No, I need to clean first. But you can come over after I clean.
Or, and hear me out, or, you could clean mine and we could still hang out at yours so mine doesn't get messy again.
No, I need to clean first. But you can come over after I clean.
Why is it down to you to accomodate (or bitchslap) people at all? Unwelcome and unwanted help or advice is not a favor. It's unwelcome. If someone is not ready to receive help or advice, has not reached out to you, or has shown no signs that they are interested in receiving help from you, then don't give it to them. We all seem perfectly capable of understanding this in people without mental illnesses, but with mentally ill people we immediately want to step in despite the fact that we are often not wanted, and then label people as ungrateful and difficult when we aren't well received.
Give people time. There's no rush. People are allowed to process their emotions at their own pace, with lots of pitfalls and hurdles along the way. They're allowed to feel bad without your help or anyone else's being forced on them. Let people who are close to the person who feels bad and want to help and know what works and care about the outcome do the prodding, if they want to do the prodding. They don't have to. You don't have to be in a shrink's office to start working through the issues in your life.
Yes, really. I can't speak for others, but I seldom if ever see Kyueei as hostile. Blunt, but blunt ≠hostile, which many people seem to forget or misinterpret.
You seriously can't triage what mental illnesses tend to be more serious than others? Really? Of course there are so many that it becomes splitting hairs, and some cases can be so extreme it can create a data point outlier. Otherwise though, yes some tends to be much more severe than others. The big three are Schizophrenia, Schizoaffective, and Bipolar disorder.
NIMH » Serious Mental Illness (SMI) Among U.S. Adults
A bias is a bias. Since you question the basis of psychology (which is something that can't actually be invalidated in the first place), that certainly removes a lot of credibility for you to be able to speak about it. If there was legimate shakey ground for it, sure then it would be legit, but in this case there is not.
If people answer, we'll see. It doesn't particularly matter all that much.
a good sign of fakers are people who won't go get treatment.
I like Ivy's answer to this. I also agree with you for the most part.
However, the thing is, if you have to interact with this person, purely in terms of practical interaction - where influencing each other is inevitable - it can be helpful to know where you're going to draw the line. Usually, we tolerate a lot more from friends (because we understand and therefore empathise more with them, they are more valuable to us), than we do from strangers, for instance - even in the face of the same behaviour.
For me it's a matter of maximising the interaction for both parties. Mental illness or not. I'm not even talking about that - I just look at mental illness as a more noticeable personality quirk I have to work with. And I always try to minimise the damage I do to others - and that includes psychological damage. If I notice during an interaction that someone would benefit from a tough love push, I don't mind giving that, but if I notice someone is in a defensive, fragile state (due to the topic or some hidden tripwire I missed), I'll automatically try to figure out where that sensitivity is coming from and how I can soothe it - at the very least for my own comfort and for the duration of the communication, but if at all possible, to give them a bit of connection, understanding and support to take with and build on (as it is exceedingly rare in this world, as well as one of the biggest unfulfilled needs in many people, causing behavioural problems). It's not about controlling them, so much, as it is about giving us both a win-win and a pleasant moment in time. This can however be hard to do with people who are actually harmful to others - including myself. However, would it be fair to treat them differently when their need for understanding and support is equally valid. Then again, where do you draw the line on preserving your own boundaries and keeping yourself from harm and potentially harming another to do so?
It becomes a question of benefits and costs to yourself and to the other person - and when to actually choose between your protection and their needs - at least to me.
Edit: fwiw, [MENTION=4939]kyuuei[/MENTION] is ime rarely hostile, just very honest, blunt and to the point, with a clear explanation of where she stands on the topic and why. I don't always agree with her positions and she does draw lines faster than I would myself, but I've rarely seen her not open to discussing those lines. Chances are, though, that you'll find she prioritises other values than you, which are the core of her positions.
proposing being an ass hole requires an excuse is an oxymoron
Translated: "If you don't do what I think you should do, then you're faking." Just because someone doesn't do something your way, doesn't mean anyone is faking anything.
Yeah and there's power differentials in any diagnostic relationship, power differentials in any labelling, power differentials in just life and a lot relationships, which involve the sorts of dilemma you highlight here, how frames things, who reframes them, who is objective, who is, in contrast, being defensive and resistant to insight.
That's a blind alley that its possible to spend a hell of a lot of time in, its also something its important to think about because struggling individuals with a bit of insight, to use a local saying "one cute hur", can usually act swiftly to frame things in such a way that suits themselves and labels everyone else defensive, resistant etc.
Its part of the reason why I think that a lot of therapeutic relationships need to be treated as terminable, why I think that more social relationships should be terminable and people actively take steps to terminate them when it looks like that sort of feedback loop is developing. The most intractable and interminable relationships generally have a huge component of that sort of feedback loop and the relationship itself winds up being fuel to that particular fire.
That is still just your perception. It doesn't take precedence over my perception.
From what I can tell, that's just a graph that shows the prevalence of serious mental illnesses across social groups, not what mental illnesses are considered serious. Why should I define what mental illnesses are more serious than others? Categorizing in that way isn't useful to me. You're the one who made the claim so you do it.
Oh, here we go. Because of what I think about things I don't have credibility to have my opinions counted or even discuss with the people who hold the correct opinions.
It's just more of the same. I should just submit to everyone's judgement about everything ever. This is most certainly an overreaction but at some point nothing I say on this topic matters because of the nature of what I'm saying.