I'm Wil Wheaton. I Live with Chronic Depression and Anxiety. I Am Not Ashamed

We all have better luxuries now than kings had hundreds of years ago. Less famine, life threatening situations and so on. But we do have a way to compare ourselves with best parts of lives of many interesting people around the world. We have antibiotics and painkillers, but we also seem to have way more options and anxiety.

I'd assume there's much less physical pain. But what about suffering that can be caused by things like depression?

Do you think it's about the same, much better, slightly worse?

Not to mention famine was common, and parents would e.g. go hungry for long stretches of time so their kids could subsist on half-rations of nutrient-poor staples. In such an environment, domestic violence is common, and it is difficult to make any kind of long-term plans. You just try to survive day by day.

Then there’s also literally backbreaking labor, poor sanitation, poor healthcare, parasites, the equivalent of smoking a few packs a day by sleeping next to a wood fire, infant mortality of >50%, and so on.

Source: this stuff was still rampant in the 1960s in rural southern Mexico, and still happens today in many countries around the world. You can still interview people who grew up with that kind of terror.

Let's get this out now: I'm glad he finally sought help, and that he's getting it.

The things about this article that bug me:

1. He starts off with the article with a "trigger warning." The title is about depression and anxiety. Having a 'trigger warning' is either insulting to the reader, or it's a weird posturing thing. Seems a little offputting when he's trying to write about his own experience and then in a way has to apologize for it.

2. He talks about his huge accomplishments and then he discounts himself due to his 'identity': " I have run out of space in my office for the awards I’ve received for my work, and as a white, heterosexual, cisgender man in America, I live life on the lowest difficulty setting — with the Celebrity cheat enabled." (Why is that even important to talk about your sexuality, race, or even standing... if he's trying to do a raw and honest appeal this seems a little off to me) This topic has nothing to do with those categories. Leave it for a later addressing of remarks to discredit due to those attributes (this is an issue that can affect anyone, even Trump, [insert who you hate])

> My life is, by every objective measurement, very very good.

Clearly not if you're suffering.

3. The apology to his mother. Again why is he apologizing for what he's going for? This to me seems like: 1. an improper sharing of a message to a close family member 2. a projection of his relationship to his mother, etc. This just seems really weird with respect of the audience of the talk.

EDIT: If you want to communicate how it's affected people close to you.. tell the audience. I spoke with my mother on this. Her concerns were x,y,z. That would give the audience a template of how to do the same if they feel it's needed.

4. The ending which he's trying to become an activist. He's trying to call for political influence and then trying to endorse organizations.

At the end of this, I'm left wondering:

Why did he write this?

What does this piece mean? It goes from being very personal and revealing to impersonal and political/advocating. Why not split both of those up. Let the next question be: "How can we address that? Give the audience a way to say "I'm seeing these things.. what can I do?"

Is this a vehicle for him to talk about "change" he wants to see?

Also nice is that the illness is sufficiently accepted that a guy who works on TV can talk about it publicly (though perhaps uniquely and I suppose with some risk)