Skip to content

Men are opening up about mental health to AI instead of humans

Technology
331 140 6
  • You know what i see? Men being afraid of going alone with their kid to the park, because the mom's there believe they are a sexual predator just by gender. Men not appliying for kindergarden or school jobs because of a tendency of mothers to see every man in childcare as a pedophile. Men getting called the cops onto them in the parking lot when going to their car after shopping.

    And it's the same with violence against women - every man is automatically seen as a brutalizer, or someone who would daterape.

    As long as those prejudices exist - and they are mainly female prejudices! - men will not open up. When you are seen as a threat even if you aren't one (see the man and the bear in the woods), there is no way they will become empathic, because innocently playing with your child in the park could have lifelong consequences for you.

    Either you don't talk to women or you have some insecurities you need to reconcile.

    I'm sure some of this exists in some people, but this isn't the whole of reality.

    I don't give a single fuck what happens when I open up, and if anyone around me doesn't like it, I do not give a shit.

    Just be yourself unapologetically, and if the people around you don't like it, find new people. And this isn't to say be that person that's always just a giant shithead and go "I'm just blunt, I say it like it is, I've always been this way so it's fine" What I mean is be kind, be yourself, talk about your emotions, communicate, and if you can't do that around the people you know, fix whatever hangups you have with yourself in doing that, or fix the people around you.

  • Everyone else is blaming women for how men act. You disagree?

    One guy said women raise boys, so it's their fault.

    Another said therapy only works for women and suggested women aren't under any social pressure.

    You think those are intelligent, well thought arguments? Because they're stupid.

    This comments section is fucking bonkers, I have never been close to a situation where any of these scenarios played out in real life.

  • Either you don't talk to women or you have some insecurities you need to reconcile.

    I'm sure some of this exists in some people, but this isn't the whole of reality.

    I don't give a single fuck what happens when I open up, and if anyone around me doesn't like it, I do not give a shit.

    Just be yourself unapologetically, and if the people around you don't like it, find new people. And this isn't to say be that person that's always just a giant shithead and go "I'm just blunt, I say it like it is, I've always been this way so it's fine" What I mean is be kind, be yourself, talk about your emotions, communicate, and if you can't do that around the people you know, fix whatever hangups you have with yourself in doing that, or fix the people around you.

    Most of my friends are women, i have more issues with men than women; and they also aren't judging when i open up. But i know that they aren't representative.

    The issue is that it only takes one overzealous woman to ruin a mans life in the US: having trouble with cops on the playground, losing a job over social media accusations without proof - at least for the large majority of men. (things are different when we look at people in power, where hard facts aren't enough to remove them - this enrages me just as much as any woman)

    In that way, women are as much an aggressor as men are, it's just that their tools are different. Where a aggressive man might tend to physical violence, aggressive women are able to dish it out with social violence.

    I just wanted to show up that painting men as the source of all evil is shortsighted. There are a lot of women applying pressure to keep men in the role they are in, cementing the patriarchate just as much as men are.

    And why shouldn't they? If you don't want to work outside of passion projects, or want to be a homemaker while your husband brings in the money? If you shy away from responsibility and feel safer when a strong father figure decides? Or being fine with men being in charge, as long as they have control over their husband? Those lifestyles are all valid too, and they profit directly from the patriarchate in one way or another, even if it might not be healthy at all.

    There is no (or next to none) help for men to step outside of this structure. I am totally for helping women to get their rightful place side by side to men, but there also has to be a discussion about how not only men are oppressing everyone, but also how women are using their tools to oppress everyone, and how it is harmful to just paint one side as the perpetrator here.

    There also should be more of an discourse about how life and values for men should look after achieving equality, because just replacing the patriarchate with an matriarchate is not gonna cut it.

  • Lol see where it goes? If you think these AI companies, that are very publicly bleeding money, aren't selling your data out for pennies on the dollar, you're just keeping your head in the sand.

    I've been asking Google Gemini weird and stupid trivia questions just to burn the world down faster.

  • So somewhere they feel safe to do so. Says something pretty fucked up about our culture that men don't feel safe to open up anywhere. And no, it's not their own fault.

    And no, it’s not their own fault.

    Of course it is, men are cool targets to hate, get with the program.

  • Haha, not every place is in the US. Hopefully, I won't face this kind of treatment as I do not live in that shit hole of a country

    not every place is in the US

    Thank Sithrak for that, jeez...

  • Even therapists are suffering these days. It’s just more challenging than it’s ever been to gaslight clients into believing their concerns about the world aren’t objectively true and instead the symptom of an internal struggle.

    I wonder how many therapists end up gaslighting and depressing themselves by trying to unintentionally gaslight their patients.

  • Phasers to stun please. I was agreeing with you?

    They can't read lol

  • One chat request to an LLM produces about as much CO2 as burning one droplet of gasoline (if it was from coal fired power, less if it comes from cleaner sources). It makes far less CO2 to talk to a chatbot for hours upon hours than a ten minute drive to see a therapist once a week.

    Sorry, you’re right. I meant the training of the LLM is what uses lots of energy, I guess that’s not end user’s fault.

  • Sorry, you’re right. I meant the training of the LLM is what uses lots of energy, I guess that’s not end user’s fault.

    @MrLLM @Womble

    Question ... did someone once do a study comparing a regular fulltext indexed based search vs ai in terms of energy consumption 😉

    Second ... if people would keep using "old" tech -> wouldn't that be better for employment of people and therefor for social stability on this planet ?

  • Even therapists are suffering these days. It’s just more challenging than it’s ever been to gaslight clients into believing their concerns about the world aren’t objectively true and instead the symptom of an internal struggle.

    ...which are always conveniently treated by drugs!

  • A profound relational revolution is underway, not orchestrated by tech developers but driven by users themselves. Many of the 400 million weekly users of ChatGPT are seeking more than just assistance with emails or information on food safety; they are looking for emotional support.

    “Therapy and companionship” have emerged as two of the most frequent applications for generative AI globally, according to the Harvard Business Review. This trend marks a significant, unplanned pivot in how people interact with technology.

    Buy more. Buy more now.

  • @MrLLM @Womble

    Question ... did someone once do a study comparing a regular fulltext indexed based search vs ai in terms of energy consumption 😉

    Second ... if people would keep using "old" tech -> wouldn't that be better for employment of people and therefor for social stability on this planet ?

    To your first question, nop, I have no idea how much energy takes to index the web in a traditional way (e.g MapReduce). But I think, in recent years, it’s been pretty clear that training AI consumes more energy (so much that big corpo are investing in nuclear energy, I think there was an article about companies giving up meeting 2030 [or 2050?] carbon emission goals, couldn’t find it)

    About the second… I agree with you, but I also think that the problem is much bigger and complex than that.

  • I'll admit I tried talking to a local deepseek about a minor mental health issue one night when I just didn't want to wake up/bother my friends. Broke the AI within about 6 prompts where no matter what I said it would repeat the same answer word-for-word about going for walks and eating better. Honestly, breaking the AI and laughing at it did more for my mental health than anything anyone could have said, but I'm an AI hater. I wouldn't recommend anyone in real need use AI for mental health advice.

    I'd say make a grilled cheese sandwich with quality Gruyere and Cheddar and take a nap after.

  • A profound relational revolution is underway, not orchestrated by tech developers but driven by users themselves. Many of the 400 million weekly users of ChatGPT are seeking more than just assistance with emails or information on food safety; they are looking for emotional support.

    “Therapy and companionship” have emerged as two of the most frequent applications for generative AI globally, according to the Harvard Business Review. This trend marks a significant, unplanned pivot in how people interact with technology.

    CDC data from 2022 indicated that more than one in five U.S. adults under the age of 45 experienced symptoms of mental distress.

    Must be the lack of personnel. Couldn't have anything to do with the global insecurity of rising inflation and low wage jobs coupled with the skyrocketing housing costs. Not to mention the whole "the earth is steadily getting hotter and extreme weather events are happening more and more frequently."

    Yeah, let's invest in more AI that will fuck over the planet even more with colossal energy requirements and not even bother with making people more financially and socially secure.

  • My mental image the solution of your last paragraph is a guy and their counsoler just chatting outside chopping firewood or other simple/quiet lawn work.

    "I need a therapist, and a lumberjack"

    You know, working together on something outside might be absolutely the ticket. Genius.

  • So somewhere they feel safe to do so. Says something pretty fucked up about our culture that men don't feel safe to open up anywhere. And no, it's not their own fault.

    Everyday it seems to become clearer that American culture as whole is a problem. But that's not something people are allowed to talk about.

  • So somewhere they feel safe to do so. Says something pretty fucked up about our culture that men don't feel safe to open up anywhere. And no, it's not their own fault.

    I wouldn't use AI but I certainly don't have anyone to open up to really. Either they'd use what I tell them against me or just aren't in a position to offer any real support. With my luck I'd end up institutionalized for saying some unhinged shit anyway.

  • They are human beings who are more frequently able to relate to people who are similar to them based on shared experiences including social pressures. I don't think either gender is unable to relate to the other gender, but social pressure is pretty strong and leads to common outcomes that involve pressures based race, gender, and economic status among others. Someone from a wealthy family is more likely to have a certain outlook compared to someone who had food insecurity as a child.

    assumptions assumptions!

    your presumption is that you'd be a better therapist, not a worse one, if you have more shared experiences with the client. that's not something current evidence supports.

    empathy means we strive to understand one another, not presume we understand them based on our own experiences. THAT is how bad therapy happens. and self-disclosure is a crutch for poor rapport building skills.

    without the shared experiences, there can be more drive for empath and mutual understanding. the feeling of being understood by someone outside your group can be transformative.

    In truth, positive outcomes have little correlation with therapist-client demographics. the demographic differential does alter what the course of therapy might look like, but not the outcomes.

  • Or “men would rather talk to superpowered autocorrect rather than sharing their feelings with family and friends”

    Have you considered the fact that most of the time, even when people "want to hear mens issues", they reject them and tell them to man up? Maybe "superpowered autocorrect" could be a vector to nourish this severe lack of openness?

    Personally I use AI for this purpose, mostly because it accepts me for who I am and provides genuine advice that has actually helped me improve my life, rather than the people around me saying that I should "put more effort into things", or "it's just in your head".

    It's not "lone wolfing" to stop telling the people who've rejected your concerns about your feelings and issues, it's just the act of not wasting time on those who don't care.

  • 4 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • matrix is cooked

    Technology technology
    75
    1
    180 Stimmen
    75 Beiträge
    33 Aufrufe
    penguin202124@sh.itjust.worksP
    That's very fair. Better start contributing I guess.
  • YouTube might slow down your videos if you block ads

    Technology technology
    225
    1
    650 Stimmen
    225 Beiträge
    91 Aufrufe
    R
    And as an added bonus yt-dlp defaults to maximum quality! Even more strain on YouTube servers!
  • 353 Stimmen
    40 Beiträge
    23 Aufrufe
    L
    If AI constantly refined its own output, sure, unless it hits a wall eventually or starts spewing bullshit because of some quirk of training. But I doubt it could learn to summarise better without external input, just like a compiler won't produce a more optimised version of itself without human development work.
  • 1k Stimmen
    95 Beiträge
    15 Aufrufe
    G
    Obviously the law must be simple enough to follow so that for Jim’s furniture shop is not a problem nor a too high cost to respect it, but it must be clear that if you break it you can cease to exist as company. I think this may be the root of our disagreement, I do not believe that there is any law making body today that is capable of an elegantly simple law. I could be too naive, but I think it is possible. We also definitely have a difference on opinion when it comes to the severity of the infraction, in my mind, while privacy is important, it should not have the same level of punishments associated with it when compared to something on the level of poisoning water ways; I think that a privacy law should hurt but be able to be learned from while in the poison case it should result in the bankruptcy of a company. The severity is directly proportional to the number of people affected. If you violate the privacy of 200 million people is the same that you poison the water of 10 people. And while with the poisoning scenario it could be better to jail the responsible people (for a very, very long time) and let the company survive to clean the water, once your privacy is violated there is no way back, a company could not fix it. The issue we find ourselves with today is that the aggregate of all privacy breaches makes it harmful to the people, but with a sizeable enough fine, I find it hard to believe that there would be major or lasting damage. So how much money your privacy it's worth ? 6 For this reason I don’t think it is wise to write laws that will bankrupt a company off of one infraction which was not directly or indirectly harmful to the physical well being of the people: and I am using indirectly a little bit more strict than I would like to since as I said before, the aggregate of all the information is harmful. The point is that the goal is not to bankrupt companies but to have them behave right. The penalty associated to every law IS the tool that make you respect the law. And it must be so high that you don't want to break the law. I would have to look into the laws in question, but on a surface level I think that any company should be subjected to the same baseline privacy laws, so if there isn’t anything screwy within the law that apple, Google, and Facebook are ignoring, I think it should apply to them. Trust me on this one, direct experience payment processors have a lot more rules to follow to be able to work. I do not want jail time for the CEO by default but he need to know that he will pay personally if the company break the law, it is the only way to make him run the company being sure that it follow the laws. For some reason I don’t have my usual cynicism when it comes to this issue. I think that the magnitude of loses that vested interests have in these companies would make it so that companies would police themselves for fear of losing profits. That being said I wouldn’t be opposed to some form of personal accountability on corporate leadership, but I fear that they will just end up finding a way to create a scapegoat everytime. It is not cynicism. I simply think that a huge fine to a single person (the CEO for example) is useless since it too easy to avoid and if it really huge realistically it would be never paid anyway so nothing usefull since the net worth of this kind of people is only on the paper. So if you slap a 100 billion file to Musk he will never pay because he has not the money to pay even if technically he is worth way more than that. Jail time instead is something that even Musk can experience. In general I like laws that are as objective as possible, I think that a privacy law should be written so that it is very objectively overbearing, but that has a smaller fine associated with it. This way the law is very clear on right and wrong, while also giving the businesses time and incentive to change their practices without having to sink large amount of expenses into lawyers to review every minute detail, which is the logical conclusion of the one infraction bankrupt system that you seem to be supporting. Then you write a law that explicitally state what you can do and what is not allowed is forbidden by default.
  • 323 Stimmen
    137 Beiträge
    59 Aufrufe
    F
    I think it would be best if that's a user setting, like dark mode. It would obviously be a popular setting to adjust. If they don't do that, there will doubtless be grease monkey and other scripts to hide it.
  • Cloudflare built an oauth provider with Claude

    Technology technology
    23
    1
    34 Stimmen
    23 Beiträge
    39 Aufrufe
    A
    I have to say that you just have to sayed something up
  • You Can Choose Tools That Make You Happy

    Technology technology
    1
    1
    30 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    8 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet