Category Archives: Psychopathology

Alt Left: Identity Politics People and Groups Are Both Mentally Ill

Zamfir: And why is IP supposed to be bad?

I just gave you a lot of reasons. It’s insane. All the IP’s can’t possibly be true. Only one of the conflicting IP’s can be true and the other must be false, or they must both be wrong. It can’t be true that Blacks are bad and Whites are good and also that Blacks are good and Whites are bad, etc. It’s crazy. Same thing with all of the others.

Basically these are all positions that are various forms of nonsense.

In particular,  they are much too quite to call anyone who says boo about them a hater, to demonize their enemies du jour, and frankly to be paranoid.

Most people who criticize various races, ethnic groups or nationalities are not racists. Most men who criticize women are not misogynists. Most women who criticize men are not misandrists. Most people who criticize Jews are not anti-Semites. Most people who criticize Islam are not Muslim haters. Most people who criticize gays are not homophobes. Most people who criticize transsexuals are not transphobes.

So it’s just a bunch of thin-skinned paranoid haters who can’t take any criticism, all with different glorious identities and demonized enemies. I agree with gays hating homophobes, transsexuals hating transphobes, Jews hating anti-Semites, etc., but all of these people are paranoid crazies who think everyone is an evil enemy out to get them, they all have a huge chip on their shoulders, who can’t take any criticism, who think all critics are deadly enemies, and are frankly very narcissistic with inflated self-esteem.

When these qualities are present in a person, we generally say they are unhealthy or mentally ill. Generally they have a personality disorder. If these mentally ill people have the same qualities as these groups, then we say that these groups themselves are paranoid crazies who think everyone is an evil enemy out to get them, all have a huge chip on their shoulders, can’t take any criticism, think all critics are deadly enemies, and are frankly very narcissistic with inflated self-esteem are either groups of mentally ill people or perhaps the groups themselves are mentally ill.

Actual societal structures can become mentally disordered just as a person can. So all of these groups are more or less mentally ill groups full of mentally ill people. The people in the groups have personality disorders and the groups themselves actually have personality disorders!

IP people are crazy. IP groups, being full of crazy people, are crazy groups.

Period.

6 Comments

Filed under Cultural Marxists, Left, Mental Illness, Personality Disorders, Politics, Psychology, Psychopathology, Race/Ethnicity, Social Problems, Sociology, Useless Western Left

How Trump Stole the 2016 Elections: The Blatant Evidence

Zamfir: You say Trump “stole the election with computers”. Really? What are you talking about here? I’ve looked into these bizarre claims and never found any proper evidence of anything.

 

They’re not bizarre. Republicans been doing it since 2000 because the public doesn’t really support them anymore, so like all capitalist, ruling class, and oligarchic political parties, they have to lie, cheat, and steal to stay in power. See the Latin American Right for example. The Republicans been stealing them with computers, especially since 2004. Bush out and out stole the 2004 election.

We can tell they were stolen by how the exit polls went radically off compared to the actual vote. Exit polls are the gold standard of politics for over 50 years now. They always reliably track with results. Out of 50 states, polls will be off in maybe two states, no more. They’ve been going off, often by a lot and almost always in a Republican direction, since 2000. This is when the Republicans started stealing them with the computers. That’s why the Republicans put the computers in in the first place – to steal elections.

In Michigan, all polls for weeks before the election – hundreds of them – were all off, including the exit polls. That can’t possibly happen. So Michigan was stolen. They refused to count 70,000 votes in Detroit for no reason except that they are nigger votes I guess. And many fraudulent votes for Republicans were found even before the recount. A recount was never done because all Michigan politicians opposed it. Why did they oppose a recount?

Wisconsin was also stolen. Exit polls were off but always in Republican districts. There was no real recount in Wisconsin. There was only a fake recount, and some precincts were incredibly shady to where it appeared to witnesses that they were seeing actual fraud taking place.

Also 30,000 fraudulent votes for Republicans were found before the recount even started. The vote in Milwaukee was not possible, and I think they never even recounted it. Write-in’s supported Clinton and those lean rightwing. All exit polls showed Clinton winning. Exit polls were perfect in all precincts that had hand counted ballots but went off in all precincts that had computer counted ballots.

50,000 fraudulent votes were found in Pennsylvania before the recount even started. Write in votes supported Clinton and those tend to lean conservative. There was no recount in Pennsylvania because the DNC governor fought it in court! All exit polls showed Clinton winning.

The vote in Florida was not possible. 70% of votes were write-in’s and they supported Clinton by a decent margin. For Trump to win, a huge number of voters on election day would have had to support Trump. That number was so large as to be statistically impossible. Republican turnout was not elevated on election day anyway. As many Democrats came out as Republicans.

Trump started saying the election was going to be stolen because he was going to steal it himself. He always accuses his opponents of doing what he does or is going to do. This is called projection but it is particularly prominent in this man. It is considered to be a primitive and immature defense that kids use a lot. Yes, adults use it a lot, but people who project all the time are notably unhealthy. It is particularly prominent in personality disorders.

Also Trump, Conaway, and Guiliani became unusually calm about Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania a few days before the election. All polls were pro-Clinton. Manafort said he had just talked to the Russians, and they said not to worry about Michigan. I assume the Russians may have been in on the vote-hacking. Vote-hacking in this last election was never investigated by the FBI or by anyone.

I will add that sleazy Democrats do this too. Hillary had to have stolen a number of primaries. There is no way for the exit polls to go off like that, and the DNC laid down the law that Sanders could not win. Democrats don’t seem to want to fix these machines either I guess because they use them to steal elections themselves.

Republicans are fanatically opposed to all recounts of elections and to fixing the damned voting machines. They must know that the way they are set up now, they are hackable.

Really we need to get rid of them altogether and go back to hand counted ballots. States that hand count ballots never see their exit polls go off.

3 Comments

Filed under Conservatism, Corruption, Democrats, Florida, Government, Local, Mental Illness, Michigan, Midwest, Northeast, Personality Disorders, Political Science, Politics, Psychology, Psychopathology, Regional, Republicans, Russia, South, US Politics, USA, Wisconsin

Why Trump Is a Disaster: Donald Trump Is Not Mentally or Emotionally Fit to Be President

Zamfir: I’m surprised you have a strong preference for Democrats over Republicans. To me it seems like a hopeless choice. If you vote Republican you’re voting for one set of evil elite interests, but not explicitly against your biology and cultural heritage; if you vote Republican you’re voting for another set of evil elite interests, and explicitly against your biology and cultural heritage.

Hard to pick between those two! What is the real advantage in voting Democrat in your opinion? (I guess I’d vote for Bernie, but then again I’d vote for Trump for similar reasons… Not that I expect either one would ever do much on anything I care about.)

Trump’s incompetent. Trump might be senile and he’s obviously dangerously mentally ill.

Trump suffers from Malignant Narcissism, the same disorder that Ted Bundy and other serial killers had. That’s right. Our President has the same mental illness that serial killers do! Original theoreticians on this disorder said that it was the closest thing to pure evil in the mental illnesses. And that’s correct. The best description for Trump is that he is evil. Trump’s a bad person, a jerk, an ass, a prick, a lousy human being, an idiot, a fool, a moron, and worst of all, he’s dangerous. Trump’s obviously too mentally ill and otherwise impaired with dementia to be President.

3 Comments

Filed under Democrats, Government, Mental Illness, Narcissistic, Personality Disorders, Politics, Psychology, Psychopathology, Republicans, US Politics

Game/PUA: The Latest Insult: “You’re an Incel!”

The latest idiotic Internet insult is “You’re an incel!” Even I am getting called an incel lately. That’s laughable because I am about as far from being an incel as a man gets.

There’s nothing new here. This bullshit has been going on forever now, and feminists have always specialized in the insult, “Obviously you can’t get laid!” It also takes other forms. “Neckbeard” means much the same thing. For some reason, it is always feminists and Cultural Left types who wield the “Obviously you can’t get laid”, neckbeard, and incel insults.

For some reason, rightwingers never say this. I suppose that’s because rightwingers don’t care whether some man gets women or not because after all, it’s not that important.

The stupid thing about this insult is that Cultural Left boneheads call every man they hate a neckbeard, incel, or insist, “Obviously you can’t get laid!” Of all the retarded things to say about a human being you don’t even know! Furthermore, this is always done on the Internet, when the Cultural Left types have never met the person and know nothing about him. They read his prose and decide he can’t get laid with God’s help!

I have been reading prose on the Internet for many years now. For the life of me, I have never run across male prose that indicates to me whether a man is successful with women or not. There is no “can’t get laid” style of writing. There’s no such thing! Unless the person is discussing sex, you have no idea if he’s a 50 year old incel or if he’s closing in on Wilt Chamberlain’s record.

Similarly, you can’t diagnose mental illness much less Asperger’s Syndrome on the Internet. I work in mental health. How the Hell can I look at someone’s prose or journalism on the Net and give them a DSM diagnosis? Yet every Cultural Left idiot on Earth can diagnose mental illness better than the finest clinicians – by merely reading a simple gleaning of someone’s prose! Such geniuses!

Of course Asperger’s Syndrome (the most overdiagnosed condition in history) cannot be diagnosed on the Net. Everybody thinks they can, and everyone is always diagnosing everyone else as an “Aspie.” It’s mostly Cultural Left types calling everyone they hate an Aspie. To say this isn’t very nice to Aspies is an understatement. But no clinician can possibly diagnose AS from a snippet of prose. How the Hell can Cultural Left scum outdiagnose the world’s finest diagnosticians?

This insult “Obviously you can’t get laid!” arises from the completely false feminist belief that all men who feminists consider to be misogynists (most of us) cannot possibly get laid. In other words, if you’re a misogynist, obviously you can’t get laid to save your life.

Now I have been observing the dating scene for decades, and one thing that is clear to me is that a lot of misogynistic men get tons of sex. Even the stereotypical bad boys who treat women like crap are well known to be drowning in pussy. Many though not all womanizers are definitely misogynists. The standard male advice about women, particularly from womanizers, is, “You gotta treat women like shit.” This is all pretty awful for those of us who want to be decent men because it seems like a requirement for a successful relationship with women is abusing them.

This goes along with the typical problem of nice guys, which feminists get all wrong.

2 Comments

Filed under Asperger's Syndrome, Autism, Conservatism, Feminism, Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Left, Little or None, Man World, Mental Illness, Political Science, Psychology, Psychopathology, Psychotherapy, Romantic Relationships, Sex

The Definitions 99% of the Population Gets Wrong: Pedophilia and Hebephilia

Jynxi: Pedophilia has to prepubescent children. I don’t think these girls qualify as ten year olds. However, the correct term might be hebephilia, a attraction to pubescent young adolescent children. I think the public school teachers union has all the information you need.

I am making fun of all the dangerous idiots out there, almost all of whom are women, who insist that any man who is attracted to any teenage girl is a pedophile. Yeah, these dumb bitches actually believe this!

Women in power won’t rule based on logic because females are simply not logical creatures. It’s men who are logical ones. Women in power will rule based on their feels, which is a bad idea in general and especially for men, at whom most of these women’s persecution will be aimed. Women can help us men run things. I do not object to that. I just don’t want them running things. It’s not a problem. Each gender has its roles. Women can’t do everything.

Hebephilia is not appropriate here either, and the definition is incorrect. Hebephilia is not attraction to pubescent females, otherwise all men would be hebephiles because all men are attracted to pubescent girls. Instead it is a preference for pubescent girls to the point of fixation to where they are simply not attracted at all to mature females. They are not a lot different from pedophiles, but they think they are superior to the pedos.

I have lurked on one of their 8chan boards, and hebephiles are weird. For instance, people would post a photo of a 16 year old girl, and they would all start screaming, “Ew gross! No grandmas!” Yeah, they actually believe that. 16 year old girls are disgusting Grandmas to these guys. That’s almost as bad as the pedos who think even pubescent females are too old.

I happen to think hebephilia is a disorder, but there was a big debate around Hebephilia in the latest DSM-5, and the consensus was that Hebephilia not only was not a mental illness, it wasn’t even abnormal! Also they were worried that making it a mental illness would allow the authorities to lock up some guy who screws a 14 year old forever on preventive detention bullshit, which I think is unconstitutional.

 

1 Comment

Filed under Dangerous Idiots, Gender Studies, Girls, Heterosexuality, Idiots, Mental Illness, Pedophilia, Psychology, Psychopathology, Sex, Women

Against Preventive Detention: It’s Not Against the Law to Be Dangerous

You cannot lock people up for “Dangerousness.” It’s not a crime to be dangerous. People can be as dangerous as they want to within certain limits. It’s a free country and you are free to be as dangerous as you want to be. People aren’t criminals until the commit a crime. If we want to lock someone up, we have to wait until they commit a crime first. It’s seems awful, but it’s only fair, don’t you think? Why not lock me up because I might rob a bank some day. After all, I have thought about it before.

There are many men now locked up on the charge of Dangerousness because of new laws that allow sex offenders, and sex offenders only mind you, to be imprisoned on preventive detention forever all because they have a mental disorder that supposedly makes them dangerous.

This is a grotesque misuse of the laws locking up the Criminally Insane. Those people need to be legitimately crazy, generally speaking psychotic, and they generally need to have a chronic psychotic disorder that won’t get better, to be locked away as Dangerous Due to Insanity. I have no qualms with locking up completely insane people who have also committed serious crimes and have an untreatable mental illness that makes them an out and out menace to society. They don’t have the faintest idea what they are doing most of the time, and that combined with a propensity for violent crime means that people like that have to be locked up at least until they are stabilized.

So because we were locking up the psychotically violent criminals in preventive detention (which is rational), the authorities opened up the damned DSM and noted that the DSM had made the error of labeling certain paraphilias as mental disorders, which they probably are not.

How does merely having a paraphilia make you nuts? Some guy has foot fetish. No one knows about it other than some woman who might sleep with him. Otherwise he’s completely normal. Show me how this man is crazy. I can’t see it.

So they started diagnosing a number of sex offenders with paraphilias as a way to keep them locked up forever even after they had served their full term in prison and had paid their debt to society!

These “Mentally Disordered Sex Offenders” being locked away forever because they might maybe commit a crime if they are released are what boils down to thought criminals being prosecuted for thought crimes.

People allow it because they hate pedos so much, but now that people have said it’s OK to lock people away forever on preventive detention on the basis of dangerousness, what’s preventing the authorities from coming out and arresting you for “Dangerousness?” What’s preventive the expansion of these crazy Dangerousness laws? Nothing. People are idiots. They allowed their hatred for pedos to cloud their judgement, and now they have set themselves up for some very nasty preventive detention nonsense. That 5-4 Supreme Court case that legalized this preventive detention nonsense was one of the worst cases ever. Scalia wrote the final opinion, so that ought to tell you something.

1 Comment

Filed under Corrections, Crime, Idiots, Law, Law enforcement, Mass Hysterias, Mental Illness, Moralfags, Pedophile Mass Hysteria, Pedophilia, Psychology, Psychopathology, Sex, Social Problems, Sociology

Paranoia, Aggression, Victimhood, and Assimilation: The Dilemma of the Jews

If you want to find out if someone is an anti-Semite, the last person you should ask is a Jew. This is because Jews see probably 10X more antisemites than actually exist. In other words, they’re paranoid.

One wonders why one would want to think that people who like you actually hate you or go about worrying all the time that many people in your day to day life surreptitiously hate you. If you go to a therapist with symptoms like that, you get diagnosed with a mental disorder. It’s called paranoia. When it gets very bad, it becomes Paranoid Personality Disorder and it gets even worse in a lot of psychoses, especially Paranoid Schizophrenia, Manic Psychosis, and Delusional Disorder.

If paranoia is a mental illness, does that mean that most Jews are nuts? Maybe. I’d much rather call Jews crazy than evil. Besides, it’s a lot more accurate.

But one wonders why the need for the paranoia? It’s simple. The Jews are a tribe, a human tribe. Judaism and Jewishness is simple a manifestation of human ethnocentrism found in every tribe. All tribes are paranoid about all the other tribes and have an extremely elevated view of themselves that implies that they are either the best people on Earth, the only people on Earth, or the first people on Earth. Paranoia tends to go hand in hand with grandiosity. After all, if you are a measly nothing of a man, why would all of these powerful entities be plotting against you all the time. The only way you could have all these people out to get you is if you were pretty damned important!

People with low self-esteem are not usually paranoid. They assume people don’t like them, often correctly. At any rate “people don’t like me” is an anxiety process related to low self-self esteem, anxiety, guilt and high inhibition. The classic process is Social Phobia. Social phobics often feel that people don’t like them because they are inferior. But that’s not paranoia!

Paranoids, instead, go far beyond the notion that people don’t like them. It’s so much worse than that. Paranoids believe that the people who don’t like you are actual enemies and they are plotting against you! And it’s associated with high self-esteem, not low self-esteem, and low levels of anxiety as opposed to high levels. Instead of anxiety and depression, the paranoid feels grandiosity and anger.

Now here we tie into the Jews.

Look a the description I just wrote of how paranoids act and feel and tell me that doesn’t sound exactly like some of the negative stereotypes of Jews.

Why be paranoid?

The Jews are paranoid because paranoia is the only thing that keeps them going. In the Middle Ages, they actually built some of those ghettos themselves in order to keep their people away from the Gentiles. In 1800, a proper Orthodox Jew would not only not dine with a Gentile. He would not even take tea with one! The Yemeni Jews are like this to this very day.

For centuries in the ghetto, the rabbis preached how the Gentiles hated them and how the Jews had to keep away from the Gentiles. In Medieval Spain, if a Jewish woman had sex with a Gentile, her community would punish her by cutting off her nose!

The Jews are remarkably inbred. They have existed for 2,000 years in the Diaspora and they are still remarkably pure. A good way to keep your tribe pure is to preach that all of the outsiders are evil people who hate you. Of course you don’t want to mingle with them, much less have sex with them.

So the Jews actually owe their very existence to centuries of paranoia along with all the attendant emotions that go along with it – grandiosity towards themselves, anger and hostility (not anxiety) towards non- Jews and basically aggressive, belligerent, chip on the shoulder mindset, which clinical paranoids also have.

All paranoids are victims. Not only that, but they are innocent victims. Innocent victimhood is a necessary state for the paranoia to develop in the first place. The Jews also are perennial victims. They are supposedly victims of centuries of oppression everywhere they  have gone and the future only holds the same if not worse. And of course the Jews are always innocent. They got thrown out of all those countries through no fault of their own. They dindu nuffin. Those Gentiles were just being irrational or insane and downright evil. Pure evil. Pure evil for no reason at all, the worst sort of evil of them all.

Hence it follows that Jews have a need to be victims. Hang around Jews long enough and it will become apparent that they actually desire and cherish their victimhood. In fact, in my opinion, victimhood is the most precious thing a Jew has. One thing you don’t do is take away a Jews sense of victimhood. It seems they will almost kill to keep that.

So what happens if you take away the paranoia and sense of victimhood from the Jews? Simple. The Jews go extinct. The only reason they persisted all this time was due to their hatred for non-Jews. The day the Jews stop hating non-Jews and seeing themselves as victims of all-encompassing anti-Semitism is the day the Jews start going out. Because once that happens, the Jews will have no reason not to assimilate and marry non-Jews.

And this is the Catch-22 of Jewish assimilation. And in fact some of these very arguments have been used by Jews themselves in the centuries-old debate about assimilation.

3 Comments

Filed under Anti-Semitism, Culture, Jews, Mental Illness, Personality Disorders, Psychology, Psychopathology, Psychotic Disorders, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, The Jewish Question

Are Schizophrenic People Smart?

Although of course schizophrenics vary in IQ, the research shows that lower IQ is associated with schizophrenia. Typically the lower IQ was present before the schizophrenia hit. Whether these people already had pre-schizophrenia and the low IQ was a signal of that or whether lower IQ is an independent risk factor is not known. I suggest the former.

I am not sure if schizophrenia itself, once it hits, causes an IQ decline, but it would not surprise me. The process of developing schizophrenia involves considerable damage to the brain. It makes sense that this brain damage, in addition to causing the disorder, also lowered your IQ.

In summary, people with schizophrenia tend to have lower IQ’s than normals on average, but the difference may not be large. I think it was only ~3 points.

1 Comment

Filed under Intelligence, Mental Illness, Psychology, Psychopathology, Psychotic Disorders, Schizophrenia

What Percentage of Homosexual People Is Acceptable To You in a Given Population?

Answered on Queera.

Believe it or not, all of the answers said that if a country’s population was 100% gay, that would be absolutely wonderful! I’m sure having all the population of your country gay would be the greatest thing since sliced bread! What the Hell’s the matter with people? It would be catastrophic for any country to be 100% gay, though we’re probably headed that way in the US at the rate we’re going here.

How could having 100% of the population of your country gay possibly be a good thing!? Color me mystified.

A given population as in for a country? 3%. That’s the percentage in the US, and it’s just fine by me.

Understand that homosexuality is bad for society in the sense that it causes a lot of costly problems for society. Furthermore, taxes paid by gays do not make up for the costs that society incurs from homosexuals.

  • Homosexuals live 20 years less than heterosexuals. This is horribly sad for gay people that they miss out on so many years of wonderful life, but it seems to me that reduced lifespan is costly to society.
  • Gays have higher rates of mood and anxiety disorders. While this causes a lot of suffering to gay people, and this is sad, at the same time, mental illness is costly to society.
  • Gays have much higher rates of drinking, smoking, and drug abuse than straights. The gay male party and play, scene revolving heavily around methamphetamine and club drugs is particularly alarming. Lesbians in particular smoke a lot. The costs of drinking, smoking, and drug abuse to gays themselves are no doubt significant in terms of disease, mortality, and the suffering that can come from excessive substance abuse, nevertheless, this incurs a lot of costs to society.
  • Gay men obviously have a very high STD rate. At 20% infection rate, the HIV rate is especially alarming. Most of these diseases remain confined to the gay community and have not broken out significantly to the straight community, with the exception of the Black community with all the down low men. But the great heterosexual HIV epidemic spreading from gays to straights never occurred mostly because HIV goes from men to women and then it stops, as spokesmen from the New York Department of Public Health said as early as the 1980’s. That’s not completely true, but it is very hard to get HIV from a woman. Hepatitis A, B, and C are or were very common in the gay community, vastly more common than among heterosexuals, most of whom only acquire B and C from IV drug use. Parasitical diseases such as shigella, ameobiasis and giardiasis are also extremely common among gay men, whereas they are quite rare among straights. In recent syphilis epidemics, up to 85% of cases are among gay men. Syphilis is quite uncommon among straights. Gay men have elevated rates of anal cancer, and the rate is rising. The rate is vastly higher than the rate among straights.I would like to point out that it is gay men themselves who suffer most from these diseases, and this suffering, although self-imposed, is often tragic, horrifying and heartbreaking in particularly in the heart-wrenching case of HIV. Lesbians have very low rates of STD’s but higher rates of breast cancer. I doubt if lesbians impose a disease burden on society. The very high gay male STD rate, in particular the HIV rate, obviously imposes considerable costs to society.
  • Tragically, gay men have a suicide rate 3X higher than straight men, even in San Francisco, the most gay-friendly place in the US. The attempted suicide rate is also very high. Gay male teenagers have a tragically very high attempted suicide rate at 8X the normal rate. Suicidal behavior causes unfathomable and heartbreaking suffering on gay men. However, attempted and completed suicides impose considerable cost on society.
  • Domestic violence rates are very high in gay and lesbian couples, especially the latter. A gay man is much more likely to beat his partner than a straight man is. A woman is much less likely to be beaten by a male partner than by a female partner. This causes immense suffering to the partners of gay and lesbian batterers. In addition, domestic violence is costly to society.
  • In gay areas, gay men typically take over all of the public restrooms and turn them into miniature sex clubs. This renders most public restrooms unusable by the rest of us. Most gay men typically vociferously support the use of public restrooms as sex dens for gays. I don’t have much sympathy here. Gay men are simply being very irresponsible with this depraved mindset. Further, this is a cost to society.

It is first of all most important to point out that gay men themselves suffer worst from most from these largely self-imposed conditions, a suffering so profound that it almost moves you to tears. Compassion is essential. Nevertheless, there is a cost to society. Some of these issues may be caused by discrimination (see the high teenage gay male attempted suicide rate), but there is a cost to society no matter what causes it. Some of these problems would lessen with increased acceptance of gays, but others would linger or possibly even worsen.

The question comes up whether gays pay for the costs they bring to society. Many gays seem to have above average intelligence for some reason, especially gay men. Gays seem more artistically talented than straights. More gays than straights seem to get college degrees, in particular gay men.

Gay men seem to earn higher than average wages and are disproportionately employed in high paying and prestigious professions. I am always hearing about a homosexual, often a gay man, who is contributing something noteworthy and exemplary to our society such that it mentions a media notice. Obviously, gay men contribute more to the tax base per capita than straights. So gays, especially gay men, offer considerable benefits to society, not flowing from their homosexuality but from other aspects of their lives.

I have not discussed lesbians here because I know little about them, but I doubt that they impose serious costs on society other than reduced lifespan.

However the question rises whether gays pay for themselves. Despite their excellent contributions to society and their higher than normal tax contributions, I still do not think that homosexuals pay for themselves.

The question then arises about whether the rest of us should be willing to carry a small burden for our gay brothers.

Personally I feel that at 3%, I am willing to shoulder the costs of homosexuals to society, as the numbers are so small that it is something we can cope with. I would be willing to tolerate up to 6% gay men in society. I think we could deal at that rate.

However, if the rate of male homosexuality went higher than that, all of these problems above would increase in scope with attendant costs.

Honestly, even when you get to 10% gay men in any country, your problems are going to go up a lot. The % of gay men in New York and San Francisco is quite high, and they definitely impose considerable costs on these cities.

Once you start heading up to 15–20% of any country’s population being gay, I think it would be unsustainable for many reasons (see above).

Homosexuality in society seems to be one of those things, like many things in life, that is best in small doses.

9 Comments

Filed under Alcohol, Anxiety Disorders, Civil Rights, Death, Depressants, Discrimination, Gender Studies, Health, Heterosexuality, Homosexuality, Illness, Intoxicants, Man World, Mental Illness, Mood Disorders, Psychology, Psychopathology, Public Health, Sex, Social Problems, Sociology, Speed, Stimulants

What Makes an OCD Thought More Rooted in the Mind and Makes It Even More Difficult to be Removed?

I understand exactly what you are talking about. OCD thoughts or obsessions have some peculiar power to them. Something “sticks” about them. I call them Super-thoughts and believe that they are much more powerful than regular thoughts. They seem to have some odd “pull” to them that seems to almost force you to think about them.

I have had clients who have told me that they feel that they have to think these thoughts. Unfortunately, I felt that way somewhat myself at one point. Keep in mind that OCD’ers often feel that they “have” to do all sorts of things. This is the compulsive nature of the illness, but the broken record nature of the obsessions also looks compulsive or habitual. If OCD is a disease of doubting, as the French say, it is also a disease of repetition.

To determine if something is an obsession or not, the great psychiatrist George Winokur told his med school students, “Look at how hard the patient resists the thought. The harder they resist and fight the thought, the more likely it is to be an obsession.”

I will take it even further. “If you try to stop it, it’s an obsession.” That’s not literally true, but it’s pretty much true.

The thoughts also become your friend in a sense because they are with you most of the time. In counseling, I sometimes tell my clients to think of the thoughts as your best friend. After all, they are always with you, and they will never leave you, right? Just like your best friend.

The thoughts also seem to be “alive” in a sense, and it seems like they do not want to die.

Before I realized I had OCD, I just thought I was going insane in my head. For some reason, this was projected out at the world, and everyone seemed to think there was something wrong with me.

The OCD had set up bizarre rules that I had to live my life by, mostly designed to make my life as miserable as possible. I was terrified to break the rules. Finally I had had it with these stupid and frankly masochistic rules, that I started to stand up and fight them. I remember every time I did that, the OCD would stand up and fight and “try to stay alive.” Finally, I would beat the OCD and the the OCD would back down, cower, and say, “Ok, you win.” But then it would come up with a new rule that was often not quite as bad as the previous rule.

In my opinion, it is almost as if these thoughts are living beings. Living beings do not wish to die, so neither do these thoughts.

This ties in with the bizarre nature of the illness where the sufferer himself thinks the thoughts are stupid or absurd, but they still can’t stop thinking them.

Many times I have heard, “Why in the Hell am I even thinking about this?…This is something I would like to think of as infrequently as possible, or never if I could…Of all the thoughts I could think, this is the worst one of them all…Please give me a new thought to think, OCD!”

So the person feels that the thoughts are preposterous, idiotic, and senseless, nevertheless the thoughts have this bizarre pull or stickiness to them as if they are almost demanding that you think about them.

People get so used to their obsessions because they think them all the time that some OCD’ers say, “There is a part of me that wants to stay ill for some reason…I’m afraid to kill the thoughts for some reason…as much as I hate them, the thoughts seem like my friend, and it feels sad to kill them.”

Now why obsessions have this bizarre stickiness, power, or pull to them, I still have no idea. I can’t even come up with a theory. But it’s definitely a part of this very strange illness.

Leave a comment

Filed under Anxiety Disorders, Mental Illness, OCD, Psychology, Psychopathology