If someone self harmed to avoid work that tells us alot of their mental state and how they see the world and how they will recall events. I.E. how reasonable their perception of the world is.
I’m not saying they are wrong, but it is the framework reasonable people will have to use when investigating the incidents. At this point the Canadian equilivent of a labor board must look into it.
Self harm is an extreme thing to do, which tells us this is an extreme personality.
If you ever feel the need to self harm to avoid a situation at work, please seek immediate help, both through the labor board, and from family and friends. Use your nextwork to immediately exit the situation.
I couldn’t disagree more. Self-harm is a common symptom of PTSD. Her experience reads like textbook workplace abuse leading to PTSD. Yes, a toxic work environment is absolutely a known cause for PTSD. So no, it is not an “extreme personality” to be driven to self-harm from a toxic work environment that involves instances of physical sexual harassment, belittling, and threats of firing.
This is where the victim rule comes in. She was (allegedly) victimized, and nothing about her story comes off as contrived or exaggerated. Nobody is saying to take LTT down and wipe them out, but like all victims who have come out she has the RIGHT to have her testimony taken at face value until or unless it is proven otherwise. Not in a court of law, but in the court of public opinion and people’s opinions of her. And yes, that means until we know otherwise, it is reasonable to judge LTT on this, especially because it is compatible with everything else that’s come out about them.
I feel like a lot of the people that are dismissing her allegations in the way OP did are failing to recognize that on top of everything you’ve pointed out in regards to what is alleged to have happened in the workplace, she moved from Arizona for the job, so on top of dealing with the workplace bullshit, she would have been greatly distanced from any of her family or friends that she could have relied on for help which could greatly affect how unbearable the situation would have been.
Yeah. I am trying not to get into specific triggering causes because I’m not an expert myself (just have those in my family), but isolation is definitely a factor in these situations, where a person feels unable to reach out or get out for an extended period of time.
I agree that self harm is a tragic response to the kind of environment she was apparently in. I do not agree that this act somehow makes her “perception of the world” (whatever that very broad phrase might mean) unreasonable, or that it proves she has an “extreme personality” (again not sure what, definitionally, that is). I think perfectly normal people react in unexpected ways to extreme environments and unless you have some reason to assume otherwise I’m not sure it’s reasonable to look at self harm and then default to questioning the person first and not the situation first.
Because you seem very close to implying (and I’m sure this isn’t the case) that issues of “recall” “perception” “reasonableness” and “personality” makes the statements of someone who self-harms untrustworthy, suspicious, or in some way self-serving or discountable. Not saying you were consciously trying to imply that, but that’s probably the cause of the downvotes.
This feels very dismissive of the work environment that would lead someone to go to this measure, and of mental health in general. If you’re being reprimanded for taking allotted days off, and if the work environment is so hostile from higher ups that you end up being this distressed, then that’s not her fault, nor is it evidence of an extreme personality. I’m not saying it’s what I would have done, and I also would encourage anyone in a similar situation to seek other alternatives, but her decision to self harm doesn’t make her any less credible.
If someone self harmed to avoid work that tells us alot of their mental state and how they see the world and how they will recall events. I.E. how reasonable their perception of the world is.
I’m not saying they are wrong, but it is the framework reasonable people will have to use when investigating the incidents. At this point the Canadian equilivent of a labor board must look into it.
Self harm is an extreme thing to do, which tells us this is an extreme personality.
If you ever feel the need to self harm to avoid a situation at work, please seek immediate help, both through the labor board, and from family and friends. Use your nextwork to immediately exit the situation.
I couldn’t disagree more. Self-harm is a common symptom of PTSD. Her experience reads like textbook workplace abuse leading to PTSD. Yes, a toxic work environment is absolutely a known cause for PTSD. So no, it is not an “extreme personality” to be driven to self-harm from a toxic work environment that involves instances of physical sexual harassment, belittling, and threats of firing.
This is where the victim rule comes in. She was (allegedly) victimized, and nothing about her story comes off as contrived or exaggerated. Nobody is saying to take LTT down and wipe them out, but like all victims who have come out she has the RIGHT to have her testimony taken at face value until or unless it is proven otherwise. Not in a court of law, but in the court of public opinion and people’s opinions of her. And yes, that means until we know otherwise, it is reasonable to judge LTT on this, especially because it is compatible with everything else that’s come out about them.
I feel like a lot of the people that are dismissing her allegations in the way OP did are failing to recognize that on top of everything you’ve pointed out in regards to what is alleged to have happened in the workplace, she moved from Arizona for the job, so on top of dealing with the workplace bullshit, she would have been greatly distanced from any of her family or friends that she could have relied on for help which could greatly affect how unbearable the situation would have been.
Yeah. I am trying not to get into specific triggering causes because I’m not an expert myself (just have those in my family), but isolation is definitely a factor in these situations, where a person feels unable to reach out or get out for an extended period of time.
I agree that self harm is a tragic response to the kind of environment she was apparently in. I do not agree that this act somehow makes her “perception of the world” (whatever that very broad phrase might mean) unreasonable, or that it proves she has an “extreme personality” (again not sure what, definitionally, that is). I think perfectly normal people react in unexpected ways to extreme environments and unless you have some reason to assume otherwise I’m not sure it’s reasonable to look at self harm and then default to questioning the person first and not the situation first.
Because you seem very close to implying (and I’m sure this isn’t the case) that issues of “recall” “perception” “reasonableness” and “personality” makes the statements of someone who self-harms untrustworthy, suspicious, or in some way self-serving or discountable. Not saying you were consciously trying to imply that, but that’s probably the cause of the downvotes.
This feels very dismissive of the work environment that would lead someone to go to this measure, and of mental health in general. If you’re being reprimanded for taking allotted days off, and if the work environment is so hostile from higher ups that you end up being this distressed, then that’s not her fault, nor is it evidence of an extreme personality. I’m not saying it’s what I would have done, and I also would encourage anyone in a similar situation to seek other alternatives, but her decision to self harm doesn’t make her any less credible.