▲ 908 ▼ Women would rather do drugs than go to therapy (lemmy.today) submitted 8 months ago by MacNCheezus@lemmy.today to c/lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world 106 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] Velypso@sh.itjust.works 46 points 8 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (5 children) 1 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 10 child comments replies: [–] GladiusB@lemmy.world 27 points 8 months ago (2 children) Someone told me it was his mother's fault permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Akasazh@feddit.nl 10 points 8 months ago (1 child) And that he envied his daddies schlong permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] stiffyGlitch@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago did you know that that's the main reason why men are depressed? permalink fedilink source parent [–] Aggravationstation@feddit.uk 2 points 8 months ago But have you seen Freud's mother? Yowza! permalink fedilink source parent [–] _Nico198X_@europe.pub 17 points 8 months ago (1 child) did he try enough cocaine? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] stiffyGlitch@lemmy.world 7 points 8 months ago I guess not permalink fedilink source parent [–] addie@feddit.uk 14 points 8 months ago He did shake things up with a lot of new ideas. I'd like to think that proving him wrong has gotten us to a better place; it's the fin de siecle version of being wrong on the internet, everyone writes to correct you. Kind of sucks for everyone that got the bad advice in the meantime, tho. permalink fedilink source parent [–] novibe@lemmy.ml 8 points 8 months ago Idk man, if we had the drugs of the Victorian era but the worker rights of today, I think everybody would be happier 🤷♂️ permalink fedilink source parent [–] DagwoodIII@piefed.social 4 points 8 months ago (1 child) Freud was a pioneer with no technology to help him. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] squaresinger@lemmy.world 8 points 8 months ago (1 child) That is true, but that still doesn't make any of his advice correct. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] DagwoodIII@piefed.social 0 points 8 months ago (1 child) I'm not a medical historian, but he must have been of some use, otherwise we'd have never heard of him. Just because a lot of his work has been supplanted doesn't mean he should be condemned permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] squaresinger@lemmy.world 7 points 8 months ago It's not about condemming him. What he did was basically kick off the whole genre of research. And for that he is still credited and well-known. But it seems you missed the context of this thread. It started with someone sarcastically joking that cocaine is "famously good for your health", to which someone sarcastically mock-backed the claim by referencing that Freud did back cocaine. There's no need or point in defending this very debunked claim. Btw, Freud recommended cocaine as a medication against alcoholism. He administered cocaine to an alcoholic friend of his, and it did nothing against his alcoholism. In fact, the friend died soon after off a combined alcohol-cocaine overdose. This did not stop Freud from claiming that cocaine is great. He even got his girlfriend hooked on it. Freud did start the whole field of research, but his own research has been debunked a very long time ago. There's basically nothing of his research left that still counts as "state of the art", but sadly many uneducated people still repeat his nonsense. It's kinda like believing that Carl Benz' earliest car patents still have any relevance in modern car design. We credit Carl Benz for kickstarting the research in combustion engine cars, but nobody would be stupid enough to think that early research in that field has any relevance to today's practice. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] GladiusB@lemmy.world 27 points 8 months ago (2 children) Someone told me it was his mother's fault permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Akasazh@feddit.nl 10 points 8 months ago (1 child) And that he envied his daddies schlong permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] stiffyGlitch@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago did you know that that's the main reason why men are depressed? permalink fedilink source parent [–] Aggravationstation@feddit.uk 2 points 8 months ago But have you seen Freud's mother? Yowza! permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Akasazh@feddit.nl 10 points 8 months ago (1 child) And that he envied his daddies schlong permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] stiffyGlitch@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago did you know that that's the main reason why men are depressed? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] stiffyGlitch@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago did you know that that's the main reason why men are depressed? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Aggravationstation@feddit.uk 2 points 8 months ago But have you seen Freud's mother? Yowza! permalink fedilink source parent
[–] _Nico198X_@europe.pub 17 points 8 months ago (1 child) did he try enough cocaine? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] stiffyGlitch@lemmy.world 7 points 8 months ago I guess not permalink fedilink source parent
[–] addie@feddit.uk 14 points 8 months ago He did shake things up with a lot of new ideas. I'd like to think that proving him wrong has gotten us to a better place; it's the fin de siecle version of being wrong on the internet, everyone writes to correct you. Kind of sucks for everyone that got the bad advice in the meantime, tho. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] novibe@lemmy.ml 8 points 8 months ago Idk man, if we had the drugs of the Victorian era but the worker rights of today, I think everybody would be happier 🤷♂️ permalink fedilink source parent
[–] DagwoodIII@piefed.social 4 points 8 months ago (1 child) Freud was a pioneer with no technology to help him. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] squaresinger@lemmy.world 8 points 8 months ago (1 child) That is true, but that still doesn't make any of his advice correct. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] DagwoodIII@piefed.social 0 points 8 months ago (1 child) I'm not a medical historian, but he must have been of some use, otherwise we'd have never heard of him. Just because a lot of his work has been supplanted doesn't mean he should be condemned permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] squaresinger@lemmy.world 7 points 8 months ago It's not about condemming him. What he did was basically kick off the whole genre of research. And for that he is still credited and well-known. But it seems you missed the context of this thread. It started with someone sarcastically joking that cocaine is "famously good for your health", to which someone sarcastically mock-backed the claim by referencing that Freud did back cocaine. There's no need or point in defending this very debunked claim. Btw, Freud recommended cocaine as a medication against alcoholism. He administered cocaine to an alcoholic friend of his, and it did nothing against his alcoholism. In fact, the friend died soon after off a combined alcohol-cocaine overdose. This did not stop Freud from claiming that cocaine is great. He even got his girlfriend hooked on it. Freud did start the whole field of research, but his own research has been debunked a very long time ago. There's basically nothing of his research left that still counts as "state of the art", but sadly many uneducated people still repeat his nonsense. It's kinda like believing that Carl Benz' earliest car patents still have any relevance in modern car design. We credit Carl Benz for kickstarting the research in combustion engine cars, but nobody would be stupid enough to think that early research in that field has any relevance to today's practice. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] squaresinger@lemmy.world 8 points 8 months ago (1 child) That is true, but that still doesn't make any of his advice correct. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] DagwoodIII@piefed.social 0 points 8 months ago (1 child) I'm not a medical historian, but he must have been of some use, otherwise we'd have never heard of him. Just because a lot of his work has been supplanted doesn't mean he should be condemned permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] squaresinger@lemmy.world 7 points 8 months ago It's not about condemming him. What he did was basically kick off the whole genre of research. And for that he is still credited and well-known. But it seems you missed the context of this thread. It started with someone sarcastically joking that cocaine is "famously good for your health", to which someone sarcastically mock-backed the claim by referencing that Freud did back cocaine. There's no need or point in defending this very debunked claim. Btw, Freud recommended cocaine as a medication against alcoholism. He administered cocaine to an alcoholic friend of his, and it did nothing against his alcoholism. In fact, the friend died soon after off a combined alcohol-cocaine overdose. This did not stop Freud from claiming that cocaine is great. He even got his girlfriend hooked on it. Freud did start the whole field of research, but his own research has been debunked a very long time ago. There's basically nothing of his research left that still counts as "state of the art", but sadly many uneducated people still repeat his nonsense. It's kinda like believing that Carl Benz' earliest car patents still have any relevance in modern car design. We credit Carl Benz for kickstarting the research in combustion engine cars, but nobody would be stupid enough to think that early research in that field has any relevance to today's practice. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] DagwoodIII@piefed.social 0 points 8 months ago (1 child) I'm not a medical historian, but he must have been of some use, otherwise we'd have never heard of him. Just because a lot of his work has been supplanted doesn't mean he should be condemned permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] squaresinger@lemmy.world 7 points 8 months ago It's not about condemming him. What he did was basically kick off the whole genre of research. And for that he is still credited and well-known. But it seems you missed the context of this thread. It started with someone sarcastically joking that cocaine is "famously good for your health", to which someone sarcastically mock-backed the claim by referencing that Freud did back cocaine. There's no need or point in defending this very debunked claim. Btw, Freud recommended cocaine as a medication against alcoholism. He administered cocaine to an alcoholic friend of his, and it did nothing against his alcoholism. In fact, the friend died soon after off a combined alcohol-cocaine overdose. This did not stop Freud from claiming that cocaine is great. He even got his girlfriend hooked on it. Freud did start the whole field of research, but his own research has been debunked a very long time ago. There's basically nothing of his research left that still counts as "state of the art", but sadly many uneducated people still repeat his nonsense. It's kinda like believing that Carl Benz' earliest car patents still have any relevance in modern car design. We credit Carl Benz for kickstarting the research in combustion engine cars, but nobody would be stupid enough to think that early research in that field has any relevance to today's practice. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] squaresinger@lemmy.world 7 points 8 months ago It's not about condemming him. What he did was basically kick off the whole genre of research. And for that he is still credited and well-known. But it seems you missed the context of this thread. It started with someone sarcastically joking that cocaine is "famously good for your health", to which someone sarcastically mock-backed the claim by referencing that Freud did back cocaine. There's no need or point in defending this very debunked claim. Btw, Freud recommended cocaine as a medication against alcoholism. He administered cocaine to an alcoholic friend of his, and it did nothing against his alcoholism. In fact, the friend died soon after off a combined alcohol-cocaine overdose. This did not stop Freud from claiming that cocaine is great. He even got his girlfriend hooked on it. Freud did start the whole field of research, but his own research has been debunked a very long time ago. There's basically nothing of his research left that still counts as "state of the art", but sadly many uneducated people still repeat his nonsense. It's kinda like believing that Carl Benz' earliest car patents still have any relevance in modern car design. We credit Carl Benz for kickstarting the research in combustion engine cars, but nobody would be stupid enough to think that early research in that field has any relevance to today's practice. permalink fedilink source parent
