Psychiatrists Cheerful but Not the Happiest of Specialists

SDN Members don't see this ad. (About Ads)

Originally Posted by notdeadyet

This might have something to do with your fears of being accused of "hate speech."

I'm hardly representative of conservatives. But even mainstream conservatives don't speak out--something as innocuous as contesting the ridiculous charge that George W. Bush was a Nazi can get you branded as some kind of radical right-wing extremist who can't be trusted. And I never hear anyone in the hospital interjecting gratuitous comments about President Barack Hussein Obama or Nancy Pelosi into unrelated, serious discussions about patients.

Originally Posted by Ibid

But homosexuals are part of society as well. How is being open about ones sexuality going to cause damage to society? Who are you to say what is a perfectly normal life?

Being "open about one's sexuality" weakens traditional sexual morality, which makes people think they can do whatever they want sexually, which leads to broken families, fatherless children, more social chaos and less social cohesion. The acceptance of homosexuality isn't the only, nor the primary, cause of these things, but it is a part of them. But I think it's a cause celebre in our society because open homosexuaity is so aggressively contradictory to traditional Western sexual morality, and the latter is what liberals like yourself revile the most, because it represents the supposed repression and constraint on individual self-expression of the traditional West.

I find it odd that the political landscape (rather the republican primaries really) in the US seems to be dominated by arguements about issues that have largely been settled in the rest of the developed world. Your kind of thinking has more in common with the Taliban than anything else but that is an aside although it does rather beg the question as to what sort of values you think are being defended in Afganistan. Maybe the Westboro Babtist church has more followers than I thought.

The political landscape in the US is "dominated" by arguments about the open expression of homosexuality? I wish. Name one Republican politician who has said "homosexuality should remain in the closet." Heck, in the past year we witness the homosexualization of our armed forces, with nary a peep out of mainstream conservatives. "Conservatives" in the US are about one nanometer to the right of liberals like yourself, but because they are to the right of you at all, you think they're radical right-wing fundamentalist extremist wackos.

And you think opposition to homosexuality has "more in common with the Taliban than anything else?" So you think a representative American from, say, 1960, has more in common with the Taliban than he does with a representative American of today? The Chrisitan Crusaders who fought Muslims in the Middle Ages were fighting over no difference at all? Liberals claim conservatives engage in "black and white" thinking, but there's no thinking more black and white than this. To you, everything boils down to the idea that equality and nondiscrimination are the greatest goods, and inequality and discrimination the greatest evils. Therefore, the vast gulf of differences between the traditional West and the Taliban on politics, culture, philosophy, art, music, literature, science, and countless other dimensions of civilization is meaningless. The traditional West and the Taliban both feature inequality and discrimination; therefore, to you, they're the same.

Originally Posted by Abider

We like to think all is forward and upward. And maybe in our educated circles of science and medicine where wingnuts can be roundly laughed at as here, this is the case. But the collision with the type of ideas Tri is talking about is the question of our age. He feels utterly comfortable thinking of sexual preference in terms of sin and damnation.

It's not like homosexuals were executed in pre-1960's America. They had an underground subculture, much as they do today, and lived all kinds of interesting lives. They were simply prohibited from publically manifesting their homosexuality.

Originally Posted by Trismegistus4

I'm hardly representative of conservatives. But even mainstream conservatives don't speak out--something as innocuous as contesting the ridiculous charge that George W. Bush was a Nazi can get you branded as some kind of radical right-wing extremist who can't be trusted. And I never hear anyone in the hospital interjecting gratuitous comments about President Barack Hussein Obama or Nancy Pelosi into unrelated, serious discussions about patients.


Being "open about one's sexuality" weakens traditional sexual morality, which makes people think they can do whatever they want sexually, which leads to broken families, fatherless children, more social chaos and less social cohesion. The acceptance of homosexuality isn't the only, nor the primary, cause of these things, but it is a part of them. But I think it's a cause celebre in our society because open homosexuaity is so aggressively contradictory to traditional Western sexual morality, and the latter is what liberals like yourself revile the most, because it represents the supposed repression and constraint on individual self-expression of the traditional West.


The political landscape in the US is "dominated" by arguments about the open expression of homosexuality? I wish. Name one Republican politician who has said "homosexuality should remain in the closet." Heck, in the past year we witness the homosexualization of our armed forces, with nary a peep out of mainstream conservatives. "Conservatives" in the US are about one nanometer to the right of liberals like yourself, but because they are to the right of you at all, you think they're radical right-wing fundamentalist extremist wackos.

And you think opposition to homosexuality has "more in common with the Taliban than anything else?" So you think a representative American from, say, 1960, has more in common with the Taliban than he does with a representative American of today? The Chrisitan Crusaders who fought Muslims in the Middle Ages were fighting over no difference at all? Liberals claim conservatives engage in "black and white" thinking, but there's no thinking more black and white than this. To you, everything boils down to the idea that equality and nondiscrimination are the greatest goods, and inequality and discrimination the greatest evils. Therefore, the vast gulf of differences between the traditional West and the Taliban on politics, culture, philosophy, art, music, literature, science, and countless other dimensions of civilization is meaningless. The traditional West and the Taliban both feature inequality and discrimination; therefore, to you, they're the same.


It's not like homosexuals were executed in pre-1960's America. They had an underground subculture, much as they do today, and lived all kinds of interesting lives. They were simply prohibited from publically manifesting their homosexuality.

You're lack of insight into this is profound. Matched only by your general befuddlement of where exactly your own position is in the Culture War your attempting to engage in.

How can someone argue with terms like "traditional western morality." What does that even mean.

Most conservatives don't bother with your interests...you did just say "I wish" to the idea of them making homosexuality a priority.....this is cause for a long pause.....Because they know they've lost that spurious and ignorant agenda. They only continue to nod to it to corral all of your brethren to the polls. A strategy they've been engaged in for many decades now. They barely give a sh!t about your "traditional western morality." That's just a portal for catch phrases to manipulate you idiots.

When abortions were illegal do you think your republican senator's daughter really went to see Aunt so-in-so for a year to avoid betrothal to the low-born? Do you think it'd be any different if your agendas were to become sacrosanct in the halls of american governance?

We all, think you're cretins. That need to join with religious zealots the world over in the founding of a new nation somewhere--like the Zionists--where you can battle over heaven and eternity and virgins or whatever is indicated by your holy books. So long as we can live in an enlightened and prosperous peace. Like our friends in Denmark or Sweden.

And. Don't let it creep darkly in your dreams that sweet love between 2 grown men is wonderful. Own it like a man. Like Socrates, one of the founders of your traditional western morality.

Because what you're talking about is not the Deism of Jefferson. Or the making of a constitutional republic. Or the brilliance of a thomas Paine. Or anything much at all to do with the Enlightenment--the courageous lift of reason from out of the dark ages.

What you're talking about is simple piety. Religious superstition. And a body of law and governance that would prevent challenge to it and dialectic with it.

We don't prevent you from not being gay. Or living whatever morality you want. But we will never go down in accepting that your kind should dictate morality to the rest of us with your mindless adherence to bronze age illiterate desert philosophy. We will shed your blood before that. You're only tolerated because Americans have lost the memory of being Inquisited for Amorality. That we used to be subjugated to silence by corrupt fools who claimed intercession with their supreme being and us.

But take enough steps on our constitution and I'll have my guns ready the same as you. So don't morally equivocate western philosophy with your dim point of view. The fact that you can do that just illustrates your profound stupidity.

This thread is starting to look suspiciously like that SDN political forum that I try to avoid...

What happened to all the cheerful psychiatrists that I opened this thread to read about?

Originally Posted by Abider

You're lack of insight into this is profound. Matched only by your general befuddlement of where exactly your own position is in the Culture War your attempting to engage in.

How can someone argue with terms like "traditional western morality." What does that even mean.

Most conservatives don't bother with your interests...you did just say "I wish" to the idea of them making homosexuality a priority.....this is cause for a long pause.....Because they know they've lost that spurious and ignorant agenda. They only continue to nod to it to corral all of your brethren to the polls. A strategy they've been engaged in for many decades now. They barely give a sh!t about your "traditional western morality." That's just a portal for catch phrases to manipulate you idiots.

When abortions were illegal do you think your republican senator's daughter really went to see Aunt so-in-so for a year to avoid betrothal to the low-born? Do you think it'd be any different if your agendas were to become sacrosanct in the halls of american governance?

We all, think you're cretins. That need to join with religious zealots the world over in the founding of a new nation somewhere--like the Zionists--where you can battle over heaven and eternity and virgins or whatever is indicated by your holy books. So long as we can live in an enlightened and prosperous peace. Like our friends in Denmark or Sweden.

And. Don't let it creep darkly in your dreams that sweet love between 2 grown men is wonderful. Own it like a man. Like Socrates, one of the founders of your traditional western morality.

Because what you're talking about is not the Deism of Jefferson. Or the making of a constitutional republic. Or the brilliance of a thomas Paine. Or anything much at all to do with the Enlightenment--the courageous lift of reason from out of the dark ages.

What you're talking about is simple piety. Religious superstition. And a body of law and governance that would prevent challenge to it and dialectic with it.

We don't prevent you from not being gay. Or living whatever morality you want. But we will never go down in accepting that your kind should dictate morality to the rest of us with your mindless adherence to bronze age illiterate desert philosophy. We will shed your blood before that. You're only tolerated because Americans have lost the memory of being Inquisited for Amorality. That we used to be subjugated to silence by corrupt fools who claimed intercession with their supreme being and us.

But take enough steps on our constitution and I'll have my guns ready the same as you. So don't morally equivocate western philosophy with your dim point of view. The fact that you can do that just illustrates your profound stupidity.

Nuff said




(and what the f*ck, some American south states battling against science's "corrupted theories" like "evolution", teach "creationism" and they call the middle east barbaric...)



"darn foreigners they get our jubsss"

Originally Posted by OldPsychDoc

What happened to all the cheerful psychiatrists that I opened this thread to read about?

Bwahahaha!

I realize my manner is coarse. But I suppose that's the difference between me and few others who've been watching this issue globally and many of you who find such backwards anti-woman, anti-gay, and anti-democratic, rhetoric just as repulsive as we do but nevertheless feel that apology and appreciative distance is sufficient.

It isn't. You don't reason with people waiting for The Rapture.

I purpose we cede them the midwest and the southeast. And we'll take the coastal city states. All of you in the middle can decide under who's sensibilities you'd rather inhabit. And we go from there.

We'll focus on creative ingenuity, biotechnology, and design for the global economy. And they can focus on being right with god and farming and whatever provincial things that they like. We'll work out peaceful neighborly trade agreements. Their food for our global commercial products.

Have fun in their departments of psychiatry--I mean scripture class for family values.

If you want to defect, you'll have to pass our rigorous citizenship standards in secular republican democratic thought.

It's easier to ignore the closer your sensibilities are to theirs. For those of who've made the choice, there is no negotiation. Ignore that reality at the peril of all that we've achieved, for women, for minorities, for enlightenment.

It may be better to learn to argue for human rights in a way that doesn't make others question whether you've had your lithium level checked recently. I'm on board with the message, but the delivery won't make you many friends outside of San Francisco, which you might be totally fine with. There are still poor folk, women, racial and sexual minorities in the Southeast and Midwest, too, and it's hard to do much for them if you leave them to join the hive in Northern California.

Originally Posted by billypilgrim37

It may be better to learn to argue for human rights in a way that doesn't make others question whether you've had your lithium level checked recently. I'm on board with the message, but the delivery won't make you many friends outside of San Francisco, which you might be totally fine with. There are still poor folk, women, racial and sexual minorities in the Southeast and Midwest, too, and it's hard to do much for them if you leave them to join the hive in Northern California.

Sure. I take your punch on the nose. I understand what you're saying.

But I'm in exile from civilization, far from the hive. Wading through religiosity and southern culture. Who think a mixed race relationship is their business for public trial. So you take them. You wrangle some sense of civilization from their arrogance of thinking they need to help you because you're not saved. You take them. I've had enough. And I'm tired of living as cornered cultural minority among them. There's not enough cultural momentum to make my limited days on earth fruitful and enjoyable if I stayed here.

That's even with the assumption of cultural conversation being something that interests these aspects of American culture. The pop songs out of Nashville tell the story better than me. With their prolific messages of nationalism, provincial pride, and antagonism of my own sensibilities.

Take your kids to school with that as a backdrop. I've come to believe there's only a few isolated areas of American civilization. And I aim to spend my days on earth in them. Ready to defend them by force if necessary. If that makes you think about lithium levels i don't know what to tell you. I am a normal person with a particular set of ideas and opinions. Brought on by experience and the natural sensibilities of a heretic.

To your point of those left behind in the cultural badlands: by the process of their breaking free by their own will and determination we would welcome among us the strongest and brightest there is. In the same way that talent from around the world seeks it's free expression in these united states. Only we would not have to tow along dead weight who would rather we stay put or go backwards. I think america is due for a showdown of these separate world-views. The illustration of our superior dialectic with it's culture of mobilizing the brightest and the best would dominate them. And all who wanted freedom would come to our side. As it is they can leach off our accomplishments in culture and science and be comfortable judging us in our stead. We need competition and cultural conflict in this case. Not unity.

Do you think it a random accident that one of the world's technological innovation centers is in "the hive?" Culture.

Originally Posted by Abider

I realize my manner is coarse. But I suppose that's the difference between me and few others who've been watching this issue globally and many of you who find such backwards anti-woman, anti-gay, and anti-democratic, rhetoric just as repulsive as we do but nevertheless feel that apology and appreciative distance is sufficient.

It's easier to ignore the closer your sensibilities are to theirs. For those of who've made the choice, there is no negotiation. Ignore that reality at the peril of all that we've achieved, for women, for minorities, for enlightenment.

Bathe in the cool waters of Stuart Lee. Ripping the piss out of using morality as an arguement for homophobia start at 1:10 ish. Brilliant.



This one on Political Correctness displays the same genius.


Deserves a wider audience really

Originally Posted by nitemagi

True, but it was only added in 1956 at the height of the Mccarthy red scare, which IMHO is being echoed in a lot of the rhetoric thrown around today. Fear tactics rather than respect, data, or rights.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bellamy_salute

The pledge of allegiance has always interested me as well. Looks like the salute to hand on heart changed in 1942. You probably are already aware of this stuff but to me its like a lunar landscape.

Hmm, I should've read this thread a bit more. Reading every single thread can be tedious at times but as an asst. moderator I guess I should try to do that more often. Thankfully the debate tone has not turned into a flame war.

I think debate can be very healthy, but it can get out of line, especially on an Internet forum where things can be easily misinterpreted. Believe me I want people talking about edgy things when appropriate, just doing so while keeping their reason and not having threads turn in frequent hate-barrages that have gotten way off-track from the original intent of the thread.

Originally Posted by Abider

We'll focus on creative ingenuity, biotechnology, and design for the global economy. And they can focus on being right with god and farming and whatever provincial things that they like.

In the midst of a field of strawmen and further attempts to pretending as if the above are mutually exclusive, you've missed the very obvious point that these clearly they aren't mutually exclusive. Many of your patients would disagree, I promise you. Most Americans would disagree. Most psychiatrists would, as well.

I've come to believe there's only a few isolated areas of American civilization.

Those that you've dismissed. You realize, of course, that homogeneity and/or constancy is the stuff of culture--not diversity. Diversity can be viewed as but the watering down of what was potentially a true culture--a culture with a distinct and shared belief system and approach to life fitted into its own context and shaped by surroundings and need. Diversity also creates new cultures, but this takes time and renewed homogeneity / unification.

If you want to defect, you'll have to pass our rigorous citizenship standards in secular republican democratic thought.

Or else the thought police will arrest you? How libertine.

For the record, the Dark Ages ended with the onset of the medieval ages--not the Enlightenment.

I'm probably feeding the troll here, but I don't care. We have psychiatrists and patients on all ends of this divided cultural sphere. When you have stored a great deal of political and social invective, I think you lose sight of that. It's possible to have very differing beliefs but still acknowlege the centrality of the beliefs of those who hold worldviews antithetical to those of your own. I don't think you can avoid bias, but invective, yes, to be avoided. I don't know how a psychiatrist could be happy with a full tank of that stuff.

Eh, pass the Tums. I feel quite queezy.

Originally Posted by whopper

that have gotten way off-track from the original intent of the thread.

Understatement of the day?

Originally Posted by st2205

Herpetology, huh?

ha I laughed out loud at this because I have NEVER met psychiatrist who discussed this as interest. I hope to God that's not what my future will look like!