----- Original Message ----- From: "Dan Minette" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2002 1:15 PM Subject: Mental health worse than vulgar. ;-)
> The title of this thread is meant to be whimsical, not unplesant. It is a > statement that I'm drifting my thread with Marvin on purpose. > > So mental health ideas are only to be discussed in a clinical setting? Why? At the risk of crossing some of Rich's boundries, I'd like to chime in, with apologies to Rich if I am transgressing. I've visited Rich's IRC chat, and I met his troubled friend. Even before anyone had a chance to tell me about her problems, I could identify her as likely to have a dissociative disorder. It was easy. She shared many behaviors that my ex-wife exhibited. You could tell she was a nice person, but the things she said were pretty much the same things I had heard from the ex. This does not in any way qualify as a diagnosis, but if I ran across another person with these kinds of behaviors I would urge them to seek help from a professional. > The discussion of boundaries doesn't require any diagnosis, just an > understanding of what makes a healthy community. I'd be willing to accept > that you differ with my understanding, but I think a high threshold is set > when you call it "insulting and insane." I agree. The lists guidelines are really nothing but stated boundries. And whether one realises it or not we all talk about boundries all the time. The key idea regarding boundries is respecting the boundries of others. Some of the problems we have had on this list are really boundry problems. One of the side effects of open and free discussion is the pushing of boundries. We get used to speaking freely about subjects that "push the envelope" yet do not trespass on anyones boundries. Eventually a subject will come up that is near and dear to some person or group of people and someone is going to unknowingly cross a boundry into an area that is in some way hurtful to someone else. Boundries sometimes spring up unexpectedly. After 9/11 the boundries of most Americans had changed a bit (or even drasticly) in regard to certain subjects. > Indeed, I'd argue that you've come > much closer to diagnosing me when you use this statment than I am when I > discuss boundaries. :-) > In a sense, you established a sort of boundry with that statement <G> xponent Territories Maru rob
