The Student Room Group

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Starship Trooper
It's funny that the views considered far right were considered the norm a few decades ago.

As society has become more left wing mental health problems have gone through the roof. I believe studies have shown and certainly anecdotally left wing people are far more likely to suffer from mental health issues Esp anxiety than right wing people.

That said I think labelling people as mentally deficienct for their political beliefs is wrong despite being typical of the left and increasingly the liberal centre. A holdover of their USSR days in some cases.

Not gonna lie I think left-wing people are just more likely to admit when they need help.
Original post by Tolgash
Why is he supporting conversion therapy rather than trying to find a method that isn't, as one put it, discredited, disgraced and dangerous pseudoscience.

I'm not sure this makes sense to me. If indeed he did find a method that isn't "discredited, disgraced and dangerous pseudoscience", what would we call it? Would it not, by definition, be "conversion therapy"?
Original post by tazarooni89
I'm not sure this makes sense to me. If indeed he did find a method that isn't "discredited, disgraced and dangerous pseudoscience", what would we call it? Would it not, by definition, be "conversion therapy"?

Sorry, I meant that he should find methods that aren't as ridiculous as the ones currently used. His support should be aimed at changing the current state of conversation therapy rather than supporting it, unless one dubious example is actual proof that it works (which I doubt). In my opinion, it's far more likely that he's attention seeking rather than changing the scientific consensus.
(edited 3 years ago)
Original post by Kitten in boots
I hope this is intended as satire.

Not really.

I don't see what is at all controversial about saying that only he knows whether he is straight or gay, because only he experiences is own feelings. He used to claim to be gay, now he claims to be straight. So this means it's either possible to go from one to the other, or he's just lying/attention seeking.

If he's attention seeking - which one is it? Was he attention seeking when he claimed to be gay? Or is he attention seeking now that he claims to be straight?
Original post by Tolgash
Sorry, I meant that he should find methods that aren't as ridiculous as the ones currently used. His support should be aimed at changing the current practices of conversation therapy rather than supporting it in its current state, unless one dubious example is actual proof that it works (which I doubt). In my opinion, it's far more likely that he's attention seeking rather than changing the scientific consensus.

I think it's hard to say without first knowing what kind of "conversion therapy" he claims to have worked on him. Perhaps it was something completely different to the failed attempts that we're used to hearing about. Or perhaps it wasn't.
Original post by tazarooni89
I think it's hard to say without first knowing what kind of "conversion therapy" he claims to have worked on him. Perhaps it was something completely different to the failed attempts that we're used to hearing about. Or perhaps it wasn't.

If it was something improved
and revolutionary, why didn't he mention it? It doesn't take much. He could have literally said the word 'new', which would have entirely changed what he was angling at to me. You can't blame someone for interpreting 'conversion therapy' simply as the current practice that the WHO discredits. I think we're assuming quite a bit here.
(edited 3 years ago)
Original post by tazarooni89
Surely the two are directly related rather than just being said "at the same time". If indeed he is straight now (and of course, only he really knows what he feels on the inside), then that would imply that it is possible to go from one sexuality to another (even if one doesn't agree with the methods typically used to try and make that happen).


I'm personally not going to call his change in sexuality into question, the point I should have made clearer is that he's likely to have invited most of the doubt about it by simultaneously declaring himself as the new champion of a discredited and harmful practice that does not work.
(edited 3 years ago)
Original post by ashtolga23
Not gonna lie I think left-wing people are just more likely to admit when they need help.

I think we're both right
Reply 28
The man is clearly insane, gay, bi or whatever label he so wishes to dirty by attaching to himself. I thought he'd long ago been flushed from the scene after admitting to liking pedophiles or some such? How has he managed to make it back in such a sordid fashion? Like, who cares who he buggers? The only interesting bit being who would want to subject themselves to such an odious experience.
Original post by Tolgash
That's true, but we could only conclude that it simply may be possible. Why is he supporting conversion therapy rather than trying to find a different method that isn't, as one put it, discredited, disgraced and dangerous? There's a reason it's banned in many countries. It seems more probable that he just seeks attention.

From what we know about human sexuality, it can't be altered by any known means and conversion therapy is regarded as dangerous pseudoscience. So, given his past, given his attitude in general, it's pretty sensible to ignore him and hope he will go away. I remember 4-5 years ago, he was all the rage among the Trump Youth but has since been almost invisible to me.
I'd almost forgotten about Milo. I'm guessing he must have been missing the attention & decided to find a new cause to attach himself to. He's just as ridiculous as ever but I suppose the danger is that a few people might be taken in by his bs and end up trying such discredited, damaging 'therapies' themselves.

Original post by Tolgash
That's true, but we could only conclude that it simply may be possible. Why is he supporting conversion therapy rather than trying to find a different method that isn't, as one put it, discredited, disgraced and dangerous? There's a reason it's banned in many countries. It seems more probable that he just seeks attention.


Surely the real question here is why should anyone feel the need to try and change their sexuality?
Milo is a victim of long-term childhood sexual abuse who needs to be treated like one. People who insist on taking him seriously as a political commentator are an embarrassment.
Reply 32
Original post by Starship Trooper
I think we're both right

You're going to need to provide some serious evidence that the rise in mental health issues is to do with "the country becoming more left wing".

I would suggest a much, much, much realistic explanation is the rise of social media world- Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and the pressures they place on young people has far more to do with it.

Plus as mentioned, it's likely that people who are right wing may view mental health issues as weakness and refuse to admit they're having troubles and seek help.
Original post by DSilva
You're going to need to provide some serious evidence that the rise in mental health issues is to do with "the country becoming more left wing".

I would suggest a much, much, much realistic explanation is the rise of social media world- Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and the pressures they place on young people has far more to do with it.

Plus as mentioned, it's likely that people who are right wing may view mental health issues as weakness and refuse to admit they're having troubles and seek help.

I partially agree with all of that.

This has also coincided with the increase in single parent households and the rise of drug culture and pornography.

Also taking medication for things like 'depression' and 'anxiety' are now commonplace. Most people I know have been on some sort of medication for this. Virtually most such medication is addictive and has side effects.
Reply 34
Original post by Starship Trooper
I partially agree with all of that.

This has also coincided with the increase in single parent households and the rise of drug culture and pornography.

Also taking medication for things like 'depression' and 'anxiety' are now commonplace. Most people I know have been on some sort of medication for this. Virtually most such medication is addictive and has side effects.

I don't think any of that is "left wing" though. As more women enter the workplace (which is a good thing) , they becomes financially independent and less reliant on a husband.

Different generations face different challenges. It may the case that mental health issues weren't as much of a thing in years gone by but they very much are today.
Original post by DSilva
I don't think any of that is "left wing" though.

As more women enter the workplace (which is a good thing) , they becomes financially independent and less reliant on a husband.

Different generations face different challenges. It may the case that mental health issues weren't as much of a thing in years gone by but they very much are today.

It is culturally left wing. The people who lead the changes that lead to it were all on the left.

I don't think more women in the workplace is necessarily a good thing. For one thing this has helped to reduce wages (via supply and demand).

I think that's a bit flippant. If something was better before we need to look at why that was. Even if that goes against the progressive view of everything bring better now.
Reply 36
Original post by Starship Trooper
It is culturally left wing. The people who lead the changes that lead to it were all on the left.

I don't think more women in the workplace is necessarily a good thing. For one thing this has helped to reduce wages (via supply and demand).

I think that's a bit flippant. If something was better before we need to look at why that was. Even if that goes against the progressive view of everything bring better now.

The flip side of that is you used to have ltos of women horrifically abused (both physically and psychologically) by their husbands and they couldn't leave them for financial reasons.

I think you are nostalgic for a past that never was. A utopian time that never existed. Each generation faces different challenges.
Original post by DSilva
Different generations face different challenges. It may the case that mental health issues weren't as much of a thing in years gone by but they very much are today.

Depression is an age-old phenomenon that can be read in everything from ancient literatures to the works of Dickens. They didn't call it that then. Read any literature of the 30s and it's all there. Churchill constantly referenced his 'black dog'.

I am against pharmaceutical treatments for it myself, my opinion is that therapy is better as well as 'natural' cures like getting out in the sun, activity, being nice to yourself, etc. Of course, I realise some people have it very badly and feel too stuck to ask for help. It's my experience with friends that the drugs don't work, they require more and more to be effective and they cause terrible withdrawal.
Original post by DSilva
The flip side of that is you used to have ltos of women horrifically abused (both physically and psychologically) by their husbands and they couldn't leave them for financial reasons.

I think you are nostalgic for a past that never was. A utopian time that never existed. Each generation faces different challenges.

You also have plenty of women that are abused and mistreated in the workplace. I think women are treated better by their spouses than their boss or some corporation. Most social policy involves some sort of trade off.

No. I'm not naive. There were lots of bad things about the past and lots of good things about the present. I think on balance it was better in the past but ideally I'd like to salvage the better parts of today's society whilst returning to a more traditional model which I think is better for us.
Reply 39
Original post by Starship Trooper
You also have plenty of women that are abused and mistreated in the workplace. I think women are treated better by their spouses than their boss or some corporation. Most social policy involves some sort of trade off.

No. I'm not naive. There were lots of bad things about the past and lots of good things about the present. I think on balance it was better in the past but ideally I'd like to salvage the better parts of today's society whilst returning to a more traditional model which I think is better for us.

It’s up to women whether they want to work, not you or me.

If you want to combat mental health issues, then target social media.

Latest