From the previous thread, @Lady Avonlea
May we establish then, that suicide is not a con, and social media bullies are notorious for encouraging it?
Good.
In the case of Marie, I have to argue again that the moral turpitude is the symptom of the mental illness. And we have no moral right to chastise her for being ill.
Naturally, none of us here are psychiatric physicians trained in remote internet diagnoses.
We can depend on Marie's own pattern of behavior, as well, to some degree, on what she herself says about her problems.
But, if (as I have always been careful to stipulate) she is in fact mentally ill, and threatening suicide for purposes of grift and/or suicide, she can't be judged in any court, including and especially this one, by any standard of morality. The grift is the symptom. Threatening suicide is a grift, perhaps the ultimate grift. But people must be taken seriously when they do it, or we will be morally complicit. One standard of morality when dealing with the mentally vulnerable, no matter what their moral turpitude, is: Will I be complicit in this person's death, if it happens? Do I need to intervene for psychiatric care? Rather than enabling, for the second time, narc fantasies with unachievable florist studios?
Jarvis must plead guilty.
I will not.
My deal would be: A year's psychiatric treatment, and then we'll talk.
The Chateau Diaries #145 SJ settled for PhiPhi the cock whisperer & spoon collector It must be true love!
FRK needed to up the Patreon handouts in order to fund her latest "studio". Well, then, I am insulted by the use of catastrophic language on Marie’s part. Talk about crying wolf. A friend in crisis? Suck my ass. And after that, blow me. And then eat it. The LOVE BUTLER saved a HORSE crying...
tattle.life
Good.
In the case of Marie, I have to argue again that the moral turpitude is the symptom of the mental illness. And we have no moral right to chastise her for being ill.
Naturally, none of us here are psychiatric physicians trained in remote internet diagnoses.
We can depend on Marie's own pattern of behavior, as well, to some degree, on what she herself says about her problems.
But, if (as I have always been careful to stipulate) she is in fact mentally ill, and threatening suicide for purposes of grift and/or suicide, she can't be judged in any court, including and especially this one, by any standard of morality. The grift is the symptom. Threatening suicide is a grift, perhaps the ultimate grift. But people must be taken seriously when they do it, or we will be morally complicit. One standard of morality when dealing with the mentally vulnerable, no matter what their moral turpitude, is: Will I be complicit in this person's death, if it happens? Do I need to intervene for psychiatric care? Rather than enabling, for the second time, narc fantasies with unachievable florist studios?
Jarvis must plead guilty.
I will not.
My deal would be: A year's psychiatric treatment, and then we'll talk.
Last edited: