Re: BPs or Fleas? >Free

[Guest guest]

(((Thank YOU))) for helping me think about this, Free. The problem is,

there's the " should " word, again. The guy claims we " should " avoid

people who have these character traits, which *HE* calls " disorders " ,

which then became part of the PD thing in the DSM (the psychiatrist's

" bible " ). Uh huh. analogy to religion noted.

I agree if someone has, say, a gambling problem and it effects *me*,

then I can choose to not associate with that person. Or maybe I will,

despite his so called " character disorder " .

Take the 'emotionally immature' thing. The actress Cher doesn't behave

" age appropriately " . That doesn't mean she has a defective character

and " should " be avoided. What about the " fun is the cornerstone of his

life " thing? I know people who have a lot of fun. The ones who don't

have kids go out 5-7 nights a week. The ones with kids take them to

festivals and etc. I suppose if they weren't 'disordered' they'd be

spending sundays in bible study instead of champagne brunches...

The more I think about that list, the more I see it as an archaic,

Puritanical infantilizing thing...which somehow made its way into

" modern " psychiatry.

Speaking of psychiatry, 99.9% of the world doesn't have the money for

designer drugs and psychiatrists. So it's safe to say this is a field

for existentially depressed rich people ( " whoa is me....I'm soooo

upset and I *don't* know WHY? " . Maybe if they were living in a cave in

Afghanistan or in a refugee camp they might have a clue. Of course

there are the profoundly mentally ill, which I guess some

psychiatrists treat (crudely). But isn't it fair to say most of them

talk to and prescribe things to rich white urban women?

Dr. Freud might be amused to see things haven't changed much...

What century is this,

sunsh

p.s. maybe if the list went on to imply or directly state these people

shouldn't be allowed to breed, then I'd feel differently. Nada and her

foo *should have* been prevented from breeding. But that opens a whole

other can of worms...what " rights " do the mentally ill have, and ect.?

I hope I don't sound like a Neo Nazi, but if g'fada had been

sterilized when he was institutionalized, then 3 generations (so far)

would have been spared, and society would be better off (I'm thinking

of how much MONEY my foo has cost tax payers) not to mention pain --

pain to others..what they do to themselves is irrelevant...

>

> > It still seems like a lot of the 85 point 'character disorder' list

> > reads like a morality play. I still don't get why things like having

> > too much " fun " , not paying bills on time and etc. are any of my (or

> > anyone else's) business?

> >

> > huh?

> > liquid sunsh

> >

[Guest guest]

Sunshine,

I guess maybe I took it a different way. I took them more as warning

signs - especially if there was an abundance of them which made me

uncomfortable. Not so much if the characteristic made me

uncomfortable in and of itself - but if the way THAT person displayed

that characteristic made me uncomfortable - and they displayed

several of them in a way that made me uncomfortable then watching how

much affect I let that person have over my life is pretty wise.

If my response was a " Eeek!Yes!!I can't STAND how they DO that!! " I

should consider that.

But I do see how sometimes people's characteristics are described

with either a positive or negative slant. And some people can have

fun taking out the trash where others can't have fun at a party - so

it's all relative.

Actually, I like to have fun - but don't consider it a character

disorder. Yet I take into account that I can also be very serious.

And I also think fun can be a state of mind...no matter what you do.

Eek!! Now I am getting a flashback!! Of the " fun " not-fun stuff. I

had this boyfriend that would say " I'm just a playful pup " (about

himself). But he thought it was " fun " to dump cold water on me when I

was taking a hot bath - and when I got upset he just gave me his " I'm

just a playful pup " shit! Or I would be dozing off and he would poke

me in the ribs - or grab my toe and yank it...and think it was " fun. "

And when I tried to explain to him that it bothered me - and that I

could not RELAX around him when he did that crap to me - he acted

like I was some kind of grouch - and he was " just a playful pup. " So

I - according to MY standards - considered his " fun " to be defective.

I don't go for that crap of tormenting a person and then trying to

make them look like a " poor sport " for not seeing your " humor. " (He

really ticked me off about that stuff).

I'm not sure if psychiatrists are only available to the wealthy. I

thought they had quite a few public aid clients too (though I think

they often just " sign off " on those). I haven't met a psychiatrist I

wanted messing with my mind yet....but with the whole spectrum of

psychologists, therapists, counselors, etc... I think there are lots

of choices for mental health available to a range of people.

Free

> >

> > > It still seems like a lot of the 85 point 'character disorder'

list

> > > reads like a morality play. I still don't get why things like

having

> > > too much " fun " , not paying bills on time and etc. are any of my

(or

> > > anyone else's) business?

> > >

> > > huh?

> > > liquid sunsh

> > >

[Guest guest]

And the wisdom to know the difference....

Free

> In a message dated 4/11/04 7:38:26 PM Eastern Daylight Time,

> free_spirit_etc@y... writes:

> Eek!! Now I am getting a flashback!! Of the " fun " not-fun stuff

> OOO...there's the difference. Fun at somebody elses

expense...that's the BP

> stuff. Carol

>

>

>