What proportion of people in Los Angeles have been to a mental hospital???

submitted by happysmash27 from self.collapse

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]magnora7 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I know one other person in my extended family that has been to a mental hospital a few times, usually through voluntary self-admission. Although I hear people being "Baker Act"ed isn't super uncommon, where they might say something to their therapist who then things they are a suicide risk and for their own safety (which it may or may not be) they are detained in mental hospitals. In fact, I have heard of many political dissidents being silenced this way. It's a way of making people disappear without killing them.

I'm sorry you had such a bad reaction to being banned on /r/anarchism. I've been banned there too, and I consider myself a socialist-anarchist, so it really bothered me as well. So I totally know where you're coming from. It's really frustrating to believe in an ideology, and then some gatekeepers of that ideology (who often don't even really represent the ideology at all) ban you from participating. I've had that happen more times than I can count, being banned from communities that used to feel like "home" in a way... that's a big part of the reason we created saidit.

And take heart that the people in /r/anarchism are NOT anarchists, by and large. They're neo-marxists, pushing a hyper-left ideology, under the banner of being anarchists. That name was captured by people looking to "spearhead the opposition". Same with anarch-capitalism, that's just the right-wing attempt to capture anarchism, much like /r/anarchism is the left's.

Don't listen to these people. They are trying to sway you, and I know the feeling is strong, but we must be even stronger and see the lies for what they are.

Good luck out there, take care of yourself.

[–]happysmash27[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I almost have no words… Thank you so much! It is really good to know I'm not alone, and…

I've had that happen more times than I can count, being banned from communities that used to feel like "home" in a way... that's a big part of the reason we created saidit.

Now I know that at least for now, this is the place I have been looking for. The same thing has happened for me in multiple other communities as well, to the point of making me a bit paranoid about it. Now I guess I don't have to be quite so paranoid.

Having someone understand who is online rather than offline means so much to me.

I was banned for an opinion which is rather hard to explain, that people kept making a strawman out of. Everyone online went crazily against me for it, while everyone offline agreed with it. Actually…

They're neo-marxists, pushing a hyper-left ideology, under the banner of being anarchists.

This might explain the reaction, which I had both on /r/Anarchism and Raddle.

I guess it's safe here, so I'll explain. Warning: Wall of text. This is super complicated, and hard for my brain to organise.

You see, I was banned for posting my controversial opinions on a thread about controversial opinions.

One opinion was that fascists, and everyone else, should have free speech. Apparently, the community there does not support absolute free speech. I recognize the paradox of intolerance, but are fascists really that compelling that they have to be censored for people to not agree with them??? Plus, how does banning me for that opinion even make sense? Isn't it more anarchist?

The second was a bit more complicated. I, at the time, believed that distribution (but not creation!) of child porn should be legal, since I didn't see it as harming anyone. Please note that even here, many things for me, at least, are currently in the moral gray area. For example, even though I love freedom of all information, it would be harmful to distribute media that the participants of want to be deleted. There are only two types of distribution that I see as almost certainly okay:

  1. Fictional images of fictional minors.

  2. Person 1 had images taken of them under the age of 18. Person 1 is now over 18. Therefore, Person 1 should be able to allow the distribution of pornographic images of Person 1 as a minor.

The problem is, this is so long-winded that people seemed to replace it with a strawman argument online -_-

I have felt that it should be child abusers that people should be against, and not pedophiles, for a while now. See, the Wikipedia article portrayed it as being similar to a sexuality, and even had an article on a movement…

Wait, what‽

Oh wow, apparently the article doesn't exist in the English Wikipedia, yet does in the Esperanto Wikipedia (which is where I found it). I wonder if this contributed to the discrepency in beliefs?

I had tried to find numerous explanations for the belief discrepancy, from me being on the autistic spectrum, to my moral system (utilitarianism), to me being naive due to only being 16 at the time. Many people called my attempts at explanatiom excuses, and even didn't believe some, despite me having years of account history which could allow one to verify them.

I was banned from /r/metaanarchism before I could finish what I was saying. I legitimately wanted to change my belief, because with this many people against it, surely I was wrong and just naive. People weren't very helpful in that though; in one instance, a source I was linked to against my point actually appeared to support it to me, saying that banning simulated child porn was akin to thought control. At this point, the discussion was about simulated child porn, since I couldn't see how anyone in their right mind could possibly be against that. It seemed like saying video game murder was as bad as murder to me.

I was going insane trying to figure out why I was wrong, and couldn't find anywhere to post asking for help. When I moved to Raddle to try to figure it out, I was battered more, but by deleting my post about it and saying I would leave until my opinion changed, I narrowly avoided being banned. I believed that for the good of the world, if my opinion was really that bad, that logically, I should probably kill myself so it wouldn't spread if I couldn't change it. I also believe that the goal in one's life should be to help people, and say not being able to help with Anarchism meant that therefore, I was useless at this therefore had no purpose and could die. I looked everywhere I could to convince myself that I was wrong, and failed at doing it sufficiently, especially since half the places I went to seemed to ban me for even trying to figure out. Even more infuriating, there seemed to be a weird dichotomy where when I talked to people in real life, they actually agreed with me, so I couldn't change my opinion that way either.

This is why I am so glad to have at least some understanding online, even if it isn't with the ideas themselves (It was never about the ideas themselves anyway, but being banned. I didn't actually care about them that much, and still don't. The main reason I argued about them at all was an attempt to be unbanned).

I was banned from /r/Aspergers after posting about this there with no reason given, and later banned from /r/YouTube with no reason and without posting anything at all there either. This is why I am so paranoid; the bans seem to come out of nowhere, without an explanation, like some kind of curse!

If this site is safe… I am seriously relieved! I have beem bottling this up for months now and it keeps coming back to traumatise me, without me being able to get over it with no one to talk to. Hopefully now I can finally get over it…

[–]magnora7 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Thanks for sharing your story, it sucks you've run in to so many problems. I hope saidit can live up to your expectations!