I'd be interested to know if there is there a correlation here between people suspicious of anti-depressants and people suspicious of psychology in general? 'Oh therapy is for people who just want to sit and cry about their problems... they should just suck it up.' That whole mentality?

DrAwkward wrote:I think you're wrong to casually brush aside any examples of them being used correctly as "well, maybe those people could have gotten better on their own." THAT is truly ignorant.

It's much worse than that Mr Awkward.

I don't think (most of the time) that there's anything to get better from.

I think there is nothing unusual about being depressed in a culture like ours.
I think our culture, in order to function without revolt, requires people to behave in a certain way. When they don't (or can't) they get diagnosed as suffering from depression or other mental illnesses. And, today, they get given some drugs to 'normalise' them.

In fact writing this I realise I'm getting the thrust of some of this from Foucault's Madness and Civilisation which I read some years ago.

Oh not crap, by the way... there are people I'm pretty sure would've killed themselves without being on them.

Earwicker wrote:Holy cats. Do you honestly write on here worrying that someone with a mental disorder might read it and get upset?

If everyone lived by this rule there would only be bland creative endeavours, there would be no good comedy, and every television channel would show nothing but the X Factor or variations thereof.

In this case, yes.

When it's possible to make exactly the same point without mindlessly insulting a vulnerable group of people, specifically on a thread about anti-depressants - one which is going to attract the very people who are likely to be overly-sensitive to thoughtless comments - it seriously makes sense to do that.

Depression has a way of scewering your perception, making you see only the worst possible interpretation in everything. It also makes you doubt yourself. Depressives reading Rick's orginal comments are likely to read the comments as applying to themselves, whether they fit into Rick's hypothetical group or not. Their minds will convince them that they are in fact not one of the 'genuinely' depressed people, but one of the "flabby" lazy people that just need to organise their lives better. Someone who self-harms will likely use it as an excuse to hurt themselves. Someone who is depressed may stop taking their medications. I hate to think what someone suffering from an eating disorder on top might do, in response to being called "flabby" and lazy.

Earwicker wrote:

DrAwkward wrote:I think you're wrong to casually brush aside any examples of them being used correctly as "well, maybe those people could have gotten better on their own." THAT is truly ignorant.

It's much worse than that Mr Awkward.

I don't think (most of the time) that there's anything to get better from.

I think there is nothing unusual about being depressed in a culture like ours.
I think our culture, in order to function without revolt, requires people to behave in a certain way. When they don't (or can't) they get diagnosed as suffering from depression or other mental illnesses. And, today, they get given some drugs to 'normalise' them.

In fact writing this I realise I'm getting the thrust of some of this from Foucault's Madness and Civilisation which I read some years ago.

Yeah, all those people sitting on their couches overcome with despair and planning their own suicides are definitely in danger of revolting against the government.

And with that, i'm done. This is ridiculous.

DrAwkward wrote:

Earwicker wrote:

DrAwkward wrote:I think you're wrong to casually brush aside any examples of them being used correctly as "well, maybe those people could have gotten better on their own." THAT is truly ignorant.

It's much worse than that Mr Awkward.

I don't think (most of the time) that there's anything to get better from.

I think there is nothing unusual about being depressed in a culture like ours.
I think our culture, in order to function without revolt, requires people to behave in a certain way. When they don't (or can't) they get diagnosed as suffering from depression or other mental illnesses. And, today, they get given some drugs to 'normalise' them.

In fact writing this I realise I'm getting the thrust of some of this from Foucault's Madness and Civilisation which I read some years ago.

Yeah, all those people sitting on their couches overcome with despair and planning their own suicides are definitely in danger of revolting against the government.

And with that, i'm done. This is ridiculous.

Haven't you heard of suicide bombers?!

DrAwkward wrote:Yeah, all those people sitting on their couches overcome with despair and planning their own suicides are definitely in danger of revolting against the government.

And with that, i'm done. This is ridiculous.

I'd like someone to explain what's so ridiculous about the notion rather than rolling their eyes and running off to watch some American Wrestling.

Does anyone think that people who form movements to try and affect change are happy with everything?

I don't think so. I think they feel bad that things aren't as they should be so they want to change it.

What's ridiculous about that?

I think a lot of despair comes from the general feeling of hopelessness about our culture. The feeling that no-one can do anything about it.

Is that a ridiculous suggestion?

I think that the over use of pills to counter that feeling of dissatisfaction reduces the likelihood of people forming such movements (which, in turn, exacerbates that feeling of hopelessness).

What is so ridiculous about that suggestion?

I'd like someone to say why that assertion is wrong rather than just saying 'happy pills make people happy - you're just being silly'

I agree with most that happy pills can make some people happy. But, like you said, it's more complicated than that.

Crap, snap out of it!

Unhappy people are far more productive.

Earwicker wrote:I think that the over use of pills to counter that feeling of dissatisfaction reduces the likelihood of people forming such movements (which, in turn, exacerbates that feeling of hopelessness).

What is so ridiculous about that suggestion?

It takes organisation to form movements. It takes extraordinary strength of character, the ability to give rousing speeches, the ability to argue passionately without losing your temper or breaking down, clear-mindedness not clouded by emotions, total belief that what you are doing is right and much more. All qualities that will be absent while someone is suffering from depression, no matter how strong a person they were before they were affected.

Perhaps your point is relevant to those with bipolar disorder in a 'manic' phase (would Winston Churchill be as effective taking lithium as he was self-medicating with alcohol, who knows?), but certainly not depression. If you are depressed, you are hardly capable of getting out of the couch, let alone fighting for a cause or summoning the self-confidence required to organise some sort of revolutionary movement.

Rick Reuben wrote:When half the damn country ends up on these drugs, will most of you in this thread still be claiming that half of America is chemically unbalanced and in need of drugs? Maybe we should just seed the reservoirs, or use crop dusters.

Maybe if you would just shut the fuck up with all your anti-American lies, then we wouldn't be depressed enough to have to do drugs.
You're a hate monger.