3 ms·
The point is that one without PTSD might want to claim to have it. This gets sympathy, disability benefits, etc. There are also borderline cases of victimhood.
by burfog 6y ago
The point is that one without PTSD might want to claim to have it. This gets sympathy, disability benefits, etc.
There are also borderline cases of victimhood. Do those get rounded to "yes" or "no"? If you've had a difficult experience, you could talk that up into PTSD or brush it off. If being a victim brings social or financial benefits, that will make the difference for some people.
- afpx 6y agoSure. But, their premise is that PTSD can be net-positive.
- TimTheTinker 6y agoAs a diagnosis or as a "lived experience"?
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- skinkestek 6y ago> But, their premise is that PTSD can be net-positive. Isn't it rather that signalling PTSD can be a net positive?
- Traster 6y agoIt would seem relevant to determine whether the signalling is a true reflection of reality. If I'm telling people I have PTSD without PTSD then it's entirely unsuprising that I show other bad traits. If I actually have PTSD then that's quite distinct and would be an interesting study- amonst the poeple who have X, how many of them signal X and why. Then of course how many of the people signalling (for example) PTSD are people with PTSD. It would seem like a really bad conclusion to say people signalling PTSD are psychopath if actually, there are people with PTSD and then psychopaths who signal PTSD - because you're essentially lumping people with real pain into a group with people who are exploiting thier pain.