3 ms·

A few people have drawn parallels to religion in this thread, but I'm not sure if you're trying to use the example of religion to refute the idea of socially tr

A few people have drawn parallels to religion in this thread, but I'm not sure if you're trying to use the example of religion to refute the idea of socially transmissible mental illness, or to prove it. To me, it seems to prove it. It's perhaps easiest to see in the more extreme and wacky manifestations, like "speaking in tongues", although it's hard to gauge how earnest those people are and how much is an "emperor's new clothes" situation. Do they really believe that speaking in tongues is real, or do they fake it to fit in? Maybe it's a distinction without a difference.

tmentalille 4y ago
maxsilver 4y ago
My point is simply, "people believing they have distinct individual personalities inside themselves isn't remotely new, isn't terribly unusual, and maybe isn't inherently bad at all?", and I tried to wrap it in a joke people would click with (many people are closer to it than they'd think, they're just used to it in different language/contexts) Maybe it's ok if people are different -- even a little "weird" sometimes? Just because someone is different, doesn't mean they have a "mental illness". I'm not plural, plurality is not my lived experience -- so I can't speak to it -- I'm just pointing out that it doesn't seem like any kind of "socially transmissible mental illness". Knowing about something, doesn't make you that thing. Under the logic being used here, you could frame 'friends having a party' as a form of "socially transmissible alcoholism". And as someone who isn't plural but is LGBTQ+, I'm very used to seeing people pathologizing or criminalizing folks different from themselves, as a veneer of social cover for delivery of their hate. 50 years ago, someone would have called me "insane" or "crazy" or "having a mental disorder" just for existing too -- even the greatest folks can't always escape this hate (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing#Conviction_for_indecency https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing#Conviction_for_ind...). So it sets off a lot of alarm bells, when folks label someone as having a "mental illness" without a lot of due diligence.

tmentalille 4y ago

maxsilver 4y ago

My point is simply, "people believing they have distinct individual personalities inside themselves isn't remotely new, isn't terribly unusual, and maybe isn't inherently bad at all?", and I tried to wrap it in a joke people would click with (many people are closer to it than they'd think, they're just used to it in different language/contexts) Maybe it's ok if people are different -- even a little "weird" sometimes? Just because someone is different, doesn't mean they have a "mental illness". I'm not plural, plurality is not my lived experience -- so I can't speak to it -- I'm just pointing out that it doesn't seem like any kind of "socially transmissible mental illness". Knowing about something, doesn't make you that thing. Under the logic being used here, you could frame 'friends having a party' as a form of "socially transmissible alcoholism". And as someone who isn't plural but is LGBTQ+, I'm very used to seeing people pathologizing or criminalizing folks different from themselves, as a veneer of social cover for delivery of their hate. 50 years ago, someone would have called me "insane" or "crazy" or "having a mental disorder" just for existing too -- even the greatest folks can't always escape this hate (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing#Conviction_for_indecency https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing#Conviction_for_ind...). So it sets off a lot of alarm bells, when folks label someone as having a "mental illness" without a lot of due diligence.