Being around depressed people

Being around depressed people usually isn't a whole lot of fun. But sometimes it's hard to avoid being around if these people include your family or friends. Unless of course you decide to be anti-social for a long time and find a decent cave to live in for a wile. So whats the best way to handle depressed people without becoming depressed yourself?

To some people I'm an apparently extremely positive about a whole bunch of things. To others I probably seem quite depressed myself. I think it really depends on the circumstances. Certain people can make me quite depressed just by being around. Others are quite the opposite. Obviously whatever else that is going on in my life also has an influence. When i'm visibly depressed, friends will usually try to find out what is going on. Unless I think they can actually help, I will usually resist telling them. I think it serves no purpose to inform others of a situation which depressed me especially if there is nothing any of us can do about it. Then at least we're not all depressed by it.

If something makes me depressed and it is actually within my power to do something about it, then I probably will. Too bad not much fits into this category, so I'd generally prefer people not to know why.

On the flip side, what is the best thing to do when the people around you are depressed. Well actually not much. Generally all I do is wait for them to talk. For some reason people see me as trustworthy. To be honest, I really have no why I lie basically all the time. So anyway, after I hear the story, I distribute my sagely advice, which usually comes in the form of some root cause analysis - a breakdown of the problem into discrete, individually solvable problems, and a set of actions or perspective changes required to make it all go away.

Obviously these aren't expected to happen immediately, and some may dismiss this as oversimplifying the problems. But I'm not a qualified mental health practitioner, so i just do what I can until the professionals get involved. If all you want is a breakdown, I can do that.

Coming and going

Going somewhere for three months gives time for you to see and understand a place a bit more. When you go back to somewhere for three months, it reminds you of all the good and all the bad times. So its either a really good thing or a really bad thing.

I enjoyed myself a bit more than the other trips I've made back. I guess its because I actually had a lot more time to figure out what is going on. Also being a bit more selective in what I'm doing, and the people I want to see. 3 months is long enough to also know that I'm still not ready to come back permanently. 

Maybe I need to wait for some more stuff to happen. To some, five years can seem like an eternity. For some reason I don't think it is at all. To borrow a banking phrase, maybe my investment horizon is just longer than usual.

Faint

Last night, for the first time ever, I almost fainted. It's a strange experience. I felt sleepy, and very light headed, almost nauseated. There was also a slight urge to throw up, but that was quickly surpressed. For a while it seemed like the world was getting fainter, kind of like when you close your eyes to go to sleep - but instead you're eyes are quite open. There was a bit of a slump back in the chair before anyone else at the table noticed. Apparently I was very pale and sweaty. True story.

 There were probably a few factors involved:
- Not eating anything substantial earlier in the day
- Having a couple of drinks just before
- Mixing a couple of drinks just before (Red wine and a Gin n tonic)
- Being told about how skin and/or bone is removed and reattached to other parts of the body for reconstructive surgery

 I'm not normally a squeamish person. I can watch horror movies, cut up a massive raw steak into easily cook-able portions, and can watch this guy crawl around without many problems. So I'm guessing it was just a combination of all of the above that night. It took a while to get back into my body, but I'm back now, so it should be all good.

Group Work

When you're studying and given a group assignment to complete, its usually a massive drainer. Firstly you need to spend time outside of normal class hours to complete it, and these timings have to be available for your other group members to attend as well. In addition, you run into the usual problems of dealing with people in general. That is, trying to find some equilibrium between group members in terms of goals and efforts put in.

The usual scenario is that most people generally have a good idea about what is going on and are willing to put in a reasonable amount of effort into the assigned task. Sometimes there is a slacker who is not in a mind to contribute, and that usually raises a few hairs in the group. Complaints are filed and tempers are raised. But how much effort is too much in terms of the amount of stink to raise on a non-conforming team mate?

Sometimes, the shame factor alone is enough to get the offending member to comply. All other things being equal, nobody really wants to be known as a laggard. However, people will weigh this up against the actual effort involved for group compliance. In university, its generally a small group of students doing any one course, and you're bound to run into the same people again at some point in the future, whether it be in another assignment or just along the street. Students probably don't think about it much, but if you're studying the same course then its a lot more likely that you're going to be in the same industry afterwards as well, and its an extra thing to think about.

Other factors to consider are whether the people running the assignment and/or course really care whether groups are fair or not. Maybe its a test against reality - workplaces generally aren't fair in terms of how much work and reward are correlated. Maybe its just easier to mark 20 papers instead of 100.

Usually its just better to ignore it. Just do the entire assignment yourself. Its generally easier as you don't have to spend time together coordinating things, and the assignment probably flows better as well.

Jealousy

It can sometimes be a problem when your significant other gets a bit too jealous about you spending time with others - or certain others rather. But how jealous is too jealous? 

Love is a very irrational thing, and since jealously is as a result of love, it only makes sense that the behavior surrounding jealousy can be extremely irrational as well. Jealousy is kind of like a very angry, possessive form of love. It never really shows itself in attractive ways, and the word itself has very negative connotations.

Lets say you meet the partner of your dreams. You like them, they like you - and it all goes rather swimmingly for a while. You're at a friend's party, and the two of you meet someone else. You perceive mutual attraction between your partner and your new acquaintance. You start comparing yourself to your new rival. He only has one eye? You're alright. But its a pirate party! - now you're in trouble. Maybe she could be a part-time model? Perhaps you should intervene and suggest a trip to the drinks section to get the fuck out of there. You've already seen her on Victoria's Secret catalogues? Maybe screw the jealousy and suggest a threesome. She's hot and you'd totally do her. Plus, he's totally got no chance with her afterwards.

One part of being jealous about others is how your potential rival is perceived. You'd be more scared than jealous of the creepy guy making dodgy movements all night. Another part is how comfortable are you in the current relationship. If you never want to give them up, and would totally die if anything happened to them, then somehow everything is perceived as a threat. If you're a little more jaded, some might say realistic, and realise that they're here with you tonight, then nothing is changing that.

The other big thing is what you think of your partner. Are they the type of person who would dump you for something 'better'? Maybe you should be re-thinking about seeing them instead of being jealous all the time. Or maybe they're already batting above their average. You're safe until you take them for granted, but that's a whole other story.

Reading

Do you ever like how reading a novel can put your mind in a completely different world? It's as if the words can make the topic a real place with real people. I mean, normally authors write about people, but then there are ones about aliens from different planets, or really anything you could possibly imagine.

It's also good for taking your mind off your current problems. I mean, if the novel you're reading is about someone saving the galaxy, or investigating a serial murderer who is roaming the streets preying on young women, it probably puts your problems into a bit of perspective. Lets hope that the problems you have don't get worse than the above two examples. Try not to read novels about vampires trying to sparkle and kill each other. I think its probably a bit too far fetched and brings your problems back to haunt you. Especially if the first three quarters of the book are about a depressed girl. You know what I'm talking about.

This is totally different from reading a textbook. When I read a textbook I either a) struggle to understand what its trying to tell me, or b) fall asleep. Sometimes both of these things can happen at once. Reading this post again is making me sleepy.

Solution Interrupted

Do you ever hate it when you've been wracking your brain for ages trying to work out the problem, and just when you think you've got it solved, somebody tells you something completely different to what you were thinking?

Hopefully not too often.

If at all, preferably its just when you're watching or reading a murder mystery. Otherwise these kinds of surprises aren't really all that fun in real life.

Globalisation and disease

One of the major fears people have about globalisation is that it actually makes it very easy for disease to spread. The fact that humans could travel around the world in a day is something that is actually quite astonishing. Especially when the time in which your grandparents were born, flying was definitely not commercialised, let alone safe for the average traveler.

So how come nothing as big as the black death has actually come around and wiped out a significant portion of the population within the past hundred years? The last big one was the 1918 flu epidemic, which took up to 100 million lives with it. Hardly anything compared to the last 'major' pandemic, which was the one in 2009. That one took under 20,000 lives overall. One might say that we're actually winning the war against disease. Maybe the human body is actually becoming more resistant to disease than disease is becoming more virulent. Maybe the world's health care is just so much better than it used to be.

Perhaps the day where the next Spanish flu-like epidemic is right around the corner. Globalisation would have been a bad thing, helping to spread the disease like wildfire around the world, wiping out half the population. There would be a couple of silver linings. Firstly, those that are left probably won't have to worry about global warming as much since half the people creating the problem wouldn't be around any more. The other thing is that humans as a race would be better off, as the remaining population would be more resistant or immune to the disease. This of course assumes that the disease doesn't actually make you into a zombie. The only thing I know of that would make you immune from having your brains eaten out is a really strong helmet. This would be one situation where stackhats would make a massive comeback. I would curse my cousin for selling them at the garage sales.

On the other hand, maybe diseases have realised that killing the organism that keeps you alive isn't necessarily the best thing to do when you need it to survive as well. Or at least if you're going to kill them, at least give them some time to spread the disease before you do. The most successful disease these days is HIV/AIDS, which currently affects more than 34 million people worldwide. Its also actively spreading, so that number is probably growing. One of the problems with HIV is that it takes at least 3 weeks for it to be detected in the body. Some people don't find out they have HIV for years as their symptoms can be minor.

I think next time I'll write about something less morbid.