4 ms·

The style of writing and strange segways suggest mental illness; the blog description seems to confirm it.

deleted 7mo ago
[deleted]
pjerem 7mo ago
Doesn’t change anything. In civilized world, people who are mentally ill are took care of by the society, not thrown in the streets.
- hn_throwaway_99 7mo ago
  He wasn't "thrown into the streets". He was offered food and shelter, and he declined it.
  - _3u10 7mo ago
    He was respecting the laws of California. What he did was like a speeding ticket. I do agree that if he was truly in need he would have stolen an iPhone or some designer purses. How privileged to steal sleeping bags and food.
    - delichon 7mo ago
      > I needed a guide. I stole Don Quixote from the library. That wasn't any kind of necessity. He lost me there.
tossandthrow 7mo ago
It is incredible how much energy is being put into justifying why this is his own fault? I guess this is the only way people with high salaries or wealth in the US can find peace with themselves - maybe that's the mental illness?
- mettamage 7mo ago
  > Currently constructing the Sanctuary of the Silent Star while unpacking a 6-month journey through psychosis, homelessness, and the systems that govern us. One story at a time. I'm not saying it's his own fault. I'm also not too happy when people point to mental illness. But this is his blog description where he mentions himself that he unpacs a 6-month journey through psychosis. 6 months of psychosis means you're mentally ill with psychosis as a symptom.
- hn_throwaway_99 7mo ago
  What's incredible to me are comments, like yours, that are saying that somehow the system failed this person, just based on this blog post. When in fact: 1. He was given food and shelter, which he declined - most of his comments about the food are that it's too sugary. 2. He makes it sound like he was offered more permanent shelter in Feb of 2025, which he also declined. To be clear, I'm not making a judgment about this person - and, for that matter, the comment you replied to didn't seem to be making a judgment either, just stating a reasonable conclusion that the author suffered from mental illness. So I'd like to know what additional resources you think would have changed this person's circumstances?
  - imiric 7mo ago
    > I'm not making a judgment about this person [...] just stating a reasonable conclusion that the author suffered from mental illness. You're not making a judgment, but are somehow able to diagnose mental illness from a blog post? Wild. It's far easier to conclude that the system has failed this person, as it habitually fails millions of people in the US, in these same circumstances. Are they all mentally ill? And even if mental health is an issue, does that mean that they are somehow less worthy of assistance? That it's OK for a human being to live under a bridge? The level of self-righteousness and lack of empathy in your comments is baffling.
    - hn_throwaway_99 7mo ago
      > You're not making a judgment, but are somehow able to diagnose mental illness from a blog post? Wild. The author literally talks about his "psychosis" that led him to his predicament, so no, I don't think it's a judgment, just the ability to read. > And even if mental health is an issue, does that mean that they are somehow less worthy of assistance? I have no idea where you seem to get this idea. My point is that, at least in this author's case, he has received assistance. He discusses 2 separate instances in this post where he declined resources and support - he is living under a bridge because he specifically rejected the shelter that was offered him. Could the process of getting people support be better? Of course, but his experience dealing with the pains of bureaucracy doesn't seem much different that bureaucratic slights we all, rich and poor, have to deal with when trying to get assistance from government. FWIW I especially liked his "I identify as a woman" comment in order to get a shower. > The level of self-righteousness and lack of empathy in your comments is baffling. The only self righteousness I see on display is your belief that everyone else is so uncaring because we don't necessarily think the government should force this person into a shelter. I'm not judging the author at all, but I'm certainly judging you.

deleted 7mo ago

[deleted]

Doesn’t change anything. In civilized world, people who are mentally ill are took care of by the society, not thrown in the streets.

hn_throwaway_99 7mo ago
He wasn't "thrown into the streets". He was offered food and shelter, and he declined it.
- _3u10 7mo ago
  He was respecting the laws of California. What he did was like a speeding ticket. I do agree that if he was truly in need he would have stolen an iPhone or some designer purses. How privileged to steal sleeping bags and food.
  - delichon 7mo ago
    > I needed a guide. I stole Don Quixote from the library. That wasn't any kind of necessity. He lost me there.

tossandthrow 7mo ago

It is incredible how much energy is being put into justifying why this is his own fault? I guess this is the only way people with high salaries or wealth in the US can find peace with themselves - maybe that's the mental illness?

mettamage 7mo ago
> Currently constructing the Sanctuary of the Silent Star while unpacking a 6-month journey through psychosis, homelessness, and the systems that govern us. One story at a time. I'm not saying it's his own fault. I'm also not too happy when people point to mental illness. But this is his blog description where he mentions himself that he unpacs a 6-month journey through psychosis. 6 months of psychosis means you're mentally ill with psychosis as a symptom.
hn_throwaway_99 7mo ago
What's incredible to me are comments, like yours, that are saying that somehow the system failed this person, just based on this blog post. When in fact: 1. He was given food and shelter, which he declined - most of his comments about the food are that it's too sugary. 2. He makes it sound like he was offered more permanent shelter in Feb of 2025, which he also declined. To be clear, I'm not making a judgment about this person - and, for that matter, the comment you replied to didn't seem to be making a judgment either, just stating a reasonable conclusion that the author suffered from mental illness. So I'd like to know what additional resources you think would have changed this person's circumstances?
- imiric 7mo ago
  > I'm not making a judgment about this person [...] just stating a reasonable conclusion that the author suffered from mental illness. You're not making a judgment, but are somehow able to diagnose mental illness from a blog post? Wild. It's far easier to conclude that the system has failed this person, as it habitually fails millions of people in the US, in these same circumstances. Are they all mentally ill? And even if mental health is an issue, does that mean that they are somehow less worthy of assistance? That it's OK for a human being to live under a bridge? The level of self-righteousness and lack of empathy in your comments is baffling.
  - hn_throwaway_99 7mo ago
    > You're not making a judgment, but are somehow able to diagnose mental illness from a blog post? Wild. The author literally talks about his "psychosis" that led him to his predicament, so no, I don't think it's a judgment, just the ability to read. > And even if mental health is an issue, does that mean that they are somehow less worthy of assistance? I have no idea where you seem to get this idea. My point is that, at least in this author's case, he has received assistance. He discusses 2 separate instances in this post where he declined resources and support - he is living under a bridge because he specifically rejected the shelter that was offered him. Could the process of getting people support be better? Of course, but his experience dealing with the pains of bureaucracy doesn't seem much different that bureaucratic slights we all, rich and poor, have to deal with when trying to get assistance from government. FWIW I especially liked his "I identify as a woman" comment in order to get a shower. > The level of self-righteousness and lack of empathy in your comments is baffling. The only self righteousness I see on display is your belief that everyone else is so uncaring because we don't necessarily think the government should force this person into a shelter. I'm not judging the author at all, but I'm certainly judging you.