Posted by Jost on September 15, 2006, at 17:55:42
In reply to Re: internet, manu. of madness- anorexia {trigger} » Jost, posted by alexandra_k on September 15, 2006, at 11:25:24
> >they even appear to resist label removal of a therapeutic kind.
?maybe because the label removal... isn't theraputic for the individual.
~~ He does recognize that-- that if you have identity issues, and get your identity from a label, that you'll resist giving it up-- and acknowledges that that's reasonable, and understandable. It's that he's concerned about people in that category who may be losing out.
> >They do no want to get well
>now that is a judgement if ever i saw one...
I think, though, that he was only referring to some people not all-- he distinguished two groups: first, people who resist removal of the label because it constituted their source of identity, but who might otherwise want appropriate treatment, even if it involved a temporary loss of secure identity, esp. if their concerns about identity were addressed.
But second, a group who more actively resist any attempt to help them "recover" (if that's the right word really) from their disorder. ie, the pro-anorexia sites, or pro-amputee sites.
My problem with his analysis is that he never makes an argument from groups like that, which are extreme and even inflammatory examples, to people who have more "ordinary" diagnoses. Extreme disorders seem to me to offer an identity as special that may be very hard to give up, because one doesn't go to that extreme to be special, unless there's some great disruption in the ability to feel okay, much less special.
So I'm not sure you can simply reason from extremists to people who are depressed, or anxious, where one's identity might be centered around being a depressed person, which could involve an idea of being specially sensitive. That type of identity, being relatively more moderate, and culturally dispersed, doesn't involve extreme constructions of self as to be different,even outrageously and disruptively so-- And it seems that they might be easier to replace with other, more constructive forms of specialness, or effectiveness, or satisfaction in life.--since the identity they confer doesn't involve claims of such great uniqueness, or unconventionality, or violation of norms.
Plus, it isn't necessarily bad to make judgments. Sometimes we're so afraid of seeming unfair to outsider groups or individuals, they we fail to make appropriate distinctions. I'm not sure if that's the case with his judgments. He doens't make blanket judgments of people who resist giving up labels-- although he overrates the science of any psychological categories at the moment.
I certainly agree with you on that.
Jost
poster:Jost
thread:684913
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20060911/msgs/686294.html