this post was submitted on 05 Apr 2024
291 points (93.7% liked)
People Twitter
5220 readers
2126 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a tweet or similar
- No bullying or international politcs
- Be excellent to each other.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I get what you're (poorly) trying to say, but in the context of this thread - an old man lighting himself on fire during the eviction - we can safely assume his mental state is being largely influenced by the eviction.
It's pretty ridiculous to assert that self immolation is exclusively a mental health situation that is entirely insulated from the outside world, as though mental health and a person's environment are mutually exclusive and have absolutely 0 affect on each other.
It's a very convenient way of reducing problems to an individual level to completely avoid the root causes.
Maybe you are just trying to be some data purist who believes self immolation can only be done by someone in a mental health crisis - and mental health crises are exclusively internal and cannot be tied to external circumstances??
For future reference, lighting yourself on fire while actively protesting war, or actively being evicted probably has more to do with the realities of war and housing crises, and less to do with forgetting breathing exercises and lacking cognitive behaviour therapy strategies.
Someone doesn't just suddenly light themselves on fire because of either of these catalysts, without having any underlying mental health struggles that went untreated or simply were brought to a head. Feel free to break that down and correlate that any way you want to the state of the world, their environment, etc, if out of avoidance or because it's easier and more satisfying to say, "this one thing had this outcome!"
An event can force a mental health crisis. You're wrong if you believe otherwise.
You're trying to say "everyone who lights themselves on fire is having a mental health crisis" - this is true.
You're also saying "if a common event like eviction results in self immolation it's entirely the fault of mental health crisis and not eviction, because not everyone evicted self immolates" - this is false.
You're intentionally reversing cause and effect, when it's obviously wrong.
It's a weird thing - you getting your rocks off acting willfully ignorant and belligerent over some arbitrary belief that events can't be responsible for a mental health crises if the reaction isn't typical.
Why do you insist it is so important that everyone you interact with in this thread believes only mental health crisis can carry the blame?
Why is it not possible for someone who is being evicted to light themselves on fire because they are being evicted?
What makes this exclusively a mental health issue, and not a housing crisis issue?
Which would be more effective at stopping self immolations during eviction - affordable housing preventing eviction but no mental health support? Or mental health support prior to eviction, but the individual will still be homeless?
Which outcome is better? If the old man didn't self immolate, but instead became homeless? Or if the old man was never worried about losing shelter because they would never lose shelter?