Submitted by lettuceLeafer in meta

So I thought of this question when I read Thai comment

https://raddle.me/f/memer/139884/-/comment/237825

So this was in a discussion about being against the accumulation of resources. So my first reaction was like damn that is like an incredibly messed up. Sure like rich people can hoard wealth but in my experience when people talk about hoarding I more think of hoarding disorder which is pretty similar and called the same thing. Plus that's how it's used more often in my experience bc hoarding is actually pretty common.

The short breif part of this is that like hoarding disorder often is like a trauma induced response that people have. Usually caused by something like food insecurity, extreme poverty, growing up in a house of a hoarder or a compensation for severe lack of control just as being sexually assaulted.

Fror example then later in life after this issue people get a bunch of stuff that literally makes their life worse and just like can't get rid of it. I mean it's stuff that makes their life worse and they emotionally basically find it impossible to stop aquiring and get rid of things.

And this isn't even like a rich person thing. Usually poor hoarders hord stuff that was going to be thrown away or sold for very cheap at like a yard sale or something.

So I guess my question is when does the hoarding discourse become actually harmful to marginalized people. I'd say I don't care to much when it's specific that it's about hoarding like bezos or kinoshavos comment about being against accumulation in some utopian society. Tho I think potatoes comment is harmful.

I made that connection and I'm not a hoarder. If I was a hoarder myself and hoarding being something I think about a lot I would definitely take the comment as a statement on me being a shitty person or doing something wrong.

But like plenty of haorders don't really cause problems. Like if ur like most poor or middle class hoarder you are hoarding stuff that most of the time was just going to be thrown away or like second hand stuff that was just sitting in someone else's attic. That's not problematic at all. And especially considering it's a coping mechanism for some pretty intense trauma I think raddle would be a far less friendly place to these people.

Idk, I think this comment could easily be viewed in a way that punches down at some people who are really struggling even if that wasn't the authors intent. Also I'm not trying to call out potatoes or anything. They are just a good example. Plus anarchism as a whole frequently promotes oppressing people veiwed as committing the sin of gluttony.

I'm also not against people complaining about wealth inequality or those will the ability to provide necessary resources but withhold them for power or whatever. More so I do get some bad vibes from the hoarding discourse in general. I mention this bc I think there is a discussion to be had about maybe making raddle a better place and preventing vulnerable people who are generally shit on by society not getting unnecessary flak on raddle too.

9

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

NoPotatoes wrote

So "hoarding the mental disorder" usually involves someone accumulating possessions that most people don't value highly. So why would there be an incentive to separate this person from those possessions? Especially if such an action would cause mental trauma to the person?

6

metocin wrote

Yeah this whole post is just conflating junk hoarding with wealth hoarding which are two COMPLETELY different things. Being against wealth hoarding isn't ableist, lol

4

lettuceLeafer OP wrote

I'm not surprised that a clouds accolade consistently clutches their pearls after any comment less than ego inflation.

−1

flingwingin wrote

dude so many of your posts are along these same lines, and its like fr kinda worrying

no one should be worrying this hard about "what is the line between normal thing, and problematic thing"

like first of all either they're two separate things, or if it's a spectrum then u gotta decide is it all kinda problematic, or is it fine? Anyways good luck with your ethical journeys

"when does lettuce's constant use of activist categories become cultural appropriation"

i made your next topic for you ;)

5

lettuceLeafer OP wrote

Raddle is a forum where like the main draw is people from an anarchist perspective discussing society and oppression how to fix things, proper solution, how u navigate stuff and what is oppressive or not. And I assume most people are like me and discuss these things bc it's amusing. They are questions about life that make me think and sometimes people respond and completely change how I see an issue. The idea that me enjoying trying to make a space where people are more comfortable to be open and feel welcome seems weird.

Wait is ur reaction "omg I'm so worried I don't want to engage with this problem bc I'd rather be worried" when u think about if your actions ight make someone uncomfortable or be harmful to other people. Bc this comment makes no sense with that not being true.

Tho the prob more likely conclusion but the one I dont believe to be on the side of caution is you're being a passive aggressive jerk. Prob one of those anarchist types who is fine with critiquing systems that oppress them personally but if the have to engage with even mild shit that might indicate their behavior as anything less pure as Jesus.

Which sounds rude but like the point of your comment is addressing making raddle a nicer space for those who are coping with some pretty severe trauma and if current ways language is used could make their raddle experience far worse and be more of a harmful experience for them.

Like u didn't have to read it and from what I can tell no one proposed a call to action to ban or even tell off people who makes comments against material hoarding. I didn't even claim potatoes was a bad person and left it a bit undecided if their comment was harmful and tried to minimize it being about them (or at last that was my intention)

So I'm fine having a discussion with people about this which I found interesting minding my business and here u come. Lettuceleafer when u enjoy having discussion about making raddle and living life in a way where people feel more comfortable arroudn u and more comforting to those struggling with personal issues. I'm worried bc ur just having too much fun. It's not normal to talk about stuff u enjoy.

So I propose that's it's irrelevant if such language choices are harmful or not. Hell if u make comments that might make someone cry bc flingwingin told me that they are worried by me enjoying discussion changing myalmgauge to a kid such a action. In fact if I do give a fuck about hurting people's feelings that's bad.

I swear to God I read that a couple times and really tried to get a fair reading. And turns out the more positive reading still makes u look like a prick. Tho I did try to read ur comment in a way that minimizes how much of a prick u look like.

0

flingwingin wrote

wtf r u talking about "i'm tryna kill your enjoyment", all im saying is the self-flagelating and judging others questions r like FAM

it's not that you shouldnt be worried about what people think or trying to make them happier, it's that like your whole mindset and framework is these wokoid terms that dont really address like specific people being hurt, it's all posturing and thats all im trying to say

my original comment wasnt even that serious like jeez

ur best interpretation is that i'm being super serious and trying to destroy your fun and i'm a dick - by telling you to take it easy and not worry about all these categories to be judgy about?

self crit all im sayin smh

4