It’s a bit like people saying they’re so “ADHD” or “triggered”. I have ADHD and cPTSD, and there are times I find these events hurtful, but mostly I feel a bit grateful. When these concepts become popularized and widespread, it increases awareness. Then, people who do know what they’re talking about offer up corrections or guidance, and those become more widespread as well. Ultimately, it’s in my best interest that people become aware of things that affect me, and the people who were going to be rude, inconsiderate or deliberately ignorant were likely to be that way anyway - but now other laypeople can tell them or offer care and save me the emotional labor so I can use it for topics that support others but don’t hit so personally.
Nobody ever says "I'm so PTSD." But ADHD, autistic, bipolar, and OCD seem to be on the table for everyone to joke about. I don't typically have thin skin, but it's ignorant, offensive, and (genuinely) triggering for people with these disorders to hear jokes that dismiss their suffering. Just a PSA to anyone reading, I know OP knows.
We as humans are always wanting the ONE ANSWER of how to put each other into neat, predictable, potentially solvable boxes. Unfortunately that's just not how humans work. As you said it's so much more nuanced than that. As a result when a theory like attachment theory gains popularity people will latch on to it, because it feels like that magical one answer. Eventually it will fade on to the next thing..i kinda picture it moving through media like a sports crowd doing the wave, hahah.
Totally agree with Kirk re: society, work and materialism. Expectations are so incredibly high these days. These pressures to look, be and live to a rarely achieved ideal are so toxic. And yes, people may appear to have it all, but are they happy, do they know themselves?, Are they living the life they want? Bring on the Star Trek future! 😊
This reminds me of a pet peeve of mine to do with parenting styles. I absolutely hate clickbaity article titles that say "what's your parenting style?" but just give the same basic run down of authoritarian, assertive, passive. And only one of those is healthy parenting. But the framing makes it seem like it's going to help me understand different parenting choices--like my husband parents slightly differently than I do, both ways are good, just different. I'd like to explore that! It's not a problem with the concept of parenting styles, its a problem with how they are being packaged by these clickbaity parenting articles.
On the phycologists prescribing meds: I’m a policing professional in the military. About a decade ago, the military started taking a harder look at medications Soldiers were prescribed, as soldiers will often see multiple providers/have multiple meds and they were investigating links between soldier suicide and behavioral health. As a Company Commander I could order “Polypharmaceutical reviews” for at risk Soldiers where a MD and pharmacist would look at their meds and interactions and make safety recommendations. Maybe American health care could look into a similar system but instead of their boss reporting, let people self-report multiple medications.
I think the sexism allegation for attachment theory is that it is used to tell mothers 1. They need to be the perfect mother and 2. They need to be home and perfectly attuned or their child is in danger. I think this is a valuable critique, I’m in parenting education and IMH and people in my field and pseudo-experts grab the research and make it seem like we need to constantly strive toward being the perfect mother or risk our child’s future mental health. Attachment theory is WAY more complicated than that. But attachment theory is most definitely used against mothers as a shaming tool. I see it every day.
I think it is an inherent human trait to use anything to support your ideology. So I’m not surprised that conservative and liberal people use attachment theory to label themselves and other or to demonize groups of people. I see it all the time even in these comment section of these videos. It’s easier than trying to understand the complexity of every human being and as a whole.
When you say the United States was more liberal even back in the old days (lol) compared to places all over the world. I have to respectfully disagree. I am a historian and an cultural anthropologist. It really just depends on what issue is being spoken about. The Ottoman Empire for example allowed women to inherit property and choose their husbands and that their wealth never transferred to their husband. Sharia gave then these rights which were established in all Muslim countries since the 7th Century. The same can not be said for the United States until way later. Way into the 20th Century even. Also Women from our culture never became their husband's property or an add on to his family (as a courtesy for popping out babies). We never took their last names, we remained identifiable by our own tribe's name or our family's name. The thing that compares to the US, is that the Ottomans practiced slavery too. It was just not based on color of skin, it was based on being conquered peoples and not Muslim and generally most slaves ere freed over time. Children were not really born into slavery like in the US. Devshirme system of slavery is quite different from the slavery in the US. So again, it really depends on the issue at hand who was/is more liberal or not. The issue we Middle Eastern, South and Central Asian, and some African people have to this day is that women are still needing to be chaperoned in "SOME" countries. Also there is the societal norm (held in place by women too by the way) having to do with very modest dress (and for men too, not just women). But this is hardly comparable to not being considered a human being and being told who to marry and having one's property usurped by their husband and his family. I rather have my brother follow me around to the bazaar while I wear a niqab, than have a husband who despised me marry me for my inheritance. And yes that sill happened in the the US in the 20th Century- people tend forget it. I mean, I do agree that we can not judge people of the past by the societal norms that we have today. I guess we have to ask people what they themself think or how they feel (for example ask Muslim women instead of the world assuming how they feel) or even think about if our ancestors were okay with their lot in life. Perhaps, because it was part of their culture and customs, they felt totally comfortable in their situation. Anything less would have been an insult or an outrage or degrading to women themselves. The problem is Americans only learn their own history and customs (I know this because I am American). They are shown basically just a one sided perspective. And they think with a modern mind too often and forget how societies evolve very slowly. They have to go out of their way to learn the history and culture of other people, where as a lot of people in other parts of the world are more insightful because others forced their culture upon them. Or they come from the former seat of massive empires that were just extremely culturally diverse due to open boarders within the empires for thousands of years. United States is almost like a giant Island. Even considering Canada who has excellent natural boarders. The borders are not actually as open as the country likes to believe so they are not exposed so much to different cultures and histories. The people who immigrate to the US are quickly assimilated because their children are being taught this one sided history that makes them believe that the United States is superior and more liberal than the rest of the world. I mean if I did not come from and immigrant family and did not study the history and culture of many different countries (from their perspective) I would definitely have the same (incorrect) view.
King... President... Sometimes there is very little difference depending on the country and era. Even most Kings had and still do have a parliament to answer to or some similar institution.
You literally just defended slavery on the basis that it's OK if their children aren't automatically enslaved. Who do you think fathered most of the slaves' children. Islam condones infidelity and r*pe as long as they were slave kafir women, I'm not buying your story that an Abrahamic religion is immune from human rights abuses, when they are the primary source of suffering for women around the world. Your smugness that Americans are ignorant of the rest of the world, because our borders are coastal, and one guy said something dumb about how we used to be more liberal is ridiculous logic.
Love learning more abt attachment theory! Thanks for the podcast 😬
As a potentially avoidant person, I appreciate the information you always provide. It gives me a greater insight.
It’s a bit like people saying they’re so “ADHD” or “triggered”.
I have ADHD and cPTSD, and there are times I find these events hurtful, but mostly I feel a bit grateful.
When these concepts become popularized and widespread, it increases awareness. Then, people who do know what they’re talking about offer up corrections or guidance, and those become more widespread as well.
Ultimately, it’s in my best interest that people become aware of things that affect me, and the people who were going to be rude, inconsiderate or deliberately ignorant were likely to be that way anyway - but now other laypeople can tell them or offer care and save me the emotional labor so I can use it for topics that support others but don’t hit so personally.
Nobody ever says "I'm so PTSD." But ADHD, autistic, bipolar, and OCD seem to be on the table for everyone to joke about. I don't typically have thin skin, but it's ignorant, offensive, and (genuinely) triggering for people with these disorders to hear jokes that dismiss their suffering. Just a PSA to anyone reading, I know OP knows.
Really appreciate the chapter's being added 🤗
We as humans are always wanting the ONE ANSWER of how to put each other into neat, predictable, potentially solvable boxes. Unfortunately that's just not how humans work. As you said it's so much more nuanced than that. As a result when a theory like attachment theory gains popularity people will latch on to it, because it feels like that magical one answer. Eventually it will fade on to the next thing..i kinda picture it moving through media like a sports crowd doing the wave, hahah.
Totally agree with Kirk re: society, work and materialism. Expectations are so incredibly high these days. These pressures to look, be and live to a rarely achieved ideal are so toxic. And yes, people may appear to have it all, but are they happy, do they know themselves?, Are they living the life they want? Bring on the Star Trek future! 😊
It's brutally hard to be happy when you're financially insecure.
This reminds me of a pet peeve of mine to do with parenting styles. I absolutely hate clickbaity article titles that say "what's your parenting style?" but just give the same basic run down of authoritarian, assertive, passive. And only one of those is healthy parenting. But the framing makes it seem like it's going to help me understand different parenting choices--like my husband parents slightly differently than I do, both ways are good, just different. I'd like to explore that! It's not a problem with the concept of parenting styles, its a problem with how they are being packaged by these clickbaity parenting articles.
On the phycologists prescribing meds: I’m a policing professional in the military. About a decade ago, the military started taking a harder look at medications Soldiers were prescribed, as soldiers will often see multiple providers/have multiple meds and they were investigating links between soldier suicide and behavioral health. As a Company Commander I could order “Polypharmaceutical reviews” for at risk Soldiers where a MD and pharmacist would look at their meds and interactions and make safety recommendations. Maybe American health care could look into a similar system but instead of their boss reporting, let people self-report multiple medications.
I think the sexism allegation for attachment theory is that it is used to tell mothers 1. They need to be the perfect mother and 2. They need to be home and perfectly attuned or their child is in danger. I think this is a valuable critique, I’m in parenting education and IMH and people in my field and pseudo-experts grab the research and make it seem like we need to constantly strive toward being the perfect mother or risk our child’s future mental health. Attachment theory is WAY more complicated than that. But attachment theory is most definitely used against mothers as a shaming tool. I see it every day.
Very insightful thank you! I really enjoyed this
Damn. I really enjoy your podcast!😁❤️
this was a rlly interesting podcast
I think it is an inherent human trait to use anything to support your ideology. So I’m not surprised that conservative and liberal people use attachment theory to label themselves and other or to demonize groups of people. I see it all the time even in these comment section of these videos. It’s easier than trying to understand the complexity of every human being and as a whole.
I’m a UX designer and would love to help with the website redesign!
Cool video bro
Carolyn, how I miss you
When you say the United States was more liberal even back in the old days (lol) compared to places all over the world. I have to respectfully disagree. I am a historian and an cultural anthropologist. It really just depends on what issue is being spoken about. The Ottoman Empire for example allowed women to inherit property and choose their husbands and that their wealth never transferred to their husband. Sharia gave then these rights which were established in all Muslim countries since the 7th Century. The same can not be said for the United States until way later. Way into the 20th Century even. Also Women from our culture never became their husband's property or an add on to his family (as a courtesy for popping out babies). We never took their last names, we remained identifiable by our own tribe's name or our family's name. The thing that compares to the US, is that the Ottomans practiced slavery too. It was just not based on color of skin, it was based on being conquered peoples and not Muslim and generally most slaves ere freed over time. Children were not really born into slavery like in the US. Devshirme system of slavery is quite different from the slavery in the US. So again, it really depends on the issue at hand who was/is more liberal or not. The issue we Middle Eastern, South and Central Asian, and some African people have to this day is that women are still needing to be chaperoned in "SOME" countries. Also there is the societal norm (held in place by women too by the way) having to do with very modest dress (and for men too, not just women). But this is hardly comparable to not being considered a human being and being told who to marry and having one's property usurped by their husband and his family. I rather have my brother follow me around to the bazaar while I wear a niqab, than have a husband who despised me marry me for my inheritance. And yes that sill happened in the the US in the 20th Century- people tend forget it. I mean, I do agree that we can not judge people of the past by the societal norms that we have today. I guess we have to ask people what they themself think or how they feel (for example ask Muslim women instead of the world assuming how they feel) or even think about if our ancestors were okay with their lot in life. Perhaps, because it was part of their culture and customs, they felt totally comfortable in their situation. Anything less would have been an insult or an outrage or degrading to women themselves. The problem is Americans only learn their own history and customs (I know this because I am American). They are shown basically just a one sided perspective. And they think with a modern mind too often and forget how societies evolve very slowly. They have to go out of their way to learn the history and culture of other people, where as a lot of people in other parts of the world are more insightful because others forced their culture upon them. Or they come from the former seat of massive empires that were just extremely culturally diverse due to open boarders within the empires for thousands of years. United States is almost like a giant Island. Even considering Canada who has excellent natural boarders. The borders are not actually as open as the country likes to believe so they are not exposed so much to different cultures and histories. The people who immigrate to the US are quickly assimilated because their children are being taught this one sided history that makes them believe that the United States is superior and more liberal than the rest of the world. I mean if I did not come from and immigrant family and did not study the history and culture of many different countries (from their perspective) I would definitely have the same (incorrect) view.
King... President... Sometimes there is very little difference depending on the country and era. Even most Kings had and still do have a parliament to answer to or some similar institution.
You literally just defended slavery on the basis that it's OK if their children aren't automatically enslaved. Who do you think fathered most of the slaves' children. Islam condones infidelity and r*pe as long as they were slave kafir women, I'm not buying your story that an Abrahamic religion is immune from human rights abuses, when they are the primary source of suffering for women around the world. Your smugness that Americans are ignorant of the rest of the world, because our borders are coastal, and one guy said something dumb about how we used to be more liberal is ridiculous logic.