I haven't looked into the benefits of electroshock with BPD, but I'd recommend taking a look at Dr. Daniel Fox's workbook for an at-home DBT/attachment theory foucsed program. BPD is one of the few PDs that has been provably shown to be able to change. If you have $30 or so to spare, it can't hurt.
harmonea
joined 2 years ago
It's a slow and difficult process, but yes. There are certain personality disorders that can be provably put into "remission," and if people with conditions that severe can change their personalities, anyone can.
You have to learn how you've been conditioned to think and feel the way you do, and get a lot of self-discipline re: stopping to notice your feelings, figure out why they're arising, think through the consequences of acting on them, and choosing a better way.
I hate to use terms like this since they're so often the territory of conspiracy nutjobs, but you're basically deprogramming yourself. For example, a sensitive person who's been exposed to a lot of bullying might have learned some pretty intense defensive reaction, so you'd have to stop every time you think "what did he mean by that?" and think of why that's your first reaction, then choose to believe the best possible meaning even though your feelings scream at you not to. And you'd maybe keep a journal to remind yourself of all the times you were right to assume the best, since a defensive mind discards the positive and overemphasizes the negative.
This sort of thing is best accomplished with the aid of a mental health professional, but there are workbooks you can get if that's out of cost/feasibility reach for you. You'd need to know your deal to know which ones to focus on.
I don't really understand why you're comparing these two things? One is a group of people refraining from consumption of certain goods for personal reasons - health, ethics, climate impact, whatever. The other is a group of people consuming arguably more goods than they (we tbh) deserve since we're not willing or able to pay for it for one reason or another.
A better analogy would be comparing piracy to... I don't know, a veg-eater of whatever type who still enjoys the taste of bacon and resorts to stealing it because it's better to hurt the meat industry than to pay? It's a product that person really doesn't really need and absolutely would have never paid for, yet the person still wants it and obtains it in a way that hurts the industry.
(The analogy doesn't hold up since stealing physical goods has a different impact than distributing digital copies, but it's the best I've got off the cuff)
E: okay, after reading your other comments, I'm both confident this didn't address the point you wanted and confident I don't really understand your deal well enough to do so. Both of these groups have some members who have a problem with industry practices and others who are into their chosen lifestyle for other reasons. It seems like you've made some odd decisions about which groups are most prevalent among each and are framing your premise around that, and I don't think we're going to see eye-to-eye on it when the premise is Like This.
Or are you trying to say veganism should be more widely accepted because "DRM is wrong" is roughly equivalent to "animal suffering is wrong" re: "industry bad"?
You said you want good faith discussions, but you preemptively dismissed one of the biggest answers because you don't think it's a good solution. Then you have people here disagreeing with you, explaining why, and pointing to examples of it being done successfully, and you continue to completely dismiss a donation as nothing more than a "thank you" - how is this in any way a good faith discussion if any opposing viewpoint is immediately met with this kind of "YOU'RE the problem" response?
I do understand your frustration in those cases in which donations fail, but it seems like you're not willing to meet us halfway and acknowledge that sometimes, donations succeed, and not by accident or luck. There's data there - test cases we could be picking apart and seeing what critical mass needs to be reached before an instance can reliably secure donations and what we can do for admins until their instances reach that threshold. But you're just dismissing it as nonviable even though it clearly works for a lot of places.
That is not good faith.
Do you think maybe being from "one of the whitest states" is why the people you know still track their descent so carefully? I've lived all over North America, and your experience definitely doesn't match up with anywhere I've lived. Which is not to invalidate your experience, but I would strongly caution you against assuming it's the norm. Most people I knew when I was still in the US pretty much settled on a color or just plain "American" for anything past about the third generation.
Using a color descriptor like "white" or "black" isn't inherently racist for those who don't care so much about which boats all our very distant relatives were on hundreds of years ago, and it definitely doesn't preclude empathy for those who are different from us.
I feel like you're describing a pretty EU point of view here. Which is fine!
But please understand that across the pond, we've been mixing people of various descents for so long that "white" is honestly the best descriptor many of us have. I allegedly have 5 different EU countries in my lineage and ain't nobody got time to get into all that, especially when my ancestry isn't interesting enough for me to know, let alone for me to inflict on others. Those details are just not that important to who I am today, whereas the experience I had over here because of my skin color had more sway over who I am now.
"Ginger" as a term is not, in itself, derogatory or hateful in my experience.
Describing gingers as soulless or hot-tempered is about the same kind of destructive as describing blondes as stupid, which is to say it's a silly stereotype that's often the territory of playful insults between friends, while some small minority of people do run it into the ground and cause real hurt.
(This might be exacerbated by tensions between England and Ireland in that specific area, but... for most of the world "ginger" is a pretty harmless thing.)
Agnosticism is a stance about epistemology, the nature of knowledge - what it's possible to know or not know. Atheism is a stance about the nature of metaphysics and the supernatural - whether you think there are gods.
You can have a stance on both. There are Gnostic Theists (there is definitely a god), Gnostic Atheists (there is definitely no god), Agnostic Theists (I believe in a god, but I accept it as belief alone), and Agnostic Atheists (I don't believe in any gods and I don't think anyone will ever prove otherwise).
Everyone who doesn't believe in any gods, grand creators, "spiritual energy that binds us all together," or what have you is an atheist. Don't gatekeep just because someone is less militant than you, especially on a post you're making out of frustration toward those more militant than you.
I'd be more inclined to say they know it's smelly waste and want a soft surface to bury it in.
Which begs the question of why they don't go for the litterbox, but mine do always try to bury it right away.
Hey man, I'm willing to be honest about what I do. I'm not entitled to consume that media just because it exists, and I'm not going to beat around the bush about that.