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

261–270 of 304 posts

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

#261

Post by bear141 »

21asdffdsa12 wrote: post #120
bear141 wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to think that therapists were ridiculous. But after having one for six or seven years now, I realize that it’s literally just someone you pay to help you be the happiest and best version of yourself. Maybe everyone doesn’t need that, but I don’t think anyone is inherently always the best version of themselves. What’s the point of not trying to be a little better?

The digestion juices of individualistic society?

Do you mean therapy is designed to teach outcasts how to fit better into the machine? I would agree with that, and while I hate that it is partly true and reject anything like this for myself in general, individual happiness sometimes correlates with greasing your wheels to be a better subject.

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

#262

Post by lazide »

dennis_jeeves2 wrote: post #260
andersonpico wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> (especially women) It's always about that isn't it? Not getting the reaction you want, vilifying your interlocutor, then run crying with fingers in your ears screaming "lalala I didn't want it anyway" and declaring yourself a stoic is really indicative of the type of people who in the present day call themselves stoics. This whole thread is just a long-winded version of redpill discourse, people who can see past mi…

>> (especially women) >It's always about that isn't it? >How pathetic is it to still model your whole life after women while pretending to be an isle of self-reliance? Men really are lost. If I were to hazard a guess: he said it in the passing. You read into it a little too much.

Frankly, a large portion of these replies feel like some pretty clear cut projection. It’s impressive.

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

#263

Post by delichon »

michaelscott wrote: post #192
delichon wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

No, more like literal survival. In these conditions there is no mental bandwidth for things like spiritual constipation

> no mental bandwidth for things like spiritual constipation

That's a feature, not a bug. Fighting for life has more meaning and purpose that yearning for death. We're designed for it. It has only recently become atypical.

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

#264

Post by cindyllm »

delichon wrote: post #263
michaelscott wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, more like literal survival. In these conditions there is no mental bandwidth for things like spiritual constipation

> no mental bandwidth for things like spiritual constipation That's a feature, not a bug. Fighting for life has more meaning and purpose that yearning for death. We're designed for it. It has only recently become atypical.

[dead]

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

#265

Post by dennis_jeeves2 »

lazide wrote: post #262
dennis_jeeves2 wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> (especially women) >It's always about that isn't it? >How pathetic is it to still model your whole life after women while pretending to be an isle of self-reliance? Men really are lost. If I were to hazard a guess: he said it in the passing. You read into it a little too much.

Frankly, a large portion of these replies feel like some pretty clear cut projection. It’s impressive.

Yes, it's projection for sure. A large number of men appear to need validation from women. Pathetic. I guess from an evolutionary perspective it had to that way. Men who didn't need that validation worked themselves out of the gene pool.

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

#266

Post by triceratops »

watwut wrote: post #249
triceratops wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't see any vilification of women. Women value sharing and emotional vulnerability. It's how they bond with other women, who make up the bulk of their friends. Men's experiences with other men, the bulk of their friends, often make them wary of being emotionally vulnerable. Hence, naturally, a disconnect when a man and a woman are establishing a relationship.

OP blamed women for supposedly complaining that men dont open up. Men simultaneously have natural friendships with other men, but it is women fault men do not open up. Por op, women are at wrong when they want men to talk (which is outrageous ask), but also cause of men not talking. Which includes men not talking to other men, which is also fault of women.

> OP blamed women for supposedly complaining that men dont open up

Correct. And often accurate.

> it is women fault men do not open up

I don't think OP said that.

> Por op, women are at wrong when they want men to talk

Nor that.

> Which includes men not talking to other men, which is also fault of women

Nor that.

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

#267

Post by joshcsimmons »

Kostchei wrote: post #126
joshcsimmons wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is 100% not true. > An effective education requires a certain amount of torture, and it works better when self inflicted. It's the tortured artist myth. You can turn pain into art but it's not a prerequisite.

Yeh, I agree with this. My art (painting and building) comes at a much faster rate when I am content. Having time and metal space to contemplate colour scheme, being confident to start something bold: that doesn't happen if I am tired, preoccupied or depressed

Time for harvest and a separate time for planting.

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

#268

Post by triceratops »

watwut wrote: post #251
zozbot234 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Women value sharing and emotional vulnerability, but typically not from the males in their lives. There is a significant disconnect between average women and genuine male emotions, and males are expected to show emotional resilience and self-control first and foremost precisely to bridge that gap and then allow the 'sharing' to occur unimpeded, though still in a somewhat controlled way.

Are men expected to do so? Male anger is more tolerated then female anger. Also, if you look at men who are popular or get far, they are super emotional - Trump, Musk, Tate heck even Vance and Hengensberg. Emotions driven males are cultural and political leaders literally now.

> Male anger is more tolerated then female anger

That's only one emotion. What about all the rest?

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

#269

Post by bdangubic »

watwut wrote: post #251
zozbot234 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Women value sharing and emotional vulnerability, but typically not from the males in their lives. There is a significant disconnect between average women and genuine male emotions, and males are expected to show emotional resilience and self-control first and foremost precisely to bridge that gap and then allow the 'sharing' to occur unimpeded, though still in a somewhat controlled way.

Are men expected to do so? Male anger is more tolerated then female anger. Also, if you look at men who are popular or get far, they are super emotional - Trump, Musk, Tate heck even Vance and Hengensberg. Emotions driven males are cultural and political leaders literally now.

this is the general insanity of today’s world, today’s leaders would be laughed at as weakest of the weak in vast majority of human history, just absolute weakest men imaginable are “leaders” now…

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

#270

Post by erikerikson »

mewpmewp2 wrote: post #240
erikerikson wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems to me (and clearly I could be wrong) that you really want to express certain sentiments. Another way to say it is that you seem to be engaging in motivated arguing. Said with the more standard idiom, that you have "an axe to grind".

I am honestly just curious what people think, it is an interesting topic. I have heard off and on throughout my life this idea about being vulnerable. I was never fully certain what people meant by that. Even in this thread it seems people think of it differently, but no one really goes into details to clarify. E.g. what are some concrete examples of what would make a man be vulnerable?

In my opinion and in this context the common striped-down-to-its-consistent-core usage is taking the actions that expose one's inner/core emotional space/thoughts/feelings. FWIW I would agree that this doesn't have to be a true vulnerability in the dictionary or any other sense. I think many people talk past each other a lot without knowing it with this word. There is a lot of diversity in specific semantics so good question. The idea that one is vulnerable when one is known seems to encode the victim mindset many get stuck in but that's reality for many. Even when I yack at my therapists for years they still only learn small slivers of my whole person so certainly the broader being is not so vulnerable by sharing just little moments. I think openness is true strength (obvious caveats for secrets like passwords/PINs/et cetera. The contradicting position seems to be that by withholding and looking for opening for attack you position yourself for "winning". In the meantime, it seems to me, you lock in isolation and losing, missing your opportunity to connect, learn, and grow increasing your vulnerability over time. Busy night, rushed through writing so hopefully not too many errors or stupid thoughts.

[edit: Giving up control seems to be a common feature. Maybe more simply being willing to cooperate when your interactant could defect.]

Post reply on HN