Submitted by 2nbdsfrnd2 in lobby

I think most people who have no desire to connect with others are making a lifestyle choice influenced by their neurological (genetic) makeup. I know there are others who have no desire but have a serious emotional problem with it but no matter what they do they just can't get rid of it as it's a part of them. Both are influenced environmentally and genetically. However, assuming they have a mental disorder implies that they were not like this before and that they were functioning normally before some alleged incident. And assuming they must be traumatized accomplishes the same thing. If certain asocial people can function normally except when heavy interaction is required and they don't see it as a problem, why should they receive a psychiatric diagnosis? All that accomplishes is automatically seeing them as a problem that needs to be fixed. Or, it needs to be fixed, but it can't be fixed, so we will just impose some form of lifelong "therapy" and possibly drugs, as well as heavy legal restrictions based on a faulty psychiatric diagnosis. This is the reason why some people no longer have faith in the psychiatric industry, and why others use it as an attempt to ruin the lives of people they don't like.

10

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Fool wrote

Mental disorders = incompatible with society to the point of having a detrimental impact on your life.

Greater than a third of people in industrial society have a diagnosed mental disorder, how many more are undiagnosed?

What's the commonality? Modern Industrial Society

In other words, "mental disorders" are the norm and aren't a bad thing if you don't believe they are.

Some people change the language to "mental conditions", but I sort of like disorder. Life is disorder, trying to force order is where most problems arise.

7

Tequila_Wolf wrote (edited )

Psychiatry generally starts with a (bad, socially constructed, power-defined) idea of how a person should be and assumes that deviations from that are pathological rather than naturally occurring.

This is not just an issue with asocial people but anybody who diverges from the norm. Especially if that divergence means that you can't participate in the economy.

5

SnowCode wrote

Probably yes, anything that goes away from the norm of society is considered a disorder. I like disorders :3

I recommend you read Flower Bomb - Descend into Madness if you are interested in this topic.

Also I think there was a zine from crimethinc called Self as Other but I don't remember if it treats those topics.

5

Catsforfun wrote (edited )

its a social construct. what is mental illness is dependent on what a society considers mental illness. if society considers, a man being effeminate/gender nonconforming/LGBTQ an illness, they put him in conversion therapy. if that is not considered an illness, then it's totally fine for him to be effeminate or LGBTQ.

if a society doesn't value solitude and considers too much of it atypical, then if their language for constructing reality dictates, they will categorize it into a mentally ill schema.

I feel like im still being very abstract but this is my final edit.

5