Most active commenters
  • stevenAthompson(4)
  • typewithrhythm(3)
  • intended(3)

←back to thread

540 points drankl | 32 comments | | HN request time: 1.107s | source | bottom
Show context
hresvelgr ◴[] No.44485587[source]
The lovable aphorisms we had for people with character quirks were largely from our original support systems. What no one is talking about is the reason therapy-talk has become so pervasive is because all those support systems: family, friends, and local communities (religious or otherwise), have all degraded so severely for most that therapy is the only option for reaching out and getting help.
replies(7): >>44485680 #>>44485696 #>>44485993 #>>44486061 #>>44486232 #>>44486247 #>>44518150 #
1. deanCommie ◴[] No.44485696[source]
except they weren't really "support systems"

i mean they were, if you got lucky.

If you were neurotypical; if you bought in to the local religious sect's particular flavour and embraced it wholeheartedly; if you followed the other local cults of sports fandoms; if you were lucky enough to either have family without their own trauma that didn't take it out on you OR decided to repress it in exactly the same way that they did and just simply passed it forward or didn't talk about it.

i don't know what the ratios are but a LOT of people fell through the cracks.

it's just that the birth rate was high enough to continue the population growth, and there were socially acceptable ways to ignore the inconvenient problems (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosemary_Kennedy)

it's why there's now suddenly an influx of ADHD and Autism diagnosis - because in the past anyone outside of the norm who wasn't lucky to do one of the things above was simply ignored, beaten, or died.

now the stigma is gone and we're finding EXPLICIT paths to treatment, tolerance, and embracement of mental health, neuroatypical brains, spectrums, etc. Is there overpathologizing? Maybe? Hard to know! The stigmas still aren't gone. Go read the comments on any video providing tips on how to parent children on the spectrum and see neurotypicals freaking out about how soft the current generation is.

the western world seems to have peaked in tolerance in the 2010s, and is now backsliding into authoritarianism and fascism. that's trying to recreate a lot of those original support systems (by destroying the new ones). It's a bold plan, let's see how it happens.

replies(7): >>44485785 #>>44485806 #>>44485813 #>>44485953 #>>44486501 #>>44486744 #>>44492292 #
2. EMIRELADERO ◴[] No.44485785[source]
I agree with everything you said except for the last paragraph.

The people who, according to your theory, want to reverse the tolerance trend and slide towards fascism/authoritarianism didn't pop out today. They existed and lived in society in the 2010s too. So, from a logical standpoint, what changed?

replies(4): >>44485850 #>>44486009 #>>44487143 #>>44489483 #
3. MichaelZuo ◴[] No.44485806[source]
Isn’t the first half a tautology?

By definition roughly half the population in any society must belong to a below average family and/or below average communities.

And it seems pretty likely that those with below average capacities at handling, processing, reflecting, etc., on these issues would be concentrated there.

4. WorkerBee28474 ◴[] No.44485813[source]
> it's why there's now suddenly an influx of ADHD and Autism diagnosis - because in the past anyone outside of the norm who wasn't lucky to do one of the things above was simply ignored, beaten, or died.

I think you're understating how well those people were incorporated into society. My grandfather was born in the 20s and was described as quite "high strung", was amazing with technology, would repair anything, and even used to build his own farm machinery. These days he'd definitely be called severely anxious, and probably labelled as being on the spectrum. Yet he was part of a community, farmed his whole life, and built a family. People knew his quirks and compensated for them.

replies(4): >>44485890 #>>44486380 #>>44487101 #>>44489831 #
5. chairmansteve ◴[] No.44485850[source]
> what changed?

The algorithms are promoting those views?

6. Tijdreiziger ◴[] No.44485890[source]
Sorry, but are you arguing that autistic folks can’t be part of a community, farm, or build a family?
replies(1): >>44486035 #
7. typewithrhythm ◴[] No.44485953[source]
There is substantially more going on than "tolerance vs intolerance". We have a huge influx not just because of changing diagnosis standards, but also because the financial benefit for getting a diagnosis has also expanded.

The views of people you are trying to label as fascist are more accurately described as individualism vs welfare state.

replies(3): >>44486186 #>>44486199 #>>44486226 #
8. BriggyDwiggs42 ◴[] No.44486009[source]
The parent comment didn’t even pose a theory as to why. People can change beliefs over time. Weimar Germany had less Nazis in it than Nazi Germany, which would be equally confusing under your framing.
9. geerlingguy ◴[] No.44486035{3}[source]
I saw it as arguing that people with autism, ADHD, etc wouldn't be ignored, beaten, or killed, as seemed to be the argument in the parent comment?
replies(2): >>44486216 #>>44486250 #
10. wredcoll ◴[] No.44486186[source]
Ahh.. indiviualism, is that the one where you shouldn't have to help anyone else as long as things are going fine for yourself?
replies(2): >>44486243 #>>44486369 #
11. stevenAthompson ◴[] No.44486199[source]
What financial benefit would a diagnosis have?
replies(1): >>44486342 #
12. Mtinie ◴[] No.44486216{4}[source]
One anecdotal observation does not fully tell the story.
13. Mtinie ◴[] No.44486226[source]
I can assure you that from my singular anecdotal experience that a diagnosis does not imbue economic and financial benefit.
replies(1): >>44486270 #
14. stevenAthompson ◴[] No.44486243{3}[source]
Ayn Rand has a lot of friends here. She also described the neurodivergent as "subnormal" and thought that society should do nothing to help them or the handicapped. Additionally, she believed that "normal" children shouldn't have to ever interact with those who were mentally different as it would harm the "normal" children.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1HD8KXn-kI

15. Tijdreiziger ◴[] No.44486250{4}[source]
Ah, I see. I think the ‘label’ (ugh – what a terribly awful way to describe a diagnosis) and the beatings are orthogonal, though.

In my parents’ time in a (then) Dutch colony, nobody was diagnosed with anything (that was only for crazies), but all the men knew how being hit with a belt felt (daughters were spared, from what I’ve been told). Self-medicating with alcohol and beating your kids if they ‘misbehaved’ was just the done thing, as far as I’ve been told.

This is to say that anyone who showed (what we would now identify as) neurodivergent behaviour probably would’ve been beaten, but this then wouldn’t have precluded them from going on to start a family and business (and maybe beat their own kids).

Actually, this is probably still how it works in many parts of the world. Even here in the Netherlands, beating your children was only outlawed as recently as 2007.

16. Spivak ◴[] No.44486270{3}[source]
I can second the assertion. It's absurd that people really believe folks are getting benefits from having a mental disorder. It's literally the "welfare queen" nonsense just directed at a new group.

You don't even get social benefits, no one excuses your behavior just because it has a label. You get told it's your fault for not managing your disorder properly. Have you seen how we treat people with visible, obvious, undeniable disabilities? Like shit.

replies(1): >>44494050 #
17. typewithrhythm ◴[] No.44486342{3}[source]
Depending on the specific services in an area: everything from subsidised legal access to medications, to access to accommodations in schools seen as favorable (private environments to take tests, or extended deadlines). Some areas have specific assistance to parents of children with a diagnosis. Some have easier access to disability support services and payments.
replies(1): >>44487116 #
18. typewithrhythm ◴[] No.44486369{3}[source]
You can call it selfish, but you can't call it fascist.

In my perspective, it's less about what you should or shouldn't do; its about making sure that question is down to your individual morality.

19. deanCommie ◴[] No.44486380[source]
no i don't think we're saying different things.

what you're describing is survivor's bias.

1) the most talented people with cognitive differences made it out for sure. But not every person on the spectrum is "amazing with technology" in a useful way. But not all are, and the ones that weren't just didn't make it. Today they do.

2) those people still needed luck. Luck that they were able to come up in a society that didn't expect more from them than to perform a "function". Things like meeting a spouse were "easier" because there was a more rigorous social structure. Depending on which society this was in, potentially to the detriment of your grandmother who didn't have a lot of choices.

2b) and luck that the community around them accepted them. That wasn't JUST because he was a farmer, it's also because he hit the other markers of inclusion whether he wanted to or not.

People in that day and age were not cognitively free. Is cognitive freedom preferable? Well that's the question of our age. We weren't supposed to just kill god and stop. We were supposed to replace a new humanist secular philosophy to replace the theology to find purpose to humanity.

We didn't, society is now full of anxiety and malaise, and the right wing is rising promising to fix it by a RVTRN to the old ways regardless of who they harm.

20. drewcoo ◴[] No.44486501[source]
> It's why there's now suddenly an influx of ADHD and Autism diagnosis

I claim the DSM-5 is why. We changed diagnostic criteria then we diagnosed. People who used to be "normal" were suddenly "undiagnosed until late in life." But the people themselves hadn't changed much, just the diagnostic criteria.

replies(1): >>44488018 #
21. achierius ◴[] No.44486744[source]
It worked for the large majority. It now no longer works for that large majority, and practically also does not work well for the rest. We have in this sense regressed, thanks to the social liquidation of capitalism.
22. intended ◴[] No.44487101[source]
Heck no. We have “it’s always the quiet ones who go first”, to remind us what it was like from that time.

Most people suffered, and made the ones around them suffer as well. On top of that, you are in no position to move to an “average” position on the behavior spectrum, because it’s fundamentally outside your biological operational parameters.

There are TONS of relations which were kept in place, because of society, keeping people who made each other worse, in permanent proximity.

Survivorship bias is real.

We’re the ones who inherited the world with more knowledge than past generations, it’s up to us to do better with it. This will include getting better at diagnosing.

For self diagnosing, I have no idea what to do.

23. intended ◴[] No.44487116{4}[source]
What about diagnoses in countries which do not have any of these support systems?
replies(1): >>44493434 #
24. intended ◴[] No.44487143[source]
Nothing changed - mostly it seems the American condition is a side effect of dedicated partisanship and asymmetric political behavior since the 1970s.

The media apparatus in America has split into a center and left, and then a right wing which has different norms and produces its own products.

That in turn has created a durable political coalition that self referentially calls itself when it needs to support its descriptions on reality.

It’s significantly more effective at producing narratives, and moving ideas from the fringes to the main stream news channels.

Since it has little traffic with the left and center media channels, it avoids counter claims and norms on journalistic standards.

So you can now primary Bipartisan politicians, and then the ideas that gain media attention are the ones that reinforces party talking points. Counter views simply do not get air time.

What we are seeing today, is the progression of those forces, as the narratives are never challenged.

25. steve_taylor ◴[] No.44488018[source]
DSM-5 took a bunch of distinct disorders and rolled them into one new disorder called Autism Spectrum Disorder. The only problem it solved is to reduce the number of disorders with unknown pathologies.

My classically-autistic son who needs a lot of support apparently has the same disorder as a nerdy guy who comes across as a bit abrasive, doesn't understand the point of small talk, and would rather work on Linux kernel patches on a Saturday night than hit the town.

26. thrance ◴[] No.44489483[source]
Material conditions degrading further with no end in sight, a massive influx of money towards right-wing populists appealing to a frustrated middle class, etc. Same story as always. How can a country slide into authoritarianism? It seems impossible until it happens, and by then we can hardly tell we're there.
27. wat10000 ◴[] No.44489831[source]
Sounds like the lesson from Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer: deviation from the norm will be punished unless it’s exploitable.

Would your grandfather have been so well integrated if his problems had not been offset by such ability?

replies(1): >>44494104 #
28. navane ◴[] No.44492292[source]
I'm pretty sure current highly interconnected society elicts more spectrum behavior then back when 90% of the populace was just digging soil for grains.
29. stevenAthompson ◴[] No.44493434{5}[source]
This is a really great question. I checked.

Turns out that the poorer a nation is, the less reported autism they have. That could be because there is no benefit to the diagnosis or it could be because they have less healthcare in general and a real diagnosis can easily take 4-8 hours of clinical time.

Interesting either way.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9386174/

replies(1): >>44495235 #
30. stevenAthompson ◴[] No.44494050{4}[source]
66% of autistic adults admit having suicidal thoughts. 35% have attempted suicide.

If they're faking it for benefits they are REALLY committed to the bit.

31. const_cast ◴[] No.44494104{3}[source]
You're downvoted but you're correct. Disordered people who did not offer some sort of economic gain in a market were simply institutionalized. Autistic people who were not high functioning were pretty much as good as dead. Same thing goes for depression, anxiety, and schizophrenia. We had no systems in place for people who cannot work. Physical disabilities were more of the same. If you could work, it was okay-ish. You'll still get treated as a freak and discriminated against daily, but you weren't completely shut out of society. If you couldn't work, however...
32. nradov ◴[] No.44495235{6}[source]
Or it could be because poorer countries actually have lower rates of autism. I'm not claiming that's the case, just that we don't have any reliable data on it one way or the other.