Eating 30 doughnuts in a row every morning – that’s what someone could call an addiction.It's hard to imagine what actions could possibly be more lacking in criteria for 'addiction' than that which is necessary for life.
The answer though not unfamiliar in tone, still surprised me, which is good;
By rushing straight off to rehab, Weinstein is begging for our compassion: “I know I hurt these women, but it’s an addiction! I need a second chance!” No mate, you messed up your second chance the second time you treated a young woman as your personal playthingUmm, yes, buuut, him asking for a second chance can be dismissed outside of any considerations of whether he has a pattern of symptoms which meet diagnostic criteria, or not.
Diagnosis should neither be reward nor punishment. It's not validation or negation of suffering, identity, social value etc., Its considerations are purely presence or absence of any condition. Treatment too should not be about "compassion" or lack of it, but of efficacy-that is the ability of any remedy to effectively and efficiently bring resolution or cure of said pathology.
Crimes are tried by the legal system, not by medicine.
Health must not continue down the road of becoming an alternative system of justice. Health vigilantism is deliberate politic of science-blocking, regressiveness and should be perceived as such. It views science that solves problems as political, as progressive and antithetical to its own political take. Science =knowledge, kind of like Adam 'n' Eve and the tree of knowledge.
Obviously, 'obesity' is a primary example of this.
Health is becoming a means of bypassing jurisprudence, handing out punishment. Led by the Liberal/Left, guardian hard selling the brutal punishment of gastric mutilation.
Ergo when an allegedly bad person wishes to be relieved of a health pathology, that turns into a moral problem, rather than no different than if the same person has to go to hospital with a sprained ankle [acquired by tripping over a gargantuan ego.]
12 step bunkery, as well as 'obesity' and its crusade is largely driven by a conservative polity. It's not even as if this has ever been hidden! It is about a particular take on human nature, rather than health or medicine. It makes the idea behind those political parties named such as "Christian Democrats" etc., make more sense [to me].
Yeah this alt kind of justice is supported by all comers and some of the few who oppose it or aspects of it are conservatives, but what is being supported above all is the politic of injecting a conservative/right-wing mentality into what could be deemed medical science. [You'll need a translate if you don't speak Portuguese.]
Let's refresh on the saggy, baggy criteria that is now addiction;
Behavioral addiction is a form of addiction that involves a compulsion to engage in a rewarding non-drug-related behavior – sometimes called a natural reward– despite any negative consequences to the person's physical, mental, social or financial well-being.Behavioural addiction, is not addiction it is referencing nervous or neurotic compulsion.
It’s a compulsion: he feels that if he doesn’t act on it, the sky will fall on his head or something.That's compulsion and compulsion is not addiction, though addiction could be said to be a form of compulsion. And, "rewarding non-drug-related behaviour", well?
Seeing as the above says, "type" of addiction, we'll continue on to "addiction";
Addiction is a brain disorder characterized by compulsive engagement in rewarding stimuli, despite adverse consequences.Compulsive engagement in rewarding stimuli, does Weinstein's alleged activities match that, yes or no?
Despite the involvement of a number of psychosocial factors, a biological process..... is the core pathology that drives the development and maintenance of an addiction.Biological process? "....one which is induced by repeated exposure to an addictive stimulus". Shappi's objections are foundering on falsifiability. How can you exclude anything from that which was drawn not to exclude anything anyone wants to shove under 'addiction'?
It has never occurred that enforced 12 step quackery is also bad because its very inefficacy draws a heavier reliance on things like dispersing bad feeling, potentially, up to and including that which is something to feel guilty about. I was thinking in terms of relieving unnecessary suffering and inconvenience.
If we actually stopped using hate and other negative emotions for so called public health campaigns, and sought cured addiction proper along with nervous compulsion, then each person is free to feel feelings apt to their situation, whatever that is.
If 'compassion' is the treatment or a major part of the treatment for 'addiction'/sexual compulsion then if Weinstein meets the symptomatology, he should have every expectation of receiving the treatment available, regardless of his criminal status, just like any other condition or injury to his person.
To emphasise the uselessness of faddiction to those currently looking to "food addict"- as some kind of promotion from "greedy" or whatever;
In responding to the ever-growing claims against him, the man who not so long ago was one of Tinseltown’s greatest titans has told reporters he is seeking help for sex addiction, which is an outrageous attempt to dodge the reality of his behaviour.Underneath it all, perfectly thoughtful people consider "addict" to be dodging responsibility. Do you think that represents a life time of stepping up without hesitation and saying; "I am responsible for my weight"?
If you want to see this as a deal, it's a worse one. Not only can it not dispel the taint of your definition as inherently pathological ('obese'), it adds to that, dodging responsibility, something most have never done out of choice.
Try to see through your desperation for relief, only real answers to actual problems will do. Value yourself enough to remain clear-headed enough to demand them, that's the part of the validation you're missing, its within you, it's not the gift of your tormentors.