• theneverfox
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Nah, I pick my words carefully, and usually have a mountain of science behind them

    For example, I said 4/5 of RFK’s opinions are actually pretty good, but the 5th is so insane it puts the last 4 into doubt.

    Someone calls me out on “they want to put AuDHD people into camps”. I say I’m one of them, and being able to voluntary get out of the modern world for as long as you need is a safety net that would save so many lives

    They asked if I had a PhD, so I hit them with the science - behavioral activation, getting away from your stressors, and getting away from modern life (because we’re not crazy, the modern human world is what’s crazy) is the most effective treatment for most mental illness. And I went on to list my concerns about implementation, and how this great idea could easily become a work camp if it’s not as voluntary as advertised

    They hit me with “that’s some pull yourself up by your bootstraps shit”

    That’s what lemmy has been like. It’s not “um actually”, it’s “if I totally breeze through what you said in the most uncharitable way, I can interpret this as you said something horrible”

    • nomy@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 hours ago

      I classify them the same. People who read a 3 paragraph comment and pick one single part (and act like it discredits your entire point) are the worst of the ackshuallyers.