As "Norms" are redefined, and boundaries are increasingly being removed toward a more inclusive society,is there any line between alternative life choices and mental /ethical instability ?

Society is set up in a way that you can be or do almost anything you want.

People have changed their skin color, their gender,sexual orientation, surgically altered themselves to look like animals , started religions in which they appointed themselves as God , developed every sexual fettish under the sun including encounters with inanimate objects and animals, etc ... and for the most part, these decisions are only deemed mentally/ethically unstable if someone is killed or severely injured in the process.

Question

In such a fluid society,is there any line between alternative life choices and mental /ethical instability?

Perspective....who decides what, and when changes occur why do they.

body art

subject of curiosity in our family
I had my ears pierced when I was thirteen as a sort of
'coming of age' thing and it was a big deal. My mother took me to the mall
and bought me these pretty little gold studs and after that I was now allowed to shave my legs, wear ( minimal) make up and perfume suitable for a young lady like Love's Baby Soft
tattoos? in my childhood you only saw those on bikers, convicts and carnies
gauged ears were something you might see in national geographic along with neck rings or bound feet or bones thru the nose
henna painting was from India only
this has changed over time

you now see people walking around with some extensive body art going on
I asked my oldest son when does the next tat become just a little too much?

Well.I think in the past , it was a combination of the church, the government and maybe psychological professionals who determined the criteria for normal? Im not sure. None of them turned out to be beacons of morality and mental health themselves ?
Maybe thats why previous norms were challenged?

You brought up a great question snoman, and i only offered a guess . Im not sure what the answer is.

NOBODY knows the answers....we must find within ourselves the line between good and bad.....Where do we go after enlightenment is the real question.

Currently there are
now 71 gender categories...and growing.

I think we should sell when it hits

I only worry about younger adults in that regard tmom,.in terms of potential limits the tats/puercings might impose on certain job opportunitiez. The job market is hard enough out there without inflicting further impediments on oneself

That makes sense snoman . Develop your own ethical or mental stability barometer. Its all you have control over after all. :)

Hmmm... After the enlightenment,.i guess we strive to treat every person with dignity , despite our personal biases? Might be worth striving for but i will be the first to admit... its very hard to do

71 genders ...Wow ! That blows my mind ...

The amounts of "harm."


That's not even remotely true.
People are setting themselves up in a way that they can pretend they can be or do almost anything they want (freedom) and believe it matters when in practical reality it doesn't.

What most "alternative life choices" are is simply shallow "face" communication/manipulations that don't really have an effect on anything meaningful. Individual emotional titillation and masturbation.

At best what you have are historically defined national boundaries surrounding multiple cultures that are self segregating; with individual and small groups of people playing musical chairs for where they go as they randomly and arbitrarily decide which is "best" and compete for hierarchy.


The line is right where it starts harming something that matters to base biology.

As long as new people keep being born, useful people keep the new people alive, old people don't inhibit the useful or new, and a system that facilitates it is being perpetuated, most anything else is just mental and emotional masturbation by the individuals to make themselves feel more important than the minute bit, on some level, they know they are.

Everything you are saying makes sense tom , but it lends itself to the question. Who has the authority to determine who is "pretending" vs those who are getting in touch with who they feel they authentically are?

not really, in my opinion

the mental health profession really only considers it 'instable' if it causes a person trouble functioning in life

that is to say, two people can live the exact same lifestyle, but one feels remorse or guilt or some type of stigma that removes their ability to function and one can be perfectly guilt free about it,, and only the former is mentally 'instable'

literally, anything society can remove stigma from , can be considered an instability one day and not the next

so mental instability has come to mean societal disapproval,,
if society begins to approve, stigma/guilt and most negative self feelings disappear and the 'instability' is no longer and an 'alternative' pops up,,,,




from the APA

Mental illnesses are health conditions involving changes in thinking, emotion or behavior (or a combination of these). Mental illnesses are associated with distress and/or problems functioning in social, work or family activities.

"literally, anything society can remove stigma from , can be considered an instability one day and not the next"


unless of course you are a sociopath


harm to self or harm to others

societal rules/mores/norms

You answered your own question?



I would change someone to "themselves or someone else".

People are locked away for mental instability if they are a threat to themselves or someone else.

People are locked away for ethical instability if they are a threat to themselves, someone else or society.

You can be batshiat crazy and not be a threat and people will just call you essentric or senile.

Last night I took my son to buy a dryer at an apartment complex.
After we got it loaded in the truck I watched a kid walk up to a handicap parking sign and grab it and slam his head into it. Then he walked away.
I was entertained. I really didn't care if he was crazy or not. I had no desire to try it. I am not concerned about it because he is nothing to me. Now, if my son did that, I would be right on it.

Very good point Ms H. There really aren't many trendy deviations from the norm which are considered a downright threat to oneself or society. So the only lines to be drawn here are the ones that our internal barometers evoke.

Im not even sure if the socio paths have a fixed set of diagnosable criteria anymore Tmom.

Intersting points there Tom.

Do you think that the line society draws between a life choice and a mental instability can also hinge on one's socio economic status in society Tom?

For example, before, marijuana was legalised in some places , would society judge a commoner off the street who used it , and a celebrity who used it in the same way?

I also get your point about our internal barometers going on alert when we site certain behaviors in people we care about ,as opposed to a stranger on the street

First I must remind you that I am not society. I am an outsider looking at society. I am alone and isolated.

This gives me a unique perspective.
I see most of society as insane.
I have no desire to 'fit in' with that insanity.

Crazy/Ethical
The OP subject at hand.

I've seen enough social interactions of people in general that I know there is a socio-pathology to how the general public views unique traits of different classes.
Those 'lines' are everywhere. It isn't even limited to major differences or social classifications.

It happens in the classrooms with children, at the workplace with co-workers, at churches with parishioners and even within the family itself.

It doesn't have to be a pronounced change from the expected norm either. It can be a line used to alienate people for their views on things.

You like Trump.
Oh, you're crazy.
You should be stopped.

You believe in abortion.
Oh, you're crazy.
You should be stopped.

You're a cross-dresser.
Oh, you're crazy.
You should be stopped.

You're gay.
Oh, you're crazy.
You should be stopped.

I see all this and realize that people can't really accept others.

You like spinach.
Oh, you're crazy.
You should be stopped.

I suggest you look at your ideas of things that you feel are the crazy things that people do, say or believe and look at why you have determined them to be crazy or unethical.

While some things may have merit with many people they may not have merit with ALL people.

I have my own views of crazy/unethical as well. It is a line I draw to prevent those things from affecting me. I use my own understanding of myself to teach me to try to understand others.
Just because I can understand crazy stuff they do does not mean I want them in my life. I'll accept that they are them, at a distance.

Ive opened my mind to alot of differences, but I still have some personal biases that are hard to see past I admit. Maybe in time that will change :)

And you are right . The world is full of people drawing lines of alienation

My suggestion is, that it's a mistake in thinking, to look for a GENERAL boundary line for human behavior. Especially when we want as we do in the US, to have a true free society.

The only answer that makes sense to me, is to say emphatically YES, that there very much is a "line between alternative life choices and mental /ethical instability." However, that line can ONLY be detected and drawn, on an individual basis. Not a general one.

It doesn't have to be per individual person for each and every consideration, though. Some things, such as pedophilia, don't require us to examine each pedophile, before declaring them unfit to be amongst the rest of us. We don't have to examine each person whose sexual turn on involves killing their "mate."

But save for a very few obvious concerns such as those, literally anything CAN be examples of mental or ethical instability, including what are considered mainstream, conservative values. I've known a number of fanatically, and mentally "off" normal people in my life, and they are just as much of a negative force in society as the mentally ill "alternative lifestyle" people.