Today I Learned
What did you learn today? Share it with us!
We learn something new every day. This is a community dedicated to informing each other and helping to spread knowledge.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must begin with TIL. Linking to a source of info is optional, but highly recommended as it helps to spark discussion.
** Posts must be about an actual fact that you have learned, but it doesn't matter if you learned it today. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.**
Rule 2- Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding non-TIL posts.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-TIL posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.
If you vocally harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.
Partnered Communities
You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.
Community Moderation
For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.
view the rest of the comments
It's fuckin insane that ODD is still in the DSM. That alone is enough for me to want to dismiss the entire text.
I think it's more like if you're so opposed to what any authority figure tells you to do that you will do the opposite of what your doctor tells you, for example, sometimes out of spite or vindication.
Yes but I think that perspective puts all the onus of change on the harmed individual and none on the institution that abused and broke their trust of authority, and therefore functions as a scapegoat for abuse of authority, or authority itself. "Healing" under this understanding involves getting a traumatized individual to trust their doctor, who's authority likely chains back to the same powers who hold the reigns of their abuser, and to move on with their lives while that normalized abuser - The one creating the trauma in the first place - Continues to do untold harm. Someone labeled ODD is traumatized by authority yet the label exists not primarily to aid the victim, but to externalize blame away from the authority and onto the victim.
Furthermore I've at least read that more and more these days ODD "symptoms" are being reunderstood as expressions of various non-normative neurotypes that may place things like justice and ethical reciprocity at a higher priority than most. I myself have been introduced by my therapist to PDA type autism, Pathological/Persistent Demand Avoidance, which before it's relatively recent recognition used to get a lot of people slapped with the ODD label. I don't express my demand avoidance externally unless cornered, more it informs my entire lifestyle strategy in advance, so I escaped having a direct confrontation as a kid that would have gotten me labeled. But I identify strongly with and my heart goes out to ODD-labeled people.
Wait until you find out its entire contents and history... Total BS!
Read what was linked, it's literally only diagnosed in children. In which case, yes, if they disregard all authority (including their parents), it is a problem.
Wow sounds even more legit to victimize only kids... jfc.
It's a problem for a hierarchical society that requires continual compliance for next to no explanation, not a problem for the child. It's not a medical condition internal to an individual, it's a social illness external to them, and therefore has no place in a medical text.
That's simply raising children. Yes, you should ideally explain as much as possible to children, but some things you simply can't because they're not mature enough to understand it, it could traumatize them or there's simply no time.
I mean, imagine a child suddenly deciding to run into a busy road and you start explaining why they should stop instead of giving clear orders: "you know, those cars are moving very fast and..." * Splat *
And even if you to have the option to explain, if the child simply says "I don't care" and ignores you, then how are you supposed to raise them? That's specifically what this diagnosis is about.
I'm deeply concerned for the wellbeing of your children.
I'm deeply concerned for the wellbeing of a society that's even peppered (let alone prolific) with this naive-realist rationalised irrationality.
"That's simply" authoritarian totalitarianism, normalised.
And of course, the totalitarianised psyche does not see this. Like the fish does not see water. Does not even know its a thing. Knows no other way. "That's simply" how it is to them.
A couple other things spring to mind:
"If you're old enough to ask the question, you're old enough to handle the answer." (And even before (and if not, plant the seed and they may get it later).
and
Try explanation before dismissing it out of hand. Better pedagogy. Explanation's not even a high bar. There are better yet. Invite exploring ideas.
I'm not even remotely taking about hitting kids, jfc. But way to completely miss the point that explanation and exploring ideas sometimes simply doesn't work and create a strawman.
How're you going to imprison, drug, and profit from kids without physical coercion? Get a clue.
Just an example of not using reasoned explanations and instead conforming to "requires continual compliance for next to no explanation" that sprang to mind.
Since I was not saying you were saying what you're saying I was saying, that's your own (both) strawman fallacy fallacy, and its own strawman fallacy. As I said, it's just what also sprang to mind in that same vein of thought. At a stretch, maybe you could try claim it a slippery slope fallacy on my part, but again, I was not saying that's the inevitable result from your line of thought(/dogma). It's just a possibility [due consideration] within that philosophy.
Also, while we're on the case of detecting fallacies, you've moved the goalposts from "That**’s** simply raising children." to "explanation and exploring ideas sometimes simply doesn’t work".
Did you even read what I wrote literally one sentence later?
I did.
And responded (and, I thought, offered refutation) to that too...
Are we playing the "did you read" game?
Did you read what I wrote that responds directly to that matter?
... Not a very productive way of going about this, is it. :/
Always worth a double check of those three fingers pointing back, every time pointing a finger in hate. n_n
Yes we are playing the "did you read" game, since you accused me of moving the goalposts when it was crystal clear in the sentence after that that the goalposts were there all along.
Yeah, it's definitely not very productive to argue in bad faith.
Yeah, your worthless comments keep piling up.
It's raising children in a hierarchical society that requires continual compliance for next to no explanation. Again, it's not a problem internal to the child, and it's not medical, it's wrong to frame it as a medical condition.
Busy roads that leave no nuance between safety and instant death, no safe introductory margin for a child to explore and understand, are a product of a hierarchical society. The only reason we require unwavering compliance from our children that bleeds into labeling them with medical conditions if they do not comply is because we have built a society that is hostile to them.
To balk and protest at that state of affairs is not a disorder, it's entirely healthy. It's the state of affairs that is ill.
I don't think you're understanding the problem here. Busy roads were one example, there are plenty of others, train tracks, the mixer or blender in the kitchen, a fork in a power outlet - these have absolutely nothing to do with hierarchy. There will always be dangers. And even if there aren't any, if you don't have a grip on children to prevent them from injuring other children or even adults, you have a serious problem on your hands. If you don't correct that, you get the kind of adults that make our society ill as you put it.
And again, this is not about balking and protesting at the ill state of affairs, and the diagnosing factors make that very clear.