

Clearing things up in my head

Not open for further replies.
Hi, i'm sorry if this doesnt belong here or it has nothing to do with what these forums are about but i have questions that i can't find the answers to myself.

I just really want to get some responses if anything i explain in this post could be seen as suicidal or i was just throwing it into such a category for an easy explanation to myself.

I'm 21, and I must admit at the moment i'm feeling much better about life. Just looking through these forums it got me thinking about how I was.

I am severly overweight, i dont share any strong love within my family, even though i have an older brother and sister i was very much a lonely child, i never had done anything with a girl until i was 20 and was very anti-social and have always been pessimistic.

I used to troll through websites and forums about ways to commit suicide, even found the perfect way for me, but always ended up crying when i thought about if i ever went through with it. The only thing which really held me back I think was the thought of my mum crying - i couldnt take it and still cant take it when i think about it.

I've always had this feeling of invulnerability, i know it probably sound stupid but somewhere in my head i think if i was in a car crash i wouldnt get hurt, if i drew a knife accross my wrist it wouldnt bleed, if i fell off a building i'd get back up. Even though i'm smart enough to realise the reality of it all, and that those things do cause physical pain - i dont know, i just dont think things can hurt me.

I've never done anything to really hurt myself, the worst was bashing my head against a wall one time when really drunk, and cutting up my hand real bad smacking it against a brick wall, and there was also a time where i punched myself unconcious in my car for a few minutes. When i drink i drink excessive amounts really quickly, its obvious to anyone that i'm drinking so much to get rid of my worries, i'm really low on confidence, i really think i have none.

The past 5 months though have been much better and have lifted my spirits a bit, i found a girl, and i honestly love her, she's the first person to genuinly make me smile. But she's also seen the side of me when im drunk, i get emotional and insult myself and hurt myself...she obviously hates it. I've stopped drinking now and it gets better but my mood changes really bad, one second i'm happy and the next im prowling the net for information on suicide or getting really self concious and down.

I think of myself as having suicidal tendancies, but thats why i came here and said what i said..i really dont know but i'd like to. I always kind of got off on the fact i was so interested in suicide and such, and it made me feel better thinking such things.

Thanks for reading, sorry if im talking crap.


SF Friend
Staff Alumni
Welcome to the forum!:smile: I'm sure you'll find lots of caring supportive people to listen to you and offer shoulders to cry on or arms to reach out to you.

YOu're not talking crap - you're expressing your feelings, nothing crappy about that. Come here as often as you like to vent. We're good listeners.:smile:


CM 1000

I believe that you want to live and to stop suffering You are not responsible for your thoughts suicidal because it come from your unconscious I send to you an article written in French by Dr. Daniel Bordeleau the suicidal idea an idea of archetypal nature, according to Dr. Daniel Bordeleau. There are tons of books treating of the suicide, recognize Daniel Bordeleau, person in charge for formation clinical at the Department of psychiatry and psychoanalyst at the Louis-Hippolyte-Lafontaine hospital. However, it added another of them. Vis-a-vis with the suicide is however single in its kind. Whereas almost the totality of the works on this milked question of diagnosis, of factors of risk and modes of intervention, that of Dr. Bordeleau seeks to bore the mystery of "the suicidal experiment", to include/understand the major significance of it. Other milked particular, it tackles the question in the light of the psychoanalysis jungienne and of its concept of prototype. The prototype of the Plus suicide of 80% of the population would have one day or the other the idea to be removed the life. The medical literature shows that the suicide is present in all the cultures and that it is observed, with variable incidences, in the children, the old adults, people, the men and the women, as well at the Westerners as at the Eastern ones. The fairy tales and religious mythologies also abound of case where death or the deep sleep returns to the image of a suicide nonknown as. The psychoanalyst refuses to see "an incomprehensible aberration there that only a severe mental disordered state could explain", as one generally believes it. Such an interpretation does not tally with the suicides maturely considered nor with the frequent idea of the paradisiac rest occupying the spirit of the suicidal people, not more than with "the invitation with the life" which it observes among several patients. The majority of the suicidal patients who consult a therapeutist are not besides in severe depression, according to what it noted. Daniel Bordeleau rather sees the suicidal idea like something forming to part of nature even human being. All its interpretation turns around the idea of the prototypes such as it was developed by Carl Gustav Jung. "the concept of prototype requires the recognition of the existence of the unconscious collective, written Daniel Bordeleau. The prototypes are the paramount roots of the complexes which structure the behaviors, images, affects and thoughts such as they emergent in the typical situations of the human life." The prototype is impossible to represent, but its effects appear with the conscience in the form of images or of ideas. Different from the instinct and intellect, it feeds the behavioral images of the religions, the tales, the culture or the dream. The image of the wise old man, the Virgin, God or quite simply of the parental experiment are examples of archetypal images. The prototype forms part of the collective human heritage without being genetic (see framed). For Dr. Bordeleau, there would be thus a prototype of the "suicidality", i.e. "a predisposition ' to have the idea de' to give oneself the death registered in the psyché human one". Without we being at the thank you of the prototype, this one can appear with the favour of particular experiments. Thus, any emotional situation in which the individual does not find a solution is likely to stimulate the prototype at the base of the suicidal idea. The intervention of the therapeutist consists in making become aware with the patient of the message conveyed by the archetypal image so that it exerts his choice and makes a conscious decision. "That does not want to say that the suicide is the ' bonne' solution, Dr. Bordeleau specifies. My opinion is that the suicidal idea brings a ' espoir' in a situation of ' désespoir'." Is enlightened and foolish suicides All that can appear extremely original and interesting, but there a clinical utility to draw from such an interpretation? "the first merit of this approach is more not to have one pathological vision of the suicide", answers Dr. Bordeleau, who devoted two chapters of his volume to the clinical aspect of the suicide. "the clinician then sees the person who thinks of committing suicide not like a patient but like somebody living an experiment forming part of the human nature." The psychoanalyst does not regard the suicide as the effect of a depression, a psychosis or a neurosis. If these disturbances can accompany the suicidal idea, nothing indicates that there is a bond of cause for purpose. It advances even the idea that the states neurobiologic as the weak rate of serotonin at committed suicide is "the reflection of the neurotransmission of the suicidal phenomenon" rather than the cause of this idea. "the approach also leads us to take into account all dimensions of the person. It is necessary to leave cleavage body-spirit. To treat only the mechanics of the neuro-transmitters is likely to make the patient more carefree. The result will be that the suicidal idea will return stronger because the message will not have been delivered to the ego." To make emerge the direction of the suicide on the other hand requires to look opposite the suicidal idea. The step is not without risk since the possibility of the suicide as solution is not isolated. "It is unrealistic to hope to do this work [ clinical ] if the possibility of a suicide is not possible [... ], written Daniel Bordeleau. What it is necessary to prevent, it is not the suicide, it is the foolish suicide, that whose direction remains unconscious. That implies the acceptance which there are enlightened suicides." In spite of the feeling of anger, disappointment and deep disturbance that such a result can cause in the therapeutist, Daniel Bordeleau refuses to see a failure there. "It is not a failure because the good means of prevention does not exist." Daniel Baril De Jung with Dawkins In the spirit of Jung, the prototypes were of hereditary nature, transmitted of one generation to the other since the night of times. "That does not mean that it is necessary to seek the trace in genes of it", Daniel Bordeleau estimates. He rather sees the prototypes in bond with what the evolutionist Richard Dawkins, author of egoistic Gene, named the "mèmes". The mèmes - word forged starting from "memory" and "imitation" - would be hypothetical nongenetic réplicateurs ensuring the transmission of the cultural and behavioral contents or even of the ideas. This rather nebulous concept is not that an allegory and seems to return to neural networks preexistent or created by the idea which takes root in the brain or which is forged by him. Like arts, the idea of God would be for example a mème which is retorted by oral tradition or written or by imitation. "the typically male and typically female behaviors are not registered in the genotypes, supports Dr. Bordeleau. Those contain only components. In fact the mèmes ensure continuity on the plans behavioral and expérientiel." But why should it be supposed that the mèmes, the prototypes - or a priori to knowledge, as Kant said - predisposing with the imitation and with the cultural training are not genetic origin? The question remains posed. And if, at the beginning of the century, knowledge in genetics had been as advanced as today, would Jung have spoken the same language? D.B.
Not open for further replies.

Please Donate to Help Keep SF Running

Total amount