Pages: 1 … 421 422 423 424 425 … 695

 

2013-04-21 18:45:26
Uzique The Lesser
Banned
+382|4473

13rin wrote:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/ … JJ20110904

^anything to this?
america is undoubtedly more medicated than europe. you guys take the cake when it comes to anti-depressants, painkiller abuse, over-prescription and over-diagnosis of things such as ADHD. our media continually portray YOUR shit to be the one that is crazy. as for "40% of europeans suffering mental illness" - what nonsense. 40%? that would have to encompass a VERY wide definition of 'mental illness'. it says "on an annual basis" and can include "stress, depression, insomnia". well? and, as it says, only a 1/3rd of that putative and fantastical 40% figure are medicated/treated, which seems like a much more realistic number. really it's a complete non-story: 1/3rd of 40% of people, once a year, go to the doctor to seek help for stress/sleep problems/feeling low. so about 15% of europeans go to the doctor once a year for a complaint that could generally be called a 'mental' health complaint, as opposed to a physical ailment. okay. really alarming!  and that's not even counting these: "wittchen's team looked at about 100 illnesses covering all major brain disorders from anxiety and depression to addiction to schizophrenia, as well as major neurological disorders including epilepsy, Parkinson's and multiple sclerosis." so really that 15% makes up a HUGE range of problems.

and as for the rest of the article, e.g. mental health being the "biggest problem facing modern europe", well, it's a little disingenuous of the article to make out it's euro-centric or euro-specific. mental health disorders are the biggest health problem facing the advanced western world, PERIOD. every single psychological and sociological study that traces the 'fault-lines' of stress, anxiety, disorder-type illnesses pretty much traces it to causes and influences of modern western life. the US and europe are not exactly dissimilar when it comes to the everyday lived-experience.

all in all, a total puff-piece. the one good thing i get from it is that now mental health problems are at the top of the agenda. well: good. i'm glad that mental health issues are getting the attention and treatment that they deserve. if anything, europe has been more progressive and more accepting in bringing mental health out of its taboo-like shade, and into the open with treatment. europe have been pioneers in their treatment of the mentally ill for a lot longer than america, for e.g. the french grand hospitals at la salpetriere, etc. the piece sounds alarmist, but the tone of it is quite misjudged, considering how many average american citizens are (over) prescribed 'mental health' medication. you could say that mental health issues have always been here... just it has taken until now for them to get the medical research, funding, and appropriately compassionate care that is deserved. as opposed to just throwing them in an asylum, or sending them out on the boats.

tl;dr: this is a western problem, not a european one, if anything. mental illness seems to go hand in hand with our increasingly competitive, atomized, and materialistic life. stress and anxiety are parts of our overworked, over-stimulated lifestyles. people feel insecure and unsafe financially, class-wise, gender-wise, race-wise, and every other tender social issue nowadays that are brought into the open fora of 'liberal democracy'. basically: read into it all you want, all we're seeing over here is a self-satisfied american trying to find conspicuous faults with 'them europeans'. trying to make out that nearly 1/2 of all europeans have a mental health problem is absolutely ludicrous. but okay. europe is in peril! the sinking project! this is the fallout of 60 years of socialism!!! etc.etc. yawn.

i read foucault's 'histoire de la folie à l'age classique' (a history of insanity in the age of reason)' a few weeks ago. it is a great book, if you are truly interested in the history of and attitudes towards mental health in the western world. fascinating book.

Last edited by Uzique The Lesser (2013-04-21 19:05:58)

2013-04-21 18:57:13
Uzique The Lesser
Banned
+382|4473
so, what do you make of this?

http://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/asto … 1110203624

According to a report released yesterday by the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), the rate of antidepressant use in this country among teens and adults (people ages 12 and older) increased by almost 400% between 1988–1994 and 2005–2008.

The federal government’s health statisticians figure that about one in every 10 Americans takes an antidepressant. And by their reckoning, antidepressants were the third most common prescription medication taken by Americans in 2005–2008, the latest period during which the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) collected data on prescription drug use.

Here are a few other stand-out statistics from the report on antidepressants:

    23% of women in their 40s and 50s take antidepressants, a higher percentage than any other group (by age or sex)
    Women are 2½ times more likely to be taking an antidepressant than men (click here to read a May 2011 article in the Harvard Mental Health Letter about women and depression)
    14% of non-Hispanic white people take antidepressants compared with just 4% of non-Hispanic blacks and 3% of Mexican Americans
15% of americans on anti-depressants ALONE. nearly a QUARTER of middle-aged women on anti-depressants. that's just for ONE illness. ONE type of mental health medication. now do you see how the "one third of 40% of europeans seek help for mental issues" looks a little silly?

or this?

http://www.whitehouse.gov/ondcp/prescription-drug-abuse

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has classified prescription drug abuse as an epidemic. While there has been a marked decrease in the use of some illegal drugs like cocaine, data from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) show that nearly one-third of people aged 12 and over who used drugs for the first time in 2009 began by using a prescription drug non-medically.

According to the recent Monitoring the Future study – the Nation's largest survey of drug use among young people – prescription drugs are the second-most abused category of drugs after marijuana. In addition, the latest National Survey on Drug Use and Health shows that over 70 percent of people who abused prescription pain relievers got them from friends or relatives, while approximately 5 percent got them from a drug dealer or over the Internet. Further, opiate overdoses, once almost always due to heroin use, are now increasingly due to abuse of prescription painkillers. In our military, illicit drug use increased from 5% to 12% among active duty service members from 2005 to 2008, primarily due to non-medical use of prescription drugs.

The number of prescriptions filled for opioid pain relievers – some of the most powerful medications available – has increased dramatically in recent years. From 1997 to 2007, the milligram-per-person use of prescription opioids in the U.S. increased from 74 milligrams to 369 milligrams, an increase of 402%. In addition, in 2000, retail pharmacies dispensed 174 million prescriptions for opioids; by 2009, 257 million prescriptions were dispensed, an increase of 48%. As the chart below demonstrates, these increases mirror increases in prescription drug abuse.
america is doomed, etc. europe is true paradise, etc.

Last edited by Uzique The Lesser (2013-04-21 19:00:34)

2013-04-21 19:31:15
DesertFox-
The very model of a modern major general
+796|6903|United States of America
I was gonna say, there's no way that's accurate without a wide definition of "mental illness". I'd go so far as to say 100% do because "people are crazy".

I can only speak from my experience in the US as well, but people do tend to look for pharmaceutical answers to their problems fairly quickly. I remember visiting a friend of mine's apartment and was shocked by what I considered to be a buttload of pill bottles he had for small stuff like allergies/insomnia. I haven't had a prescription filled in 4 years, and most of the time when I'm sick, I just rest and let my body work it out. I would even say I probably have a bit of an aversion to taking drugs for medication (and yet strangely nearly went into pharmacy, too). One of my friends who is a pharmacist does express concern quite often at the sheer amount of drugs people are prescribed these days. The public does trust drugs a lot, though, too. We'd probably be just fine switching a lot of stuff out for placebos and have no one the wiser.
2013-04-21 22:11:09
Macbeth
Banned
+2,444|5804

Macbeth wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

Macbeth wrote:


It has been almost a week and you still haven't made your case against killing people for political reasons, Ken. I'm eagerly awaiting your update.
Fear of racial warfare?  There were violent protests, race riots, black panthers (that acheived less through violence even AFTER MLK) that did little to move the nation.  The idea of nonviolent protest is to get the public on your side - people who aren't normally invested in your cause.  MLK and Gandhi did that.  Gandhi was killed before the cold war even escalated - and Gandhi didn't even accomplish his stated goal of creating a unified subcontinent - he was devastated at the creation of Pakistan.

Sure violence works sometimes - but violence in those two instances you cited actually didn't work.  It's easier to gain sympathizers when a dude is beating a peaceful protester with a stick than it is when that protester is firing off a molotov cocktail.

What about the farm workers rights boycotts led by Cesar Chavez?  The CIW protest against Taco Bell for a living wage?  Both are closer to our life time than MLK and the workers rights organizing led by Cesar helped your lovely Filipinos...you'd think you'd be a bit more knowledgeable about that one specifically.
Re: MLK and Cesar I defer to Mary L. Dudziak a USC professor. Her book Cold War Civil Rights: Race and the Image of American Democracy lays out how the Cold War pushed much of the civil rights movement. Sorry to drop the ad text of the book but I'm just pointing out that among academic and scholars the idea that the civil rights movement was pushed by the cold war is popular.
In 1958, an African-American handyman named Jimmy Wilson was sentenced to die in Alabama for stealing two dollars. Shocking as this sentence was, it was overturned only after intense international attention and the interference of an embarrassed John Foster Dulles. Soon after the United States' segregated military defeated a racist regime in World War II, American racism was a major concern of U.S. allies, a chief Soviet propaganda theme, and an obstacle to American Cold War goals throughout Africa, Asia, and Latin America. Each lynching harmed foreign relations, and "the Negro problem" became a central issue in every administration from Truman to Johnson.

In what may be the best analysis of how international relations affected any domestic issue, Mary Dudziak interprets postwar civil rights as a Cold War feature. She argues that the Cold War helped facilitate key social reforms, including desegregation. Civil rights activists gained tremendous advantage as the government sought to polish its international image. But improving the nation's reputation did not always require real change. This focus on image rather than substance--combined with constraints on McCarthy-era political activism and the triumph of law-and-order rhetoric--limited the nature and extent of progress.
I would quote right out of it if I still had a copy.

Like I said before Gandhi was the last stop before another Indian revolt. Do you honestly think that the U.K. would have been able to stop it? Had WW2 not happened the British and the rest of the Euros would have held onto their colonies since they would have had the power to keep control of them. Please cite some preWW2 examples of European decolonization that didn't involve violence but instead were won by appealing to European's sympathy and compassion.

Holding up nonviolence as the thing that really won both of those movements is an attempt to push a worldview that sustains existing power structures. Violence shouldn't be the first thing people go to obviously. But politically oppressed people shouldn't shy away from using violence. The overwhelming majority of people, especially in America, don't care about what happens to other people as long as it doesn't affect them. Hell in this country the majority of citizens and the segment of the group that holds the power are actually in support of political oppression in many cases. How often do you hear people complaining about the industrial prison complex on T.V. or in public other than a few liberals? Now how often do you hear support for things like "get tough on crime"? Or how about people rattling off race and crime stats in order to support putting black people in prison? Should black people just sit back patiently and wait for American to find it in its her to stop destroying their communities for money just because it feels bad? I think they have a case for using violence to add some pressure for their cause.
Almost a week. Still your move Ken.
2013-04-21 22:22:00
RTHKI
mmmf mmmf mmmf
+1,741|6956|Oxferd Ohire
hes reeling over the lakers loss
https://i.imgur.com/tMvdWFG.png
2013-04-22 02:40:12
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,813|6325|eXtreme to the maX

Uzique The Lesser wrote:

ah okay, so 'democracy' perpetuated 'tyranny'. that's new.
Congress blocked him, so yes.
Fuck Israel
2013-04-22 04:07:41
Uzique The Lesser
Banned
+382|4473

DesertFox- wrote:

I was gonna say, there's no way that's accurate without a wide definition of "mental illness". I'd go so far as to say 100% do because "people are crazy".

I can only speak from my experience in the US as well, but people do tend to look for pharmaceutical answers to their problems fairly quickly. I remember visiting a friend of mine's apartment and was shocked by what I considered to be a buttload of pill bottles he had for small stuff like allergies/insomnia. I haven't had a prescription filled in 4 years, and most of the time when I'm sick, I just rest and let my body work it out. I would even say I probably have a bit of an aversion to taking drugs for medication (and yet strangely nearly went into pharmacy, too). One of my friends who is a pharmacist does express concern quite often at the sheer amount of drugs people are prescribed these days. The public does trust drugs a lot, though, too. We'd probably be just fine switching a lot of stuff out for placebos and have no one the wiser.
it's simple: private healthcare system -> pharmaceutical companies have an interest in selling as many pill bottles as possible.

whereas over here, being prescribed something normally runs at a 'loss' (you pay a standard prescription fee, but it is normally far below the cost of the actual medication/treatment). so people are prescribed medication less (though not so little that it would ever be an issue). but there definitely seems to be a trend to 'medicalize' everything in america. i've seen a few documentaries where fucking nutjob doctors/child psychologists put temperamental kids on heavy doses of anti-depressants or anti-psychotics, because of their 'symptoms'.

also VERY seldom would you be given a heavy-duty painkiller prescription for anything. and never anything that would give you more than 1-2 weeks' supply.

Last edited by Uzique The Lesser (2013-04-22 04:08:50)

2013-04-22 07:40:39
13rin
Member
+977|6698

Uzique The Lesser wrote:

so, what do you make of this?

http://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/asto … 1110203624

According to a report released yesterday by the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), the rate of antidepressant use in this country among teens and adults (people ages 12 and older) increased by almost 400% between 1988–1994 and 2005–2008.

The federal government’s health statisticians figure that about one in every 10 Americans takes an antidepressant. And by their reckoning, antidepressants were the third most common prescription medication taken by Americans in 2005–2008, the latest period during which the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) collected data on prescription drug use.

Here are a few other stand-out statistics from the report on antidepressants:

    23% of women in their 40s and 50s take antidepressants, a higher percentage than any other group (by age or sex)
    Women are 2½ times more likely to be taking an antidepressant than men (click here to read a May 2011 article in the Harvard Mental Health Letter about women and depression)
    14% of non-Hispanic white people take antidepressants compared with just 4% of non-Hispanic blacks and 3% of Mexican Americans
15% of americans on anti-depressants ALONE. nearly a QUARTER of middle-aged women on anti-depressants. that's just for ONE illness. ONE type of mental health medication. now do you see how the "one third of 40% of europeans seek help for mental issues" looks a little silly?

or this?

http://www.whitehouse.gov/ondcp/prescription-drug-abuse

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has classified prescription drug abuse as an epidemic. While there has been a marked decrease in the use of some illegal drugs like cocaine, data from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) show that nearly one-third of people aged 12 and over who used drugs for the first time in 2009 began by using a prescription drug non-medically.

According to the recent Monitoring the Future study – the Nation's largest survey of drug use among young people – prescription drugs are the second-most abused category of drugs after marijuana. In addition, the latest National Survey on Drug Use and Health shows that over 70 percent of people who abused prescription pain relievers got them from friends or relatives, while approximately 5 percent got them from a drug dealer or over the Internet. Further, opiate overdoses, once almost always due to heroin use, are now increasingly due to abuse of prescription painkillers. In our military, illicit drug use increased from 5% to 12% among active duty service members from 2005 to 2008, primarily due to non-medical use of prescription drugs.

The number of prescriptions filled for opioid pain relievers – some of the most powerful medications available – has increased dramatically in recent years. From 1997 to 2007, the milligram-per-person use of prescription opioids in the U.S. increased from 74 milligrams to 369 milligrams, an increase of 402%. In addition, in 2000, retail pharmacies dispensed 174 million prescriptions for opioids; by 2009, 257 million prescriptions were dispensed, an increase of 48%. As the chart below demonstrates, these increases mirror increases in prescription drug abuse.
america is doomed, etc. europe is true paradise, etc.
Fair enough.  I thought it to be a bit stretched and broad, I was just wondering what the euro's take would be.  I'm not so much concerned with the mental/drug epidemic, as I think obesity and health complications caused by it will be the biggest concern the US faces in the next 20 to 40 years.
I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something.  - Rodney Booker, Job Fair attendee.
2013-04-22 07:44:36
Uzique The Lesser
Banned
+382|4473
the 'news story' essentially says that 15% of europeans go to the doctors at least once per year for a 'mental complaint', rather than a physical one. bearing in mind a certain proportion of those have serious brain conditions, i think the "40% of europeans have a mental illness" headline is very bad journalism... to put it mildly.

and yes, actually, isn't the actual statistical evidence right in saying that 40% of adult americans are clinically obese? now there's an alarming headline...
2013-04-22 11:54:08
globefish23
sophisticated slacker
+334|6542|Graz, Austria

Uzique The Lesser wrote:

this is a stain on the recent history of the US/UK, imo, one measure short of a concentration camp.
Wait until they have figured out the Endlösung.
2013-04-22 23:05:27
Macbeth
Banned
+2,444|5804

I just don't feel any of that hatred towards the Westboro Baptist Church others feel.
2013-04-23 03:28:16
Shocking
sorry you feel that way
+333|6218|...

Uzique The Lesser wrote:

13rin wrote:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/ … JJ20110904

^anything to this?
if anything, europe has been more progressive and more accepting in bringing mental health out of its taboo-like shade, and into the open with treatment. .
I'm not so sure about this, visiting psychiatric clinics and seeking help for mental illness is still considered a taboo by many people here (mostly older generations), whereas in the U.S. I believe people are more accepting of it.

Last edited by Shocking (2013-04-23 03:29:50)

inane little opines
2013-04-23 03:30:32
Macbeth
Banned
+2,444|5804

You can thank the Sopranos for that. Seriously. That show about a Mob boss getting treated for depression and panic attacks on HBO helped relax many people's views on mental healthcare.
2013-04-23 03:44:36
Uzique The Lesser
Banned
+382|4473

Shocking wrote:

Uzique The Lesser wrote:

13rin wrote:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/ … JJ20110904

^anything to this?
if anything, europe has been more progressive and more accepting in bringing mental health out of its taboo-like shade, and into the open with treatment. .
I'm not so sure about this, visiting psychiatric clinics and seeking help for mental illness is still considered a taboo by many people here (mostly older generations), whereas in the U.S. I believe people are more accepting of it.
that's because 'psycho-analysis' became a major fashion and fad in 1950's and 1960's america. it's because advertising and PR were closely related to the newly established professional field of psychoanalysis (quite divorced from the theoretical psychoanalysis of the Continent). basically: sending your wife to sit on a couch and talk about her problems became a fashionable middle-class thing. it doesn't say anythning about tolerance towards genuine mental illness - towards schizophrenics, manic depressives, or even just people with genuine issues. psychoanalysis in america historically has just been an accoutrement for people with 'first world problems'.

europe has been much more progressive about the medicalization and rationalization of irrationality. there are still taboos that need to be broken down, i agree, mostly taboos deriving from the workplace/occupation, but europe's health-system and specifically its mental health apparatus are very good, tbh. they have been since the mid-nineteenth century, when madness stopped being treated like some curse from god/nature and started to be seen concretely in terms of a disorder with an etiology and course of treatment. a lot of severely mentally sick people in america tend to end up homeless, because society has no safety-net or interest in them. that's quite different from my experiences of places like paris, for example, where strolling around montmartre, you can often find many 'walking crazies', who parole around all day muttering to themselves, and are treated oddly politely and tolerantly by the people around them.
2013-04-23 03:45:21
Uzique The Lesser
Banned
+382|4473

Macbeth wrote:

You can thank the Sopranos for that. Seriously. That show about a Mob boss getting treated for depression and panic attacks on HBO helped relax many people's views on mental healthcare.
lol psychoanalysis stretches back to post-ww2, not 2000's television. hahaha. did you know that the inventor of PR and advertising on madison avenue was a nephew of sigmund freud? lots of early advertising aimed to use newly-'discovered' psychological techniques to insidiously sells products. some of the most important and most well-networked people in new york in the 50's were top psychoanalysts. i can't remember the guy's name but he was a famous disciple of freud, and he owned an apartment on central park, which - because of his clientele - would have all the rich and famous in attendance. from state politicians to normal mailer.

Last edited by Uzique The Lesser (2013-04-23 03:48:16)

2013-04-23 03:47:49
Macbeth
Banned
+2,444|5804

Who said anything about psychoanalysis? I'm saying that the public became a bit more accepting of people getting treated for mental disorders and depression due to the Sopranos having an identifiable main character seeking treatment.
2013-04-23 03:50:34
Uzique The Lesser
Banned
+382|4473
https://humanities.wisc.edu/now/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Picture-2.png
2013-04-23 03:51:40
Spearhead
Gulf coast redneck hippy
+731|6909|Tampa Bay Florida
I think mentally ill people are not necessarily ill.  They're just neurotically different, like aspies.  In ancient times they were probably shamans and religious leaders.  Filled with supernatural energy, not necessarily evil or dangerous, just "halfway" between our world and the spirit world.  Of course rationalism changed all that.
2013-04-23 03:52:00
Macbeth
Banned
+2,444|5804

I knew the last screenshot was from Feat and Loathing. Where is this one from and what is it supposed to mean?
2013-04-23 03:52:57
Uzique The Lesser
Banned
+382|4473

Macbeth wrote:

Who said anything about psychoanalysis? I'm saying that the public became a bit more accepting of people getting treated for mental disorders and depression due to the Sopranos having an identifiable main character seeking treatment.
psychoanalysis was the only treatment for most mental complaints until the 1970's and 1980's. since then you can probably thank pharmaceutical companies and private medical care for 'promoting' the casual consumption of pills for mental illness. more so than a tv show. there have been plenty of fictional portrayals of mentally-unstable people in the media. think of all those film noir movies with an unbalanced but byronic hero or anti-hero. the sopranos is a bit of a spurious place to pin the tail on the donkey.
2013-04-23 03:53:50
Uzique The Lesser
Banned
+382|4473

Macbeth wrote:

I knew the last screenshot was from Feat and Loathing. Where is this one from and what is it supposed to mean?
it's from mad men. a tv show about newly-minted advertising men in the 50's. that's a shot of one of the main character's wife... undergoing psychoanalysis. but okay, tell me more about how a tv series in the 2000's finally made a 50 year old phenomenon culturally 'acceptable'.
2013-04-23 03:55:07
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6893|Canberra, AUS

Spearhead wrote:

I think mentally ill people are not necessarily ill.  They're just neurotically different, like aspies.  In ancient times they were probably shamans and religious leaders.  Filled with supernatural energy, not necessarily evil or dangerous, just "halfway" between our world and the spirit world.  Of course rationalism changed all that.
On what basis does a (hypothetical) chemical imbalance or genetic tweak leading to - say - bipolar syndrome not qualify as an "illness"?

Last edited by Spark (2013-04-23 03:55:54)

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
2013-04-23 03:56:37
Uzique The Lesser
Banned
+382|4473

Spearhead wrote:

I think mentally ill people are not necessarily ill.  They're just neurotically different, like aspies.  In ancient times they were probably shamans and religious leaders.  Filled with supernatural energy, not necessarily evil or dangerous, just "halfway" between our world and the spirit world.  Of course rationalism changed all that.
most of the time the mad - as opposed to mentally ill - were put on boats and sailed off to the next unfortunate trading-post or city that would have them. often kept in camps or posts outside the city gates, in the spiritual succession of medieval lepers. eventually the locals would get too frightened or bothered by them, and, in a scapegoat fashion, insist they be huddled along to the next town. they were treated as people with a different disposition passed down by god though, again fulfilling the symbolic function that lepers did - people suffering for the collective's sins now, so that they made be redeemed in the after-life. 'shamans and religious leaders' really is going back a long long way... where solid historical evidence kind of drops off. speculating that moses was mentally ill doesn't really get you very far.

Last edited by Uzique The Lesser (2013-04-23 04:01:24)

2013-04-23 03:58:56
Uzique The Lesser
Banned
+382|4473

Spark wrote:

Spearhead wrote:

I think mentally ill people are not necessarily ill.  They're just neurotically different, like aspies.  In ancient times they were probably shamans and religious leaders.  Filled with supernatural energy, not necessarily evil or dangerous, just "halfway" between our world and the spirit world.  Of course rationalism changed all that.
On what basis does a (hypothetical) chemical imbalance or genetic tweak leading to - say - bipolar syndrome not qualify as an "illness"?
it depends. a modern definition of 'mental illness' takes as a basic a priori assumption that there is such a thing as 'normality'. this sense of 'normality' has only really existed since the enlightenment, and since rationalism came along and basically conceived of a new human subject according to quasi-objective fact and notions of immutable truth (shifting madness from a basic definition of someone 'acting in error' to something with an moral-ethical transgression implied, too). there is a tendency thesedays to medicalize and disorder-ify everything that deviates from the standard norm. but i definitely agree that bi-polar depression is an 'illness', as much as aspergers is an 'illness' (technically a disorder but there is no significant difference...)

Last edited by Uzique The Lesser (2013-04-23 04:00:14)

2013-04-23 04:03:26
Macbeth
Banned
+2,444|5804

Uzique The Lesser wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

I knew the last screenshot was from Feat and Loathing. Where is this one from and what is it supposed to mean?
it's from mad men. a tv show about newly-minted advertising men in the 50's. that's a shot of one of the main character's wife... undergoing psychoanalysis. but okay, tell me more about how a tv series in the 2000's finally made a 50 year old phenomenon culturally 'acceptable'.
I hope you don't get all of your American cultural knowledge from T.V. shows and shitty movies. All I'm saying is that there was a large mostly male segment of society that viewed mental health treatment as unmanly and weak. The Sopranos had a role in breaking down that stereotype/barrier by having a very aggressive and strong male lead character seeking treatment. I figure the most of U.S. culture you get is from Mad Men and Johnny Depp movies but before that we had many years of very negative depictions of people getting treatment. Now things are much different.

 

Pages: 1 … 421 422 423 424 425 … 695

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard