are psychiatrists insane?

Gorodov wrote:And do not think that it is useless.

See what LeOkAsPEr says:

LeOkAsPEr wrote:He's got you there, just look at the Suffragists and Suffragettes. The Suffragists used petitions and got empty promises where as the Suffragettes used violent means to really get the message across, when that happened they were a bit more prepared to act.

Petitions don't always work. I don't know what people think they're going to do. It's not like that once a petition has reached the target the requests become in effect and the government is under legal obligation to act out. It's just a request, it's basically a bunch of people saying saying what they want to happen, doesn't mean it's going to happen. It could work but it's unlikely, when threatened with a piece of paper covered in signatures it's unlikely anyone will care, but when you actually go out there and prove you're going to do something then they'll take notice.

I agree with LeOkAsPEr. Look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_suffragists_and_suffragettes.
I am not convinced a petition in this case has any effect. Besides, if I generate signatures there is no way for anyone to tell signatures have been generated. I can do a good job generating them just as if there were real people signing online. And it is useless.

What I am suggesting is to attack shrinks by all means possible, like I said facilitate pervert calls by advertising sex under their number, go put stickers on their door at their address, or some "go away" stuff, of smash their windows, abuse their email address to send viagra offers, and real address to book some pizzas nobody ordered, or hookers, or exterminator of cockroaches, all those things to get shrinks mad, and make them go nuts. Keep bugging them, and be an activist.

Petition does nothing to shrinks, and nothing to anybody. But real-world attacks (like suffragettes) actually work, bring attention, and make people want to understand why this is happening. Then people will read our information. Let's start by booking an escort service to come to your shrink's address today. More than one girl is a plus. Who said there cannot be an escort service every hour called and told to come to that address looking for Mr. [...your shrinks name...]?

Quackery, let's try to organize an appeal to the court. After all, before you yourself suggested it.

To sign who can hear and understand: http://goo.gl/sMnJ6y Do not miss this opportunity!

Support and this petition gentlemen: https://www.causes.com/posts/950388-i-h ... NeJvwmvgll
Understand, it is necessary for all of us!

Cruxx wrote:Whenever I say Something the hearer does not want to be true, I am labelled as Mad.
Mentally incompetent, unTruthful, whatever . . .
Thereby, my inConvenient Meaning can be disregarded, without testing their Sanity,
without checking their reality-map for errors
. . . what might remain of their Sanity, that is.

This is interesting and I think you are the one who mentioned telepathy in another post (which at first I stigmaed of madness in my mind only to reconsider it later when exposed to or reminded of an example which gave weight to that idea).

I was pondering something today which I think is relevent. I dunno how much you know about body language but for example if I am thinking I don't want to talk to someone, my arms cross, it's a kind of block jesture subconsciously meaning/communicating via body language not to talk to me, as far as my understanding goes. There are tons of examples you probably already know about, some are very subtle and I've not analysed all of them so I'm not 100% sure of their meaning but I suggest that perhaps everything we think is communicated via body language/signals in some way such as wording, so that even when we lie the message gets across (I think I've noticed in myself that there are subtle differences in wording within the same train of thought when I believe it and when I don't e.g. I believe the world is flat / the world is flat. First = where trying to convince you but I don't really believe it / second = I quasi believe it. Maybe that worked maybe it didn't but I tried to reinact not believing and then believing the same train of thought. And interesting reading back on those as if someone else said it, first sounds like an idiot or attention seeking joker (which is not true, only trying to convince someone of something you don't believe), second sounds like someone ill educated or someone from a historical time where they all believed the world was flat), expanding on this now perhaps when people solidly believe things they state it as fact and when they don't they say the opposite of what they really think i.e they believe it / it really is true / etc, all lies communicating it's a lie to the other person who just gets fed up.

Anyway I've gone off on a tangent a bit theorizing more about this. But basically, and it's a very interesting subject for me, I'm suggesting, that perhaps all thought is fitted to the subconscious or something like that so that everytime we think we jesture via body language or another mechanism of communication.

Telepathy sounded insane at first until it fitted belief in my frame of reference then I opened my mind and expanded on the idea, so perhaps everyone or most people (and reading into my own langauge I think "or" in that context really means "*" i.e. correction), believes only what connects to their frame of reference, so in order to communicate ideas outside of peoples frame of reference e.g. on the periphery of mainstream, the gap has to be bridged e.g. with an analogy. That explains why I sensed it would be effective to bridge the gap between seeing psyhchiatry as reliable and seeing it as quackery by using atheism as the bridge i.e. being an atheist of psychiatry, that fits into people's frame of reference by communicating the stigma of believing in God and joining it to psychiatry, which makes me wonder whether I am really comunicating what I think is logical or really just communicating that psychiatry is the outgroup and maybe everyone has an outgroup in their mind who are not welcome in the tribe and that's all I'm really subconsciously communicating.

Maybe that's why psychiatry and treating people dehumaized way go hand in hand because they are really treating us as the outgroup i.e. people not belonging to the belief system in the tribe or something so we have to find ways to bridge the gaps then they'll treat us as the ingroup maybe? Maybe that's where acts of kindness fit in as well. Maybe gifting is an evolutionary way of welcoming people into the tribe and allying with people / bridging the difference, so when people gift it is saying *I am friendly we are together and this was lost when money/greed/scarcity was perpetuated. I swear I'm onto something, but my mind has been altered by the drugs and I'm not as sound intellectually as I once was after being what feels like dopimine-pathway-clogged with the substance in the drug (which perhaps needs clarifying with something that recognizes the in/out group and bridges the difference because saying my mind is worse is another way of communicating I am a part of the outgroup I am thinking).

I mean, telepathy seems an odd word (*when I first heard it I naturally reacted to it as non-understanderble/outgroup) but perhaps it needs defined first in order to bridge the difference, really to welcome the other to the belief maybe, otherwise the belief goes right over their head and you are seen as the out group which is a guess as to whatever that may be which will not be based on scientific reality but stigma, I swear I'm onto this, I mean it makes sense from an evolutionary standpoint that anything that is seen as different and not understanderable slash not fitting in with current frame of reference of thoughts or ideas is seen as a danger seen as outgroup stigmatized etc. Hence why if I say I am an atheist of psychiatry I communicate via the anology pretty well, but if I say psychiatry is all lies I'm seen as the outgroup and I sense that I will be seen as the outgroup before I say it, which is where telepathy plays a role, I can sense when I'm about to say something that puts me on the outgroup status leaving me having to find my way back into the group and bridge the difference again. Maybe the problem then is that until peoples beliefs about mental illness are bridged to better understood people with mental illness they will continue to always automatically be stigmatized.

So now I want to help the mentally ill after I've been condemned to it and damaged by it, maybe I'm reading into this too much, but maybe that's because I'm now no longer seeing it as an outgroup but an ingroup, I see the reality of it and therefore I see people are like me and subjecting to wrongdoing but everyone else subconsciously stigmatizes what they don't understand as an outgroup. So until people are made to be part of the group by understanding eachother or gifting to eachother they will continue to stigmatize each other? Many of us, me included until I understood more about psychiatrists backgrounds, instinctively stigmatize the psychiatrists as bad people in the reverse effect because we don't understand why they are mistreating us. Maybe what is missing is bridging the gap between the tribes via information or gifts. This reminds me of slaves, that were different colours, I think they were being seen outgroups to eachother and that's why the blacks were shackled etc because they were automatically stigmatized as outgroup, because people couldn't relate to them from their frame of reference.

I know that's a bit of a mish mash. But that pretty well communites my theory of telepathy, probably subconscouly via wording phrasing my logical intent.

In concise summary I theorize
1: thoughts are communicated subconsciously via body language / phrasing of sentances
2: the sense referred to as telepathy where people sense how much their statement will be taken the an agreeable or non-agreeable way is really a sense of belonging to the group - when someone doesn't contain any frame of reference in their thoughts to what another has said they will automatically be considered outgroup, when someone does contain a reference in their frame of thought with different meaning they will be considered in or outgroup depending on the differing belief, and when someone contains the frame of reference they will be considered ingroup.

My apologies for a long post previous. Another thing, that when someone writes differing lengths of posts that is outgroup likewise as it is differing of the norm and norm = belonging to the group, so naturally I will drift from view of the group some degree for that one. One more thing, on an internet forum I imagine people are more naturally distant from each other to begin with, because of the varying initial understanding of eachother and distance in person perhaps, like I feel welcome with Riccola and Copy_Cat and Crux (and probably there are more however I've so far read a short number of threads) *and KINDNESSTHERAPY however some of the other posters I am viewing as distant from myself, I imagine that's partly as well because some come and go from here as they arrive here as a space they can vent their meaningful experiences/thoughts out in an accepted space and dip there toe into the group then to move on maybe sometimes for some reason, after the scattering connection with peoples belief systems to begin with as we are all strangers at first ot eachother and know little about eachothers backgrounds, which gives me an idea, maybe a brief non-personal history profile option is a good idea or maybe not. I dunno, I think I've got some of the above scewed in some way and am on the border of insulting which I don't mean I'm rather phrasing the reality wrong I think.

babybowrain wrote:are psychiatrits facists? (...) it's based on european theories...that were around the time facism rose.

Ehm you know all born in Europe (or also in the Orient) for the simple fact that America is not in a significant temporal line.
Moreover the real "fascists" are in the USA.
And anyway psychiatry's birth is far far away from the Fascism period.
In this period instead it borns Psychoanalysis, and Fascism didnt look well at it, moreover Freud was Jewish and her sister died in a concentration camp.

Dammit. I tried to edit that but timeout. My wording is all wrong in the second paragraph of the previous littleun.......................not sure what to say apart from bollocks,.. nevermind.. and now I've posted this below anothers post, ah well maybe.... Reading it back, it's not so bad, I'm overacknowledging it.

pat789 wrote:Dammit. I tried to edit that but timeout. My wording is all wrong in the second paragraph of the previous littleun.......................not sure what to say apart from bollocks,.. nevermind.. and now I've posted this below anothers post, ah well maybe.... Reading it back, it's not so bad, I'm overacknowledging it.

How did you want it to read? PM me

They are organized abusers, all you can do is *** them.