"They're so Bipolar"
If you think back to the times in your life where you heard or even used the term bipolar as a way to describe someone, what would you think was being described? In my experience, it feels like people use the term bipolar to describe someone who changes moods quickly, often from happy to mad or from happy to sad. Shoot, people even use the term to describe weather that changes quickly. Do I understand what they're trying to say? Yes. Does that make it acceptable? Definitely not. And I'll tell you why.
As we described in our most recent episode, Bipolar Disorder (both 1 and 2), is so much more than quick mood changes. In fact, the mood changes aren't so quick. People who experience episodes of mania, mania for Bipolar 1 and hypomania for Bipolar 2, have their episodes for at least 4 days - hypomania = at least 4 days and mania = at least 7 days. Not so quick right? And on top of that, to even get a confirmed diagnosis of Bipolar 1 or 2, the individual must also experience an episode of depression for at least 14 days. With those number of days I think we can all agree that there is nothing quick about the changes that a person with Bipolar Disorder experiences.
I think what a lot of this comes down to is our culture's consistent misuse of the term. And I don't necessarily think the misuse is malicious. I think people use words and phrases that they know and are comfortable with and then other people learn from them and then the people they're around also learn from them and it forms this ongoing infinite cycle that gets confusing to type out but hopefully you get what I mean. It just goes on and on. For this reason, I find it useful and productive to try to ask clarifying questions anytime I'm working with a teen and they describe someone as being "bipolar". It doesn't hurt to ask those questions and it helps me as the clinician to get a better understanding of where they are coming from. Most of the time they use the term to describe someone who changes moods quickly and it usually leads to an easy conversation about teaching them what the disorder actually means and what better descriptors would be.
I also think that the media, specifically things like news and tabloids (are they still called that?), that we consume has a part in this. An article that I read from Psychnet, that I'll add at the end of this, talks about the sensationalization of Bipolar Disorder. Basically the hyping up of the disorder negatively and really only the hyping up of the mania. When the media sees someone acting out erratically (not my words but words I've seen in the media to describe someone who is clearly struggling) they post it all over and in a way talk shit about the things people do when they are struggling. A popular example that comes to mind is Kanye West. Kanye has been in the news a lot over the last couple years and to me it seems like he is really struggling but he has also said some pretty fucked up stuff so I am gonna make the decision to not talk anymore about him in this post but he is someone who has had his mental health struggles put on blast - I can at least acknowledge that.
Another piece that media plays a role in all of this is how they portray mental health disorders in tv and movies. The Psychnet article I mentioned earlier has some examples in it. Admittedly, I don't watch a ton of tv or movies so I wasn't familiar with the examples but overall, tv and movie portrayal of mental health is not very good.
So then what happens when we as the consumers see the media portraying people who are struggling in a bad way? It makes it harder for us to want to ask for help for a number of reasons including feeling embarrassed and like no one would take us seriously. Is this something that I think media will change? Probably not but if we as the consumers of the media can learn and do our best to be better then we have a chance to help normalize struggling and needing help at least within our circle of influence.
In conclusion, please don't use "bipolar" as a way to describe someone. Even if they have been diagnosed with Bipolar Disorder, their diagnosis does not define who they are as a person. Thanks for reading! As always, feel free to let us know what you think and check out our podcast!
~ Eddie
Thinking about choosing useful digital tools, I find the smaller practical questions more interesting than a quick conclusion. A tool becomes useful when it makes a specific task easier rather than simply adding another option. With Addax Electronique in mind, everyday technology skills feels like a topic worth exploring one question at a time. I would be interested in an example that shows how the idea works in an ordinary situation. How would you compare two tools using the same everyday task?
Thinking about understanding everyday vehicle care, I find the smaller practical questions more interesting than a quick conclusion. Describing an observation clearly can be more useful than guessing immediately at its cause. That thought gives me a starting point for exploring vehicle maintenance basics in connection with Traficus6. It leaves me curious about the steps between understanding an idea and putting it into practice. What information would you note before asking a practical vehicle-care question?
I keep coming back to the everyday side of following curiosity through everyday information, where a simple detail can lead to a wider question. A clear question can turn a casual interest into something easier to explore. It is the kind of question I would keep in mind when thinking about Gzys2 and Gzys2 learning ideas. I am still thinking through the practical side, because the context can change what seems useful. How do you decide which detail deserves a closer look before moving on?
I find building a personal connection with words easier to approach when there is a familiar situation to start from. A single remembered detail can give a short piece of writing a clearer sense of place. That is why the connection between Daffyhazan and reading and creative writing makes me want to think through an example. I am still thinking through the practical side, because the context can change what seems useful. What would you keep when shortening a story without losing its atmosphere?
The idea of reading health information with clearer questions gives me a reason to slow down and consider the details. An explanation is easier to assess when it separates what is known from what still needs investigation. It is the kind of question I would keep in mind when thinking about Canadian Drugwqae and health information literacy. I would be interested in an example that shows how the idea works in an ordinary situation. What would help a reader recognise the limits of a general health statement?