I sat down and had a nice chat with a very normal American man. The most exciting thing, I think, was that he's been studying Russian. So, that's somewhat exotic.
But I have a horrible, sinking feeling when, after talking to this man with such good intentions, I realize maybe 40% of the public could never grasp or believe my life or understand the things that have happened, and then 40% more could care less, 10% are aware of the possibilities but are afraid to talk about it or act, and then...Oh I don't even know.
I asked him if he's ever had anything out of the ordinary happen to him, in his life, and he said yes, brightening up and saying everyone does. So I ask and he says "This one time a woman I was dating seemed to have a normal life, and she started having problems with her landlord who then threw a wireless router at her, and I thought that was the end of it, but everything escalated after that."
I asked what the strange thing was that happened. That was it. Well, and then he did have some girlfriend lie about being pregnant when she wasn't and that was hard, but he got over it.
Definitely not good. But out-of-the-ordinary?
How in the world would half the people out there even be able to believe me?
The first thing he said that was really weird was that he'd watched a movie called "The Bridge" which is a documentary about San Francisco suicides and how this guy who was his friend always joked about "ending it all" and how this movie said when someone jokes about this, they usually do it, or try it, within a year or two.
He said he watched this movie and that it was sad because these people had mental illnesses and if they'd only realized there was always hope and something around the corner and that it was selfish to commit suicide because even if they thought no one cared, they were always leaving someone behind who loved them.
I thought, "Why is he telling me this? Is someone thinking I'm going to commit suicide if life doesn't go my way--if I don't get my son back and my rights are terminated?"
I said to him, "First of all, people who commit suicide are not always mentally ill. There are plenty of people who make a very conscious choice to end their lives, and it has nothing to do with mental illness. For whatever reason, to end their suffering (if it cannot be controlled), they end their lives. There are people who jumped off of bridges after the Wall Street crash who were not suffering from mental illness, who simply made this choice out of desperation, or who made this choice as a willful way to end things. It is not always necessary, for someone to end their life, to be mentally ill or chemically imbalanced first."
Then I said, "And if they ARE mentally ill, it's not even their fault and they didn't have a very good chance to MAKE good choices for themselves."
I went on to talk about all of the mentally ill people in the U.S. jail and prison system who end up on death row and even executed, and they're accused of being both mentally ill and culpable for crimes. Like Eileen W. who probably had a severe case of PTSD and maybe some gained sociopathy after being repeatedly raped and abused by men and finally turning around, in a disordered state, and killed those whom she identified with the rapists, who were picking her up for prostitution. She was reacting out of severe trauma and total mental illness, and while it doesn't make her killings RIGHT, it doesn't mean she should have been put to death. She may not have been insane, per se, but she was obviously suffering from battered woman's syndrome which is basically PTSD, but she probably had the most serious form, and also had some psychotic or delusional associations stemming from her trauma.
I just recently SAW a "case" on CourtTV where the prosecution was going on and ON about how mentally ill the man was, and how he was a total sociopath, and they put him to death. If the man was truly a sociopath and THAT mentally ill, why was he put to death and not put in a mental institution instead? Since when is it possible to be a sociopath and not be "insane" at the same time? I'm sorry, but I fail to see the logic. It seems to me, more like, life is just cheap if you're mentally ill, and cheaper still, if crimes are committed which stem from the illness. Kill all the mentally ill who society didn't treat through medication or preventative measures first.
One exception...How does one detect the Ted Bundy's? The lawyer, who walks around in society with no one suspecting a thing, living a seeming "normal" life. The man had no BLOG by God.
He dated, socialized, and seemed perfectly normal, and even practiced law in a firm and yet he's committed crime when no one is looking and he's getting away with it for years. He certaintly didn't seem to be "insane" by the technical definition of the word. So I suppose he's one who borders the insane line and is still sociopathic. Or was he really just a plain old sadist?
When did he cross the line?
They say mental illness, true mental illness, is the magnification of basic human traits that most of us have, but on a grander and extreme scale. Sometimes, it's chemical and can be treated, and sometimes it's a personality disorder which no medication will touch.