did bother to confirm this. And my thoughts here are more in general about how these conversations go down than about these specific individuals.