3 ms·

This article strikes me as partially honest and raw and then the other to be very planned and calculated. Let's get this out now: I'm glad he finally sought he

by monksy 8y ago

This article strikes me as partially honest and raw and then the other to be very planned and calculated. Let's get this out now: I'm glad he finally sought help, and that he's getting it. The things about this article that bug me: 1. He starts off with the article with a "trigger warning." The title is about depression and anxiety. Having a 'trigger warning' is either insulting to the reader, or it's a weird posturing thing. Seems a little offputting when he's trying to write about his own experience and then in a way has to apologize for it. 2. He talks about his huge accomplishments and then he discounts himself due to his 'identity': " I have run out of space in my office for the awards I’ve received for my work, and as a white, heterosexual, cisgender man in America, I live life on the lowest difficulty setting — with the Celebrity cheat enabled." (Why is that even important to talk about your sexuality, race, or even standing... if he's trying to do a raw and honest appeal this seems a little off to me) This topic has nothing to do with those categories. Leave it for a later addressing of remarks to discredit due to those attributes (this is an issue that can affect anyone, even Trump, [insert who you hate]) > My life is, by every objective measurement, very very good. Clearly not if you're suffering. 3. The apology to his mother. Again why is he apologizing for what he's going for? This to me seems like: 1. an improper sharing of a message to a close family member 2. a projection of his relationship to his mother, etc. This just seems really weird with respect of the audience of the talk. EDIT: If you want to communicate how it's affected people close to you.. tell the audience. I spoke with my mother on this. Her concerns were x,y,z. That would give the audience a template of how to do the same if they feel it's needed. 4. The ending which he's trying to become an activist. He's trying to call for political influence and then trying to endorse organizations. At the end of this, I'm left wondering: Why did he write this? What does this piece mean? It goes from being very personal and revealing to impersonal and political/advocating. Why not split both of those up. Let the next question be: "How can we address that? Give the audience a way to say "I'm seeing these things.. what can I do?" Is this a vehicle for him to talk about "change" he wants to see?

dmitri20 8y ago
> My life is, by every objective measurement, very very good. I found this statement silly too. He's getting older. His body is slowly deteriorating. His opportunities are dwindling. His best days are probably behind him. That's reason enough for depression by itself.
leetcrew 8y ago
maybe he genuinely believes that 1) and 2) are important. or maybe he doesn't want to get trashed in the comments, so he just throws the easy disclaimers out front. either is fine, imo. 3) and 4), maybe you have a point there...
- monksy 8y ago
  I think a lot of the issue that I had for that is that it comes across from me that he mixes speaking from a point of view of himself from the exterior then builds up a case of what was happening internally. To me, the 1&2 just came off as "look at my accomplishments" rather than a humble and personal "I did well, and I felt that a lot of people saw me as x,y,z" Comments: He's been well known for being outspoken and aggressive towards people he disagrees with.
glitcher 8y ago
>> My life is, by every objective measurement, very very good. > Clearly not if you're suffering. C'mon, you know this statement was meant to illustrate the fact that even if everything in your life is going your way, it doesn't mean that you are immune from depression. I can see where you are coming from on your other points, although I don't share all your sentiments myself. So ok, he probably shouldn't become a psychiatrist. And maybe the next talk he gives at a mental illness conference could benefit from some of this constructive criticism (I agree on that whole "I live life on the lowest difficulty setting" bit). But overall, I see this article as a big plus in the fight against the stigma of mental illness, and the struggle for those afflicted to find help. Sure he's not an expert in the medical field, and his style of sharing his own story maybe isn't for everybody, but surely there is more value to him sharing than just that he is getting help for himself.
AceJohnny2 8y ago
You've been downvoted because it sounds like you're rejecting Wil Wheaton's core point, which is to bring into the open a topic that is still pretty taboo in American society. He's doing this to raise awareness, and help other people who are suffering alone get help. To address your points: - This is planned and calculated only to the extent that it's a speech meant to get a point across. It is revealing personal vulnerability in order to help others who might be suffering from similar conditions, or those who have friends or family suffering from them, recognize the symptoms and take action. 1. The term "trigger warning" is sadly overloaded these days, but it is still useful for those suffering from the anxiety and depression he's talking about. Those are the people targeted by that paragraph, not you. Note that this speech was addressing NAMI, "National Association on Mental Illness", so it's likely some of those people were in the audience. 2. The word "objective" is the last sentence is key here. He is contrasting how other perceive the quality of his life vs how he's actually living it. 3. He's apologizing to his mother because she is likely going to hear or read this speech which reveals some pretty personal information, and she will likely blame herself. More generally, it's a message to people who have lost loved ones: don't blame yourselves. 4. Yes, he's trying to raise awareness and push for social change. Activism is part of doing that, and of course publishing this speech is as well.
- monksy 8y ago
  I think we both agree here that this is a very important topic and people should be aware of it. I wished this had more of a RCA response at the end. How can you [the audience member] get help. If I saw him saying "well .. I want to tell you something very personal, and that has taken me on a very dark path" .. insert full story. At the end, rather than trying to promote organizations and his political stances. I wished he would say: "I've been very much helped by x, and y." or "I feel that this organization could help with this issue, because ... " I feel like that would have been a much more personal, and gave him a much more consistent speech that would have persuaded his audience better. These are things happening to him, that's his story. I get the feeling that friend's I've known that have been suicidal/depressed, if they read his message, they wouldn't have a positive path forward. They'd read it and it wouldn't give them tools to help their situation.
zeroego 8y ago
In response to your 4th point, these were prepared remarks for a NAMI conference in Ohio. He says as much at the very beginning of the article.
abeyer 8y ago
1. For the audience this is not unusual, if not even expected. 2. If you're going to mention accomplishments, why _not_ mention things that may temper them? 3. I don't think the statement was necessarily incongruent with the rest of the talk, but your criticisms are fair. 4, and the rest. Given that this is specifically a talk to and in support of a specific organization, why _wouldn't_ he do this? If he doesn't believe in and support their views, why would he be talking for them? And if he does, why would he not say so while talking to them?
ethiclub 8y ago
Devils advocate, personal experience, personal interpretation, and understanding of current literature: 1) Reflects current consensus in the field. Some may argue as 'coddling'(and consensus and approach may change) but is in general regarded as the safe empathetic thing to do, slightly analogous to epilepsy considerations. 'Posturing' could be considered an uncharitable assumption here... "What is the agenda behind any posturing?" 2.a) Presumably pointed out to show that it can indeed affect anyone. B) likely reflects a common thought cycle of his (guilt at feeling this way due to position etc.; this becomes part of the self hate cycle). C) to precisely acknowledge that this article doesn't intend to undermine other precarious or disadvantaged positions). "> My life is, by every objective measurement, very very good. Clearly not if you're suffering." This is precisely the point he was making, I believe(...?) 3) is important to those readers that still cannot bear to even imagine burdening their loved one with a similar admission. At least one of this article's readers wept imagining the value, freedom and weightlessness that may come from finally saying this, and by extension realising the inevitability of that statement vs a more unsatisfactory ending. (I.e it was valuable to one reader , at least). 4. Seems appropriate to ask for funding to reduce net negative emotion in the world. I would assume that your downvotes are due to your answer showing appearing unnecessarily hostile and uncharitable to the article, which is probably being interpreted on face value and being written with good, empathetic intention (not a hidden agenda).
- monksy 8y ago
  I don't agree with all of your points/responses. But I do appreciate the respect shown in the response! Hidden agenda: I'm terrible at those. I want to see him, as I would to other speakers looking to speak, with a better and more consistent speech. My dog in this fight is that I want to see him lead people to improve. If it's important: I really don't like the guy. (If I'm going to be consistent I don't like how he projects himself) He doesn't seem to have a respect for people he disagrees with and he comes off really smug in some of his work. My criticisms were about his speech and how I saw it and was made uncomfortable about where I felt it was going.

by monksy 8y ago

dmitri20 8y ago

> My life is, by every objective measurement, very very good. I found this statement silly too. He's getting older. His body is slowly deteriorating. His opportunities are dwindling. His best days are probably behind him. That's reason enough for depression by itself.

leetcrew 8y ago

maybe he genuinely believes that 1) and 2) are important. or maybe he doesn't want to get trashed in the comments, so he just throws the easy disclaimers out front. either is fine, imo. 3) and 4), maybe you have a point there...

monksy 8y ago
I think a lot of the issue that I had for that is that it comes across from me that he mixes speaking from a point of view of himself from the exterior then builds up a case of what was happening internally. To me, the 1&2 just came off as "look at my accomplishments" rather than a humble and personal "I did well, and I felt that a lot of people saw me as x,y,z" Comments: He's been well known for being outspoken and aggressive towards people he disagrees with.

glitcher 8y ago

>> My life is, by every objective measurement, very very good. > Clearly not if you're suffering. C'mon, you know this statement was meant to illustrate the fact that even if everything in your life is going your way, it doesn't mean that you are immune from depression. I can see where you are coming from on your other points, although I don't share all your sentiments myself. So ok, he probably shouldn't become a psychiatrist. And maybe the next talk he gives at a mental illness conference could benefit from some of this constructive criticism (I agree on that whole "I live life on the lowest difficulty setting" bit). But overall, I see this article as a big plus in the fight against the stigma of mental illness, and the struggle for those afflicted to find help. Sure he's not an expert in the medical field, and his style of sharing his own story maybe isn't for everybody, but surely there is more value to him sharing than just that he is getting help for himself.

AceJohnny2 8y ago

You've been downvoted because it sounds like you're rejecting Wil Wheaton's core point, which is to bring into the open a topic that is still pretty taboo in American society. He's doing this to raise awareness, and help other people who are suffering alone get help. To address your points: - This is planned and calculated only to the extent that it's a speech meant to get a point across. It is revealing personal vulnerability in order to help others who might be suffering from similar conditions, or those who have friends or family suffering from them, recognize the symptoms and take action. 1. The term "trigger warning" is sadly overloaded these days, but it is still useful for those suffering from the anxiety and depression he's talking about. Those are the people targeted by that paragraph, not you. Note that this speech was addressing NAMI, "National Association on Mental Illness", so it's likely some of those people were in the audience. 2. The word "objective" is the last sentence is key here. He is contrasting how other perceive the quality of his life vs how he's actually living it. 3. He's apologizing to his mother because she is likely going to hear or read this speech which reveals some pretty personal information, and she will likely blame herself. More generally, it's a message to people who have lost loved ones: don't blame yourselves. 4. Yes, he's trying to raise awareness and push for social change. Activism is part of doing that, and of course publishing this speech is as well.

monksy 8y ago
I think we both agree here that this is a very important topic and people should be aware of it. I wished this had more of a RCA response at the end. How can you [the audience member] get help. If I saw him saying "well .. I want to tell you something very personal, and that has taken me on a very dark path" .. insert full story. At the end, rather than trying to promote organizations and his political stances. I wished he would say: "I've been very much helped by x, and y." or "I feel that this organization could help with this issue, because ... " I feel like that would have been a much more personal, and gave him a much more consistent speech that would have persuaded his audience better. These are things happening to him, that's his story. I get the feeling that friend's I've known that have been suicidal/depressed, if they read his message, they wouldn't have a positive path forward. They'd read it and it wouldn't give them tools to help their situation.

zeroego 8y ago

In response to your 4th point, these were prepared remarks for a NAMI conference in Ohio. He says as much at the very beginning of the article.

abeyer 8y ago

1. For the audience this is not unusual, if not even expected. 2. If you're going to mention accomplishments, why _not_ mention things that may temper them? 3. I don't think the statement was necessarily incongruent with the rest of the talk, but your criticisms are fair. 4, and the rest. Given that this is specifically a talk to and in support of a specific organization, why _wouldn't_ he do this? If he doesn't believe in and support their views, why would he be talking for them? And if he does, why would he not say so while talking to them?

ethiclub 8y ago

Devils advocate, personal experience, personal interpretation, and understanding of current literature: 1) Reflects current consensus in the field. Some may argue as 'coddling'(and consensus and approach may change) but is in general regarded as the safe empathetic thing to do, slightly analogous to epilepsy considerations. 'Posturing' could be considered an uncharitable assumption here... "What is the agenda behind any posturing?" 2.a) Presumably pointed out to show that it can indeed affect anyone. B) likely reflects a common thought cycle of his (guilt at feeling this way due to position etc.; this becomes part of the self hate cycle). C) to precisely acknowledge that this article doesn't intend to undermine other precarious or disadvantaged positions). "> My life is, by every objective measurement, very very good. Clearly not if you're suffering." This is precisely the point he was making, I believe(...?) 3) is important to those readers that still cannot bear to even imagine burdening their loved one with a similar admission. At least one of this article's readers wept imagining the value, freedom and weightlessness that may come from finally saying this, and by extension realising the inevitability of that statement vs a more unsatisfactory ending. (I.e it was valuable to one reader , at least). 4. Seems appropriate to ask for funding to reduce net negative emotion in the world. I would assume that your downvotes are due to your answer showing appearing unnecessarily hostile and uncharitable to the article, which is probably being interpreted on face value and being written with good, empathetic intention (not a hidden agenda).

monksy 8y ago
I don't agree with all of your points/responses. But I do appreciate the respect shown in the response! Hidden agenda: I'm terrible at those. I want to see him, as I would to other speakers looking to speak, with a better and more consistent speech. My dog in this fight is that I want to see him lead people to improve. If it's important: I really don't like the guy. (If I'm going to be consistent I don't like how he projects himself) He doesn't seem to have a respect for people he disagrees with and he comes off really smug in some of his work. My criticisms were about his speech and how I saw it and was made uncomfortable about where I felt it was going.