Really, internet?
Given the recent Bell Let's Talk campaign, @HumphreyChimp found the reductionist nature of this quote problematic. Anti-stigma programs (including Let's Talk) caution against pathologizing and simplifying concepts like "happy," "sad," and "depressed" as though one simple behavioral change will take care of the problem. Mark Kingwell's excellent book, In Pursuit of Happiness: Better Living From Plato to Prozac, does a great job of inviting people to think critically about concepts of happiness. Kingwell suggests that the current emphasis on individualism is problematic, as are a very new (and odd) hedonistic pre-occupation with happiness - including the historically unprecedented individualization of social problems (as opposed to seeing them as a collective pursuit).
@HumphreyChimp also challenges the idea that happiness would be an "inside job," as though situational and systemic factors (such as oppression, discrimination and abuse) would play no part. Undoubtedly, some issues around happiness (such as that original meme) have to do with the "first world problems" of the very privileged (like Mandy Hale, the sassy author from whose book the original quote originated).
But that over simplification doesn't stand simple tests of examples. If you are, for example, a women who lives in a society in which you are silenced, beaten, refused the right to an education, and generally oppressed, then is that woman's unhappiness her own fault?
If you are a person who is experiencing heath issues - perhaps a painful physical illness, or perhaps a mental illness, does Hale's flippant sentiment apply? (Actually, Barbara Ehrenreich already wrote extensively about this in Bright Sided).
Perhaps this is a little less truthy and reductionist than the original:
No comments:
Post a Comment