Forty-two percent of likely Iowa Republican caucusgoers said that former President Trumpās recent remarks about immigrants āpoisoning the bloodā of the country makes them more likely to support himā¦
Itās worded worse than āin an unfortunate wayā. The phrase used was āall the mental illnessā. If Lennybird wants to be less prejudice, they can rephrase it themself.
I agree again, but the attempt was good, and the recognition of wrong doing is even better. I am in a good mood today and am exhilarated to see people given the chance to grow.
I have to say on a different day I may have had a much different response to this. I guess such is mental illness and developmental disability.
I typically get so angry to see myself placed with the likes to trump and his crowd of pathetics.
Hey, can you read my thread with lennybird? I was in a good mood too. I was hoping to get them to clearly say they understood they (inadvertently) vilified mental illness and that it was wrong. I failed. thread
That is unfortunate, with a more clear picture, this looks more like someone that has chosen to allow mental health to be an excuse for poor behavior rather than a reason for it. I would argue this is equally as bad.
I do not argue mental health as an excuse, I have my struggles and set backs in that arena but it doesnāt give me permission to be an awful person, I do think there is a vulnerable population that can be prayed upon due to a tendency toward credulity, or having been relentlessly bullied that now they want to find a group to belong to, and in that group they want to find some form of secret knowledge that the masses are not aware of, like a secret shadow government that is really in charge. So when they are proven right they can have a great I told you so moment they have wanted all their life.
So again I say looking in from the outside mental illness often looks the same and is poorly understood if it is understood at all even by those that live with us and care for us. From the tone that op seems to be taking they are starting to feel piled up on and is shutting down to just definsiveness. I suggest perhaps they need exposure to more people and the stigma of mental illness may be at play. I am sure many people in their life has a struggle or even a diagnosis, but it is not appropriate to talk about so they may never know.
Sorry for rambling, just really have a lot of thought on this, and rarely get to talk about it. Very much a fascinating subject.
Thatās cool; Iāll just ramble at you awhile. : ) I really want to say some things that I didnāt say in the thread.
To anyone reading this, there was a comment more or less assigning negative things to āall mental illness and bigotsā. The author edited the comment after push back, but I didnāt think that was really sufficient. In this essayā¦ (not memeing, gere we go)
What I wanted:
I donāt have a copy of what was said. Itās gone and I should be happy. BUT, Iām not. I want some acknowledgement that it is understood why that wording was awful and some assurance that attention will paid in the future. Iām basically describing an apology. Itās not, apologies have an acceptance stage that Iām willing to skip. I do not think itās reasonable to hope all those with a mental illness accept the apology.
I did not explicitly ask for what I wanted. Honestly saying my piece and getting silence was expected.
What I got:
Despite editing my comment to reflect fair points, I do believe mental illness absolutely needs to be discussed more.
Ok, but you did not discuss it. You made a sweeping statement. It was worthless at best. Not a discussion. Why even say this to me.
The post continues by adding extraneous groups to the discussion. So now we have bigots, trumpers, the mentally ill, people exposed to lead, drug addicts, people with genetic conditions.
Now, I have no idea what to expect. I made a fuss about making sweeping statements about general groups, and now we have more people to vilify. I genuinely cannot tell if they simply not reading what I said, or are they listing people to line up against a wall? Only the author knows. I strongly suspected itās the former. I still do, but less so.
But I did get confirmation, that no, they do not see my point. They do not realize how easily they are vilifying those with mental illness. Hereās what was said:
the fact remains that there is a deeper issue of mental illness that resides within the Republican ranks.
Is it wrong for a group to have a high concentration of people with mental disorders? I donāt think so. In fact, do you know what group has quite a high percentage? Therapy groups. Are they evil? What is that quote saying about Republicans that canāt logically similarly apply to therapy groups?
My Goal:
The real issue here that I did not realize how subtly I was referring to a rhetorical trick that was at the root of my complaint. Itās very similar to the motte-and-bailey fallacy. Say a hate preacher wants to convince their flock that gays are evil. (Iām going to switch to saying āhomosexualsā because thatās how you are likely to hear this in the wild.) So instead, he just decries horrible acts of molesters. But the preacher never simply says āchild molestersā; they sub in the phrase āhomosexuals and child molestersā. That way, the audience will connect them. They wonāt realize it, but their brain will wire a connection anyway.
This is the language I was fighting. My goal was to get this person to see that they were (unwittingly?) committing this rhetorical trick. I heard complaints that should be made of bigots instead made of āmental illness and bigotsā. Donāt lump innocent motte in with a horrible bailey.
It is pretty likely that the author didnāt read my post. It seems they picked words to respond to instead of any ideas. Like I wasnāt really talking about guns or gay rights, but those words are kicked off the typing. The gun tangent was understandable, but I said nothing about homosexuality per se, and they say
There is nothing explicitly wrong with being homoexual.
Which again, true and ick. I tried to stick an implied parenthetical āor implicitly eitherā in there to kinda fix the ick, but what does it mean for something to be implicitly wrong? But I knew better than to bring this up. Not the fight to have.
The Conclusion:
I simply wanted them to avow or disavow the paraphased comment: āIt is nice that I can now identify all mental illness and bigotsā. I expected them to see vilification now. And I think they did. In fact, they added some more calling them āpeople who proudly broadcast their own ignorance and lack of appeal to reason and moral standardsā.
So I guess that is where they are comfortable leaving it. I really think there is something about the mental illness label that makes them afraid of people. Itās sad.
But who knows. They claim they āwrote very, very clearly: Trump supportersā when I asked what group they were talking about. Obviously, they didnāt mean people with mental illness, but again, they did bring up bigots, trumpers, the mentally ill, people exposed to lead, drug addicts, people with genetic conditions. So writing isnāt their strong suit. You did not āwriteā that. It was not clear. It was not very clear. And it surely wasnāt very, very clear. But keep writing āveryā in there. I might be fooled that it was clear eventually. Maybe they genuinely donāt see my point. But I doubt it. There is clear resentment of the mentally ill.
I can see your point, and for my part understand your grievance, however I think you are asking too much and expect to much. This is a stranger on the Internet talking to a stranger on the Internet exactly like you and I. You have absolutely no reason to care about my opinion about this, and likely wonāt.
I want you to know I understand, I really do and I would have the same type of reaction on other days. For some reason my wound isnāt so raw today. I hated seeing that statement it was painful, just like when someone in my family uses the r word at me. I donāt know if maybe the fight in me has just started to die on this one.
I am autistic and homosexual with a list of mental health conditions that come from a lifetime of masking both of them plus trauma and som other shit, wanting dignity is exhausting, I donāt know your situation but I am guessing you fully understand the stress of looking over your should for fear of the consequences of someone noticing something you canāt turn off.
I hope you donāt think I have been trying to argue, I am more just wanting someone to talk to, if I added to your frustrations I am sorry! Truly!
Lol, thatās the best part. Iām not even mad. Iām just writing words for readers. I know that my expectations wouldnāt be met. Of course not. āExpectingā was the wrong word to use. It was more hope.
I just saw a transgression (hopefully a micro one), and thought, āhey, I got time and feel like writing.ā I just looped you in because I thought it might benefit both of our headspaces. Hope I was right.
Thatās exactly your problem. You understood that they had no ill intentions, but you still had to spend time badgering them and going after them to prove a point.
You could have chosen to interpret their post in a way that didnāt offend you, but you chose to get offended, and then you try to make them look like the asshole for not bending over backwards when you āhurt yourself in your confusionā.
I never said I was offended. I said the language vilifies people will mental illnesses.
I donāt know why it is inappropriate to try to prove a point. And no, I donāt know they had no ill intentions. I was hoping that the language was inadvertently hurtful. After the discussion, I honestly feel that the other party does in fact harbor some toxic views of people who are mentally ill. I was hurt in disappointment, not confusion. I was confused why one couldnāt disavow something so simple. I donāt know if Iād rather have the confusion or disappointment.
Iām not choosing an interpretation either. Do you know what was said?
Iām pretty sure most people, as the user who responded to you could see, could understand the intent behind the words. Admittedly it was hyperbole and mental illness in itself shouldnāt be mocked; however itās not necessarily a good sign that an ideology has a woeful concentration thereof. After all, it is an illness that can impact normalized behavior, which if that is the foundation that fuels a particular ideologyā¦ We should be concerned.
Key to note I didnāt say neurodivergent. And if you have a mental illness and arenāt under the trump banner then that perhaps speaks more to the severity of those who are.
Iām happy you edited you comment. I think you can just leave mental illness out. Why bring it up without anyway to address it? When we talk about guns, mental health (with no policy action mentioned) gets brought up, and itās worthless. Itās worse than worthless. Itās a distraction.
Iām particularly glad you lost the phrase āall mental illness and bigotsā. It had a clear āhomosexuals and pedophilesā ring to it when it falls on my ears. Thank you.
Despite editing my comment to reflect fair points, I do believe mental illness absolutely needs to be discussed more. There is clearly a crisis going on and thereās an intersect of (but not limited to):
Exposure (Lead, brain injuries from football, etc.)
Drug Abuse (pharmaceutical or street that alters state of mind)
Genetic conditions
ā¦ And these people are being taken advantage of for an ulterior motive they do not understand. Whether I say all or not, the fact remains that there is a deeper issue of mental illness that resides within the Republican ranks. And why is this important to raise? It helps explain why itās so impossible to reach these people by logic or compassion. Anyone whoās seen it first-hand in a hospital understands exactly what Iām saying here.
Even in the firearm debate, mental illness is a necessary talking-point that should help fuel change: Increased access to healthcare (Single-payer, therapy, etc.), and an explanation as to how people who perceive themselves to be the āgood guys with the gunsā can very radically shift to being anything but.
That being said, I am going to come down hard on any Trump supporter. There is no excuse; no justification to continue supporting Trump or even the broader Republican party at this point without singling oneās self out as being a combination of deeply bigoted, ignorant, or selfish.
Ok, Iām trying to give you benefit of the doubt here, but youāre really digging in your heels here.
I do believe mental illness absolutely needs to be discussed more
Then you should* have done that. Your comment āwell Iām glad we can see all the mental illness and bigots togetherā (paraphased since I canāt access the original) is simply bigoted. It is not a discussion of mental illness or mental illness policy. Itās worthless and hurtful. After posting such trash, trying to have a thoughtful conversation after being called out is disingenuous.
Edit: I missed a word, but while Iām here, Iāll add:
That being said, I am going to come down hard on any Trump supporter. There is no excuse
^This is exactly why there is push back. Paired with the original comment, this sounds like āIām going to come down hard on any Trump supporter, the bigots, all mental illness havers, there is no excuse.ā It sounds just like the hate preachers deliberately tacking āand homosexualsā to any phrase that includes pedophiles.
Iām hearing a lot of words from you, but besides the fact you changed your wording, you seem to show little remorse for your actions. I donāt understand. I donāt think youāre a troll. So either defend the phrase āall mental illness and bigotsā or apologize for it. I donāt want to discuss mental health with you.
Itās simply a frustration of hitting oneās head against the wall with a group that is causing widespread damage to society and who heeds no appeal to reason or morality. Call it for lack of better words. Iāve edited my comment and adjusted my words to better reflect my position and be more respectful to lumping all with mental illness in with such a group, but with that I absolutely will dig my heels in here until better reason is presented. Frankly, I think you are the one who is making uncalled accusations and outlandish claims now.
Edit: To your edit:
There is nothing explicitly wrong with being homoexual. And while there is something explicitly wrong with being a pedophile, the flaw in that is that there is an accusation of being a pedophile that is the problem ā we donāt have that issue here since this entire discussion is about Trump supporters proudly announcing their identity and immorality. That is the difference.
with a group that is causing widespread damage to society
What group is that? All mental illness havers? You must take back your words before I take you seriously. I edited my previous comment while you were replying to it.
Frankly, I think you are the one who is making uncalled accusations and outlandish claims now.
I donāt know what claim I am making besides you said that you are happy that you can now easily identify āall mental illness and bigotsā. If that claim is outlandish, please say so. Did you not say that? Is there an apology I missed?
That you can now easily identify āall mental illness and bigotsā.
That you believe itās a problem that I am able to identify and avoid people who proudly broadcast their own ignorance and lack of appeal to reason and moral standards is somehow a bad thing ā youāll have to make a very compelling counterargument.
Ok, there it is. I misjudged you. Sorry. It seems that you are in fact an asshole.
[you said that you are happy] that you can now easily identify āall mental illness and bigotsā.
That you believe itās a problem that I am able to identify and avoid people who proudly broadcast their own ignorance and lack of appeal to reason and moral standards is somehow a bad thing
I didnāt think you would go there. I thought you saw what you were doing. I donāt know now. Iām done.
Itās worded worse than āin an unfortunate wayā. The phrase used was āall the mental illnessā. If Lennybird wants to be less prejudice, they can rephrase it themself.
I agree, but have hope that with the olive branch education can begin, at that may bring understanding.
Right, and it seems lennybird has edited the comment. I still donāt like it, but itās not as ick.
I agree again, but the attempt was good, and the recognition of wrong doing is even better. I am in a good mood today and am exhilarated to see people given the chance to grow.
I have to say on a different day I may have had a much different response to this. I guess such is mental illness and developmental disability.
I typically get so angry to see myself placed with the likes to trump and his crowd of pathetics.
Hey, can you read my thread with lennybird? I was in a good mood too. I was hoping to get them to clearly say they understood they (inadvertently) vilified mental illness and that it was wrong. I failed. thread
That is unfortunate, with a more clear picture, this looks more like someone that has chosen to allow mental health to be an excuse for poor behavior rather than a reason for it. I would argue this is equally as bad.
I do not argue mental health as an excuse, I have my struggles and set backs in that arena but it doesnāt give me permission to be an awful person, I do think there is a vulnerable population that can be prayed upon due to a tendency toward credulity, or having been relentlessly bullied that now they want to find a group to belong to, and in that group they want to find some form of secret knowledge that the masses are not aware of, like a secret shadow government that is really in charge. So when they are proven right they can have a great I told you so moment they have wanted all their life.
So again I say looking in from the outside mental illness often looks the same and is poorly understood if it is understood at all even by those that live with us and care for us. From the tone that op seems to be taking they are starting to feel piled up on and is shutting down to just definsiveness. I suggest perhaps they need exposure to more people and the stigma of mental illness may be at play. I am sure many people in their life has a struggle or even a diagnosis, but it is not appropriate to talk about so they may never know.
Sorry for rambling, just really have a lot of thought on this, and rarely get to talk about it. Very much a fascinating subject.
Thatās cool; Iāll just ramble at you awhile. : ) I really want to say some things that I didnāt say in the thread.
To anyone reading this, there was a comment more or less assigning negative things to āall mental illness and bigotsā. The author edited the comment after push back, but I didnāt think that was really sufficient. In this essayā¦ (not memeing, gere we go)
What I wanted: I donāt have a copy of what was said. Itās gone and I should be happy. BUT, Iām not. I want some acknowledgement that it is understood why that wording was awful and some assurance that attention will paid in the future. Iām basically describing an apology. Itās not, apologies have an acceptance stage that Iām willing to skip. I do not think itās reasonable to hope all those with a mental illness accept the apology.
I did not explicitly ask for what I wanted. Honestly saying my piece and getting silence was expected.
What I got:
Ok, but you did not discuss it. You made a sweeping statement. It was worthless at best. Not a discussion. Why even say this to me.
The post continues by adding extraneous groups to the discussion. So now we have bigots, trumpers, the mentally ill, people exposed to lead, drug addicts, people with genetic conditions.
Now, I have no idea what to expect. I made a fuss about making sweeping statements about general groups, and now we have more people to vilify. I genuinely cannot tell if they simply not reading what I said, or are they listing people to line up against a wall? Only the author knows. I strongly suspected itās the former. I still do, but less so.
But I did get confirmation, that no, they do not see my point. They do not realize how easily they are vilifying those with mental illness. Hereās what was said:
Is it wrong for a group to have a high concentration of people with mental disorders? I donāt think so. In fact, do you know what group has quite a high percentage? Therapy groups. Are they evil? What is that quote saying about Republicans that canāt logically similarly apply to therapy groups?
My Goal:
The real issue here that I did not realize how subtly I was referring to a rhetorical trick that was at the root of my complaint. Itās very similar to the motte-and-bailey fallacy. Say a hate preacher wants to convince their flock that gays are evil. (Iām going to switch to saying āhomosexualsā because thatās how you are likely to hear this in the wild.) So instead, he just decries horrible acts of molesters. But the preacher never simply says āchild molestersā; they sub in the phrase āhomosexuals and child molestersā. That way, the audience will connect them. They wonāt realize it, but their brain will wire a connection anyway.
This is the language I was fighting. My goal was to get this person to see that they were (unwittingly?) committing this rhetorical trick. I heard complaints that should be made of bigots instead made of āmental illness and bigotsā. Donāt lump innocent motte in with a horrible bailey.
It is pretty likely that the author didnāt read my post. It seems they picked words to respond to instead of any ideas. Like I wasnāt really talking about guns or gay rights, but those words are kicked off the typing. The gun tangent was understandable, but I said nothing about homosexuality per se, and they say
Which again, true and ick. I tried to stick an implied parenthetical āor implicitly eitherā in there to kinda fix the ick, but what does it mean for something to be implicitly wrong? But I knew better than to bring this up. Not the fight to have.
The Conclusion:
I simply wanted them to avow or disavow the paraphased comment: āIt is nice that I can now identify all mental illness and bigotsā. I expected them to see vilification now. And I think they did. In fact, they added some more calling them āpeople who proudly broadcast their own ignorance and lack of appeal to reason and moral standardsā.
So I guess that is where they are comfortable leaving it. I really think there is something about the mental illness label that makes them afraid of people. Itās sad.
But who knows. They claim they āwrote very, very clearly: Trump supportersā when I asked what group they were talking about. Obviously, they didnāt mean people with mental illness, but again, they did bring up bigots, trumpers, the mentally ill, people exposed to lead, drug addicts, people with genetic conditions. So writing isnāt their strong suit. You did not āwriteā that. It was not clear. It was not very clear. And it surely wasnāt very, very clear. But keep writing āveryā in there. I might be fooled that it was clear eventually. Maybe they genuinely donāt see my point. But I doubt it. There is clear resentment of the mentally ill.
I can see your point, and for my part understand your grievance, however I think you are asking too much and expect to much. This is a stranger on the Internet talking to a stranger on the Internet exactly like you and I. You have absolutely no reason to care about my opinion about this, and likely wonāt.
I want you to know I understand, I really do and I would have the same type of reaction on other days. For some reason my wound isnāt so raw today. I hated seeing that statement it was painful, just like when someone in my family uses the r word at me. I donāt know if maybe the fight in me has just started to die on this one.
I am autistic and homosexual with a list of mental health conditions that come from a lifetime of masking both of them plus trauma and som other shit, wanting dignity is exhausting, I donāt know your situation but I am guessing you fully understand the stress of looking over your should for fear of the consequences of someone noticing something you canāt turn off.
I hope you donāt think I have been trying to argue, I am more just wanting someone to talk to, if I added to your frustrations I am sorry! Truly!
Lol, thatās the best part. Iām not even mad. Iām just writing words for readers. I know that my expectations wouldnāt be met. Of course not. āExpectingā was the wrong word to use. It was more hope.
I just saw a transgression (hopefully a micro one), and thought, āhey, I got time and feel like writing.ā I just looped you in because I thought it might benefit both of our headspaces. Hope I was right.
Thatās exactly your problem. You understood that they had no ill intentions, but you still had to spend time badgering them and going after them to prove a point.
You could have chosen to interpret their post in a way that didnāt offend you, but you chose to get offended, and then you try to make them look like the asshole for not bending over backwards when you āhurt yourself in your confusionā.
I never said I was offended. I said the language vilifies people will mental illnesses.
I donāt know why it is inappropriate to try to prove a point. And no, I donāt know they had no ill intentions. I was hoping that the language was inadvertently hurtful. After the discussion, I honestly feel that the other party does in fact harbor some toxic views of people who are mentally ill. I was hurt in disappointment, not confusion. I was confused why one couldnāt disavow something so simple. I donāt know if Iād rather have the confusion or disappointment.
Iām not choosing an interpretation either. Do you know what was said?
Iām pretty sure most people, as the user who responded to you could see, could understand the intent behind the words. Admittedly it was hyperbole and mental illness in itself shouldnāt be mocked; however itās not necessarily a good sign that an ideology has a woeful concentration thereof. After all, it is an illness that can impact normalized behavior, which if that is the foundation that fuels a particular ideologyā¦ We should be concerned.
Key to note I didnāt say neurodivergent. And if you have a mental illness and arenāt under the trump banner then that perhaps speaks more to the severity of those who are.
Iām happy you edited you comment. I think you can just leave mental illness out. Why bring it up without anyway to address it? When we talk about guns, mental health (with no policy action mentioned) gets brought up, and itās worthless. Itās worse than worthless. Itās a distraction.
Iām particularly glad you lost the phrase āall mental illness and bigotsā. It had a clear āhomosexuals and pedophilesā ring to it when it falls on my ears. Thank you.
Despite editing my comment to reflect fair points, I do believe mental illness absolutely needs to be discussed more. There is clearly a crisis going on and thereās an intersect of (but not limited to):
ā¦ And these people are being taken advantage of for an ulterior motive they do not understand. Whether I say all or not, the fact remains that there is a deeper issue of mental illness that resides within the Republican ranks. And why is this important to raise? It helps explain why itās so impossible to reach these people by logic or compassion. Anyone whoās seen it first-hand in a hospital understands exactly what Iām saying here.
Even in the firearm debate, mental illness is a necessary talking-point that should help fuel change: Increased access to healthcare (Single-payer, therapy, etc.), and an explanation as to how people who perceive themselves to be the āgood guys with the gunsā can very radically shift to being anything but.
That being said, I am going to come down hard on any Trump supporter. There is no excuse; no justification to continue supporting Trump or even the broader Republican party at this point without singling oneās self out as being a combination of deeply bigoted, ignorant, or selfish.
Ok, Iām trying to give you benefit of the doubt here, but youāre really digging in your heels here.
Then you should* have done that. Your comment āwell Iām glad we can see all the mental illness and bigots togetherā (paraphased since I canāt access the original) is simply bigoted. It is not a discussion of mental illness or mental illness policy. Itās worthless and hurtful. After posting such trash, trying to have a thoughtful conversation after being called out is disingenuous.
Edit: I missed a word, but while Iām here, Iāll add:
^This is exactly why there is push back. Paired with the original comment, this sounds like āIām going to come down hard on any Trump supporter, the bigots, all mental illness havers, there is no excuse.ā It sounds just like the hate preachers deliberately tacking āand homosexualsā to any phrase that includes pedophiles.
Iām hearing a lot of words from you, but besides the fact you changed your wording, you seem to show little remorse for your actions. I donāt understand. I donāt think youāre a troll. So either defend the phrase āall mental illness and bigotsā or apologize for it. I donāt want to discuss mental health with you.
Itās simply a frustration of hitting oneās head against the wall with a group that is causing widespread damage to society and who heeds no appeal to reason or morality. Call it for lack of better words. Iāve edited my comment and adjusted my words to better reflect my position and be more respectful to lumping all with mental illness in with such a group, but with that I absolutely will dig my heels in here until better reason is presented. Frankly, I think you are the one who is making uncalled accusations and outlandish claims now.
Edit: To your edit:
There is nothing explicitly wrong with being homoexual. And while there is something explicitly wrong with being a pedophile, the flaw in that is that there is an accusation of being a pedophile that is the problem ā we donāt have that issue here since this entire discussion is about Trump supporters proudly announcing their identity and immorality. That is the difference.
What group is that? All mental illness havers? You must take back your words before I take you seriously. I edited my previous comment while you were replying to it.
I donāt know what claim I am making besides you said that you are happy that you can now easily identify āall mental illness and bigotsā. If that claim is outlandish, please say so. Did you not say that? Is there an apology I missed?
As I wrote very, very clearly: Trump supporters.
That you believe itās a problem that I am able to identify and avoid people who proudly broadcast their own ignorance and lack of appeal to reason and moral standards is somehow a bad thing ā youāll have to make a very compelling counterargument.
Ok, there it is. I misjudged you. Sorry. It seems that you are in fact an asshole.
I didnāt think you would go there. I thought you saw what you were doing. I donāt know now. Iām done.