The researchers aren’t sure exactly how psilocybin works—a rather common problem in drugs aimed at brain chemistry. Psilocybin seems to quiet the prefrontal cortex, a part of the brain where increased activity has been associated with depression. It also might be acting on the brain’s use of glutamate, a neurotransmitter that affects learning and memory. Ross said what might be happening is a sort of “inverse PTSD”—a profoundly positive memory that affects participants for months, much like a severe trauma might in post-traumatic stress disorder.
It’s also possible that the sheer mysticism of the experience was enough to prompt a change in mood. “There’s a sacredness or a reverence to that experience … it’s also accompanied by positive mood, in the sense of an open-heartedness, love or benevolence,” Griffiths said. Participants might have a sense that “the experience is more real and more true than everyday waking consciousness. Although the effects of the drugs are gone by the end of the day, the memories of these experiences and the attributions made to them endure.” It’s not uncommon, he said, for study participants to say they think about their psilocybin experience every day.
to artists/writers/creators who have ever been accused of/feel guilty about “forcing” diversity in racial/queer/etc. representation, please never forget that it often will always feel at least a little forced and will require a conscious effort to be diverse. it isn’t because these kinds of people don’t exist in real life but that we rarely see them in the media we consume and so there’s a huge cognitive dissonance between media reality and actual reality. the white, cishet, able-bodied, neurotypical, etc. character has been normalized so much so that no matter your own background/marginalization, it becomes your default when making your own characters. this is coming from a queer woc. so, long story short, don’t be afraid of making the conscious effort to be more diverse. it will often take a conscious effort. you don’t have to wait for a scenario where it feels “natural” because there doesn't need to be a justification for diversity.
if you have such an issue with that class and triggering your necrophobia, you should leave it? the world isn't censored, and academia certainly shouldn't be. if you can't handle the heat, get out of the kitchen.
“the world isn’t censored”
you’re totally right
censorship is totally the same as accommodating someone or giving a warning for something that may be disabling for them
and there’s absolutely nothing in this world that provides these accommodations
and if you “can’t handle the heat” because of your disability,
then you should totally “get out of the kitchen” because there is no place here for you.
Anxiety disorders and other mental illnesses are disabilities that often require accommodations in many forms. Sometimes those accommodations come in the form of trigger warnings, which I’m sure you’ve seen (I mean, judging by your message I doubt you use them, but I do, so I’m sure you’ve seen them). Accommodation can be medication (if the person needing the medication can afford it, and if the medication works for them). And accommodation can be understanding - a verbal warning before showing graphic images, providing a non-triggering link or alternate coursework.
I have always needed such accommodations, because I have never been able to simply not take a class before in my life. So I know what I’m doing when I ask my professors for accommodations at the beginning of each semester, as I have had to ask for accommodations for every science and history class I’ve taken since middle school. Because necrophobia is an uncommon disorder, many teachers are at first taken aback by the specificity of my request (which is usually: “Hi, I just want to let you know now before it comes up later that I have necrophobia, which is fear of dead bodies. So if at any time during the semester there will be images or photos of dead bodies, blood, skeletons, or body parts, I’ll need a warning in advance and I may need alternate coursework.”) but they usually understand and are willing to work with me.
Of course, I’ve had teachers who have treated me like a huge inconvenience (“*heavy sigh* You’re just trying to get out of doing the work, aren’t you?”) and that’s never fun. But let me ask you this: if you were a teacher and you had a student who was a recovering alcoholic, and your subject had nothing to do with alcoholism but you did have a slide in a powerpoint showing photos of beer bottles (things the student told you were triggering for them), would you seriously not accommodate them and remove the photos? Would you really cry “CENSORSHIP!!” and refuse to extend empathy toward this person?
There’s a huge flaw in your thinking, anon. You’re equating censorship with needing accommodations such as the ones I listed. And don’t get me wrong, I’m not a big fan of censorship in general, but these are false equivalencies. This is akin to situations wherein Person A is hurt or offended by Person B’s words, and instead of apologizing, Person B says, “I have freedom of speech!” That’s not the point, and it never was. As much as Person B has freedom of speech, Person A has freedom to be hurt by this speech. Person B also has the freedom to not be an asshole and apologize and try to be better in the future about what they say around Person A.
I want people to be better about how they accommodate my phobia, because as inconvenient as it may be for them, for me it can be disabling.
And for the record, my class is Children and the Media. I only told my professor about my phobia because she mentioned that she did a fellowship in forensic psychology, and I thought, “You know, maybe it would be good to mention this just in case forensics come up in class somehow.” And I’m glad I did, because she told me that there was an image of a dead body in our lecture about depression and suicide. It’s not like I’m taking a biology class, or a forensics class, or anatomy or anything like that. I’m taking a class about how the media affects cognitive development in children and adolescents. I really shouldn’t even have to justify this, but here you go: I’m taking a class about something I’m interested in. And I’m not going to drop it just because there is one photo of one dead body in one slide. What it does mean is that I have to physically miss a class because my professor won’t take the photo out of the slide, which is annoying because I want to be there and I’m paying to be there.
And literally all my teacher would have to do is remove the photo from the slide she shows to the class, or even just say “just so you know, on this next slide there will be an image of a dead body, so if that’s upsetting for you, put your head down now.” She’s at least accommodating me a little bit by removing the photo from her slideshow and emailing that version to me, but it would make so much more sense to just remove the photo from the version she shows everybody so I’m not missing a whole class because of it. (And honestly - how much more can one image really add? And if it adds that much more, then how much more am I missing just because I can’t go to class that day?)
Signing this off with a big FUCK YOU to anyone who thinks mental disorders don’t deserve accommodations or that trigger warnings are the same as censoring things. F U C K . Y O U .