Category Archives: Psychiatry

UPDATED: Shine On Mr. Sheen, You Crazy Diamond

Celebrity, Drug War, Ilana Mercer, Pseudoscience, Psychiatry, Psychology & Pop-Psychology

During an hour-long interview with CNN”s Piers Morgan, Charlie Sheen had some choice words for the addiction industry (Sheen’s clearly an enemy of the Industry.) I loved every minute of it.

SHEEN: “I’ve been around them for 22 years. And they’ve been lying to me for two decades. … I’m a winner and their lives look like they’re — you know, ruled by losers. Just to put it in black and white terms. I don’t want their lives, and they want mine, but they want to criticize the hell out of it. … I don’t believe myself to be an addict. I really don’t. I think that I just ignore or smash or finally dismiss a model that I think is rooted in vintage balderdash, you know? For lack of a better word.”

Lovely.

And about the busybody public Sheen said this: “I wish people would shift that focus on to themselves and their own family and their own friends and just maybe spend a little more time on their home front.” [Transcripts.]

Watch out: The Shamans will be furious. Haven’t the likes of Drs. Keith Ablo and Drew Pinsky labored to create lucrative niches for themselves in the media by medicalizing all manner of misbehavior?

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders started out with some 60 categories of disorders (not diseases). It now sports hundreds for which a biological origin is asserted (with little scientific backing). Good for Sheen for copping only to being a bad boy, not a sick boy in need of the ministrations of prissy prohibitionists.

From “Mel’s Malady, Foxman’s Fetish”:

The Delphic oracles of the disease theory of delinquency (the “experts”) have slapped all manner of misconduct with diagnostic labels. At the root of this diseasing of behavior is the eradication of good and bad. Placing bad behavior beyond the strictures of traditional morality, moreover, makes it amenable to external, “therapeutic” or state interventions.
Liberals first, and conservatives in short succession, have taken to the idiom of disease like ducks to water. Left and right now insist, based on wispy pseudoscience, that just about every human excess is an illness as organic as cancer or diabetes.
A teacher who seduces her underage pupil has to be “sick,” or else she’d not have indulged her fantasies. The same post hoc illogic is applied to the morbidly obese: if you overeat, you’re diseased!
Are you a dad who dotes on his kids when they are around, but fails to mail them child support money when they return to mom? There’s a Harvard professor by the name of Dr. John Ratey who’ll cheerily diagnose you with “Environmental Dependency Disorder”: you remember your kids only when they are present.
And so it goes: the arsonist has “pyromania,” the thief is inflicted with “kleptomania,” and Bill Clinton is not promiscuous, but a “sex-addict.”

From “Addictions Are About Behavior, Not Disease”:

“When it comes to thinking about addiction, opinions converge. Having bought into the addiction industry’s mantra, so-called social progressives and conservatives alike share the same ideological hangover from the Prohibition era, with a twist of AA sadism: all are religious about abstinence, and all accept as bible from Sinai the wisdom of coercing addicts into treatment regimens. But perhaps the greatest error made in the attempt at humane formulations about addiction is to cast as a disease what is essentially a problem of behavior. …

“The rationale for using the disease model to describe addiction even though it is intellectually dishonest is that medical treatment is effective. Yet another deception. An overview of controlled studies indicates that ‘treated patients do not fare better than untreated people with the same problems.’ Of note is a 4500-subject-strong 1996 US epidemiological study conducted by the National Longitudinal Alcohol Epidemiological Survey. Treated alcoholics, it was found, were more heavily alcohol dependent on average than untreated alcoholics. Clearly a behavioral problem cannot be remedied by medical intervention. Addicts are cured when they decide to give up the habit.”

I don’t watch Sheen’s television. But as far as bucking a treatment industry that relies, for the most, on coercing addicts into rehabilitation—I say, Shine on Sheen, You Crazy Diamond.

UPDATE: Contemplationist: Dr. Thomas Szasz is a friend who is featured on these (BAB’s) pixelated pages. Do search for his articles under “BAB’s A List.” Tom has provided praise for my new book, to be released on May 10, 2011. Sign-up for my newsletter, befriend me on Facebook, and follow me on Twitter for updates.

Loughner, Language, and The Big Lie

Education, English, Free Will Vs. Determinism, Government, Political Correctness, Politics, Propaganda, Pseudoscience, Psychiatry

The following is from my new WND.COM column, “Loughner, Language, and The Big Lie”:

“… Jared Lee Loughner was both fixated on his representative’s imagined failings, and preoccupied with language and its misuse. These elements combined and then combusted in his head.

As a writer who really loves the English language, I am intrigued by the intrusive, persistent thoughts about grammar and illiteracy to have plagued Loughner.

You see, as I mourn the senseless slaughter of my countrymen, I also grieve – with almost every book I pick up or Internet tract I read – the bastardization of the language.

Given time, the nation’s mental-health mavens will confuse matters. They will likely assert, without any science, that misfiring neurotransmitters in the man’s brain brought us to this point. It would appear, however, that what pushed Loughner into an abyss was the inability to “read” the world around him.

Words are symbols. They are used as agreed-upon conventions to make sense of the world. For Loughner, these constructs no longer corresponded to the things they are supposed to describe.

The magazine Mother Jones interviewed Bryce Tierney, a close friend of Loughner. Tierney confirmed “the fascination Loughner had with semantics and how the world is really nothing – [an] illusion.” In addition, Loughner, said his pal, liked to insist (credibly) that government was “f—ing us over.”

Perhaps, then, it was not speech per se that inflamed Loughner’s febrile passions, but, rather, Orwellian speech; lies that belie reality.

The Big Lies. …”

Read the complete column, “Loughner, Language, and The Big Lie.”

UPDATED: MUNICH (and More)

Film, Hollywood, Pop-Culture, Psychiatry, Terrorism

This is the time of the year when one desperately needs relief from the fare television offers. It’s essential to make a trip or two to Blockbuster during the holiday season for some mindless entertainment—which is a step up from the stomach-turning, sappy, deeply silly Xmas films whose screening began as early as late in November.

As it is, it’s impossible to watch the assorted estrogen-oozing action dramas and crime series inflicted on the TV viewer. The phony heroine lords it over meek meterosexuals with fussy falsettos. Men know their place. Dare-devil women run the show, which makes the show dull, because 90 pounds of botoxic, silicone-plumped flesh in stilettos can’t run very fast (in real life, and I’m a sucker for reality). And you just know that back on terra firma, the 200 pounder she’s cuffing with seeming ease would have flung her as far as the equator, or coshed her to death.

A leading man is invariably a mentalist (I don’t know what that is), a gentle doctor suffering from low-sperm count, or a buffoon (“Burn Notice”).

Did you know that Daniel Wroughton Craig is quite a capable actor? Since I’m not a fan of the film industry, discovering that the latest James Bond is more than a Pierce Brosnan (although not nearly as good looking) or a Timothy Dalton and Roger Moore was a pleasant surprise.

I mention Craig, as we were watching Munich, directed by Steven Spielberg, and based on a book by Canadian journalist George Jonas, Barbara Amiel’s first husband.

Munich has a decent script and actors, their main attribute being that they are not American, so the acting is understated, not ego-centered and embarrassing. A bit of that unique Israeli humor is captured occasionally. Munich “shows how a squad of assassins, led by former Mossad agent Avner (Eric Bana), track down and murder a list of Black September members thought to be responsible for the eleven Israeli athletes’ murders. The second part of the film, which depicts the Israeli government’s response, has been debated a great deal by film critics and newspaper columnists. Spielberg refers to the film’s second part as “historical fiction,” saying it is inspired by the actual Israeli operations which are now known as Operation Wrath of God.”

Daniel Craig plays Steve, the South African get-away driver. He manages a heavy South African accent the likes I’ve never heard before. At first, I did not recognize him and thought Craig was an obscure actor from the Old Country. From their non-existent acting repertoire, younger American actors exclude accents. (It’s “too much like hard work, besides; doesn’t’ everyone speak English with an American accent?”) An East European dialect in “Law and Order SVU” sounds like the “Direct TV” commercial.

The depiction of the Munich massacre is hard to take for those of us who remember the lack of German security, the free pass that government gave the butchers, and the same peoples’ decision to continue the fun and games in the aftermath of the gruesome murders.

An excellent series also well-worth renting is “In Treatment.” Reading the credits, I saw the words, “Betipul,” which is Hebrew for “In treatment.” It figures that these nuanced portraits of people in therapy were adapted for the small screen from a foreign script. It has nothing of the Oprah, Phil filth—the two charlatans whose worldviews guide interpersonal relationships in the US.

Wikipedia confirms that, “The program’s format, script and opening theme are based on, often being word for word translations of, Hagai Levi’s successful Israeli series BeTipul, which won every possible award for a drama series at the Israeli Academy Awards.” I seldom watch TV becasue I get so bored. “In Treatment” is riveting TV. It’s deep but not labored.

UPDATE (Dec. 18): My thanks to Nora for fleshing out the context of Munich’s release. You can see how far behind I am in my film viewing. As we were watching, I did mutter to my husband about the facts that had been omitted (see above). It’s my understanding, however, that both Spielberg and Jonas are pro-Israel. Jonas most certainly is. And Spielberg is behind an enormous Holocaust project, so he is most sensitive to the arguments for Israel’s founding and survival. The Palestinians were definitely the butchers of the film; Israelis were the bunglers—I did get the impression of a inexpert mission, but then technology was primitive in those days.

To repeat, the Israelis were the sympathetic parties in the plot. Any statement to the contrary in the German press must have been a product of that press’ wish-fulfillment projections. Some of “the other side” came through in the rather smug, second-rate arguments presented during a chance meeting between the Israeli protagonist and a Palestinian terrorist. The Israeli came out on top.

All in all, it’s a decent effort. The horrific replays of the Munich massacre displayed the heroism of some of the Israeli athletes. Perhaps not enough.

UPDATED: ‘MAD’ MEL (What’s Worse?)

Addiction, Celebrity, Conservatism, Hollywood, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Morality, Psychiatry

“The South Park depiction of Mel Gibson bouncing off walls he had freshly ‘coated’ in bodily waste is not far off,” I wrote of Gibson’s previous peccadilloes.

It usually falls to liberals to fend for A-list reprobates. Left to Barbara Walters, Paris Hilton’s porn debut, in which she made narcissistic love to the camera, (i.e. herself) was elevated to a PG-rated tale of innocence betrayed. Conservatives, usually attuned to the coarsening culture, and fierce about defending cops, are airbrushing Mel Gibson in the same way (although, unlike Paris, he doesn’t need makeup).
Mel’s many conservative fans have downplayed his vulgar public conduct. He cussed cops who were being decent to him, threatened to ruin them, Russell Crowed a phone, and generally behaved like a hog high on his own power.

The latest Gibson indiscretion is covered well by Larry Auster (whose take comports with mine in “Mel’s ‘Malady,’ Foxman’s Fetish”. Or perhpas I’m biased because LA just echoes my thoughts (minus the aspect on the medicalization of misbehavior)?

Either way, we both have Gibson pegged. Over to Larry’s “Gibson And Conservatives”:

What a ridiculous culture we live in—and that includes the mainstream conservatives. Mel Gibson in a drunken rant that was surreptitiously recorded said a pile of extremely offensive things to his ex-mistress. But because in the midst of this geyser of verbal abuse, he used the word “nigger” once, his rant is constantly billed—by conservatives—as a “racist rant,” even though the rant overall had nothing to do with race. When it comes to race, meaning, when it comes to blacks, the mainstream conservatives are precious little Victorian ladies, ready to faint dead away at the sound of the “N” word, even when uttered in a private conversation by a man who was obviously drunk.

As for Gibson, I’ve been saying for 15 years, based on his movies, based on his appalling demeanor in TV interviews, that the man was not a conservative but a messy product of our debased contemporary culture, a point I particularly emphasized in VFR’s huge debate about his movie The Passion. Conservatives, especially paleocons, couldn’t see this about Gibson, because his Catholicism and his seven children with one wife designated him automatically as a traditionalist conservative in their minds. They didn’t see the non-conservative qualities and attitudes he was actually expressing in the public realm …

UPDATE (July 14): Even more obscene than the preoccupation with Mel and Oksana’s icky audio is the orgy that will follow the announcement of the impending engagement of the two stupidest people in Alaska. I give the marraige of twiddledumb and twiddledumber, if indeed it gets past this stage, six months. I wish them well, of course.

I agree with Gibson on the following. This Oksana Grigorieva is distinctly dumb. Any woman that looks, naturally, as pretty as she did here, yet goes and modifies herself to look like a slightly improved version of the Octamom, is a devastatingly dumb bimbo.