Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Arthur Conan Doyle explored men’s mental health through Sherlock Holmes

theconversation.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 304 posts

Re: Arthur Conan Doyle explored men’s mental health through Sherlock Holmes

#171

Post by Joeboy »

mewpmewp2 wrote: post #165
Joeboy wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I was at school (and in the 20th century generally) admitting to anything outside traditional masculinity / heterosexuality made you vulnerable to physical / verbal attack. Which remains the case for a lot of people in the 21st century. If they want to be loud and proud then good for them, but I can understand it if they prefer to keep it quiet. Whereas, at least around me, now, I think you can come out as gay w…

Yeah, I think the 2nd type of relationship is much worse than no relationship, I'd say the problem there wouldn't be with someone being vulnerable, it's the problem with the relationship... Yeah, during school it's difficult since you are forced together with potentially toxic people. As an adult you can choose at least in personal life and to an extent workplace, although sometimes workplace can also be difficult to…

The thing is, what you want is specifically a relationship where you are not vulnerable. If you're not worried about the consequences of the things you say, there's no actual vulnerability. You're just adapting to a safe situation. In which case good for you and you partner.

Re: Arthur Conan Doyle explored men’s mental health through Sherlock Holmes

#172

Post by ompogUe »

JKCalhoun wrote: post #29

Not from Doyle, but the film, "The Seven-Per-Cent Solution", presents Holmes as very vulnerable. Especially given the amazing cast, it is an excellent portrayal. That Holmes would encounter Sigmund Freud seemed to me at the time as a wild use of artistic license. Since then though I have come to believe that there were a lot fewer people on the Earth in general than I could really appreciate at the time, and some of…

One of the Rathbone/Bruce films in the 40s has Holmes chasing Nazi's for some microfilm. I understand "supporting the fighting spirit" of the times, but still find it difficult to reconcile.

Re: Arthur Conan Doyle explored men’s mental health through Sherlock Holmes

#173

Post by pxc »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #158
n4r9 wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is it different to having a personal trainer for your physical fitness?

In theory, at one point people will be done with therapy. I think a better analogy is a physical therapist; you go to one because of an injury. A personal trainer is for boosting your physical health / performance. For mental health, you'd get a coach, training, or read one of many self-help books, not a therapist.

There are multiple kinds of psychological counseling. Some "supportive therapy" really is more of an ongoing thing, like having a personal trainer. Some kinds of psychological therapy always aim to have a terminus, like physical therapy.

Re: Arthur Conan Doyle explored men’s mental health through Sherlock Holmes

#174

Post by FireBeyond »

tossandthrow wrote: post #2

> One of those taboo subjects was male vulnerability and mental health problems. (emphasis is mine) I would argue that still in 2025 this is an extreme and institutionalized taboo.

Right. Even here in HN I was arguing with someone who has the hot take that “more conservative leaning men have less mental health issues than liberal and left leaning men and I don’t think we do enough to think about why exactly that might be and what those liberal men could do differently”, and got very angry when I suggested that maybe the reason for that was that conservative men were less likely to seek help or treatment or to even acknowledge, instead of outright deny, any mental health challenges, for fear of anything from seeming weak to being ostracized.

Re: Arthur Conan Doyle explored men’s mental health through Sherlock Holmes

#175

Post by pxc »

koakuma-chan wrote: post #118
tossandthrow wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In all fairness, the internet is for many people a near 100% part of their life. Especially for people working remotely without a family.

HN is like 70% of my life.

I also spend what feels to me like a lot of time here. I like it, despite its problems. But HN isn't good enough to deserve to be 70% of anyone's life. :(

Re: Arthur Conan Doyle explored men’s mental health through Sherlock Holmes

#176

Post by steveylang »

1dom wrote: post #141
pxc wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Trauma" ultimately just means "severe injury" or something like that, doesn't it? We take it for granted that virtually no one will make it through life without ever sustaining a serious or enduring physical injury. Why is it so implausible to say that practically everyone can expect to eventually have to deal with at least one significant mental injury, too?

I think the reason why mental health is more public these days is because it wasn't talked about and addressed. To extend you physical injury analogy: yes, people get physically injured. People break legs, and because of the focus and progress on physical injuries, they wear a cast for a few weeks, and then - for all practical intents and purposes - the injury never happened. Because the same attention wasn't applied…

Because historically we haven't handled mental injuries as well as the physical ones. I don't completely disagree with your original points. I think depth, nuance, and accuracy of the conversation matters most of all. There is plenty of superficial, influencer-level chatter in both realms.

Re: Arthur Conan Doyle explored men’s mental health through Sherlock Holmes

#177

Post by delichon »

paxys wrote: post #170
delichon wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The most miserable people I've known were rich people's children. Depression is more about the lack of hope than money.

You probably don't know very many poor people then, because poverty, food insecurity, physical insecurity, homelessness, job loss are all very common depression triggers. It's just that these cases don't make the front page of newspapers at the same rate as celebrities committing suicide.

The ones I knew weren't celebrities, they were friendless and isolated and consumed with self disgust.

Poor people trapped in unemployment have something in common with rich kids trapped in lethargy. A kind of spiritual constipation.

Re: Arthur Conan Doyle explored men’s mental health through Sherlock Holmes

#178

Post by lazide »

squigz wrote: post #47
akimbostrawman wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An actual adult realizes the real world differences between "should not" and "will not".

I'm not sure what this is trying to say? Can you elaborate please?

One is ‘I wish’. The other is ‘won’t happen’.

Re: Arthur Conan Doyle explored men’s mental health through Sherlock Holmes

#179

Post by scubbo »

pxc wrote: post #112
apples_oranges wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I neither like the taboo nor the opposite. Too much psychology talk in every day life, everyone is traumatised and has unresolved issues etc. That may be, but I wish we would handle it all more privately...

"Trauma" ultimately just means "severe injury" or something like that, doesn't it? We take it for granted that virtually no one will make it through life without ever sustaining a serious or enduring physical injury. Why is it so implausible to say that practically everyone can expect to eventually have to deal with at least one significant mental injury, too?

I'd say that significant mental injury is _far_ more likely than physical.

Re: Arthur Conan Doyle explored men’s mental health through Sherlock Holmes

#180

Post by lazide »

podgorniy wrote: post #101
boh wrote: post #79

We live in a culture of transparency where you are rewarded for confessing your weaknesses. At the time people tackled their issues outside of print, outside of public discourse. Just because there's no record of a person's private life doesn't mean it was taboo. It's just not for you to know about.

> We live in a culture of transparency where you are rewarded for confessing your weaknesses. Where exactly do you observe this?

I suspect they are talking about pop culture which is awash with drama.

But it always has been, just less self-important/self-reporting drama (x is getting divorced because they told us!), and more ‘we just found out x celebrity is getting divorced’.

Post reply on HN