RE: ADDICTS

RE: ADDICTS (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

tweakabelle -> RE: ADDICTS (12/27/2013 5:58:53 PM)
One thing that has emerged in this thread is the way the term 'addict' is understood. For many people, this term conjures up a threatening desperate criminal heroin addicted figure, whose sole and amoral concern is their next shot. This cliched view neglects to consider that most addicts lives what seem to be relatively normal lives - the numbers of gambling/alcohol addicts are many times greater than the numbers of heroin addicts. Often we only get to see the 'secret' addictions of gamblers, drinkers etc when their lives disintegrate completely. Even then my feeling is that most people see gambling/alcohol addicts quite differently (and more sympathetically) to the cliched figure of the 'heroin addict' sketched above. Gambling/alcohol addicts tend to be viewed as 'victims' of their addictions whereas the heroin addict is seen as responsible for their own choices. Unlike the heroin addict, the object of their addictions is legal, and so their addictions are not seen as challenges to prevailing moral/legal orders. Viewed from a treatment perspective, a radically different picture emerges. The addiction is seen as the problem, the particular substance/behaviour is seen as secondary. These divergent approaches can have very real effects when it comes to legal/funding/decisions. This suggests that society can have an important role in the treatment of addicted individuals and may even have a partial role in producing those individuals. Is addiction purely a consequence of personal choices? Do addicts hold total responsibility for their addictions? Is there a social dimension to addiction? If so what effect should this realisation have on how addictions are understood and treated?

vincentML -> RE: ADDICTS (12/28/2013 10:01:53 AM)
quote: Your willingness to descend to insulting and infantilizing addicts apparently knows no bounds. When they fail, "it is not because of lack of skillful means," a doctrine you recite without a shred of evidence, and when they succeed they (only) "think" they have quit by their own will, poor fools. Somehow I don't think that's a very helpful attitude, Vincent. I don't recall the context in which I remarked on 'skillful means.' I don't think the term was mine originally; I may have been responding to somebody else using the term. As I recall it was Kana who pointed out that AA urges addicts to seek a higher power. Is that what you mean by "infantilization?" My consistent points have been that the cause of addiction may be due to prenatal or early childhood stress environments; that recovery is extremely difficult because of brain damage (a disease of the brain) and that blaming addicts for a lack of responsibility or some vague personal "weakness" is a hindrance to providing successful treatment to the millions who go untreated. Tweakabelle covered that last point well in her reply to you. Although, I originally did not make the argument about the need for skillful means maybe I was wrong in whatever I implied. Maybe they do lack skillful means. Your citation of success with MM seems to support that addicts need to be taught strategies: "MBRP offers skills in cognitive-behavioral relapse prevention integrated with mindfulness meditation." I am unclear about what you are getting at here, Kirata. If you are saying the skillful means are available to them then I was right in saying if they fail it is not for lack of skillful means. Their failure may be because their intention is subverted by distorted brain chemistry.

vincentML -> RE: ADDICTS (12/28/2013 10:03:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle One thing that has emerged in this thread is the way the term 'addict' is understood. For many people, this term conjures up a threatening desperate criminal heroin addicted figure, whose sole and amoral concern is their next shot. This cliched view neglects to consider that most addicts lives what seem to be relatively normal lives - the numbers of gambling/alcohol addicts are many times greater than the numbers of heroin addicts. Often we only get to see the 'secret' addictions of gamblers, drinkers etc when their lives disintegrate completely. Even then my feeling is that most people see gambling/alcohol addicts quite differently (and more sympathetically) to the cliched figure of the 'heroin addict' sketched above. Gambling/alcohol addicts tend to be viewed as 'victims' of their addictions whereas the heroin addict is seen as responsible for their own choices. Unlike the heroin addict, the object of their addictions is legal, and so their addictions are not seen as challenges to prevailing moral/legal orders. Viewed from a treatment perspective, a radically different picture emerges. The addiction is seen as the problem, the particular substance/behaviour is seen as secondary. These divergent approaches can have very real effects when it comes to legal/funding/decisions. This suggests that society can have an important role in the treatment of addicted individuals and may even have a partial role in producing those individuals. Is addiction purely a consequence of personal choices? Do addicts hold total responsibility for their addictions? Is there a social dimension to addiction? If so what effect should this realisation have on how addictions are understood and treated? Thank you for making these points [:)]

Charles6682 -> RE: ADDICTS (12/30/2013 1:18:05 PM)
One thing I would like to see is more "recovery" group's within the Lifestyle. AA has different type's of group's, for all different people from all walk's of life. I know there are a few group's out there but I hope more meeting's follow at some point and it catch's on. That's just my opinion. From this thread here and from other people I've talked with, addict's come from all walk's of life and clearly some right here in the "fetish lifestyle". Is addiction a disease or is it more influenced by social surrounding? I think its a matter of both. Each is probably true for some people and both for other's. In the end, the addict who is still suffering probably doesn't care about that at that moment. Maybe at a later time. And the science is there for addiction as well.

vincentML -> RE: ADDICTS (12/30/2013 3:37:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Charles6682 One thing I would like to see is more "recovery" group's within the Lifestyle. AA has different type's of group's, for all different people from all walk's of life. I know there are a few group's out there but I hope more meeting's follow at some point and it catch's on. That's just my opinion. From this thread here and from other people I've talked with, addict's come from all walk's of life and clearly some right here in the "fetish lifestyle". Is addiction a disease or is it more influenced by social surrounding? I think its a matter of both. Each is probably true for some people and both for other's. In the end, the addict who is still suffering probably doesn't care about that at that moment. Maybe at a later time. And the science is there for addiction as well. Charles, when I used the term 'disease of the brain' I did not mean some kind of infectious disease involving a pathogen. I was using the term 'disease' more loosely to indicate alterations to the brain from using the intoxicant. Just wish to make that distinction clear to you. As for people in this lifestyle, sure there are substance addicts and behavioral addicts like workaholics, shopaholics, addicted gamblers, and so on. It would not surprise me to learn that a fetish is an addiction. If that is true there are quite a hellova lot of addicts in the lifestyle. Maybe the "lifestyle" is an addiction. Anyone have any thoughts on that?

Charles6682 -> RE: ADDICTS (12/30/2013 4:16:18 PM)
I know what you mean by "disease" of the brain. As for fetish being an addiction, of course fetish and kink's can become an addiction. Can the "lifestyle" itself become an addiction? I don't see why not? The DSM gives some clear examples on this, which the DSM was recently updated back in May of 2013. The trick is, like the alcoholic, would people in the "lifestyle" even admit that the fetish lifestyle can become an addiction or is it just a way of life? If everything is going good, then why someone want to stop something that make's them feel good? It's the consequences that makes the difference and whether they are good or bad consequences. quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: ORIGINAL: Charles6682 One thing I would like to see is more "recovery" group's within the Lifestyle. AA has different type's of group's, for all different people from all walk's of life. I know there are a few group's out there but I hope more meeting's follow at some point and it catch's on. That's just my opinion. From this thread here and from other people I've talked with, addict's come from all walk's of life and clearly some right here in the "fetish lifestyle". Is addiction a disease or is it more influenced by social surrounding? I think its a matter of both. Each is probably true for some people and both for other's. In the end, the addict who is still suffering probably doesn't care about that at that moment. Maybe at a later time. And the science is there for addiction as well. Charles, when I used the term 'disease of the brain' I did not mean some kind of infectious disease involving a pathogen. I was using the term 'disease' more loosely to indicate alterations to the brain from using the intoxicant. Just wish to make that distinction clear to you. As for people in this lifestyle, sure there are substance addicts and behavioral addicts like workaholics, shopaholics, addicted gamblers, and so on. It would not surprise me to learn that a fetish is an addiction. If that is true there are quite a hellova lot of addicts in the lifestyle. Maybe the "lifestyle" is an addiction. Anyone have any thoughts on that?

vincentML -> RE: ADDICTS (12/31/2013 10:47:20 AM)
quote: I know what you mean by "disease" of the brain. As for fetish being an addiction, of course fetish and kink's can become an addiction. Can the "lifestyle" itself become an addiction? I don't see why not? The DSM gives some clear examples on this, which the DSM was recently updated back in May of 2013. The trick is, like the alcoholic, would people in the "lifestyle" even admit that the fetish lifestyle can become an addiction or is it just a way of life? If everything is going good, then why someone want to stop something that make's them feel good? It's the consequences that makes the difference and whether they are good or bad consequences. Good points [:)]

Page: << < prev 13 14 15 16 [17]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875