MirkerLurker

Sounds like a great guy, and a great start.

Don't overthink it. Terrified? Tell him! Excited? Tell him! You two will figure it out together. You'll be fine. Also, congrats! I feel you there. *hugs* Yeah. That is exactly what I mean. I'm sure the instrumental bits are fine. I totally get the "but it's not perfect" though, haha. I spent so long fiddling with the lyrics for the one I wrote. So. Long. It's never perfect.

*hugs* Yes. Great bonding technique, agreed. Yes. Can't get the different parts of me to agree or even make sense. And it just fractures me apart more, bit by shattered bit. *squeezes super tight* Those are real. Holy crap, Kansas, that's beautiful. I mean, it's not 'happy'. But wow, you nailed it. I remember that. I remember that so well. I spent years living with the broken numbness, taking comfort only from knowing that at least I'm helping others. Waiting with wistfulness, with longing for the day I was no longer needed, so I could finally go, leave, be done. Finally fly, drift away for good. Occasionally hoping again, feeling again, getting broken again, going numb again. Holding to those I cared about, even as the rest of me, everything except my grip on them, crumbled and blew away. Moving, functioning, but empty; a shell with human skin, a mask with nothing left behind it. And sometimes that faded to the background, and I could feel things; but it was always there in the back of my mind, waiting; never gone. Except now it is. It's a memory now. I still remember it; I still have the shape it left behind in my mind; but I'm not numb anymore. I get foggy sometimes, slow and have to push through, but not empty, not anymore. You can heal. It doesn't have to stay. You can learn how to feel again. It hurts like hell sometimes, that process. But it also brings joy. It's not quick. But it comes. I don't know why you're broken. But you're not broken beyond repair. I'll be here to help with that if I can. I can't promise to be here frequently, every time you need help. I'm glad we've got a group, to share that helping. But I can promise I will keep coming back. And saying it again, I want to hear the songs you write be played and sung. I'll sing them with you if you'd like. I love your songs. They're real. They show the you behind the mask. And I want to see more. Right, hey, speaking of songs, this is what I came on to share. I just found this guy's music, and storming crem, this song is good.

First off, this is a great concise summary/statement of your view, thank you. I'm with you on a lot of that. That there is an objective truth; that human perception is flawed and we can never be truly certain that our perception is correct; that we do our best to define how things work, and base our actions on the best evidence we have, with the understanding that we could be proven wrong. Things we have more evidence for, we hold more strongly; things we have less evidence for, we hold more loosely (or base actions on less). And with that, I believe God exists. Could I be wrong? Yes. But I don't think I am. (and Dragonheir noted Pascal's Wager, which is an element in the background here of "if it turns out I'm wrong, I've lost nothing of consequence, while if it turns out I'm right, the result is eternity-changing.") Alright. Why do I believe God exists? (I'm going to make statements without giving concrete sources for them up front; not because there aren't sources, but because I learned a lot of this by listening - to podcasts by historians and theologians, to preachers, to articles read out loud, etc - and I can't for the life of me remember the names of them, and going back and finding them isn't as easy as opening up a book to find the footnotes or a webpage to reference. I make sure that the stuff I listen to names their sources, and as I'm listening I listen for "is that a respectable source, are there multiple sources, etc" but my brain does not remember names and I cannot requote them at you without going back and finding them, which will take time. I will absolutely go find the sources you're interested in - ask me about any of the things I say and I'll start digging up some of the backing evidence. But I want to focus my time on where your questions lie.) I would start with the life and death of Jesus Christ. The actual, real existence of the man called Jesus the Christ, Jesus of Nazareth, Jesus of Galilee (all the same person) is very well documented, historically speaking. From a historical research and evidence standpoint, we have more certainty of the reality and life events of Jesus than we do of Alexander the Great, or Plato, or Julius Caesar. There's never 100% agreement between scholars of any type in any field; but it's a pretty well accepted fact among professional historians, both christians and nonchristians alike, that Jesus was a real person who lived around the turn of our calendar system, whose life and actions we have real evidence for. The few who argue that Jesus didn't exist, or was actually multiple people, are rather scoffed at as crazy conspiracy theorists, because there's so much evidence to the contrary. Once we've established that there was a real person named Jesus Christ who lived around the turn of our current calendar system, who led a group of followers, who taught a rather revolutionary message including elements like "women are important too" and "I am God" that got him in trouble with the local authorities of the time, (and feel free to keep reading even though you're not sold, I'm just establishing order of operations) the next step is to examine more closely the evidence for his death and resurrection. His death - again, pretty much undisputed. The number of details given, from both the biblical texts and other nonChristian historical texts of the time, that line up with other things we know about that time period, and even some details that weren't something people of that time would have known about that are now demonstrated true, are solid. (Jesus sweating blood while awaiting his arrest and subsequent torture, for example - medical research of the time did not know that was a thing, and early doubters and critics of Christianity list that as evidence against the veracity of the written recordings of his death, but modern medical research has now shown that to be a real but very rare condition seen in people under extreme stress. The fact that that is recorded, when no one of the time would have known to make it up if this was fictional, is a point in favor of the historical accuracy of the text. And other things - like Pontius Pilate, the local ruler who gave the official order to crucify Jesus, being surprised by how quickly Jesus died and sending a soldier to go verify it - line up perfectly with other historical records of the culture and procedures of the time. I believe we even have a bit of testimony from the soldier who was sent to verify the death, though I won't stand by that, I might be misremembering that bit.) The historicity of the resurrection is more debated, of course, because a) it's a more unlikely claim and therefore we're more skeptical and want stronger evidence, and also b) because a lot of the evidence and support for Jesus being God, and therefore God existing, rests on the resurrection really happening. We don't rest life-changing views of reality on whether Plato was a real person - heck, he could be made up for all we care, we can still find interesting logic and possible truth in the arguments attributed to his name without needing it to actually be him that wrote them. But Jesus rising from the dead? People stake massive life-changing beliefs on that being true. So. Here are some non-conclusive but supporting points in favor of the resurrection. 1) There were several hundred witnesses. We obviously can't talk to them ourselves, but the biblical texts tell of Jesus appearing to a crowd of several hundred people - a crowd that he told prior to his death to gather in that place and wait there. (A crowd that had every reason to then not do so once he'd died, as the shame and mockery and outright persecution of people still following him was real at the time). Many of those people left their own recordings of that witness, or are referenced by other people telling the story as "hey, go talk to these people, they actually saw him". They have names, they have testimonies, and we have some recordings of them. He also appeared to a smattering of other people, some of whom we also have first- or second-hand testimonies from. 2) There had been other people claiming to be the Messiah before, who collected a group of followers, went around teaching, and then got killed for heresy. Jesus wasn't the first to do this. Matter of fact, it was kind of a regular thing. And each and every time, the group of followers fell apart after the claimant died, went back to their old jobs and homes and never got back together. Except Jesus' followers. For some reason, something was clearly different this time (whether it was Jesus resurrecting or not, something was different), because this group of followers not only continued believing instead of falling away, but they also started spreading the word - and many people of the time believed them, despite the insanity of their claim - even as the cultural authorities of the time were actively hunting and killing them for it. People who watched their leader get tortured and then murdered would need some damn good motivation and evidence to keep promoting his message afterwards; and then to watch their compatriots get shunned, beaten, arrested, and murdered, and still keep spreading the message. 3) One of those followers who believed and spread the word of Jesus' resurrection was his younger brother James. His brother who, we see in the text, spent Jesus' whole life telling him "Dude, you need to stop. You're not God. You're embarrassing the whole family. Omg, please stop." It wasn't until after witnessing Jesus' death and resurrection that James finally believed - and then went around telling everyone "Yeah, my brother is God. Yeah, the one I kept telling you was crazy. Yeah, I was wrong, and my sibling is actually God and you should worship him, and that's super embarrassing for me to admit." (I paraphrased, and wrote in some emotions there. But how many siblings do you know who would spend years telling people their sibling was crazy, then watch him get murdered, and then flip and start telling everyone their sibling was God?) And that message that the followers were spreading...it stayed. This wasn't the first God claim to be made, or the last. But something happened that literally changed the course of history. (Tangent: We in the West owe a LOT of our modern philosophies to the ideas that came out of Christianity. The idea of equality for all; that all humans have worth; that emotions are valid; that forgiveness is a good thing; these are things most Western people assume as true, and even sometimes tell Christians that the Christians are doing badly [sometimes true], but that actually came out of the influence of Christian philosophies being taught back in the early AD/CE centuries.) And once you've established the resurrection, or at least enough reasonable evidence for it that you have to seriously consider it, you look at Jesus' teachings through the lens of "This guy actually had the authority and knowledge of God the Creator" and go back and read what he taught with that in mind. Which ties back into the "We humans have flawed perception and can't ever fully know truth", by the way. We can't. But if we have reasonable belief in a Creator (as evidenced prior), and then we have a Revelation from that Creator about what actually is True (His Son, and His Word), then we can be as certain of that Truth as we are of the existence of the Creator. (And I phrase it that way on purpose - if you're uncertain of the Creator, then the Revelation doesn't mean anything. But if you accept that the source/creator of the real Truth chose to directly reveal some of that Truth to us, then you can hold those pieces that were revealed as more certain than anything else, since it's not based only on flawed human observation, but on direct revelation, onto which we can also add human observation to confirm it.) And we're back at the gravity illustration. Can we ever be fully 100% certain that we have correctly perceived and labelled the truth of Jesus' life? No. But there is enough evidence, backed up by other sources and spanning thousands of years, to give a strong foundation. And therefore, like with gravity, although I know I could be proven wrong at some point, I find it reasonable and wise to act in accordance with the idea that that is True. And frankly, I believe it to be true, as well as I can believe anything to be true. And therefore, I will change my actions in accordance to the guidance of God's Word. ...That's a large part of why I'm willing to talk about mental health here, btw. God tells us to care for those around us. Maybe I want to hide, fake it, never tell anyone, just disappear. I would never have come to an online forum, talked with people I've never seen, about this stuff. But God tells Christians (through Jesus and through the Bible) to be in community with those around them; to encourage one another, to support one another, to lead by example, to put ourselves second and others first. So, y'all are more important than my fears, than my selfish desires. And now I've been helped too, by listening to that, and getting to hear your stories, and your support. You'll find Christians who refuse to question their faith, by the way; who will insist that they never have any doubts, that there can't possibly be any way they're wrong. I generally find that those who refuse to question are afraid. Afraid that when they ask those questions, or admit they have doubts (because we're human, we all do sometimes, they just don't admit it), that they will not be able to answer them. And they don't want to face that, so they refuse. (You'll find that mentality in other places too, not just Christianity - people don't like to question their core assumptions or beliefs, especially those on which their sense of identity rests.) But I find that questioning, acknowledging doubts and seeking answers, is how we grow our understanding and strengthen our beliefs (whether in science or religion or people, or whatever). I have certainly gone through periods of doubt. When I doubt the existence of God at all, I look at the historical evidence for Christ. When I doubt God's goodness or His love for people, I look at the way that Jesus treated people, the messages He taught, and the way God protected His people throughout the Old Testament. When I doubt my perception or understanding, I talk to others who believe (and sometimes others who don't) and ask them for their reasoning. You can also get into medical or biological or philosophical or ontological arguments and evidence for the existence of God. Dragonheir brought up the cosmological argument - and you did too, actually (everything is the result of or a reaction to something else; everything has a cause, but where is the first cause? What could have caused something from nothing? Only something with what we consider to be "divine" attributes, as opposed to physics as we understand them.) That only argues for the existence of something outside our current understanding of physics, not "the God of the Bible", but it's a good addition to the pile of arguments and thoughts for "some kind of greater Being or Source". And from there you can move to "what is that greater Source, and how can we understand more about it?" I only looked at historical here, and only at a bit of it at that. There's more, believe me. There's...so much more. There's so many books and papers of arguments for the existence of God. You may have noticed, it's something people like to argue about As a side note, I also have some religious experience arguments, like Dragonheir cited. I've occasionally felt what I would call God's presence. I have places in my life that I would identify as God at work, circumstances and situations that line up too perfectly. But I don't base my foundational belief on them. Those feelings are the fleshing out, the beauty that colors the more solid framework of my belief. Not the floor, the foundation on which it rests. I disagree actually - historians generally consider the bible to be a reliable source for historical information. The parts written as history (dates, events, names) are mostly verifiable through other documents; places where there are differences often line up with cultural behaviors of the time (reciting generational lines as groups of 7 generations between important people, even if it means skipping some people in the recitation, for example). And especially the more divisive parts - like the life of Jesus - are pretty well documented and backed up by other sources. (The bible as a whole is not all a historical document - it is a collection of books, some of which are meant to be historical recordings, some of which are parables or storytelling, some of which are prophetic, some of which are prayers or advice for people. But the parts where the accuracy of the history matters are researched and backed up.) "Math" is the one of the labelling systems that we use to describe the objective reality of the universe. We can change the labels we use (2+2=1), but it doesn't change the objective reality, just what scribble we assign that meaning to. When we change math, it's because we realize we described something incorrectly or incompletely, not because the function of reality itself changed. Curiousity: How do you reconcile the existence of contradictory beliefs, if you believe that each person's belief is true for them? For example, one person believes there is a God, and another believes there is not. I think you've addressed this already, but I want to make sure I'm understanding you correctly. You would say that that one of those people might be objectively correct, but since we have no way of determining which one is correct, for practical purposes it makes no difference which one is right, and so we can let them both believe differently? Bit of a devil's advocate here, but yes. The idea is that it's incredibly statistically unlikely for us to have developed, but there have been SO many places for SO long that eventually, the energy chugging randomly along bouncing around eventually happened to bounce in exactly the correct way to end up with people. And statistically, that means there are probably a small number of planets where at some point there was some semblance of life, that got partway through developing but failed for some reason or other.

Ok. Back to light speed: The fact that there are circumstances in which light moves at a different speed doesn't mean there isn't an objective truth - just that we started by defining it incorrectly. We set a definition based on observation, and used it until we observe exceptions. Then we study where and why those exceptions occur, and modify our definition to better match the objective truth. "Light always travels at C" becomes "Light always travels at C unless acted on by an external force". (Ok, there's probably more that should be included in that definition - like what forces are capable of affecting lightspeed - but I hope you see what I mean.) That's science. Science is the process through which we compare multiple viewpoints to eliminate as many variables (our faulty perception included) as possible and ascertain as best we can what is objectively True. To throw a mildly absurd example to question: Gravity. Would you acknowledge the existence of the force we call "Gravity" as objectively True? I pick gravity on purpose, because we don't actually know why it works, despite much study. Scientists still debate and research that. But no one debates whether it's affecting us right now; and we've got a pretty darn good definition of what it affects and how it affects those things. No one debates "is light affected by gravity", because...we've done studies. We've done so many studies. We've compiled so many data points. If you ask someone "Is gravity real"...you don't really have any debate. To summarize: We don't have a full understanding of gravity (our 'definition [like our light definition] is still incomplete), but we can conclusively say that there is something objectively there - and we can conclusively describe a lot of its characteristics. Does the fact that we can't describe ALL of it mean that we can't trust the parts we can describe? (Again to the absurd) Does the fact that I don't know why or how gravity pulls things towards the center of mass mean that I'm never sure that if I drop an apple, it will fall towards earth? There's two possible "base" responses to that point, and I have a follow up question for either: If you read that and say "YES" - Yes, the fact that we can't define all of it means that we truly can't trust the functions we have defined." Then...how do you science? Not trying to be insulting, just legitimately confused. Or maybe better question: We can't fully trust the functions we observe, but it's clearly important to make educated guesses and assumptions on some of them in order to function (If you decided "I don't trust gravity to work every time, therefore I'm going to walk off this cliff and expect to not fall", you would have an obvious problem.) So how do you decided what researched observations to accept and use? If you read that and say "NO" - No, the fact that we can't define all of it does NOT mean that we can't trust the functions. We can trust that apples will fall towards earth if we drop them, even if we can't fully define why." Then where's the line at which evidence crosses from "insufficient to determine any kind of objectivity" to "sufficient to determine x, y, or z"? What kind of evidence does it take, how much of it, etc? How many different viewpoints, how many studies, how much variation in results. Final note: Does any of that make sense, or do you think I hit a logical fallacy or missed something? Is there a better question I could be asking, is my example flawed?

oof. Yeah. I'm sorry. *hug* ...I forgot to quote, this is in response to @Heřãłðøfľõvê

...geez. *hugs* Can you ask your parents and psychiatrist about having a joint session? A session (or more) where your parents (maybe one at a time tho...) are there with you, and the psychiatrist helps guide the talk and provide professional commentary? Ask the psychiatrist first though, to see whether they think it would be helpful. ...i mean. we prolly would. soo. I'm amused at this problem. That's tough. *hug* You didn't mean it. But it did hurt Sophia even though you didn't mean it. I think what you can do is apologize - to Sophia and also to Lee - and ask how you can help make it better. Whether they accept it or not is up to them. Possible advice to consider - but I don't know your friends, so take it or leave it, as it may not be a good idea. Know what's really, really hard? Admitting that you lied right when you do it. Say the lie, realize you're supposed to not do that...and immediately, right then, say "Wait. I'm sorry. That wasn't true. This is actually what's true." The person/people you're speaking to will probably still get upset - but they'll also be able to see that you're working on it, and actively trying to get better about not lying. I don't know your friends; that might help them feel better about you. It might not. Oh wait! I came on to link the "off topic mental health" thread that Stormcursed got up and running. It's currently got the religion/subjective truth debate going. Anyone can feel free to pop in, whether to join the debate or just read for fun.

How are you claiming that light always travels at the same speed? Wouldn't that be an objective truth? I'm going to go to science for this, I think. But I'm going to start by confirming I'm understanding you correctly. Your response is mostly based on human perception - we each see things through our own lens, our own perception, so how can we know what the real objective truth was? As in, there very well may be a real objective truth, but because we have no way of discerning it (due to everyone's experience being different), it's not practical to try and interact with objective truth. ...Actually, I'm going to wait to debate that until you reply with confirmation or correction. It'll mean a slow conversation, but any response I give will be dependent on whether I'm understanding your position correctly. I mean, if I give a response, and then you point out "That's not what I was trying to say", then my response was irrelevant and I'm debating with myself

*hugs* I'm sorry. I wish I could do more to help That sucks, I'm sorry. Yes, let's do it!

If it's a discussion you want to continue, pms are always open, or we could start another religion thread, or a group message thread. And if it's not, that's fine - I'm happy to agree to disagree and leave it there. I can see the logic you're following. (Though I'm curious - do you believe all truth is subjective? Or that there are some objective truths, just not as many as most people think they're are? I'd be curious to hear a defense of 'there is no such thing as objective truth' from you if that's your perspective.) At the end of the day, you and I disagree about whether religion is an objective or subjective truth, and I'm perfectly happy to agree to disagree. I like you either way, so. Ooh, devil's advocate! Yay! On the false trichotomy: ooh, you're right, I started with the assumption that there is only one Jesus in question. Good point. I made that assumption without thinking about it, however, because we actually have a ton of historical evidence for the existence and life/works of the man (singluar) called Jesus Christ. We have more historically verifiable evidence of his life than we do for Alexander the Great, Plato, or Julius Caesar. Which connects to your point about the Bible having differences in its repeating stories. (I want to note that the differences are not outright contradictions; one person retelling an event remembering different details or things happening in a different order than another person recalling the same event is not a contradiction of the truth of the event.) But! The differences in the different retellings, and the fact that we have many manuscripts with different wording, actually make it less likely that the source material has been confused or mixed up or had false information. Historians look for many copies with many differences to trace out the story of how an original document actually appeared, and many narrators with many different retellings to trace out how an event actually happened. The more retellings and the more differences, the more certain we can be that we have the real story. ...sorry for a bit of a nerd rant. I find that aspect of historical study fascinating. As for omnipotence: That doesn't actually mean what most people think it means. God cannot contradict his own nature. He cannot do anything evil, for example. He cannot sin, and He cannot not exist, because existence is part of his nature. ...yeah ok, too much theology for this thread. The important thing I want to say: both Hoid and Stormcursed said something along the lines of "don't feel to need to believe something you don't actually believe." Yes. I wholeheartedly agree with this. You should always be willing to question your beliefs. Question your assumptions, your beliefs; it will help you be clear about what you do and don't find to be true, and feeling confident in what is and is not true is incredibly helpful to your sense of self, of stability. And any religion (or any other belief of informative thing or whatever) that demands you not question it, or implies you're bad for questioning it, is suspect.

Warning: Religion post Note: This is probably adding a lot to your overall stress. Not saying that as a "you should be fixing that" but as a "remember that you're going through a lot, and doubting your faith is a big part of it". Religious beliefs that you're raised in are very foundational, and questioning them can change or threaten to change a LOT of how you view and interact with the world. Also, I would recommend putting "sorting through how you feel about religion" into a higher priority than a lot of other things, because it is so foundational. Ok, the rest of this is going into a spoiler box, because I'm going to gently (hopefully gently?) poke at the religion topic that got brought up. Again - to any whom I respond to, please don't feel the need to respond, and please let me know if something I say bothers you. (I'm also not sure if this really belongs in this thread, but religious beliefs impact mental health a LOT, so I think discussing religion fits, but obviously that can be a sensitive topic, so.) Ok Kvothe is not a good character to compare yourself to - not only because he's a "hero" archetype who accomplishes way more than even other people in that story do, let alone real people, but also because he's not a great hero, and I don't really like his personality. He's charismatic, yes, and I found the books interesting, but him personally...don't feel the need to try to be Kvothe. You're not stupid or crazy for comparing yourself to fictional characters, though. Fiction is how we tell truths that are too hard for reality. We learn about truth and about ourselves through storytelling. Of course we compare ourselves to the characters. We look at what behavior goes well, and what doesn't. How characters react. How real people react to the characters. The fiction stories that are good, the ones that stick with you, are the ones that are about truth. (I.E. why Stormlight is so good. Kaladin may be fictional, but the depression he models, and the ideals he chases, are not; Dalinar may be fictional, but the struggles and the determination he demonstrates aren't; etc.) ...also I am both a diligent martial arts student and a lazy bum who struggles every day with starting tasks and doing things. So. Take that as you will.

yes that's what I mean. I have on and off depression, along with overstimulation. I offer words for "if they're helpful", but I completely understand "I can't bring myself to process that right now. That's too much. Moving is too much. Thinking takes too much work. Maybe later I'll be functional enough to look at that...maybe not..." Yeah. Ignore me if you can't process right now. That's fine.

*hug* Yep, that fits into "dissociating". Dissociating is a symptom, not a diagnosis. It's common to a number of different mental health issues. If being lazy means you're too lazy to actually go k- yourself, then by all means, be lazy. We like having you around. Besides, lazy people are more chill to hang out with. You don't need to know what you're doing here. Pick something. Does it need to be big or important? Nah. Does it need to stay the same forever? Absolutely nah. Change it on a whim. Be here for a cat, because the cat needs you. YES ABSOLUTELY IGNORE ME You can respond later, or not at all, and that's FINE. You could come back in ten months and respond and I'd just be like "yeah ok, so blah blah responding" I totally get "too much, can't do that right now". You can always respond to my things in your own time, or not at all.

Haly already said this, but I’ll echo it: It’s not “shouldn’t”. There is no “should” when it comes to emotions. They are what they are. You’re not bad, or too much, or wrong, or anything like that for having struggles. Minor note here. Use if helpful, discard if you’ve already tried this. High likelihood you’ve tried some or all of this already, but I'll offer it in case. Feeling bad after eating sounds like you’re eating the “wrong” things. (Not quite the right words, but I’m trying.) It sounds like your body wants specific kinds of foods, and/or specific amounts, to be ok. Try different things (all carbs? No carbs? Only liquids? Only protein?) - and keep doing whatever works, even if it’s against “conventional” dietary logic. Eat tiny amounts of food frequently throughout the day, or don’t eat at all until evening. Try “stupid” or “unhealthy” things - watch your health to be prepared in case you feel worse, but try them. Can’t eat food but need blood sugar? Try drinking sugary liquids. Your body is yours specifically. Find what works for it, not for “everyone”. I used to feel like throwing up after breakfast every day. I tried different foods and food groups, I tried coffee/no coffee, I tried smaller amounts, larger amounts; no dice. I felt sluggish, foggy, and nauseous. Finally I said “screw it” and stopped eating breakfast. Guess what? I’m better now! Because I don’t eat breakfast anymore. Anytime I do, I feel sick. So I don’t. (For other people, that might make them dizzy or cause other problems, but for my body, that’s what I need.) So look, if consuming nothing but sugary coffee throughout the day and only eating solid foods at dinner makes your health better, do it. Take a multivitamin to keep yourself reasonably balanced, and make sure to get bloodwork done at your yearly physical with your doctor to check if there’s any long-term effects. (Obligatory side note: I am not a doctor. Please stay current with your doctor, let them know what changes you’ve made and what effects you’ve experienced, and get all your regular checkups and tests done.) It’s good that you’ve tried other things already. It’s good that you’re working to do what you can and figure out what helps. Someone offering ideas, and you telling them you’ve tried those already, is a confirmation that those things sound like they could help, and also communicating that for you they didn’t. It’s how we dialogue about helping. If we can’t say “how about this?” “Tried that one” “ok, how about…” then we can’t help each other, we can’t talk to each other. - That sounds like burnout. Used to snap out of it naturally, but don’t any more. Triggers are anger and stress (others’ or your own) - anything that triggers anxiety. Burnout and depression often go hand in hand. Silver said it already (Silver’s post was AWESOME and honestly I’m not sure why I’m adding anything), but you’ve been going through a LOT. Of course you’re burning out. You’ve been carrying too much, for too long. Your ability to recover and bounce back has been emptied, depleted. Your brain, your emotions, are too tired, too worn down, to logic properly. I wish I had better advice to help. But I know you know all the basic depression things - smell grass, drink water, get sleep, eat a balanced diet, get good exercise; all those lovely ideas that always work great on paper or some diagnostic chart. Burnout adds the ever-so-helpful “do what you can to change your life circumstances to reduce stress”. Because I definitely wasn’t doing that already. Yep. Thank you. And because I have so much control over my daily routine and living situation, etc. Yes, I’ll just push that magic button to remove stress from my life. Why didn’t I think of that sooner??? Maybe helpful, maybe not: physical routine changes take 12 weeks to show noticeable effects. A new workout, for example, won’t have you seeing noticeable strength increases until a few months after you start it. Well, mental health is often the same. New habits, new things we try, don’t always show results right away, but that doesn’t mean they’re not working. Our brains take time to change. Don’t give up on a new thing you’re trying if it doesn’t feel like it’s working fast enough. And hey Hawks? I'm glad you're here. I like hearing from you. Hey, welcome! Thanks for sharing your story. No worries about rambling - that's basically why we're here! !! COOKIE!!! You're back! And you're...er...smiling...wait, that's...that's more like an evil grin... ...this could be bad, or very very fun. Anyways, welcome back! NOM I wanna add a note about leaving someone on READ - because I do it whenever I'm overwhelmed or can't focus. I've tried to get better about dropping a quick "saw this, will come back to it later" to at least let the other person know that I'm not deliberately ignoring them. But esp when I'm struggling with depression or overstimulation, I often check a message to see if it's something I'm capable of responding to at the moment, but then don't respond because it's not something I can do in that moment. And I'll come back to it when I can - when my brain is functioning again or whatever - but it'll say "READ" but have no reply because I care enough that I wanted to try, at least. I wanted to try to answer. That's not the case for everyone, of course. And them not seeing it at all b/c they're not online is a different thing, I'm just commenting on the "message left on READ" part. I SECOND THIS Yes I wanna see, you should post it! ...wait you said go look at your art thread, I'm blind I will come back later for the religion stuff, I have thoughts but no more time to write atm.

Woo hoo!! Oh noes. GUYS GUYS GUESS WHAT?! You know that super awkward social situation where someone else knows your name and says hi, and you have no idea who that person is?? I just had that happen, and I successfully navigated it!! I managed to make it not awkward, and then I engaged in small talk until my order was ready!! AND I managed to remember their name by the end of the conversation!! I've attracted gloryspren, I tell you.

... *stares for an awkwardly long moment at the brownie half* *takes brownie half* *smushes self against Storm's side, shoulder to shoulder* *eats brownie half*

I believe the appropriate thing to say here is "Break a leg!" (Only, y'know, don't actually. Way too much paperwork if you actually do it.)

Not for nighttime, but do you have noise-cancelling headphones? Those can be used to take a break even when it's loud around you. Ask Skye for recommendations if you want, I know he has them and uses them in loud environments. *hugs* YES! I love this scene, and this speech. You're right, this guy's voiceover is great. Not quite what I picture Wit sounding like, but great inflection and timing.

So: Yes, it will get bad again. But then it will get good again. And it will get less bad the next time. And more good the next time. We fluctuate. We go up and down. Healing progress that we make doesn't guarantee us "no more bad". But it lessens the bad and increases the good, and makes the good periods longer and the bad ones shorter. So when it eventually does start to feel bad again, remember that it won't last. And you will have good again. And with that stated, enjoy the good time! The bad will come again, yes, but right now it's good! The bad can be dealt with when it comes. Don't let steal the happiness from the good of right now. Grab the good with both hands and spin it on circles! *Hug* So celebrate again when you are feeling good! Enjoy what you can about the "correct timing" celebrations (and I hope you do feel better for them), but then have another one later! *Hugs* *proudly waves weirdo flag* *Looks at Stormcursed* *Wraps weirdo flag around Stormcursed's shoulders, gives another hug, and hands a brownie* Oooof. You need a bubble to escape into and take a nap. *hug* So. As an adult, I can tell you it will be ok. It does get better. Some of the getting better takes work. Some of it takes time. But it does get better. I realize that's fairly vague. But on the overall whole, it's also true. Won't always look or feel like it's true. But zooming out and taking a wider perspective, it's true.

Ah hmm. Yeah I'm unfamiliar with the LDS specific doctrines and covenants, so I don't have a response to that. I'll look them up someone when I'm not supposed to be sleeping. As for the side note: yes omg I feel you. My doc changed when I'm supposed to take them, and I keep forgetting and teaching them at the wrong time. But forgetting then altogether is even worse *hug* at least you realized why it's awful at the moment ..

Doing ok, doing ok. Struggling some with getting things done. Fluctuating between doing things and not doing things. Kinda vague I realize. My advice always comes with the caveat that since I don't know anything other than this post and don't know you or her personally, take the advice as a suggestion and discard it if it doesn't work for you. Avoid outright contradicting her; if she genuinely thinks she's a bad person, then if she's told "No you're not", she probably won't believe you. She'll think you're just being nice or something like that. Ask questions instead. "Why do you think you're a bad person?" "Does that make me a bad person too, since I like you and trust you?" Tailor your questions to her and her responses, obviously; but I like to ask questions, see what kind of logic the person is following, and then ask more questions that start to poke holes in those logic trains. Help her start to see for herself some of the ways her brain is tricking her. And that you won't judge her or dismiss her. And tell her she means the world to you. Maybe she'll believe you, maybe she won't; but we internalize the things we hear often. Tell her what you like about her, and tell it to her often. She may not believe you, but it will start to influence the way she thinks about herself. And keep at it. We often have more effect than we know, but also change and growth can take a while. Don't give up. I don't have a good response, just *hugs* First: Remember that your best is not something you should expect every day. Our culture is awful about that. We can't sustain 100% effort 100% of the time. Great days are awesome, but we won't have them everyday. We'd burn out. Secondly, while what I said is true, it's also normal to want more good days. A sustainable good health level should have a number of good days; depression makes them few and far between, because depression gets in the way of having them. So when you do have one, celebrate it! I understand that grief, the awful realization that this good day should be something you have more of, but you don't, and it just highlights how not-good all the other days are. Go ahead and grieve that. But also celebrate the good day. Don't let depression steal the good from the good day too. YAY! Yeah. Putting down devices is...irritatingly effective. For me it's books too. I use books to escape, and so I have to put them down too. I'm so glad you had a good day! YEP oh yeah, I know lots of things that help...I just don't like them. Sometimes I do them. Sometimes I don't. And then when I don't, I feel guilty, because I know better, and I should be doing better, and I'm doing worse because I'm not doing the things to help, so clearly it's all my fault that I'm not doing well, and those things people say about "if you just tried harder or applied yourself, you'd excel" are true, and I'm actually a rather useless person with no willpower who doesn't contribute anything... I don't like that cycle. Lots of people have misinformation about mental health. Lots of people repeat what their parents say, lots of people don't research it because they think that what they've been 'taught' is true and sufficient. It's miserable, and they're wrong, and it creates so much pain and misery. It is indeed sickening. The sentence "if you don't have scars, you didn't self harm" is straight up not true. The clinical definition does not include that, and includes things that don't leave scars as self-harm. The second part...is horrid. It's an awful way in which the church as a whole is diseased. The church is a place for sinners, for people who are messed up and seeking help; unfortunately, that means it's also full of people who are...messed up. (Please note, I am not saying churches are bad. I think churches are incredibly important. But you can't look at the presence of the church in the world and not also acknowledge that it is imperfect, and sometimes twisted into hatred. Which is awful, and makes me angry and sad and bleh.) Bit of a theological point - not sure if ok here? Taln (or anyone else), pls let me know if this is too religious, I'll pull the comment and put it in a pm or something, not sure what the specific boundaries on this are. We should be careful using "God created us like this" as a defense of things. God created us perfect and sinless; and then humanity turned away, sin entered the world, and we got broken. How we are now is not how we were intended to be. (We weren't supposed to struggle with anxiety, or depression, or self-hm, or alcoholism, or drugs, or any number of things.) We are designed and created in God's image, and He loves us the way we are, but He also grieves over the ways we're broken. He's sad for us, He wants us to be healed and whole again, and He offers us a way to do that - because how we are now isn't fully how we're supposed to be. I'm not saying "you're wrong", I'm saying "Be careful that you don't use that as your only way to defend something - you need biblical backing for why the trait you're defending is part of God's image and plan, and not part of the Fall and the breaking." (sorry if that's not a point you want to go into - defending points based on faulty or low evidence bothers me, esp when the thing is important, so I commented - feel free to ignore!) And I am NOT excusing ANYONE saying they will "beat" the ANYTHING out of ANYONE. That's not ok. We were never supposed to hurt one another, and that I can defend biblically. The statement those people made is horrible. And I'm not going to rant further about it because it makes me angry. *hug* *bigger hug* Oooh, Invictus! Ok, on the one hand. It's cool, it's a neat poem. The last two lines especially get quoted a lot, they're powerful. On the other hand, the last two lines also make me think of this, and I can't help laughing, which kind of breaks the drama of the poem :

I'm so glad, I'm so glad you found this feeling. Yes, write it down. And reread it whenever you're having trouble believing it. Halyyyyyyyyyyyy *hug*

*hugs* You are most welcome. *hug* Ooh, that's a good one! *hug* I'm barely noticeably autistic; I have the sensory stuff, but I actually thought I was ADHD and went and got evaluated and they were like nope, no adhd, but yes autistic. And I went "...huh?" ...but then I considered how stressed I get when my routines are messed with, or when something unexpected happens, and. Well. It jives. I lost my watch chain I keep telling myself to get a new one and forgetting. Yay! Good job going and trying it out. It took numerous months for me to feel like I was even remotely comfortable with my psychologist. Don't be too concerned if it feels like it's not really doing something, or just feels weird. Give it some time. And don't be afraid to try a different psychologist, if you're not liking the one you have after a couple months or visits. But really tho, whether it ends up helping or not, you're trying things. So good job. Hooray! Oh wait! I came on to share a song! I forgot!

Danke! *squeezes Felicity* If it's your choices that brought you here, then your choices can help get you out of it. Remember you are not helpless. Your efforts do make a difference. It's also ok to need help. And to change your goals. To choose things that work with who you are now, and not who you were, or who you think you're supposed to be. Or even who you want to be. You don't need to make it as if you were never broken if you want to go on. You need to stop trying to be who you were and learn how to be who you are now. Who you are now is broken; and that's ok. You're not less of a person because you're broken. You're just a different person. There's always a tomorrow. There's always another chance; always another choice to make. If you want to change who you are now, or where you are now, you can always start again; start differently; go a new direction; try again. "It's not the first step, is it? It's the next step. Always the next step." I don't know what will happen if you fail. But something will. On a practical level, maybe you spend a few years working a low-level job, earning some basic income and getting job experience to put on your resume, and then go back to school and try again, this time with a better idea what you do (or don't) want to do with your life, and maybe with some new motivation to work up out of the job you were in because it was awful. Or maybe you'll find you like the job you got, and go from there. Whatever it is, there are choices, and possibilities, and ways to go forward. They may not be the ones you were trying for; they may not be what you had imagined. But that doesn't mean they can't be good. *hug* Have a plan for what you'll do when the urges come up. Not "don't do it", but what you'll actively do. My therapist gave me the ice trick - run ice cubes over your skin instead of cutting, or stick your wrists in a bowl of ice. But you don't have to use that - just have something that you will actively do, to replace the sh behavior. ohhhhh my poor child. You need baked goods. Here, have a brownie. *hug* Shatter! You have a face! I can see you! Sorry, I know you were complaining about it, but I'm excited to have a face for your words and voice. I think Mag already responded fantastically, so I don't really feel the need to add much. Just that honestly, if I passed you in the library, I would probably steal a second glance as I walked past, because you look like the sort of person I'd like to know. Oh, and a practical note, I always put antibiotic on my scabs when I pick them, I think it helps them heal a bit faster. If you don't do that already, you could try that. Advice my therapist gave me: get ice and run the ice over your skin where you would hurt yourself. Offer that to her. The ice serves the same sort of grounding sensation. Not the same, but can help. And having something specific to do to replace the sh behavior is important. And beyond that, what everybody else said is good. Let her know you're there for her, you accept her, you don't want to see her hurt, you want to help, and there's nothing she can do that would scare you into leaving her. Recommendation: Look at what you enjoy about the things you enjoy doing. The skillsets, the environment, the challenge level, etc. And look for professions that share some of those. If the things you enjoy doing are things in quiet environments, look for professions that tend to have quiet environments. If you enjoy a low challenge level in your hobbies, then look for a job with a low challenge level. If you like a fast-paced hobby with timed challenges, look for that; if you like working with your hands, look for that; if you like creating, look for that, if you like rote work where your mind can wander look for that, etc etc. Don't feel you have to ruin a hobby you love by trying to turn it into a money-making career. Instead, use the hobbies you enjoy as a gauge for what types of work you should look into. Your work can be something that suits you even if it's not something you're passionate about. Also, here is a hug if you would like it. *hug* Yes, what Whirtle said. Mag, this was really well stated. Also, yes, can the club please have spinning chairs?! *grabs another barstool and starts spinning next to Whirtle* Also fluffy blankets and a pile of metal watch chains for sensory reasons. (And Mag, don't worry about diagnosed or not. Your experience is true for you regardless of what label it has. If you share experiences with us, but don't have the label "autism", that doesn't invalidate your experiences. We still share them! Including not looking people in the eye. Ugh. *shudder*) *hug* I'm sorry. That's hard. Yesss. Lying quietly is wonderful. Music, played and listened to, is so useful. One of the things I'm learning, as both a mom and a friend, is to accept the gifts of help that others give me without cheapening them by making it my fault for needing it somehow. We support each other. We want to. Hey, have you read the book Eliza and Her Monsters by Francesca Zappia? If you haven't, you should. Hey Haly? Thanks. Thanks for trusting us with that. For being willing to come here and say all that. For coming here instead of doing something. So she a) thinks you're gross, but b) doesn't think you're unattractive. I'd want clarification on that, cuz that sounds weird to me. But yeah, that's gonna hurt to hear. I'm sorry. *hug* And you're "not very helpful advise-wise" but also "good to talk to" - dude, that means that she likes talking to you and being around you even though you don't have good advice. That's kind of a compliment, I'd say. Or at least, I'd choose to take it that way. And the humor thing...yeah, I feel you there. See if you can start learning from her? Ask her to gently tell you when you're making jokes at the wrong time, and try to look at what social cues were going on at the time so you can learn them for the future. Yeah, it hurts to be told that. It sucks. But if we are willing to accept that we don't like it and work to change, we can do better. And if our friends hear us trying to work on it, they see that we're hearing them and responding to them and trying to care for them. ...So that's my analysis. But, tbh. Her response is rough. I'm sorry. *hug*

When my body is thirsty, I crave...chocolate. Because we've all got some wires crossed up in our brains Yep lol Another day, another death, another resurrection. Cheetah pls? *gives big hugs and cuddles*