Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

SilverBabyComeToMe t1_iyg2nkz wrote

Sigh. The DID TikTok trend even infects the books sub. Please stop armchair diagnosing people.

−23

ThrowingSomeBruddahs OP t1_iyg4rwm wrote

This post isn’t about DID. It’s mentioned, but not elaborated upon. You’d know that if you actually read the post.

8

SilverBabyComeToMe t1_iyg675t wrote

I'm honestly just weary of armchair interpretations of serious and complex mental illnesses.

This is really harmful to people with mental illnesses and it adds to the stigma.

−18

laine918 t1_iygk1hn wrote

I don't see anything in this post that stigmatizes mental illness, and I don't think you have to have a doctorate to make deductions about people's mental states using conditions codified by years of research as shorthand.

11

ThrowingSomeBruddahs OP t1_iyg9cqm wrote

Psychological interpretations of literature have been a part of literary analysis since Freud.

Just admit you haven’t read the post and move on.

9

SilverBabyComeToMe t1_iygakhj wrote

Obviously I read it or I wouldn't be calling you out.

People are allowed to disagree with you.

Psychological interpretations do not mean just slapping a quick Google armchair diagnosis on something and calling it good without further study into what the diagnosis really is.

And Freud is a quack, if we let every Freudian analysis stand, we'd still think every gun and stick was a representation of penis envy.

It's okay if people disagree with you. You don't have to personally attack me because I disagree with you.

But I am very protective of the stigma that is perpetuated by Internet interpretations of mental and physical illness, and you caught me on a day where I happen to be pretty fed up in particular.

So, please, pretty please with a cherry on top, please be aware of armchair diagnosing. That's all I ask.

−17

ThrowingSomeBruddahs OP t1_iygbiaf wrote

Where is the harm in the “armchair diagnosis” of a fictional character? Do you believe that only a licensed psychologist is qualified to perform a psychological interpretation of literature? If so, you must oppose psychological interpretations of literature virtually on principle alone. It is an extreme view, to put it lightly.

Do you believe that people who experience dissociative amnesia or depersonalization will take issue with the fact that I think Niffenegger dramatized their illnesses? If so, why? If not, then why the fuss?

6

SilverBabyComeToMe t1_iygbw36 wrote

Yes, by all means, swing to the most drastic interpretation of what I said. That's helpful.

This is why I'm weary. I even said please.

0

ThrowingSomeBruddahs OP t1_iygc6r8 wrote

Yeah, sorry, but I won’t be crybullied into thinking I’ve somehow harmed other people with mental illness just because you say so.

You either seem uninterested in defending your position or unable to do so. Thanks for the clarification. Now I know exactly how seriously to take you.

6

SilverBabyComeToMe t1_iyggrkq wrote

I have no idea what "cry bullied" means. I don't think that's a word. But I'm quite certain that's not what I'm doing.

I've disagreed with you, and asked you nicely to please not contribute to the stigma of mental illness with a shallow interpretation of a Google search definition of a diagnosis.

But I already made my point. I have no intention of spending all night getting into a petty debate.

Stigma is harmful, and incorrect media portrayals contribute. What you call "dramatic" is part of that - mentally ill people aren't being "dramatic" - they're ill.

Here is an article about why stigma is harmful. Please take a minute to read it over. It would say a lot if you could step back and just agree that contributing to stigma in general is not a good thing.

https://www.psychiatry.org/patients-families/stigma-and-discrimination

1

ThrowingSomeBruddahs OP t1_iyghv3e wrote

Sorry, but you still haven’t answered some very basic questions that I’ve already asked you once.

I’ll repeat them now.

1.) What is the harm in “armchair diagnosis” of a fictional character? How, specifically, does it contribute to the stigma of mental illness?

2.) Does one need to be a licensed professional in order to perform a psychological interpretation of a piece of literature? Who gets to interpret? If I myself have PTSD, can I talk about depictions of PTSD in media? If not, why not?

3.) Do you believe that people who experience dissociative amnesia and depersonalization would take issue with the fact that I think Niffenegger dramatized their mental illness? If so, why? If not, then why the fuss? Note, here, since you seem to be confused: the word dramatize means only “to put those mental illnesses into a story,” not “to characterize those mental illnesses as merely dramatic, as opposed to illnesses.”

Clear these questions up and I’m happy to consider your viewpoint. Otherwise, as someone with PTSD, I’m going to speak on post-traumatic stress conditions as I see fit. Thanks.

6

[deleted] t1_iygdo5d wrote

[deleted]

−3

ThrowingSomeBruddahs OP t1_iyggt6r wrote

No, there’s not. Dissociative amnesia and depersonalization are not the same thing as dissociative identity disorder. So while I am not a medical professional (and don’t believe I need to be in order to interpret literature through a psychological lens), I quite clearly know more than you do about the subject.

7

[deleted] t1_iyghbel wrote

[deleted]

−3

ThrowingSomeBruddahs OP t1_iygi6b8 wrote

Do you believe that only medical professionals are allowed to make psychological interpretations of literature?

4

clullanc t1_iyh1nfy wrote

I really don’t see why this post is harmful.

It’s one thing generalizing and making assumptions about actual people experiencing mental health issues.

Op is analyzing a book. They’re not saying anything about the people that this effects.

7

non_avian t1_iyhksz1 wrote

This person is wildly misapplying these terms to discuss PTSD, but you're also out of pocket. I'm carding you both.

0