In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set || First feminist blog on the internet

Irrational, Hysterical and Angry

I decided to dedicate this post to the code words typically attributed to feminists.  Of course you cannot point out social injustice without being angry, irrational, and hysterical.  All logical people naturally exist as automatons, going through their days parroting the status quo. Only an unbalanced person would even begin to think that the system we live under could possibly be unfair.  What do you mean all men operate with gender privilege? In fact even pointing out that calling a feminist angry, irrational, and hysterical is sexist, is enough to further entrench the views of some.

Angry: When aimed at a black female such as myself this is never a neutral comment.  The angry black woman is a social construction that is used to uphold  racial, and gender hierarchy.   In a wider gender discourse labeling someone as angry is an attempt at silencing, and dismissing. Are there issues in this world worth being angry about..yes, but does that mean that we live a life filled with anger,…no.  Even if we admit to anger, why is this a bad thing?  When I read in the newspaper about women being murdered, raped and abused, would it make me a better person if I just put a smile on my face, and said c’est la vie?  Perhaps I should consult with my doctor, and become yet another one of those over medicated Prozac twits, so that I can dull my feelings of genuine outrage every time women are treated like disposable bodies without any value.  How can I not be thrilled knowing that women still make less than men, are increasingly denied access to birth control, and that women are unnecessarily being castrated by doctors, who believe that if you are past child bearing age, your uterus is the equivalent of a spare tire.

Irrational: This is another one of my favorite taunts.  The world just works this way, and if you cannot see that, then you are irrational.   Ask yourself do the majority of people think like you?  If the answer is no, then you must be irrational.  Lets just follow this ridiculous argument to its irrational conclusion, with an example that is easy to relate to.  Before the civil rights movement in the United States many people felt that segregation was a good thing. Many people felt that it was right to treat blacks as inferior based solely on the color of our skin.  So here is my question, rational thinkers, was segregation right because the majority of people felt that it was right?  Was slavery right, because the majority of people felt that it was not immoral to own a human being?  Believe it or not, there is such a thing as the tyranny of the majority, and just because a vast number of people believe that a situation is correct, does not mean that it is not abusive, or harmful to another. But what would I know, I’m just another one of those irrational feminists.

Hysterical:  This is another way of saying that even though an injustice is happening it really isn’t all that bad. There, there dear… You are just over reacting. No we don’t have a global rape culture, even though the United Nations finally made it a war crime.  You see when feminists talk it is just irritating noise, useless fodder without any relation to reality…in a word hysterical.  We hysterical women go on about rape and sexual harassment, even though as an individual you may fall into the lucky 10% that manages to live without ever being raped, or harassed sexually. Of course it is hysterical for us to be so concerned with that 90%  figure, when rational and happy people would fixate on the 10% figure. You hysterical feminists go on as though all men are rapists or are not tampered with sexually (please ignore the differential in experience between men and women to validate the aforementioned commentary)  It is not as if we are entitled to bodily integrity because everyone knows, that female bodies are for male consumption. In fact we won’t ever get things right until we start thinking from a patriarchal point of view.  You see the world greatest thinkers were men, and so we should never expect anything worth while to come from the mind of an hysterical, angry, irrational female. Don’t even deny it, because then you will be hysterical and irrational. Facts, are facts and we should never ever make a situation larger than it is. Our problem is that we are not correctly ciphering information from a male perspective. Ahhh…it occurs to me perhaps the problem is that we are too focused on our needs. I know that women do the majority of the housekeeping, child rearing, and elder care, but we can do more damn it. Men deserve more comfort than they are currently receiving. Perhaps if we took the time to wash the royal penis that is currently trying to rule our lives daily, we would  learn through humility that being hysterical, irrational and angry is counter to the needs of the important half of humanity.

Despite the taunts, and the jeers I refuse to submit my will to another.  My power is precious, and it will not be used to maintain a system that is built upon oppressing women and POC.  Yeah I know that makes me an ‘unwoman’, an anathema even, but looking in the mirror and liking who I am as a person is worth something to me.  It would certainly be safer and easier for me to identify with my oppressors, but that would mean a life devoid of agency and autonomy. So call me your worst, deny your gender privilege, but I will live my life on my terms and by so doing honor the spirit of my foremothers, who died so that I could have the right to declare myself an independent autonomous woman.


117 thoughts on Irrational, Hysterical and Angry

  1. I understand the point you’re trying to make with the Prozac comment, but please remember that many women make an educated choice to take antidepressants and are not “over medicated Prozac twits” who can’t feel outrage at sexism.

  2. When I wrote over medicated Prozac twits it was not aimed at people suffering from true mental illness…the idea is that we live in an over medicated society and people often take medication that they don’t need because the medical establishment profits from our paranoia. It goes without saying that someone suffering from a true illness is exempt from commentary such as this.

  3. You make some great points… Also, it’s important to note that who has traditionally gotten to construct academic, medical, and legal concepts of “rationality” — the privileged.

    However, as a feminist who has taken anti-depressents and is stillplenty “angry,” “irrational,” and “hysterical” about social injustice, I take offense to your Prozac comment. I’m sure it was a joke, but please remember that anti-depressants are not something that people take just to feel perky or forget about their problems — they are to correct a chemical imbalance that severely impacts one’s life. Being on anti-depressants is what allows many people such as myself to have the necessary energy and concern for the world to be activists.

  4. One other thing that I thought I should add…I recognize depression as a real illness but feel the need to question why it seems to marketed as a womans disease. When you look at advertisements in the media it is almost always aimed at women. My point being that there is a difference between actually being ill and internalizing illness because someone has told you that you are sick.

  5. I think it’s because men aren’t supposed to admit we’re depressed, or sad at all – the only acceptable negative emotion for us is rage, it would seem, in the same sort of way that women can’t ever be angry because that’s just unfeminine.

  6. I think more women are depressed than men because it is depressing to live as a woman in this world.

  7. LOL re “wash the royal penis!” Hey, if more of them did that for themselves, it would work out much better for everyone.

    Great point about how words as well as actions are used to keep women, and feminists, in our place.

    On the prozac thing — I know what you meant. When you get controversial (which is what makes your writing so interesting), it’s more necessary to qualify things you wouldn’t have to qualify in person with someone who knows you. Yeah, doctors overprescribe, and and many people overindulge in medical fixes as an escape. Yet a bunch of others, who aren’t per se “sick,” benefit from conservatively dosed antidepressants or anti anxiety meds on either a short term or long term level, without dulling essential emotions or hiding from working through them. I know you meant the former.

  8. Irrational, Hysterical and Angry…

    This is why I almost threw a party last week after an episode of “Race for the White House” that Rachel Maddow hosted.

    A caller asked whether B. Obama would be unable to choose HRC because of “tension” between HRC and M. Obama. The men, include some I would have called progressive either took the comment seriously or made some sexist joke. But Maddow didn’t laugh it off and let it go…she pressed the issue and a female panelist actually called the idea SEXIST.

    Right there…on network news…in front of the very men who were buying the sexism.

    And Not just a “she can’t be president” or “OMGZ she has teh CLEAVAGE!!@@!”…but the idea that women are unable to THINK as well as men.

    Yes, I realize that the world is a sad place when I feel like calling sexism what is is requires a celebration…but there it is…I’ll take the scraps I’m given.

  9. Take it from someone who knows his nootrophics. We *are* overmedicated. Sometimes rather seriously so. It’s just just the overmedication, but the misallocation of medication. Drugs are pushed towards

    a) The people who have money
    b) The people we want to control easier–the politically powerless like children or homeless or people in various forms of custody, etc, etc, etc.

    Drugs like Ritalin are massively overprescribed. However, it should be an OTC drug. Get the paradox? Legal methamphetamines are almost totally geared for control in various forms. Pharms want high profits for a very simple drug, schools and parents want docile children. However, Ritalin is not easily available for people and activities in which it would help. From all nighters in school, to long drives, or any other activity in which extra focus would help.

    I believe depression should be treated, and it should be treated absolutely as seriously as heart disease or any other long term degenerative condition. It’s something that wears your body down and shortens life without the need for suicide. Thing is, anti-depression, again is both over-and-underprescribed. No poor person gets anti-depressants. Nobody in prison gets anti-depressants, even though probably a very large number could benefit from them. People who are in certain kind of macho occupations do not get anti-depressants when they should. But for many middle class and wealthier women? Yes. Far more than they should. I don’t doubt many of the benefits from antidepressants, but many are taking it when they probably shouldn’t, and many are taking it in liu of better treatments, mostly because such things are much more expensive. *All* long term psychiatric drugs should be taken with a therapist in tow, doing actual therapy that reduces the need for or complements these drugs. A clinically depressed person should not be taking antidepressant without actual therapy. Depression is NOT treatable by pills alone, except for truly serious chemical malfunctions (and even then, it’s a treatment, not a restoration of norms).

    As a final sentiment…

    *Do* take Kava for mild situational depression, and *definitly* take Kava if you’re taking Paxil for anxiety disorders. There is a reason that the pharms did a hit job on Kava about a decade ago. Toxic effects is from carelessly prepared Kava (including aboveground plant material), which is really freaking rare. Note that I’m not telling you to replace an antidepressant like Prozac with Kava, but I’m just saying that Kava can replace Paxil in many cases, and good for treating small cases of depression–and depression should *always* be dealt with, even small cases, because much of what depression is about is digging that hole deeper and deeper, making you isolate youself, saying hurtful things, etc. Small cases can be damaging as well!

    St John’s Wort is good for mild cases of long term depression.

    In all cases, if you get repeated bouts of blues, or you get into that longer dark stuff, talk to a therapist. Maybe you need to make long term changes in your behavior. Change jobs, start exercising more, take up yoga or tai chi, eat differently, socialise more…A therapist can help you figure out triggers, and help you think and live *around* the broken parts of your head.

  10. I think when talking about code words its important to use the actual denotative meanings in order to refute the connotations that the words have taken on. Irrational is not a synonym for emotional or passionate, angry does not automatically imply that someone is incorrect, and hysteria is an outdated term for a culturally based syndrome that simply isn’t seen anymore. Examining the roots and implications of these code words is valuable, but an immediate way to combat them would seem to be to force people to actually say what they mean.

    Brown Shoes: Its not just that men aren’t supposed to admit when we’re depressed, it’s that the diagnostic criteria are written essentially with women in mind. Men and women, because of socialization and cultural expectations, tend to have slightly different expressions of depression. The DSM criteria for a depressive episode is tilted in such a way that it is much easier for a woman to fit them than a man.

  11. Perhaps I should consult with my doctor, and become yet another one of those over medicated Prozac twits, so that I can dull my feelings of genuine outrage every time women are treated like disposable bodies without any value.

    Renee, I love your writing, but I take issue with this statement. I take anti-anxiety meds, without which I literally could not function. They don’t dull my feelings – they make me a productive member of society. I am still outraged on a frequent basis, and frankly, my entire career (I’m a civil rights lawyer) is based on that outrage and channeling it toward social change.

    Your language makes me think that you have dismissed those of us who take psychiatric meds as insufficiently committed to social justice. I hope I’m reading you wrong.

  12. Perhaps I should consult with my doctor, and become yet another one of those over medicated Prozac twits, so that I can dull my feelings of genuine outrage every time women are treated like disposable bodies without any value.

    No, no, no. Prozac doesn’t work like that. You’re supposed to watch reality television to get the effect you’re talking about. And obsess over shoes.

  13. she pressed the issue and a female panelist actually called the idea SEXIST.

    I didn’t see the program you’re referring to, so maybe I’m missing some key aspect of tone or whatnot, but how on Earth is it “sexist” to suggest that there’s tension between Obama and Clinton? They were at each others’ throats for four months. Of course there’s probably still lingering tension between the two.

  14. I didn’t see the program you’re referring to, so maybe I’m missing some key aspect of tone or whatnot, but how on Earth is it “sexist” to suggest that there’s tension between Obama and Clinton? They were at each others’ throats for four months. Of course there’s probably still lingering tension between the two.

    Between *Barack* Obama and Hillary Clinton, sure, that would make sense. The segment dealt with *Michelle* Obama and HRC being at each other’s throats and that this would prevent Barack Obama from offering the veep spot to Hillary Clinton.

    No one suggests that *Bill* Clinton and Barack Obama might catfight with other as a reason why Barack Obama wouldn’t offer Hillary Clinton the veep spot, so why would anyone suggest that Barack would do the reasonable, equitable thing if not for his wife and HRC having that totally irrational inter-woman hostility thing going on? It’s fucking ridiculous. It totally does suggest that a. Barack Obama is a reasonable man but a “pussy” because he listens to his wife b. Michelle Obama is irrational and angry c. so is Hillary Clinton d. and anyway, two women have an extra-special hate for each other even if one of the women was in fact competing *with* the other woman’s husband.

    Actually, Bill trying to dickfight with Barack would, based on his observed behavior, be a reasonable explanation why Barack would not give Hillary the veep spot. Michelle trying to catfight with Hillary makes no goddamn sense given that if we have seen a spouse taking the campaign and the opposition irrationally personally, it would be Bill and not Michelle. But Bill wanting to dickfight Barack does not fit into our stereotypical view of male and female politicians (though on the other hand it absolutely does fit most people’s anecdotal perception of *men*.)

  15. When I wrote over medicated Prozac twits it was not aimed at people suffering from true mental illness…the idea is that we live in an over medicated society and people often take medication that they don’t need because the medical establishment profits from our paranoia. It goes without saying that someone suffering from a true illness is exempt from commentary such as this.

    Um, that’s still not really okay.

    How come the trope that “Americans are overmedicated” only really comes up when people are talking about mental illness? Why is it that those who are not dealing with mental illness feel qualified to make assumptions about whether or not someone’s diagnosis is legitimate, or whether they are just one of the “overmedicated Prozac twits”. Wouldn’t that be between that person and their doctor?

    It’s like MRAs and “men get raped too”. If you’ve ever been prescribed medication for mental illness, you’ll probably notice that pretty much every time mental illness comes up, someone starts to rail against “overmedicated Prozac twits”.

    It means that people like me are constantly put in the position of defending whether or not our illnesses are legitimate. It’s not right that that happens – and definitely not cool to see that kind of language on a feminist site.

    It kinda feels like being called “hysterical”.

  16. in general i too liked the blog post. however, i’m one of those middle-class women who takes anti-depressants because, well, i can’t function without them. i’ve been in and out of therapy for decades, and you know what? there’s only so much that therapy can do when your brain chemistry is out of whack. it’s very easy to armchair quarterback another person’s life, though.

    that said, i have to honestloy say that i do better, in terms of being effective at promoting social justice, when i’m *not* angry. the initial motivation to action may stem from anger, but i don’t buy the notion that if one isn’t angry, one isn’t being helpful. not what you said exactly, renee, but something i’ve read elsewhere on feminist blogs.

    i think the role of anger in feminism and activism is an excellent discussion though. i’m so glad that you brought it up.

  17. How come the trope that “Americans are overmedicated” only really comes up when people are talking about mental illness?
    Actually it comes up alot with antibiotics as well. In this case the over medication is targeted at women. Do you remember the last anti-depressant commercial you saw that stared a man?

    It means that people like me are constantly put in the position of defending whether or not our illnesses are legitimate
    Defending illness is standard, that is why doctors function as gatekeepers.

    Your language makes me think that you have dismissed those of us who take psychiatric meds as insufficiently committed to social justice. I hope I’m reading you wrong.
    Rachel of course it is not my desire to minimize anyone’s suffering. I think that people believe that because I made that statement that I could not have possibly suffered with depression myself, and that is not the case. I would not have been able to survive my postpartum depression without it. What I am saying is that yes there are those of us who suffer or have suffered from a legitimate illness but we should also recognize that there are some that are medicated simply because they are women and have been constructed as naturally irritational, hysterical or angry. We put so much trust in doctors as gatekeepers that we never question the impact that social construction has on how they practice medicine. For women this can be particularly problematic, as it leads to things like over medication (mothers little helpers anyone) or the more drastic unnecessary hysterectomies. When I refer to someone as an over medicated prozac twit, it means a person who is not ill or has not stopped to question why this medication is even prescribed for her. Someone who has thought it all out or is clearly ill would not fit under the category that I have described.
    Finally if people take the time to read the whole post what should be clear is that it is aimed at stereotypes that are harmful to women. Some of the misunderstanding has to do with the transference of the written word and not knowing me on a more intimate level. I will state unequivocally I am dedicated to uplifting women and as such if this post caused offense, I am sorry. My intent was to point out the ways in which stereotypes used to discipline us are harmful.

  18. Wow, between this post and the comments in the one on ableist language…wow.

    I’m starting to feel like Feministe is not the place for those of us who are mentally ill.

    So much for allies.

  19. Mayhaps it might be more clear if I said my interpretation:

    Renee is talking about many of the insidious impacts of TV ads for medicines.

    Here’s a google…
    http://www.google.com/search?client=opera&rls=en&q=fda+tv+advertising+psychiatric+drugs&sourceid=opera&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

    Read up, and her post might make more sense to you.

    trishka, I understand if the only thing that really worked for you were the pills. I don’t want to give the impression that therapy is the end all and be all of everything. However, most studies show that a combination of drugs and therapy works best in psychiatric care. In general, this is really true of all serious drugs. People need to cultivate strong relationships with their pharmacists, their doctors, their psychiatrist, anybody with expertise, who is willing to listen to you, make changes, and give suggestions if needed. It’s alright to do all your own research, but specialists can really help you listen to your own body with their perspectives.

  20. in general i too liked the blog post. however, i’m one of those middle-class women who takes anti-depressants because, well, i can’t function without them. i’ve been in and out of therapy for decades, and you know what? there’s only so much that therapy can do when your brain chemistry is out of whack. it’s very easy to armchair quarterback another person’s life, though.

    that said, i have to honestloy say that i do better, in terms of being effective at promoting social justice, when i’m *not* angry. the initial motivation to action may stem from anger, but i don’t buy the notion that if one isn’t angry, one isn’t being helpful. not what you said exactly, renee, but something i’ve read elsewhere on feminist blogs.

    i think the role of anger in feminism and activism is an excellent discussion though. i’m so glad that you brought it up.

    btw, toast, the tension being referred to was between MICHELLE obama and clinton. and you know the media loves nothing better than a good ol’ cat fight. they’ll manufacture one if they have to…

  21. “there are some that are medicated simply because they are women and have been constructed as naturally irritational, hysterical or angry. We put so much trust in doctors as gatekeepers that we never question the impact that social construction has on how they practice medicine. For women this can be particularly problematic, as it leads to things like over medication (mothers little helpers anyone)”

    I agree with you on this, Renee. There is no reason big pharma should not be under the same scrutiny we apply to everything else.

  22. trishka, I understand if the only thing that really worked for you were the pills. I don’t want to give the impression that therapy is the end all and be all of everything. However, most studies show that a combination of drugs and therapy works best in psychiatric care. In general, this is really true of all serious drugs. People need to cultivate strong relationships with their pharmacists, their doctors, their psychiatrist, anybody with expertise, who is willing to listen to you, make changes, and give suggestions if needed. It’s alright to do all your own research, but specialists can really help you listen to your own body with their perspectives.

    Mmmmmm…..paternalism.

  23. /me chuckles…

    Oh, as if I could take that seriously.

    In a world where people are constantly trying to get you to make poor decisions all by yourself, it is not paternalist to ask that people find other people, with expertise, that they trust.

  24. Shah8, it is paternalistic to lecture someone, who you do not know, on how they should address their health.

    It is paternalistic to assume that people with mental illness do not already know that, in most cases, psychiatric drugs are best used in conjunction with therapy. Or to assume that we do not already understand the significance of actually talking to our doctors. Gosh! Good thing you are here to tell us!

  25. I think that when they put my grandmother on antidepressents when her husband died, and then anti-anxiety meds. because she was anxious, WITHOUT individual talk therapy, her doctors did her a great disservice. She’s still on them (years after her husband’s death) and they probably interfere with her pain meds, which is her real problem. She isn’t even in group any more.

    My dad and I and others in the family have tried to talk her out of the psychotropics before, but it hasn’t worked. She didn’t even understand (and she is a smart lady) that her antidepressents were an upper, and her anti-anxiety drugs were downers. This is probably because her doctor didn’t explain it to her.

    Being sad some of the time is part of the human experience. Depression should only be treated with pharmaceuticals when the patient, making informed decisions, weighs the risks of treatment against its benefits. All this pushing of psychotropic drugs without first at least trying talk therapy is a huge, huge, mistake. Of course those with chemical imbalances should be given the treatment they want, but there should also be informed consent. It seems to me that people I know with severe depression are well-informed, but people like my grandmother are not. (And I do have a non-medicated manic-depressive friend. For her, that was the best choice, and I’ve seen her depressive, and it is pretty severe.)

  26. Toast,

    My apologies, as others have already mentioned, it was Michelle and Hillary not Barrack and Hillary. My bad for not being clear with the initials and whatnot.

    On a related note…can we please get Rachel Maddow her own show on the TV? I mean a strong, intelligent woman who knows her shit AND addresses sexism. It might make me vomit a little less every time I accidentally skim by Morning Joe.

  27. Well, then Panopticon,

    Allow me to bring in the context. Part of what Renee was talking about was the targeting of women for treating psychiatric disorders. My experience, as someone who is actually, quite familiar with much of the literature regarding psychiatric pharmacy, tells me that far too many people are influenced by the media that the pharmacuetical company pushed out, such that they start therapies that really should be monitored by someone. However, they do not see anybody but a doctor willing to prescribe medication–and incentivized to provide it with little scrutiny.

    Moreover, this is a problem *especially* for women and children. It’s a well documented problem, which is why the US is really the only country that allows tv advertising for drugs (New Zealand is phasing out). I don’t think *I* know, or *you* know precisely who is reading this thread, and who stands to benefit. At a minimum, I believe it’s a *good* thing to raise conciousness about mental health issues, instead of assume that everybody knows what they need to know about psychiatric drugs. Not everyone is *like* you, or trishka! Not even everyone who needs to have such drugs are informed about and able to get them (since they are marketed to and directed to the wealther segments). And in each and every one of our heads is delicate machinery that is *highly* individual. We have a mental health care crisis in this country because people *don’t* know!

    Ismone, certain SSRI’s have issues with withdrawal effects. Has your grandmother ever been off them for any length of time? If so, perhaps her relunctance to work with you is related to fears of dealing with withdrawal.

  28. When I refer to someone as an over medicated prozac twit, it means a person who is not ill or has not stopped to question why this medication is even prescribed for her.

    So the problem is the woman who takes her doctor’s word for it that she’s sick and needs medication and not the doctor who’s overprescribing?

    I think that’s why that particular line in an otherwise good post is grating on so many people: you’ve basically blamed the victim. Given the long, long history of women and medicine, it seems a little cruel to call someone a “twit” because she believed her doctor. Would you call someone who had her uterus removed on her doctor’s advice a “twit” if it turned out to not be medically necessary.

    And, yes, I take Wellbutrin. It’s the only way I can hold down a job. It does the opposite of numbing me — it allows me to feel a full range of emotions without everything being grayed out by depression.

  29. No, no, no. Prozac doesn’t work like that.

    Indeed, quite the opposite. Before I went on Prozac I was too wrapped up in myself and my own unhappiness to care about how other women were treated. Now that I’m on Prozac I care a lot more about the outside world, and as a result am much more angry about it.

    But overall, amazing post. When I get called an angry feminist I reply with: “Hell yes I’m angry. I’m angry about [insert list of sexist injustices here]. The real question is, why aren’t you angry about this?”

  30. In all cases, if you get repeated bouts of blues, or you get into that longer dark stuff, talk to a therapist. Maybe you need to make long term changes in your behavior. Change jobs, start exercising more, take up yoga or tai chi, eat differently, socialise more…A therapist can help you figure out triggers, and help you think and live *around* the broken parts of your head.

    I know we’ve had some spats in the past, but I couldn’t agree with this more. Antidepressants aren’t really a long term strategy on their own. They’re great for stabilization, for getting someone out of a serious episode, but they’re only symptom relief. Real, serious, clinical depression is more than just being sad or out of sorts (I’m still not sure why the term melancholia went out of fashion) and it really can’t be sorted out without therapy. Its one of the quiet shames of our health care system that the poor have little access to mental health care and that often when they do have access the best they can hope for is a revolving door of students on practicum or interns waiting to flee to the suburbs.

  31. Defending illness is standard, that is why doctors function as gatekeepers.

    What I am saying is that yes there are those of us who suffer or have suffered from a legitimate illness but we should also recognize that there are some that are medicated simply because they are women and have been constructed as naturally irritational, hysterical or angry. We put so much trust in doctors as gatekeepers that we never question the impact that social construction has on how they practice medicine.

    Those two points cannot stand together. Doctors fuck up all the time, especially physicians who are trying to diagnose out of the DSM as if it were a damn cookbook. You seem to recognize this, that there are serious social consequences to overmedication, that sloppy diagnosis causes immense damage. But then you talk about prozac twits and the function of doctors as gatekeepers. You’re using same implicit assumptions (Doctors know what they’re doing, women are too stupid/weak to manage their own live effectively) that lead to the problems of overmedication in order to attack the victims of overmedication. In a post about how language hurts people and is used to deny their voices you used language which hurts people and denies their voices. I’m pretty sure you didn’t mean to, but its there.

  32. Shah8, I understand the context, I am not okay with medication being targeted to women, or being really marketed at all. But hey, I am able to point that out without referring to women who take psychiatric mediation as “overmedicated twits”. Or assuming that they are just unable to deal with the fact that life is sad sometimes. Or calling into question the legitimacy of their experiences.

    Or, as you like to do, lecturing them. Would you lecture someone with heart disease on how to best care for themselves? Or asthma?

    I understand that we have a mental health crisis in this country and it’s great to raise consciousness about mental health issues in general. However, there is raising awareness, and then there is lecturing complete strangers on how they should best pursue medical treatment. Where did you get your degree in armchair psychiatry?

  33. Renee, I think you should reconsider continued defense of your “Prozac twits” comment.

    When I wrote over medicated Prozac twits it was not aimed at people suffering from true mental illness…the idea is that we live in an over medicated society and people often take medication that they don’t need because the medical establishment profits from our paranoia.

    As Mnemosyne points out, you’re putting the blame here on patients, not doctors. You assume that I, an antidepressant-taker, am a “twit”– a stupid, gullible woman– for following my doctor’s advice. I find that really offensive, as I am most certainly not a twit.

    Yes, doctors are gatekeepers; yes, anti-depressants are marketed to women; yes, there is a long history of the medical establishment diagnosing women as “hysterical,” etc, etc. That doesn’t at all change the fact that that you’ve called me stupid for taking medicine for a medical problem. You don’t know my history.

    shah8, I agree with Panopticon. I don’t know how trishka feels about you giving her unsolicited health care advice, but I don’t want any.

    There’s nothing helpful about doctors who senselessly push antidepressants on people, and there’s also nothing helpful about people who assume that those who take antidepressants are idiots or misinformed. Many of us have the capacity for critical thinking, just like “normal” people!

  34. Formal (neuroscience background) and informal education (public health interest, pharmacy, nootropics) informs my opinion.

    No, I wouldn’t say much about hearts or asthma. I don’t know very much about that sort of thing except in distant memories of my physiology and immunology classes.

    “Perhaps I should consult with my doctor, and become yet another one of those over medicated Prozac twits” is perhaps somewhat insensitive with the “twit” end. However, it is rather clear that she is referring to televised ads which oversell symptoms of depression, and overpromise what Prozac can do. If you check out this study…
    http://medicine.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371/journal.pmed.0050045&ct=1

    It is rather clear that a *very* large chunk of people taking prozac do not derive a significant benefit beyond placebos. There really *are* many people taking this drug when they should not, or when there are superior alternatives.

    I am simply not inclined to view what I have said as lecturing–the format itself is conducive to long posts rambling or ranting on different topics.

    How would I raise awareness in a post without “lecturing”?

  35. I did not give trishka medical advice. The closest to actual medical advice I gave to anyone is to Ismone, when I suggested withdrawal symptoms.

    Pipken or Panopticon might be great consumers and do all the things one should do as a consumer of health care. However, there is strong evidence that people like them are NOT the norm!

  36. Shah8, this is unsolicited healthcare advice:

    trishka, I understand if the only thing that really worked for you were the pills. I don’t want to give the impression that therapy is the end all and be all of everything. However, most studies show that a combination of drugs and therapy works best in psychiatric care. In general, this is really true of all serious drugs. People need to cultivate strong relationships with their pharmacists, their doctors, their psychiatrist, anybody with expertise, who is willing to listen to you, make changes, and give suggestions if needed. It’s alright to do all your own research, but specialists can really help you listen to your own body with their perspectives.

    Pipken or Panopticon might be great consumers and do all the things one should do as a consumer of health care. However, there is strong evidence that people like them are NOT the norm!

    Do you lecture people with high blood pressure? Or arthritis? Or is it just the mentally ill that are the lucky beneficiaries of your expertise?

  37. I liked most of the post… but i’m another mentally ill woman who took offense to the statements made about medication.. in the post and comments.

    how can you tell whether someone is “legitimately” mentally ill or just that “someone has told you that you are sick”. unless i’m mistaken, isn’t the BEST way to know if you are sick or not is if your doctor TELLS YOU you are?

    even though you stated your comment wasn’t towards “real” mentally ill people, i don’t see how you, or anyone but their doctors, knows who is “really sick” or not, and i don’t think you should make assumptions. it still sounded very offensive.

  38. Antidepressants aren’t really a long term strategy on their own. They’re great for stabilization, for getting someone out of a serious episode, but they’re only symptom relief.

    I completely disagree. I have been told that i will most likely have to be on anti-depressants for the rest of my life, by multiple doctors, no matter how much therapy I get. You saying YOU know more than them??

  39. Antidepressants, including Prozac, don’t work like that. Your ignorance is really offensive. In fact, it makes me think that you are, in fact, an unthinking twit.

    If antidepressants are “marketed” at women, don’t you think that’s a problem with marketing (and I find it really scary that your country allows advertising of prescription drugs at all – it’s banned here, and with good reason)?

  40. I always like to keep in mind that a direct literal translation of “hysterical” would be something like “womb-o-riffic.”

  41. It is rather clear that a *very* large chunk of people taking prozac do not derive a significant benefit beyond placebos.

    Since that study followed patients for a maximum of 8 weeks (and usually for less time), I’m not sure how seriously to take it. Do some patients show better results after 10 weeks? We have no way of knowing, because the studies didn’t continue that far. How are patients doing after 6 months? After a year?

    I don’t have a dog in that particular hunt since I don’t take an SSRI (Wellbutrin works on dopamine, not serotonin), but that was my first question when that study came up.

  42. how can you tell whether someone is “legitimately” mentally ill or just that “someone has told you that you are sick”. unless i’m mistaken, isn’t the BEST way to know if you are sick or not is if your doctor TELLS YOU you are?

    That is exactly the point Casey, not everyone who takes this medication is sick. Some women are prescribed this medication because some doctors still believe that woman = irritational, angry, hysterical. In some circles taking Prozac is almost fashionable. What I fail to see is why pointing this out is offensive. No one is saying that if you are suffering from a mental illness that something is wrong with you per se. Who I am calling out are the people that think that they should just pop a pill because it is the “in” thing to do, or the women that take pills without question whether or not they need it. It is an important observation in a society that is over medicated and though prozac was used as the example it applies to many, many other medications.

  43. My experience, as someone who is actually, quite familiar with much of the literature regarding psychiatric pharmacy, tells me that far too many people are influenced by the media that the pharmacuetical company pushed out, such that they start therapies that really should be monitored by someone.

    No. Doctors push meds on people when there are better options available and then fail to monitor those drugs, even when the patient really never wanted to be on them in the first place. This I know from personal experience. New doctors never want to take you off the drugs, also. At best they want to switch you; sometimes they want to add something. I had to wean myself off the drugs (after years of taking them and wanting off), which can be torturous if yoou’re taking something with really bad withdrawal effects. Drugs have never helped me. Working toward improving my circumstances and working through old traumas has.

  44. Pipken or Panopticon might be great consumers and do all the things one should do as a consumer of health care. However, there is strong evidence that people like them are NOT the norm!

    Shah8, you’re so condescending. Where is that strong evidence?

    I hear tell that we women can’t figure out for ourselves whether an abortion is the right choice for us, either.

  45. Renee, I really appreciate your efforts toward clarification. That said, this quote makes me uneasy:

    When I refer to someone as an over medicated prozac twit, it means a person who is not ill or has not stopped to question why this medication is even prescribed for her. Someone who has thought it all out or is clearly ill would not fit under the category that I have described.

    But who decides what “clearly ill” means, and how much investigation or thinking is needed before someone is deemed to have “thought it all out” means? I think those terms ought to be defined by the patient and her/his doctor, not by onlookers who by necessity can’t have as much information about the situation and about the illness. And I truly think the patient herself/himself is in the best position to determine whether s/he has thought it all out.

    The idea of having my mental state evaluated by people who are (a) not me, and (b) not my doctor – whether for purposes of passing judgment or some other purpose – disturbs me.

  46. @Rachel..just because a doctor has signed off on it does not mean that you should necessarily be taking this medication. Let us remember that doctors do get kickbacks from big pharma for pushing certain drugs. They may all swear the hipocratic oath but not all practice it. I am not pointing at any one individual and saying..you, you, you twit, I am pointing to an obvious trend to needlessly over medicate in our society.

  47. women are too stupid/weak to manage their own live effectively) that lead to the problems of overmedication in order to attack the victims of overmedication.

    In the case of over diagnosed Prozac not all women fall into the category of victim. I also firmly believe that women need to question. It is you who infantalize women by suggesting that they do not have the responsibility to question what medication they are taking and why. Even a child will ask about a vitamin they are given so why can’t grown women? WHen I am given a script I want to know who makes it, what are the side effects, how long will I have to take it, what is it expected to do…these are routine questions that every ADULT should be asking.
    I would also suggest that the desire to find yourself attacked in a feminist post is ridiculous. Sometimes a comment is not aimed at you, and at what point do we take the author at their word? We can circle around this all night but I stand fast to my commentary that the “over medicated prozac twit” was aimed at women that are indeed overmedicated either through willful ignorance or sexism on the part of the medical establishment. If you refuse to focus on that most important issue to read something into a post that I did not intend feel free.

  48. just because a doctor has signed off on it does not mean that you should necessarily be taking this medication.

    Renee: You still assume that you know better than other women when to follow the advice of their doctors. You don’t know my body, so you can’t decide whether I’m a twit or whether I’m legitimately ill. Only I can, with the help of my doctor. Your comment was (and remains) so offensive because you presume to know what’s best for depressed women, just as you’re claiming their doctors are doing.

    It’s rather baffling that you’ve written a post that skewers anti-feminist code words, and yet you are defending using a code word that stereotypes the mentally ill. It’s also bizarre to me that a fellow feminist doesn’t trust other women to make decisions about their own bodies.

  49. Renee, I see two issues here.

    The first is that the bodies of women, queer people, people of color, mentally ill people – and so on and so on – are used by the scientific and medical communities in ways that are abusive. I know that there is a long history of medical treatment being used as social control – and specifically against women who deemed to be “angry”, “irrational”, and hysterical. I’m not denying that – these are things that scare me a lot. I am a dyke. I have read my history. I know that historically, gay people had their children taken away, been locked up, and subjected to electroshock because of who they are. I am deeply skeptical of the medical community. I don’t believe that all of these bad practices are things that are “in the past”. I was actually nodding a long with a lot of your original post.

    But what is ironic to me is that a lot of the language you are using when speaking about people who are mentally ill is language that is silencing and dismissive.

    When you say another one of those over medicated Prozac twits that is silencing and dismissive. What is baffling to me is that on a feminist blog, I have to explain why this is language that silences.

    When you say Who I am calling out are the people that think that they should just pop a pill because it is the “in” thing to do. Where, oh where, are all these people who are “popping” anti-depressants because it is “cool”? I know a whole lot of people who are living with untreated/undertreated mental illness because they are uninsured and can’t afford to pay a psychiatrist/buy medication, or because they are insured and meds are too fucking expensive anyway, or the specific medication or treatment just aren’t covered. I don’t know anyone who takes anti depressants because they are just so fucking cool.

    But you know what else happens?

    A lot of people, when they are diagnosed with depression, are hesitant to even entertain the option of medication, because of the way depression medication and those who take it are perceived. I was for quite a while when I was first diagnosed. I can’t speak for everyone with depression, but I don’t think that this is that rare of an experience. What is dangerous about this is that depression is not an attack of melancholy – it is not the blues. Untreated depression kills and the way that we talk about depression really does affect people’s willingness to seek all forms of treatment – including medication.

    When you say my point being that there is a difference between actually being ill and internalizing illness because someone has told you that you are sick – this is not a new point. We are ALWAYS told that we are internalizing our depression, that we are being brainwashed by the medical community, or the pharmaceutical companies. We hear this from our families, our jobs, our lovers, and our friends. I don’t like it when people find out I take medication because I very often get an earful about how medication is over prescribed. Because people think that they can fix their problems by “popping” a pill. I then get reassured that it is not *me* that they are talking about. So who are all these pill poppers? Because it seems to me that when you talk about these vast numbers of twits who are just fooling themselves, you are assuming an awful lot about *someone*.

  50. When I read the original post, the “Prozac twits” line jerked me out of the moment. It was really jarring, and I thought about commenting on that. Then I saw that several other posters had brought it up, and I decided not to speak up; I didn’t want to contribute to a pile-on. The point had been made; surely that was enough.

    But as Renee’s most recent comment in response is, “the desire to find yourself attacked in a feminist post is ridiculous,” I have to speak up.

    The initial post contained a problematic line. Feminists and allies have pointed it out. Apologizing, possibly changing the line, determining to do better in the future, and moving on, would be a terrific response. The more you defend your wording, the more everyone offended begins to see that you aren’t interested in being hearing them.

    A little more Jill, and a little less Amanda Marcotte, would be great here.

  51. Where, oh where, are all these people who are “popping” anti-depressants because it is “cool”? I know a whole lot of people who are living with untreated/undertreated mental illness because they are uninsured and can’t afford to pay a psychiatrist/buy medication, or because they are insured and meds are too fucking expensive anyway, or the specific medication or treatment just aren’t covered. I don’t know anyone who takes anti depressants because they are just so fucking cool.
    Do you want to step away from your own experience for just one minute and recognize that you do not represent each and every single person that has ever taken Prozac. One you are making an issue of this because I used Prozac specifically but how would you have reacted it I used Ritalin as an example? Yes mental illness is stigmatized in our society but that does not in any way delegitimize the fact that there are some people that are needlessly drugged. Period. I said Prozac Twits as in the plural and gave no indication that there was a massive number other than that they are in existence, you are extrapolating it to mean that almost everyone on prozac is a twit when clearly that was not intended or even implied.

  52. Chiming in as one more person who really wishes that you’d take out the ‘prozac twits’ line. When you find yourself saying things like ‘well, I didn’t mean you when I said that’, it’s usually a good sign that you probably shouldn’t have said it (or said it that way) in the first place, and you’re really only digging yourself deeper with your responses.

    stand fast to my commentary that the “over medicated prozac twit” was aimed at women that are indeed overmedicated either through willful ignorance or sexism on the part of the medical establishment.

    So now being subjected to sexism makes you a ‘twit’? Good to know.

  53. Wow, am I still at Feministe?

    Do I really have to explain why telling someone that she is taking hurtful language “too personally” is a tactic that is used to silence women?

    Renee, when you criticize women for being twits for pursuing medical treatment, you are assuming a lot about their agency. I agree that it is legitimate to be concerned about the ways in which medical treatments are used to control communities. However, you are making disparaging statements against actual patients, against people whose rights you claim to be concerned about.

    I said Prozac Twits as in the plural and gave no indication that there was a massive number other than that they are in existence, you are extrapolating it to mean that almost everyone on prozac is a twit when clearly that was not intended or even implied.

    You actually did claim that we were an over medicated society, and that when someone is prescribed an antidepressant, she should be questioning her doctor’s intentions. You talked about an “obvious trend to needlessly over medicate in our society”. So before you claim that I am blowing things out of proportion, please go back and read over what you said and try to understand why people are getting so offended.

    Do you want to step away from your own experience for just one minute and recognize that you do not represent each and every single person that has ever taken Prozac. One you are making an issue of this because I used Prozac specifically but how would you have reacted it I used Ritalin as an example?

    Renee, I do not take Prozac or Ritalin. What I do take is actually none of your business. Please do not try to claim that I am just making it about me. There are a lot of comments here from a lot of people who have lived with depression. When we talk about being treated like our experiences are not legitimate, that is because that is how people treat people with mental illness. It is not because we think that we represent each and every single person who takes Prozac, or has depression, or is otherwise a fellow pill popper.

  54. The initial post contained a problematic line. Feminists and allies have pointed it out. Apologizing, possibly changing the line, determining to do better in the future, and moving on, would be a terrific response. The more you defend your wording, the more everyone offended begins to see that you aren’t interested in being hearing them.

    A little more Jill, and a little less Amanda Marcotte, would be great here.

    Agreed.

  55. I completely disagree. I have been told that i will most likely have to be on anti-depressants for the rest of my life, by multiple doctors, no matter how much therapy I get. You saying YOU know more than them??

    I could make a pretty good case for knowing more about psychology than an MD whose had a rotation and a couple of classes, but that isn’t the point I was making. There are a handful of people who have genuine chemical imbalances which cause depression (people who suffer from Bipolar I and II, for instance) and perhaps you are one of them. The point I was making was that for the vast majority of people who suffer from depression antidepressants aren’t going to fix the underlying problems which caused their depression. That determination is something you, your doctor, and your psychologist need to work out amongst yourselves. I’m just saying that providing antidepressants as the only means of care for people with non-organic depressions is sloppy.

  56. You actually did claim that we were an over medicated society, and that when someone is prescribed an antidepressant, she should be questioning her doctor’s intentions. You talked about an “obvious trend to needlessly over medicate in our society”. So before you claim that I am blowing things out of proportion, please go back and read over what you said and try to understand why people are getting so offended.

    Yes we are an over medicated society and I said when an adult is given ANY prescription there are critical questions they he/she should be asking their doctor. Think you should scroll back.

    Renee, I do not take Prozac or Ritalin. What I do take is actually none of your business. Please do not try to claim that I am just making it about me. There are a lot of comments here from a lot of people who have lived with depression. When we talk about being treated like our experiences are not legitimate, that is because that is how people treat people with mental illness. It is not because we think that we represent each and every single person who takes Prozac, or has depression, or is otherwise a fellow pill popper.

    Right and in the desire to make yourself representative you are more than willing to deny the experience of other women when it comes to medication. Yes there are women who are taking drugs who should not be. Can that not be recognized. Yes the mentally ill are unnecessarily stigmatized but that comment was not directed at the mentally ill. I cannot be any clearer than that. SO rattle your cage and make this about something that it was not meant to be about it. I have apologized if I have offended others, I have explained my position and listened to your argument. I even concur with alot of what you are saying but fact of the matter is this, the commentary was not directed at you and not representative of those suffering from true illness.

  57. In the case of over diagnosed Prozac not all women fall into the category of victim. I also firmly believe that women need to question.

    I believe they need to question as well, which is why I’m uncomfortable calling doctors gatekeepers, especially when so many patients get their diagnosis and proscription after a 15 minute consult with a general doctor. Even if some women are complicit, I’m still not sure what the problem there is or where you get the right to heap scorn on them. Its not like Prozac has much in the way of recreational uses or does anything for people who don’t legitimately have depression.

    t is you who infantalize women by suggesting that they do not have the responsibility to question what medication they are taking and why. Even a child will ask about a vitamin they are given so why can’t grown women? WHen I am given a script I want to know who makes it, what are the side effects, how long will I have to take it, what is it expected to do…these are routine questions that every ADULT should be asking.

    I haven’t made any statements to the contrary. Quoting out of context isn’t an argument, and it doesn’t address the point I made. The point I was making was that the same implicit assumptions that pretty much everyone here have a problem with were used by you when you invoked the idea of prozac twits. Moreover, that use was a direct example of the kinds of words you attacked in the original post. I’m not saying your argument is invalid, just that maybe you might sometimes make the same kinds of statements without realizing it.

    I would also suggest that the desire to find yourself attacked in a feminist post is ridiculous. Sometimes a comment is not aimed at you, and at what point do we take the author at their word?

    To whom are you responding, exactly? I never said that I felt attacked, never said a comment was aimed at me. You’re the one whose getting defensive here. As for taking you at your word, no. Sorry, I know this is a feminist area but that doesn’t make you immune to implicit attitudes or mistakes. Just as you don’t take a doctor at their word because of the degree hanging on their wall, you don’t get a pass for problematic language because you’ve identified as a feminist.

    We can circle around this all night but I stand fast to my commentary that the “over medicated prozac twit” was aimed at women that are indeed overmedicated either through willful ignorance or sexism on the part of the medical establishment.

    How is a woman who is over medicated because of sexism on the part of the medical establishment an “over medicated prozac twit?” Or, more specifically, why exactly do you get to be the arbiter of whose medical choices are valid and whose are not? Victims are not twits. People who disagree with you are not twits. I’ll even go one step further and say that people who choose to use medication to make their lives easier are not twits. The fact that you seem to believe that you can judge other’s choices is disturbing. That you would then take your judgment and ignorantly assume that they have made those choices in order to “dull [their] feelings of genuine outrage every time women are treated like disposable bodies without any value” is….honestly I don’t have the words right now. First that isn’t the way that anything outside of a tranquiler works, second I’m not so sure the women you’re raging against exist in any significant numbers, and third the seeming disgust displayed towards people who aren’t you is disgusting.

    If you refuse to focus on that most important issue to read something into a post that I did not intend feel free.

    You can say “nothing to see here” all you want, that doesn’t make it true. See, one of the really insidious things about implicit prejudice is that you don’t intend it.

  58. How about we all sing kumbaya and pretend that no one is ever over medicated. Nope the problem does not exist, we won’t discuss because some people cannot deal with the reality of that.

    @ William
    Just as you don’t take a doctor at their word because of the degree hanging on their wall, you don’t get a pass for problematic language because you’ve identified as a feminist.

    Yeah not looking for a free pass. What I am saying is that I have explained until I am almost blue whom the commentary was directed and why. You may view it as problematic but when I think of where it was aimed I do not consider it to be so, especially within the wider context of the post in general. Gee I might also have this feeling after the needless attacks on an earlier post where it is quite evident that multiple readers enjoy word twisting as a hobby.

    The fact that you seem to believe that you can judge other’s choices is disturbing. That you would then take your judgment and ignorantly assume that they have made those choices in order to “dull [their] feelings of genuine outrage every time women are treated like disposable bodies without any value” is….honestly I don’t have the words right now.

    Well I have the words for you…if you cannot take the time to question when it is clearly in your best interest to do so then you are a TWIT, don’t pass go, don’t collect 200 dollars. At some point there is a degree of responsibility on the part of an adult. I certainly never called anyone who disagreed with me a twit, you are entitled to your opinion just as I am entitled to mine but I will not capitulate and say I said something I did not or that I purposely intended to cause an insult. Finally your last quote from my post was a personal reference to myself and was not directed at any other group.

    Now that you have stripped down a perfectly good post for the sake of three words which were not aimed at the mentally ill but a critique of the gate keeping activities of doctors and the willful ignorance of some people I hope that you have found contentment. I for one can longer continue to beat a dead horse. BTW in closing I do find it interesting that you are quick to point out my judgmental tone and not realize that you yourself are sitting in judgment. But We’ll just sweep that under rug….chastisement noted and accepted.

  59. I get that what you said wasn’t intended to offend people with mental illnesses, but it did. The fact that so many people took it “the wrong way” should be a big clue to you that maybe it was inappropriate to say or just poorly stated. Is there any reason you can’t just admit that and move on and maybe choose your words a little more carefully next time?

  60. @Kat perhaps you missed the beginning of the thread where I said the words I AM SORRY, my intent was not to offend. It was one of the first responses that I made in this thread to begin with.

  61. Heyyo, Renee

    Do what I do, and withdraw. Talk again on another thread. It should be pretty obvious when people are merely spoiling for a fight. There is no way to converse with people who automatically view whatever you say in the worse way possible. It is silencing, and I suspect a few do it on purpose, but don’t let it get to you. Just keep on making posts, do your best to not make it easy for detractors to play that game, and build an audience of people who appreciate what you say.

  62. It’s late at night and I’m for bed, but a few things, appropos of nothing…

    1) Twit is a british slang term. It has classist connotations, and is usually directed at the upper class.

    2) I was thinking about the Vioxx case a bit earlier. That was also a massively overperscribed drug with little oversight, and many people have had their lives cut short. Merk was rather criminally neglectful and manipulative throughout the whole process.

  63. I have to say that it caught me off-guard as well. Here I am, reading a post about code words used against women, especially feminists, and vehemently agreeing and thinking that I’m glad you started blogging here because I probably wouldn’t have read your work otherwise, when I come across the Prozac comment.

    It was like I was taking a walk through the woods, and it was beautiful and peaceful and I’m appreciating everything and how it all fits together to make this incredible ecosystem, and then because I’m looking up at the birds and squirrels in the trees, I trip over a massive rock in the middle of my path.

    Since you’ve been on anti-depressants, I’m sure you know how often us depressed people are picked on. I have half the world telling me that I’m weak and need to shake it off because it’s not a real illness, and the other half telling me that anti-depressants are over-prescribed and we’re overmedicated sheep, blindly following the dictates of pharmaceutical companies. My own mother does it, to such an extent that I avoided going back on medication for months and ended up having a spectacular breakdown. That’s what off-hand comments like that do. They perpetuate the stigma, putting us medicated people on the defensive, and people who really are sick are discouraged from getting treatment… I don’t want to put words in your mouth, but I think I can safely say that that was not your intention whatsoever. It’s just a really sensitive spot for a lot of us.

    I do agree with you, but I wish that you had said it differently. Something like, “Maybe I should go to the doctor, and see if he can treat my irrationality and hysteria by ignoring what I say since I’m obviously irrational and hysterical and tossing me some samples given to him by pharmaceutical companies for subduing angry women like me.” But, you know, with your red words, which I really liked. It’s really not that different from what you did say, but it doesn’t set off any triggers for me. Others may disagree.

    Your comment was only a tiny bit hurtful, though. I think that after posting this I’ll be able overlook it entirely and appreciate your whole post, but I hope that you take some of the comments here to heart. I really don’t think you wanted to offend your intended audience, especially when the thread got derailed like this.

    I’m far more pissed off about the comments from shah8 and William explaining my illness to me because they know better! and have the expertise to inform us ignorant women that we need to make sure that we also get therapy! and that pharmaceutical companies make sketchy ads! and that meds are not the answer because they only treat the symptoms! and that St John’s Wort can be used to treat depression!

    I saw someone call it paternalistic, and I think the last comment is a good example. Yes, St John’s Wort can be used to treat mild depression, although no one I know personally who’s tried it has had much success. It can also reduce the efficacy of birth control pills. Did our commenter consider that on a feminist blog, many of the readers on anti-depressants also take oral contraceptives and know about that interaction? But he still thought it fit to inform us on how to deal with our mental health because we would be utterly lost without him, unable to understand that pharmaceutical companies want to make a profit, or when our pharmacist says, “I really don’t think you should buy this. It could react with your Tri-cyclen.”

    My mentally ill peers and I are perfectly capable of doing our own research and monitoring our own mental health, and that doesn’t include listening to obnoxious commenters who think they have all the answers to questions that nobody asked.

  64. When aimed at a black female such as myself this is never a neutral comment.

    Really? Never? Come on. If you are reading a book with a frown, and I turn to my friend and say, “look, there’s an angry black female” that’s very different than if I call you angry as you are screaming at me. I am not always speaking from the height of my gender and racial privilege.

    Context matters.

    I completely understand the point of your post. But I find the absence of context to your rules, ultimately stifling to overall discussion.

    Having said that, I’d like to add “submissive” and “doll-like” to your list as directed to brown women. Don’t do that either.

  65. just because a doctor has signed off on it does not mean that you should necessarily be taking this medication

    Are you purposely ignoring the part where I said that the patient and the doctor get to define things? I am not saying “doctor only” – I am explicitly saying the patient is involved. Why do you assume that women who take psychiatric medications do so without having investigated the options, weighed the pros and cons, and made an informed decision?

    I am saying that you, as someone who is neither the patient nor the doctor, do not know the whole story of anyone else’s mental health struggles, and you do not have the right to minimize them or judge how the actual person dealing with those mental health struggles does, in fact, deal with those mental health struggles.

    It should be pretty obvious when people are merely spoiling for a fight.

    Oh, of course, that’s what it is: we’re just spoiling for a fight. Hey shah8, it sounds an awful lot like you’re saying we’re … oh wait what was it … “irrational, hysterical, and angry” …

  66. How about we all sing kumbaya and pretend that no one is ever over medicated. Nope the problem does not exist, we won’t discuss because some people cannot deal with the reality of that.

    You realize that no one, absolutely no one, has said that we can’t talk about over-medication, right? That no one, absolutely no one, has said that over-medication does not exist?

    What we are challenging is your insistence that (1) only people who are “clearly ill” should get medications, (2) only people who haven’t thought out the options actually take medications, and (3) if anyone is offended by your views, it’s because that person is oversensitive.

    I’d echo Panopticon here: Wow, am I really at Feministe?

  67. if anyone is offended by your views, it’s because that person is oversensitive.
    Please provide evidence where I explicitly said that you or anyone else was overly sensitive?
    nly people who are “clearly ill” should get medications,

    Up that would make sense as most medicatins have serious side effects or do you consider it better to just hand them out like gum and say screw the risk.
    only people who haven’t thought out the options actually take medications
    Again serious side effects…should you just pop a pill because it is pretty? Come on lets be reasonable here…
    And the fact that very few have even bothered to address the legitimacy of over medication is very very telling. You may not have said lets not avoid it but sure have done your level best to, while throwing around accusations.

  68. How about we all sing kumbaya and pretend that no one is ever over medicated. Nope the problem does not exist, we won’t discuss because some people cannot deal with the reality of that.

    Given that you’re blaming THE PATIENTS for their own overmedication and keep insisting that it’s their own fault for listening to their doctors, you’re going to piss people off.

    You spent an entire post examining how the medical industry mistreats patients … and then wrote off the patients as overmedicated twits who just need to speak up and if they don’t, they deserve what they get.

    This is why people are not happy with you.

    It’s also odd that you can clearly see that when a woman consents to a hysterectomy that removes a healthy organ, she’s not a “twit,” but you don’t have the same understanding when a woman consents to medication. I think that consenting to unnecessary surgery is much more of an indication of stupidity than taking unnecessary medication, don’t you?

  69. Words mean things, Renee. Sometimes words do damage, sometimes they serve to disempower whole classes of people. You’ve got a number of regular commenters here saying that your words meant something to them, perhaps something you didn’t intend, but something that was nevertheless strongly felt. It might not fit your narrative, but its there and it ought to be examined.

    How about we all sing kumbaya and pretend that no one is ever over medicated. Nope the problem does not exist, we won’t discuss because some people cannot deal with the reality of that.

    You and I both know that no one on this thread has even come close to saying that. We’re not saying no one is over medicated, we’re saying that your specific example of a commonly held stereotype about people who use a certain class of drugs was offensive, inaccurate, and unnecessary.

    Yeah not looking for a free pass. What I am saying is that I have explained until I am almost blue whom the commentary was directed and why. You may view it as problematic but when I think of where it was aimed I do not consider it to be so, especially within the wider context of the post in general.

    You’re not looking for a free pass, you just don’t think anyone should have a problem with what you said because you didn’t mean them and theres a wider issue to be discussed? You were talking about language being used to attack people, particularly language rooted in the idea that someone can’t handle their emotions or is mentally ill, and then you used that same kind of language. You’re in the wider context up to your neck.

    At some point there is a degree of responsibility on the part of an adult. I certainly never called anyone who disagreed with me a twit, you are entitled to your opinion just as I am entitled to mine but I will not capitulate and say I said something I did not or that I purposely intended to cause an insult. Finally your last quote from my post was a personal reference to myself and was not directed at any other group.

    I agree that personal responsibility is part of being an adult, but again, thats not really what we’re talking about here. I also didn’t say that you were calling us twits. I was referring to the women you called twits. They made a choice that you didn’t like, and for that they get called twits. Now, I know you feel justified in calling them twits because they didn’t question their doctors well enough, but it still doesn’t make sense in the context. You weren’t talking about people who’d shovel any pill handed to them in their mouth, you were talking about people who took drugs to dull their emotions. Specifically, women who were stupid and took prozac to dull their sense of outrage because they just couldn’t handle the feelings. Cut it any way you want, but if this had come out of the mouth of someone like Malkin you’d be (rightfully) part of the chorus of voices calling her out on her gendered stereotyping and rages against imagined foes.

    BTW in closing I do find it interesting that you are quick to point out my judgmental tone and not realize that you yourself are sitting in judgment. But We’ll just sweep that under rug

    If you’ve got a critique for me that amounts to more than just “You should know thats not what I meant, I’m a feminist and theres more important issues” then I’m all ears.

  70. I echo the “am I at Feministe?” comment. This is truly bizarre. Jill, where are you?

    Now that you have stripped down a perfectly good post for the sake of three words which were not aimed at the mentally ill

    This has everything to do with the whole body of your post, as commenters have said time and again. You rightly criticized anti-feminist code words that aim to belittle women and deny their agency. At the same time you did, and continue to, belittle and deny the agency of women with depression. You really don’t see the irony there?

    Please provide evidence where I explicitly said that you or anyone else was overly sensitive?

    Golly, how about: “I would also suggest that the desire to find yourself attacked in a feminist post is ridiculous.”

    perhaps you missed the beginning of the thread where I said the words I AM SORRY, my intent was not to offend.

    Your assurance that you don’t mean to offend does not seem terribly sincere when you are still saying (a few comments ago), “Well I have the words for you…if you cannot take the time to question when it is clearly in your best interest to do so then you are a TWIT, don’t pass go, don’t collect 200 dollars.”

  71. You know, I have dealt with depression (and anxieties) in the past and probably will continue to do so. I have been on medication for it. But I don’t see how everyone who has dealt with these problems for themselves could take offense at the throwaway line in the article. It is a fact that as a country America is over-medicated. I can completely relate to the point Renee was trying to make, not because of a patriarchy but because of my family. They were the ones making me feel invalidated and they were also the ones encouraging me to get myself on medication. My first reaction (because I was so depressed) was “ok.” But after I thought about it for like, a day, I realized that the people who treated me like crap were entreating me to just start putting serious chemicals into my system so that I could be cool with them continuing to treat me like crap. If you expand this scenario out to the culture at large, you can see exactly what was meant by the comment. Whether or not you personally do, the fact remains that many people are all too happy to take medications instead of dealing with the things in this world that are causing them to feel so anxious, hopeless, and depressed. More people than for whom it is actually necessary. It was just a colorful turn of phrase, which all good writers know how to employ.

  72. It’s hard to be all *that* simpathetic to people who have used alchohol, laudanum, various barbituates, tricyclics, and pretty much anything else they can get their hands on to “self-medicate”. Rich women have been doing this since there was a patriarchy, and the first apothecary pushed his first miracle syrup. It’s in history, it’s in literature, and you know what? I understand where’s she’s coming from, even if I don’t like “twit” either.

    English is a hard enough language to use well, especially in an angry and judgemental tone, without deliberate misreading to add to the mix of interpretations. This conversation is strangely like the sort of conversation that would happen if someone talked about stoners, and all these people piped up shouting that *they* use medical marajuana, and it helps them with their nausea, appetite, and various other things that marajuana tends to help. They then say that they are offended that the initial writers lumped all of these happy and productive members of society with the negative grouping of stoners. Well, stoners are people who live for marajuana, not aided by marajuana. That poster isn’t…actually…talking…about…medical…marajuana. Likewise, Renee isn’t actually talking about anyone *but* people who abuse/self-medicate with Prozac. Twit is a harsh word, but it’s not really that far out of order for people (especially upper-class) who abuse psychotropic drugs like Prozac. It would be out of order for Pipkin, Panopticon, Mnemosyne, and much anyone who actually suffer from mental illness. However, she just ain’t talking about you guys, and that is reasonably clear.

    heh, a little npr for all http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=89882885

  73. Aaaaaannnddd, once again shah8 deems himself the arbiter of who gets to be offended and at what. Guess what? Every time you show up to condescend here, I will be right behind you to name it for what it is. Unless, of course, I’m at work. Ha!

  74. It’s hard to be all *that* simpathetic to people who have used alchohol, laudanum, various barbituates, tricyclics, and pretty much anything else they can get their hands on to “self-medicate”. … Twit is a harsh word, but it’s not really that far out of order for people (especially upper-class) who abuse psychotropic drugs like Prozac.

    Are you for real? You feel no sympathy for drug addicts and alcoholics, at least when they have money? Please do me a favor and stay out of the business of giving “advice” to people whom you deem sick.

    The scorn and disdain you express for women is truly astounding.

  75. Isn’t that the tone of a flat-earther? Or evolution denial? Isn’t their entire premise that the scientific community is just so condescending and *wrong*?

    Of course, sometimes I get labeled with that “articulate” thing.

  76. I certainly have some sympathy for financially secure people who abuse drugs. Given the destructiveness and/or apathy that powerful people who abuse drugs sometimes, one must be careful about just what you’re sympathetic for. After all I can be sympathetic to some guy using alcohol to damp down whatever psychological problems he have. I can’t afford to be sympathetic to the POTUS abusing alcohol or drugs. I can’t afford to be *that* sympathetic to the Toms and Daisies of the world either.

    On the other hand, there are zillions of poor people who desperately need mental health care, for addictions, for schizophrenia, for bipolar, and a myriad of other things. The cultivation of SSRI as lifestyle drugs has meant that those people can’t afford the drugs that can help them. The attitude of pill can fix all cheaply has meant that very few people have access to, let alone afford very therapies that can be quite effective in treating some disorders. Mental health care sucks in this country, not *least* because of those “twits” and the general cultivation of *twits* that Renee spoke of.

    I’m just not talking about you, Pipkin, and it’s egotistical to think it’s all about you and your experiences. We *do* have to talk about mental health care, and we *do* have to talk about how class affects that availability of mental health care. Some leeway *always* have to be given in the use of language to talk much about anything controversial.

  77. Not even close to being logical, shah8. Not even close. I see no coherence or consistency to your comments except to be consistently smug and pointlessly provocative. If you won’t go away of your own accord, I am hoping people can find it in them to ignore you, until you get bored enough to go away.

  78. Well. At least I do try to contribute. Perhaps you can do the same, rather than trash others (which is the majority of the posts that I remember).

    /me brings out his big book of Richard Hofstadter…

  79. Why does this always happen? Why does this always, always, always happen? “My oppression is real, but YOURS is is all in your head! I’m tired of people telling me they don’t mean me or that I’m being oversensitive… but YOU, on the other hand, should know I don’t mean you! And you’re oversensitive!” And then we spend 83 comments splitting hairs over whether “overmedicated twits” was actually meant to be a subtle critique of Big Pharma – even though there’s no evidence whatsoever that it was anything more than a dig at people who “dull their feelings” by taking medication – and the original connonations of the original meaning of the word “twit” – as if everyone was supposed to know that from the start – because the author seriously believes that s/he’ll redeem her/himself if s/he just contorts the logic wildly enough.

    When I fuck up, I apologize. It’s not that hard.

    This is ridiculous. We should start an anthology of this shit.

  80. Right and in the desire to make yourself representative you are more than willing to deny the experience of other women when it comes to medication. Yes there are women who are taking drugs who should not be. Can that not be recognized. Yes the mentally ill are unnecessarily stigmatized but that comment was not directed at the mentally ill. I cannot be any clearer than that. SO rattle your cage and make this about something that it was not meant to be about it. I have apologized if I have offended others, I have explained my position and listened to your argument. I even concur with alot of what you are saying but fact of the matter is this, the commentary was not directed at you and not representative of those suffering from true illness.

    Renee, I will echo what MANY other commentors have said (and which you seem to be ignoring): there is nothing wrong with discussing whether or not the medical community is overstepping its bounds and whether people are taking drugs when they should not be. In fact, I don’t think it is possible to make it more clear – many many many many many people have stated that. You’re responding to the comments – so you must be reading them.

    However, you are not going to get the discussion you want when you make swipes at women with mental illness and when you take swipes at women who take medication. You say that you have explained and apologized, but you still keep referring to women who take medication as twits. You keep saying that you are not referring to people who are really, truely, and clearly mentally ill, but the thing is, it is not up to you to decide who is truly and clearly ill.

    That is one of the things about disability. It is not really ever okay to make judgments about who is legitimately disabled or not, when you have not lived someone’s experiences. And that is what you are doing. Those judgments are things that people with depression and other disabilities have to face every day. So when you make comments about those twits – and when you make judgments about people who take anti depressants, you know – those women who have the temerity to seek medical treatment – you are talking about people who are legitimately ill. Because you do not know who is and who is not.

    You say you have apologized and you act like we are overreacting, but you keep reiterating the same offensive points that you made in the first post. That is not really an apology, and it is not overreaction to get upset when you take it upon yourself to disparage these other women. Whether or not they are “legitmately” ill, you are still making assumptions about patients who have decided to seek medical help. You have taken it upon yourself to assume their intentions.

    Maybe if you still can’t understand why people are upset, you should question yourself as to why you are so attached to these statements that you are making about women who may or may not be overmedicated. You say there are enough to warrant a conversation, but you keep stating these hurtful things about them. If this is the language you are going to use, where is this conversation going, and why should we engage in it with you? If you are going to make statements about mental health care, maybe you should make yourself aware of language and rhetoric that is commonly used against people who are mentally ill – and then, perhaps not use that language. Maybe you would have more of a constructive conversation then.

  81. It’s hard to be all *that* simpathetic to people who have used alchohol, laudanum, various barbituates, tricyclics, and pretty much anything else they can get their hands on to “self-medicate”. Rich women have been doing this since there was a patriarchy, and the first apothecary pushed his first miracle syrup. It’s in history, it’s in literature, and you know what? I understand where’s she’s coming from, even if I don’t like “twit” either.

    Shah8, do you consider yourself to be a feminist?

  82. Likewise, Renee isn’t actually talking about anyone *but* people who abuse/self-medicate with Prozac. Twit is a harsh word, but it’s not really that far out of order for people (especially upper-class) who abuse psychotropic drugs like Prozac.

    Still not excused. Care to outline the positive effects of Prozac abuse? What, exactly, would someone get from taking Prozac if they didn’t legitimately have depression? What benefits come with SSRI abuse? I mean, prescription drugs are abused all the time in this country, but Prozac isn’t exactly on the list of commonly abused substances. I also find it interesting how you seem to immediately connect the ideas of abuse and self medication when not too long ago you were advocating taking Kava and tossing around the word nootropic. I also find it interesting that when you’re talking about people “who have used alchohol, laudanum, various barbituates, tricyclics, and pretty much anything else they can get their hands on to ‘self-medicate’,” you tossed in trycyclics after two CNS depressants and an opiate. You and I both know they’re not in the same league and don’t have even vaguely similar effects. Perhaps if you’d singled out Buproprion, Provigil, or one of the commonly used ADHD drugs you would have had a point. But Prozac and the tricyclics aren’t exactly prime candidates for abuse. They don’t stimulate the limbic system, don’t produce euphoria, they take a hell of a long time to kick in, and they don’t really do much (outside of side effects) unless you’re depressed.

    Renee was taking shots at an imagined enemy, you and I both know it.

  83. http://www.amazon.com/Substance-Shadow-Addiction-United-States/dp/067485361X/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1214688429&sr=1-5

    http://209.85.215.104/search?q=cache:DsRFa4iySqwJ:www.nida.nih.gov/PDF/DARHW/033-052_Kandall.pdf+upper+class+drug+abuse+laudanum&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=19&gl=us&client=opera

    Drugs have interesting histories. Also pretty violent and sexual and colorful. Lots of fun to read about!

    I just really want to reiterate this: If Renee had said this 100 years ago this:

    Perhaps I should consult with my doctor, and become yet another one of those over medicated laudanum twits

    She would have been absolutely correct, no matter how harshly judgemental “twit” was, and NOBODY would have contradicted her, because we ain’t talking about the cough syrup users. We still ain’t even talking about the opium eaters that would binge on Friday nights after a hard week’s work. We would be talking about a very specific sort of woman who viewed laudanum as a lifestyle drug, in which people who had access to it were naturally superior to people who didn’t. The sort of woman who valued the pallor and fainting spells caused by laudanum since it mimiced the fragileness of tuberculosis victims (your early goths, so to speak). The sort of people who thought that laudanum gave them creative power. With their doctors who deliberately encouraged addictions, doctors who prescribed laudanum for every ailment, and who *especially* prescribed them to women for all kinds of phantasmaghorical ailments–most precisely to dull their sensations of angst or ill-humor with their situation. It is simply not hard to see the same patterns with SSRIs today.

    Laudanum was, indeed, a medically useful drug in its time. The use became twisted because it could profitably addict people, and it became very much a theme drug.

    However, laudanum is not the only such drug. Throughout history, women have been subject to rather considerable social pressures to use downers of various stripes in order to either fit in society or to dull the pain of society. That same trend continues today, with teachers asking that their students be medicated, and bosses implying that their workers need “medication, or people using drugs to be able to work in intolerable situations.

    Just because I’m not an ignorant person, and that I take complex positions and attitudes (which, obviously I do not give full justice to at times), does not mean that I am not a feminist. If we want more than primary colors in a blog-post, we do have to be willing to accept infelicities. All of us attempt things and stumble. It does not mean the whole of the message is worthless.

  84. umm. Talk about a derailed comment thread. For no apparent reason. Since it’s also clear that everyone seems to pretty much agree that mentally ill people are not “twits” and that the pharm companies take advantage in all sorts of ways.

    It’s true, rhetoric is powerful. How you say something is often times far more important than what you say.

  85. I just really want to reiterate this: If Renee had said this 100 years ago this:

    Perhaps I should consult with my doctor, and become yet another one of those over medicated laudanum twits

    She would have been absolutely correct, …It is simply not hard to see the same patterns with SSRIs today.

    Except, you know, that laudanum was a opiate that dulled the senses, stimulated the limbic system, posed the significant risk of physical dependence, easily led to overdose, and produced tolerance requiring ever increasing doses to achieve the same effect. The same simply cannot be said of SSRI’s. I agree that there exists a significant problem with over medication in the US, especially with women being proscribed antidepressants in order to get them to go away. There is a fundamental difference between women who go to their doctors in order to gain drugs whose effect is the production of pleasure and the avoidance of emotional pain, and women who are proscribed drugs which have no major secondary effects by doctors who don’t know what they’re doing.

  86. William, for the sakes of all that is convenient in our worlds, how about googling this kind of stuff? You’d get relevant hits from the first click about the use of tricyclic drugs in combination with opiods.

    Next, ascribing motives to the abuse of certain drugs (or more properly, substances) can be truly nebulous. You may as well try to figure out the motives of people who likes to cut their own flesh. Oftentimes it’s just how society percieved the use of certain thing–with the famous example of tibetans and nepalese people eating the finely ground shit of holymen! Nonetheless, two things…it is not necessary for harm to come to the user, for the drug use to cause a certain level of harm to others. Next, it is highly unlikely that the long-term use of *any* drug is truly adviseable. Some people *have* to be on SSRIs for the rest of their lives, but this should be minimized where possible.

    God, I love talking about and reading about drugs.

    Anyways, Kava can be highly useful for some people, and I would recommend that people try it as a OTC alternative to things like Paxil. St John’s Wort works okay for mild to moderate stuff. Power to the people and not the pharm company. Yeah, I do use the term “self-medicated” in both the prejorative and non-prejorative terms. Sorry. Anyways…heads are delicate instruments, be cautious about trying to fix ’em on your own.

  87. I *know* that Prozac isn’t like Laudanum.

    I was simply talking about the pattern of people/corporations pushing lifestyle drugs over history. I simply viewed Renee’s comment as that she percieved that Prozac is the latest in a very long line of downers that dull the senses and passion. I think much of the sturm an drang is simply people being familiar with different sets of literature and life-experiences. There isn’t any way a person like me is going to confuse anyone taking medication for a serious mental illness with the “twit” she is referring to. I’ve read alot about those kind of “twits” and they are often labeled as “twits”. I’m assuming she has read much the same stuff I have (if not experienced it directly).

  88. William, for the sakes of all that is convenient in our worlds, how about googling this kind of stuff? You’d get relevant hits from the first click about the use of tricyclic drugs in combination with opiods.

    Ask a CADC about the prevalence of tricyclic abuse and you’ll get a blank stare. I hate to break it to you, but you’re hardly the only person with formal training here. Yes, it is possible to use tricyclics (although its more common with MAOIs) in combination with other drugs for recreational uses, it just isn’t that common. More to the point, you’re looking at experimenters and the Erowid set when you’re talking about those kinds of cocktails, not housewives trying to dull the pain of their oppressed existence

    .Next, ascribing motives to the abuse of certain drugs (or more properly, substances) can be truly nebulous. You may as well try to figure out the motives of people who likes to cut their own flesh.

    Neither of those things is nebulous. The entire theory of substance abuse treatment revolves around discovering the reasons for drug use, in particular why certain drugs are used by certain people, what roles those drugs play in their lives, and personality variables that led to use. Indeed, when looking at dual diagnosis training in pretty much any clinical program from any orientation one of the things that is taught is what substances tend to be used to self medicate for what disorders. Look, I get that you have a background in neuropsych, but maybe you should stay within your competency and keep your mouth shut when dealing with clinical and treatment issues. Just because neurology hasn’t managed to work out a chemical pathway or physical structure for a given behavior doesn’t mean theres nothing definitive to say on the subject.

    Oftentimes it’s just how society percieved the use of certain thing–with the famous example of tibetans and nepalese people eating the finely ground shit of holymen!

    Those filthy savages! Good thing a there was a civilized white person there to set them straight…

    Nonetheless, two things…it is not necessary for harm to come to the user, for the drug use to cause a certain level of harm to others.

    Its a good thing you public health people aren’t bound by Kitchnerian ethical principles like autonomy, isn’t it. So much more freeing to just make choices for other people.

    Next, it is highly unlikely that the long-term use of *any* drug is truly adviseable.

    I can’t think of many fields in which there exists a consensus like the one you’re asserting. I mean, your opinion is that long term use of any substance is probably a bad idea except in certain cases, but again, not exactly a preponderance of evidence on either side.

    Anyways, Kava can be highly useful for some people, and I would recommend that people try it as a OTC alternative to things like Paxil. St John’s Wort works okay for mild to moderate stuff. Power to the people and not the pharm company. Yeah, I do use the term “self-medicated” in both the prejorative and non-prejorative terms. Sorry. Anyways…heads are delicate instruments, be cautious about trying to fix ‘em on your own.

    So plants with substances are a good idea for anyone to fool around with, but big pharma products are dangerous and need to be carefully watched? I’m a great fan of traditional and herbal remedies, but you need to be honest about the fact that a substance is a substance is a substance. Still, it seems like you’re trying to have it both ways. People should be cautious about trying to fix them on their own, but you recommend people try certain tweeks. I love tweaks: Buproprion, Adrafinil, Adderal, Aniracetam, Centrophenoxine, the list goes on an on. Still, at some point you need to make a decisions. Is the use of substances OK? To what degree? Only to treat illness? What counts as illness (not by any stretch of the imagination a closed question when dealing with mental health and illness)? What about enhancement? Recreation? What are the implications of each of these stances?

    I was simply talking about the pattern of people/corporations pushing lifestyle drugs over history.

    But antidepressants aren’t lifestyle drugs. They simply don’t have the environmental variability of heroin or the serotonin-like hallucinogens. Its a bullshit analogy because even though the establishment behaviors are the same, the drugs have radically different effects. Antidepressants simply don’t make people more malleable,

    especially

    the more modern ones like Prozac. You’re rationalizing, you’re twisting trying to find a way that you can continue to hold a perception that doesn’t conform to reality.

    I simply viewed Renee’s comment as that she percieved that Prozac is the latest in a very long line of downers that dull the senses and passion.

    Thats not how Prozac works and you should know that if you have the formal education you’re so fond of mentioning. First of all, Prozac isn’t a “downer” because it isn’t a CNS depressant, its an SSRI. SSRIs increase the amount of serotonin available in the brain, thus increasing stimulation of certain receptors in the 5-HT system. Second, describing these drugs as “dulling the senses and passion” makes them sound like they’re tranquilizers, which they aren’t. Nor is it a narcotic like opiates. Making those comparisons is unsound.

    I think much of the sturm an drang is simply people being familiar with different sets of literature and life-experiences. There isn’t any way a person like me is going to confuse anyone taking medication for a serious mental illness with the “twit” she is referring to.

    And we’re back to the meat of the issue. We’re talking about people with different life experiences and knowledge, but you and Renee have decided that yours are superior. That you simply understand some fundamental truths about the world and people who make choices that you do not agree with are twits. Granted, they had complex life experiences that lead you there, but if you feel they’ve made the wrong chance you have no trouble not only discounting and reviling them but resorting to calling them names, making the the objects of ridicule, and then vigorously defending your prejudice. Still, we’ve gone around this more than enough and I feel that everything which needs to be said has been on both sides. If you feel the need to have the last word, have fun.

  89. Wait, so…a young woman who is depressed due to life circumstances, has just tried to kill herself, is told she needs to go on medication, does as her doctor says even though she has reservations, dutifully tries other meds when her doctors say that she just needs to find the right “combination,” is unable to get off the meds because of the withdrawals….it’s all her fault that she’s on meds when she shouldn’t be? When you rufuse to take meds doctors tell you that you are being NONCOMPLIANT and that you are NOT COMMITTED to your own treatment and recovery and don’t deserve their help. They can refuse to release you from psych wards for being noncompliant with treatment. They can lay huge guilt trips on you, and once you are on those meds it is fucking HARD to get off, especially if no one wants you off them but you. THIS IS NOT THE PATIENT’S FAULT.

  90. Okay, and you know, I was joking, but what I’m going to come back to seriously:

    PROZAC DOES NOT WORK LIKE THAT.

    No, seriously, it doesn’t.

    If you are outraged because of all the terrible things in the world, and you start taking Prozac, it is *most* likely that what will happen is that your despair and feelings of worthlessness that you could possibly accomplish anything about what outrages you will lift somewhat, and you will feel that you actually might possibly be able to do something worthwhile with your life. And then you may get involved with activism against the things that outrage you.

    Prozac does *not*, repeat, does *not* dull your emotions. Fucking DEPRESSION dulls your emotions. Prozac, if it works for you (and it doesn’t for everyone with depression), will not make you happy. It will make you stop wanting to kill yourself (if it works right.) It will make you feel more like a worthwhile person who deserves happiness, which will empower you to fight for your rights. It does, in fact, the exact opposite of Renee’s construction in this post.

    So quite aside from the issue of whether or not mentally ill women are twits, or women who take medication their doctors push on them that they don’t need are twits, the whole sentence makes no sense BECAUSE PROZAC DOESN’T WORK LIKE THAT. “Maybe I should take some laudanum and be one of those overmedicated twits” is a sentence that makes sense, as does “Maybe I should take some valium and be one of those overmedicated twits.” Regardless of the *merit* of saying such things from a feminist, inclusive standpoint, they make sense. Putting “Prozac” in the sentence makes it make no sense. It’s kind of like saying “Maybe I should drink Coca-Cola and be one of those overmedicated twits” and you’re going “but… but… caffeine doesn’t do that… I think maybe you got something wrong…”

    It’s not like it would be hard to find something to change the sentence too. Again, while I was joking about reality TV and shoes, the truth is television and mindless consumerism *is* what women are expected to use to drug and distract ourselves so we don’t notice we’re being exploited. (Men, too.) There’s plenty of stuff in our society we’re expected to use to numb our minds. It’s just… Prozac isn’t one of them!

    (Obligatory Statement Of How I Know This Shit: I took Prozac for several months in 2000 before learning that my depression was actually caused by my birth control pills. Prozac is not a perfect drug, has bad side effects for many, and can mask your symptoms to the point where you can’t fix the underlying cause, such as bad birth control pills. But it doesn’t make you numb. *Depression* makes you numb, apathetic, and totally self-centered. It also doesn’t make you overly happy — it just gets you closer to normal.)

  91. ascribing motives to the abuse of certain drugs (or more properly, substances) can be truly nebulous. You may as well try to figure out the motives of people who likes to cut their own flesh.

    Or, y’know, you can find out by asking or reading about what they themselves say. There are actually a whole lot of reasons, and they are very well articulated in documentaries, interviews, blogs, and books. But thinking about people who self-injure as *people* would ruin your “crazy and unfathomable” analogy, wouldn’t it?

    This in a thread that is already about dismissing mentally ill people’s judgement, too.

  92. i’ve been reading this thread for the last hour or so. i am also one of the people who will be on medication-and more than just prozac-for the rest of my life, failing some kind of new treatment. i am diagnosed as bipolar, generally fast cycling. i suspect that this qualifies as “really mentally ill.” on the record, i don’t like the phrase overmedicated prozac twits, but i do see that there are some out there. i don’t really understand how this degenerated into self-medicating with laudanum and how kava is useful. i don’t think any of the discussion of symptoms, prescriptions, or overmedication is useful at this stage. i think what renee was trying to say-and generally did-is that she’s just not going to give away her power, and no-one will be taking it either. both excellent sentiments. women are labelled when they (we) do not play the games we are expected to. sometimes, it can be dangerous to be different, not so much here in us, though. i have paid a bit over not being what people expect. i do not do well in life, both because i am not typically feminine and because i am too loud and brash. that said, even on medication, i am not going to give away my power either. i think that’s really what we should take away from this-not an awkward, unthinking phrase.

  93. become yet another one of those over medicated Prozac twits,

    Yeah, about that.

    Instead of saying, “yeah, well, I didn’t mean YOU GUYS, I meant those OTHER Prozac twits who just dutifully take medicine from their male doctors,” how about saying this:

    “Wow. You readers are right. I really screwed up with that one. I have unexamined privilege around NOT being depressed and NOT having an anxiety disorder, so I’ll stopy trying to act as a Tom-Cruise-esque authority on others’ mental illness, instead of spending many paragraphs in comments about how what I said wasn’t REALLY that bad, and it’s not how I meant it, and all of you just misunderstood.”

  94. Also, unless commenters in this thread are the medical professionals who prescribe drugs for other readers in this thread, perhaps those drug-Googlers with their helpful “use natural anti-depressants! because I bet you’ve never thought of that before!” they should STFU.

    Do you really think people with mental illness are stupid, and that we just watch TV ads and call our doctors like QVC, saying, “I want some of THAT!” Or are you open to the 1% possibility that we have agonized over our decision, decided we’re better off on meds than not on meds, and that we live with the side effects and the stigma because the alternative is so much worse? Would you advise a diabetic to stop taking insulin? A heart patient to get off the Lipitor? Would you tell a person in a wheelchair she should just “try” to get up and walk?

    Look at me, all pissed off and angry and hysterical, even though I’m on Wellbutrin AND Lexapro! After reading this enlightened thread with all its medical and psychotropic experts, I would have thought that was impossible.

  95. @shah8 – what can I say, you’re my special project, as you’ve proven yourself – how shall i say – patterned. And from the looks of the comments, I’m not alone in finding you offensive. You don’t respond to reasoned dialogue, you seem to have no empathy or capacity for perspective-taking, so what’s the point? Dare I say, nothing us wimminz may respond with seems to make a dent…and as others have already pointed out, the paternalism you have displayed in this thread is sickening (unsolicited medical advice, which continued throughout the thread as you consistently second-guessed others’ choices and imposed your own “expertise” – what were your qualifications, again? Yeah, that’s what I thought.)

  96. what were your qualifications, again? Yeah, that’s what I thought.)

    Apparently formal education in neuroscience and e-learnings in public health (paternalism for Good Guys™), pharmacy (I think he probably meant pharmacology), and nootropics (an odd thing for someone seemingly opposed to self and over medication to be interested in, given that the entire movement revolves around finding and experimenting with substances which enhance cognitive functions).

  97. paternalism for Good Guys™

    LOL, William! BTW I am also in a mental health profession and I applaud you for representing psychology (clinical, I’m guessing) so well.

  98. Pipkin, and it’s egotistical to think it’s all about you and your experiences.

    It actually made me laugh out loud to read this. “Shut up woman, this ain’t about you!”

    Shah8, I’m afraid Charity has you pegged.

  99. @tinfoil hattie:

    Do you really think people with mental illness are stupid, and that we just watch TV ads and call our doctors like QVC, saying, “I want some of THAT!”

    Yep, I think that’s what their argument is.

  100. What? wait…

    I don’t respond to reasoned dialogue?

    Uh, ok.

    I do love the topic of nootropics, though. Man’s search for a newer, better, ME! has always been a fascination of mine. However, I do not take Paracetam, or Vinpocetine, or any of the other products offered by the same place (http://www.antiaging-systems.com/index.htm) that I get my adrafanil (to control my inattentive ADD). Nor would I recommend that anyone else does so. That is merely quack stuff. I have different opinions on Kava and St John’s Wort because what do you know? They have actual studies that actually backs the idea that they are effective drugs for some people and that they are safe. The brain is too complex and too difficult to deliver drugs to, to think that someone is just going to come up with some miracle pill just like that.

    However, the history and use of ancient tribal drugs like peyote, mushrooms, ayahausca, ibogaine, ergot, jimson weed, and many of the drugs used today like LSD, cannabis, cocaine, opium, caffiene, and nicotine is utterly fascinating to me. I got into that sort of stuff when I was a kid who was generally interested in herbal gardens, having had something of a fruiting plant growing craze and hanging at the local farming joint. So spices to medicines, medicines to even wilder stuff, and from there to…well…have anyone here read Aldous Huxley’s “The Doors of Perception”? It’s crazy, but you know…oddly logical and compelling. Timothy Leary has had his popular era as well. Thing is, it’s *because* of these guys (from their debunking, essentially), and others, that we have a greater understanding of how people’s need to be special tempts them to be utterly delusional. So much of our religious beliefs in the world really could be traced to the whole, “what the hell are you smoking, and can I have some?” phenomena.

    As for you, William, I’ve mostly just felt like I was Foghorn Leghorn, and you were that chickenhawk in those old cartoon. I find you just a tad nuts in the sense akin to certain Libertarians. I mean, you *do* have some odd opinions, like that Bion has much more cogent analysis to racism than someone like Dr. George M Fredrickson or Hannah Arendt (which I was using as a rather subtle point, but nm). In general, you have come off to me as someone who doesn’t “believe” in sociology (which group analysis isn’t actually a major part of, certainly not the psychoanalytic approach of Bion…). One of my personal amusements, which I had kept to myself was imagining you talking about racism in terms of the stanford experiment to Bell Hooks. Nothing against Bion or anyone else you’ve mentioned, but you’re one of those people who sees psychology as applicable to everything, aren’t you?

  101. You know…asserting over and over that it *is* about you isn’t convincing. Projecting your own lack of willingness to hear what others have said is alienating, and tends to convince others that you’re mostly out to humiliate rather than give anyone more of a voice. I would actually entertain what you have to say if you’d actually rebut what I’ve said (or failing that, not misrepresenting it). Nitpickery is, and has always been a way to shut down discussion.

    Everyone comes from a different place. Everyone has grown up into different circumstances. Everyone has read at least slightly different literature, and believed in slightly different things. Everyone has at least a slightly different worldview and command of language. This inherently means that language and literary allusions are going to create conflicts of meaning in any serious conversations. Well meaning people ask for clarification and or remedial actions, if not satisfied, they ask for an apology, if still not satisfied, then they withdraw from the conversation thinking that the group is a bunch of assholes and talk among themselves. Demanding apologies, using and misusing rhetorical gambits in order to combat and/or shame other people, things of that nature…they don’t benefit anyone, and conversations tends to grow lists of unmentionable topics. That’s bad for everyone, and we shouldn’t tolerate it.

  102. It’s hard to be all *that* simpathetic to people who have used alchohol, laudanum, various barbituates, tricyclics, and pretty much anything else they can get their hands on to “self-medicate”. Rich women have been doing this since there was a patriarchy, and the first apothecary pushed his first miracle syrup. It’s in history, it’s in literature, and you know what? I understand where’s she’s coming from, even if I don’t like “twit” either.

    You’re unbelievable shah8. Yes, all those women taking anything they could get their hands on to “self-medicate” are twits. They weren’t, and aren’t, living in a patriarchy that dictates what they may do, what they may think, and how they may feel. It’s because they were, and are, all self-indulgent greedy rich twits who have no purpose in life other than to do drugs. They have no discernible reason to desperately NEED self-medication. Nope. They’re just spoiled rich bitchez.

    You are so pompous and condescending it’s laughable. You’re an authority on exactly what, again?

  103. Wow. I never thought I’d see so much ignorance, prejudice, and oppressive attitudes on a feminist blog.

    Clearly anti-depressants do not reduce one’s ability to feel rage, since I feel fury as well as disgust at so many of these comments. In fact it’s medication, and therapy, that’s enabled me to feel appropriate anger rather than simply become unproductively and often suicidally depressed over the state of the world and the heartless stupidity of so many people in it.

    Saying that “over medicated Prozac twits” didn’t mean everyone on prozac, just, you know, the ones who don’t really need it is much like guys who defend calling a group of women “mini-skirted sluts” by saying they didn’t mean all women who wore mini skirts were sluts, they were just talking about the slutty ones.

  104. The disgust is mutual, Christine.

    There was so much more in the post topic that could be discussed. All derailed. Over something that’s essentially the equivalent of niggardly == racist!

    Sure, it’s not a bad comparison “overmedicated Prozac twits” to “mini-skirted sluts”. However, there is one problem. No matter how you look at it, the essential fact is that the statement is true within the context of her essay. Mini-skirted sluts isn’t actually true, it’s just assertion with not context to back the veracity. Truth is an absolute defense. Not only that, nobody who is familiar with the likes of the psychiatric prisons in the USSR, the book Listening to Prozac (which put a great deal of focus on Prozac as a nootropic drug, rather than as an antidepressant), the traditional encouragement to troublesome people to take something to “settle them down”, and the like is going to confuse the state/people Renee is talking about with the people who take Prozac as an actual medication. In the context of her entire essay, it’s damn near impossible to believe that Renee believes that all prozac takers are twits, given that she is rather explicitly talking about lotus eating, and not people taking prozac for their depressions.

    What has been truly sickening about this episode, to me are two things:

    1) The reliability to which it is a difficult proposition for a minority, especially minority women to agressively stand up for themselves in mixed company is reinforced, yet again. The “angry woman” strikes again, heh, even in a tribute to the angry woman! So we are reminded of just what our place is…nice little inoffensive topics that everyone can join in on. Any jumping off the reservation, not even just giving a nice hell-raising rant (like some white progressives and abolitionists I could name), but just talking about things that are primarily the concern of minority people/women, like, say, schools with an optional afrocentric curriculum which brings out hordes of white people who say that the suggestion is racist and the person who thought of it is a bad person. It keeps happening over and over and over again, and people here just don’t seem to actually think that perhaps Renee’s stubborness doesn’t have a great deal to do with this fact of life. Standing her ground would be important to her. Showing a lot more good will and quite a bit less nasty snark *might* actually have worked, you know…But then, that’s assuming some of the people commenting actually were persuadable people of good will.

    2) I was the one here who was citing facts, figures, links, and books here to back what I’ve said up. I don’t think anyone else was doing much other than complaining how their sense of justice was wronged, and paying not the least bit of attention to maybe making that sense of justice universal by describing that sense of justice, impeaching the moral authority of Renee’s essay, or anything else vaguely reminiscent of acknowlegement that people have different viewpoints. One *does* have to do more than say that my opinion matters most in order to change anyone else’s mind! If one of you thinks I’m so wrong, well, rebutt it! Facts! Logical Chains! Anything!

    and oh yeah…As Brother Muzone said, “You know what the most dangerous thing in America is? A N*gger with a library card.”

    Mine is worn, smeared, dinged. Take that for what it’s worth.

  105. I find it interesting that Kava abuse is rampant in Central Aust. at the moment – self-medication sucks. It’s also a lot more common in working class/poverty stricken areas, here in Oz. Alcohol, petrol sniffing, food, marijuana, kava. Sure, alcohol made me sleep but it increased the depression. Cigarettes controlled the breathing, but mimicked anxiety. Coffee cleared out the fog from not sleeping because of the anxiety but it sure did increase that anxiety. I was ‘lucky’ – i didn’t start on any other drugs, not like a lot of my kin who are mentally ill.

  106. This thread makes me so angry I could SCREAM!

    You hear that, Renee? I’m ANGRY! You write this post about how patriarchy uses words like ANGRY and IRRATIONAL and HYSTERICAL to silence women —

    And then you call women who disagree with you, who take offense at something you said, “ridiculous”, you imply they’re oversensitive, you call them twits —

    You’re being a hypocrite. We’re all hypocrites now and then, but you’re a hypocrite with a podium, and that’s problematic.

    It’s a problem for me, because I read your words, and I can’t help but wonder, “Would she think I’m a twit, because I started Prozac two weeks ago? I wonder if she’d think the discussions I had first with a therapist, then my GP, and then a psychiatrist, rigorous enough? Would she think I was weak-willed for acquiescing to prescription drugs after I broke down and cried in front of my therapist? How would she judge me? How would she assess my self worth? What would she think – what would shah8 think – of my mother, who has been so miserable she tried to erase her existence, who is white and female and upper class – and who drinks to dull the pain? Who drinks until she can barely feel any longer? Oh, yes, I get it – she’s a twit who deserves no sympathy, despite the anguish she’s been in for years and years, anguish I’ve witnessed, anger profound enough that she tried to overdose on PROZAC – that dull twit.”

    And I sat here for a good thirty minutes and let recrimination and doubt and self-loathing — symptoms of depression — swirl about in my head because once again someone was judging the way in which the mentally ill are forced to live. It is because of people like YOU that mental illness is so stigmatized. It is because of the things people like YOU say and do that I have spent months hating myself for being weak enough, stupid enough, lazy, broken, flawed, dysfunctional enough, to be depressed, anxious, insomniac —

    Angry? Yeah, I’m FUCKING PISSED.

  107. @ALexandra I hear you and my answer is too bad….I personally am done with the whining and carrying on over the “over medicated prozac twit” commentary. It was clear who it was directed at in the post. I have explained it ad nauseum and I even apologized too anyone that happened to take offense but I am DONE saying sorry and DONE explaining myself. So happy that you had your little rant but I have personally reached the point where I don’t give a shit anymore. This is a great post and all you want to do is focus on ONE line in it that was a commentary on people that over medicate…Key here over medicate rather than the legitimately ill.
    Once again people are so caught up in their own damn drama that they don’t want to deal with larger issues…whoa is me of course she is referring to me…she is centering me out…boo fucking hooo, though that is clearly not what I meant. So if you cannot except my apology and explanation I am done. BTW it occurs to me that this centering in that seems common here is silencing behavior. Of course we cannot talk about the issues…It’s easier to throw stones. See last week I reposted this elsewhere…yes I posted this on a site that for people dealing with medical health issues to test the commentary that was here and guess the fuck what…not a single word about that. People actually focused on the post itself. Now I know exactly what I am dealing with here. So Madam ostrich enjoy your rage but I am DONE….

  108. Even on a crap thread like this, I always learn something new…

    The case of those australian aborigines who tried to sub alcohol for kava and still wound up abusing that is interesting.

    thanks, Ananke

    Like I’ve said before, I really have a love/hate thing going with self-medication. I don’t think people should do that, but I also don’t think anyone should let people/corps corral others to hot new expensive drugs when there are old cheapies (adrafanil compared to modafanil), or suitable herbs (kava compared to paxil). If you have the money and the time, *always* see a professional willing to work with you for your psychological care, though. Do the behavior mod and talk therapy stuff suggested. Doing stuff by yourself is always a workaround.

Comments are currently closed.