Every negative emotion I have, I’m told to go to therapy.
Negative emotions are human!
Why have we, as a society, grown to fear them?
Every negative emotion I have, I’m told to go to therapy.
Negative emotions are human!
Why have we, as a society, grown to fear them?
Removed by mod
Thereapy is expensive actually, it takes a lot of “resources,” which is to say money.
Thats the US medical system you’re conflating.
Therapy only requires talking.
So when I say it requires no resources, I’m comparing it to alternatives like going on a retreat or participating in some sort of group. My point is it has lower barriers than alternatives which makes it more available.
Therapists are professionals who have to get paid, just like doctors, electricians, piano teachers, bicycle repairpeople, or whatever. I left out car repair because that’s largely about access to expensive garage facilities and special tools. Yes those costs are significant financial obstacles for lots of people, especially if they’re recurring. Participating in a group (like joining the local chess club) is usually free? Or if you mean a therapy group, I think that’s a a therapist leading a group session, so the participants split up the cost and it’s cheaper than individual therapy.
Anyway, this is money that has to come from somewhere.
deleted by creator
Fortunately, some therapists charge on a “sliding scale”. That means the therapist charges depending on what you’re able to pay. Money isn’t necessarily an insurmountable barrier.
Downvotes aren’t an “I disagree button,” y’all. This person makes a well-articulated point with a credible source; if you don’t like it either explain why or move on.
A manosphere-gateway self-help guru who somehow hasn’t lost his license by some miracle (though was reprimanded) is not what I’d call a credible source.
Pure ad hominem, and unsubstantiated ad hominem at that. The man in the video makes an argument and backs it up by evidence (and, you know, his decade of relevant professional experience). There’s straight up zero substance to anything you said (except the reprimand bit, but then you have to explain the contents of that reprimand and why they’re relevant here).
Look, if you enjoy that kinda stuff - be my guest. Let’s just maybe not pretend that him being a licensed practitioner somehow absolves him from also being a shady unethical influencer who may have ulterior motives which affect how and why he presents topics. Again - not a credible source to me and many others. Hence the downvotes.
Okay that sounds shady (specifically the Indian medicine bit, everything else is frankly not a big deal), but not in a way that’s relevant to the contents of the video or the top comment. Again, ad hominem is a fallacy for a reason, or in other words: What’s the ulterior motive?
I don’t believe it’s a fallacy to say “this person has done enough bad stuff to discredit himself and I don’t have time nor expertise to sift through his content to separate the good parts from the bad, so it’s a safer bet to not listen to him at all”.
I had not heard of the guy before, but like anyone else, he has his own perspective.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alok_Kanojia
That isn’t what most people would consider a source. The reality is that the word “reliable” often gets dropped from the term when people are asking you for a reliable source. They have an expectation that if you have a source for the information, that you have already found the information credible. The reality is that most people will accept some information from a non-credible source and that is typically when they already have a bias towards that information. Most people are not trained to recognize the existing biases in their thinking so they are unaware of the problem. What was provided is a YouTube video of an entertainer who livestreams. Give me something peer reviewed, not a video of him spouting his platform.
From my long, long experience arguing with people on the internet, the words of a practicing, licensed professional with relevant experience absolutely do count as a source, at least enough to establish a baseline for debate. At this point the burden of (dis)proof is on the accuser to provide evidence that says otherwise.
Most intellectually dishonest thing I’ve read today. You know that the contents of the video are meant to be backed not by the words of “an entertainer who livestreams,” but by his education, over a decade of relevant professional experience and all the statistics and papers he keeps citing in the damn video.
Okay three things here: First, “spouting his platform” of going to therapy but with a disclaimer that might help some people get more out of it? Like, this isn’t exactly a bombshell, nor does he say “screw therapy pay me.” There’s no perverse incentive or anything of the sort here. Second, I’ve never ever seen anyone start off an internet argument with “give me something peer reviewed.” This isn’t an academic paper. If you want something peer reviewed, you’ll have to start off with something peer reviewed first. Third, by that standard all media for non-academics is a no-go, which is not how any internet argument I’ve ever seen went. If that’s the standard you want to set then sure, but you don’t get to enforce it on other people.
therapy people have sort of a cult mentality… they don’t want to discuss the limits or issues with therapy.
they basically think it’s a miracle cure for everything, and if you disagree they downvote or call you names.
truth is therapy is a limited resource and has lots of issues. and not all therapists and therapies are the same for everyone. but that’s a complex detailed discussion folks don’t want to have. a large chunk of the therapy industry has implicit and explicit biases and is overwhelmingly dominated by women.
not to mention all the bad ignorant takes like ‘therapy is talking’… when there are many non-talk therapies that are necessary.
the problem is ‘go to therapy’ has become a way to dismiss people’s legitimate problems, concerns, and sometimes just their ordinary experiences. it’s yet another way of going ‘i don’t agree with you or like you so therefore you should just go away’.
Every woman I know says medical science completely ignores them.
Just like you ignored that sentence.
watch the video. This is not my opinion.
Removed by mod
watch the video i linked this is not my opinion.
If you cant be bothered to look at what Im citing than calling me sexist is very out of line
Don’t think I will.
I didn’t either.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Complete non-sequitur. Just… what?