This post has been edited by lilyvanilla: 11 July 2011 - 03:58 AM
Welcome to Pandora's Aquarium, a rape, sexual assault, and sexual abuse survivor message board and chat room.
If you've been a victim of any type of sexual violence, you belong here. What you see below represents just a fraction of the resources and survivor support available. Register now to join our community and take full advantage of what this online support group has to offer you as you heal and recover, or sign in to remove this message.
You are not alone, we can support you as you heal, and you've made an important step toward recovery by reaching out. If you are unable to register or have any questions, please contact the staff or view our home page.
in the SI forum sorry if you're not supposed to type the word
Posted 11 July 2011 - 03:55 AM
Invisible panda is right - it's against the forum guidelines to talk about specific methods of SI. This is because the focus of the forum is on healing from SI, and on dealing with the feelings and issues surrounding it, rather than on specific self-harm acts. The full guidelines for the SI forum can be found here.
Posted 03 October 2011 - 11:20 PM
What the difference between saying I have an eating disorder, I'm a binger. And I SI, I'm a ...
Honestly I think it makes a huge difference when your coming to the board looking for tips on what to do to avoid SI. or talking about ur struggle with SI.
Same like if I had an ED. If I'm a restricter, people aren't going to encourage me to keep busy after I eat? Right..
IDK if that makes sense, but I'm just curious.
Posted 04 October 2011 - 01:21 AM
It's a good question - you will notice that we also limit the detail with which people can talk about their eating disorders as well. Our guidelines pertaining to these two issues were developed with consultation with a highly regarded eating disorder and trauma specialist in the US, who also happens to be an ex-moderator and current Administrator of this board :)/> It is standard practice in many trauma-based therapies to limit the detail a person goes into when talking about these issues, as there is little to be gained from the sharing of war wounds and details and often these can be distracting from talking about the real matter at hand, the emotional rationale behind these behaviours. Details about self-injury and eating disorders are best discussed in the context of a therapy room or with a trusted support person, as a peer to peer support board is usually not equipped to deal with this.
If a member really wants to talk about the details of their self-injury (or indeed their eating disorder) there are many places on the internet that are better able to handle these things - we can't be everything to all members, but we can try to draw a compromise to create a healing place focussed on healing from sexual violence.
Posted 04 October 2011 - 02:24 AM
I see that for the eating disorder forum. People can say what type of eating disorder they have.
What is the difference between that and saying the method of SI you use?
I can appreciate that going into graphic detail about either one of these topics on the board is not helpful for anyone on the board. And comparing notes in a negative light is not helpful either.
I'm merely wondering, if it would be beneficial in the healing process to be able to label our SI, in the same manner that the ED's have been labeled. NO detail, to amounts, nothing more than a word.
My goal is not to create conflict, but simply to understand.
i dont mind if you hide this.
This post has been edited by lostinsideofme: 04 October 2011 - 02:30 AM
Posted 04 October 2011 - 05:37 AM
Having said that, I do think there is a difference between being able to name the type of eating disorder you have and the behaviour that manifests with this, compared to naming the type of method by which you self harm. I think that when talking about eating disorders, the behaviour that you exhibit (i.e. whether you purge, restrict, binge etc.) does actually have implications not only the differential diagnosis of the type of eating disorder, but also there are emotional reasons why someone exhibits different behaviours associated with different eating disorders - and also the treatment is going to be different. For example, the methods, rationale, treatments etc. are going to be very different between someone who has anorexia nervosa, anorexia bulemia and an over-eater for example. So I actually feel that naming the behaviour is relevant.
However, when it comes to SI, the method really doesn;t hold the same relevance. While a person may have several methods for self harming, the reason that any method is chosen is likely to be the same for them. For example, I SI in order to focus on the physical pain and not have to focus on being emotionally in pain, and the method that I use to inflict this pain is really not relevant because it is the pain itself and the emotional reasons behind this which are the point. I don't know if that makes any sense to you?
Posted 07 October 2011 - 06:30 PM
I'm not sure I entirely agree with this. I know that a person with anorexia and a person with bulimia engage in different behaviors for different reasons. That said, I'm pretty sure about 60% of individuals diagnosed with eating disorders in the United States fall into the "EDNOS" category because their disorder does not perfectly fit into one or both of those categories. In some cases, all the behavior is towards the same end of control. I definitely can see how it would be somewhat different than general self-injury. At the same time, when I was dealing with disordered eating, pretty much everything I did had the same goal and rationale in mind. When I choose to perform my more "traditional" self-injurious acts, the reasoning is very different than when I choose to sexually self-injure, for example. I think whether or not different acts hold different relevance kind of depends on the person doing it. For example, if a person was abused in a specific way, self-injuring in a way that replicates the abuse would mean something different than self-injuring in a way that hurts the body but does not directly correlate to an experience.
I've found that, oftentimes, even when posters are trying not to say what they specifically did, it isn't difficult to discern. For example, there are posts saying things like "how do you cover your scars up?" Not all forms of self-injury leave marks that would be referred to as "scars" and so this word unto itself can narrow it down a bit. The question then becomes, what counts as "graphic" and what counts as a method? I definitely agree 100% though that there shouldn't be posts where people list numbers of wounds, exactly what tools they used, detailed descriptions of what they did, etc, since it can lead to comparing and minimizing. Those types of things can be common on less regulated communities like non-survivor-oriented blog sites. At the same time, the problem I see with many of those "neutral" communities is not that people use words that narrow down what they did, but the fact that the discussion is often comparison-based and not healing-based. There will be accounts of how long they spent doing something, how many injuries they created, how much bodily damage was caused, etc. In some cases, there will even be photos (which can be quite unsettling). That kind of an environment is unhealthy (in my opinion) more due to the comparisons than due to the mention of a method.
That's just my opinion primarily.