Coping with Depression:
This InfoPax is designed to provide you with some information about depression and suggested strategies for how you can manage your mood. It is organised into modules that are designed to be worked through in sequence. Although it is not necessary that you complete one module before going on to the next, this is recommended. Each module includes information, worksheets, and suggested exercises or activities.
- Module 1: Overview of Depression
This module looks at the symptoms of depression, what causes depression, and provides information about psychotherapy for depression. PDF document: 214kb.
- Module 2: Behavioural Strategies for Managing Depression
This module describes how to increase activity levels, particularly fun activities. PDF document: 261 kb
- Module 3: The Thinking-Feeling Connection
This module describes automatic thoughts and explores how thoughts influence feelings. PDF document: 191kb.
- Module 4: The ABC Analysis
This module explores how you can use a thought diary to monitor the unhelpful thoughts that can lead to how you feel about a particular situation. PDF document: 211kb.
- Module 5: Unhelpful Thinking Styles
This module describes a number of common unhelpful thinking styles that can lead to negative emotions. PDF document: 271kb.
- Module 6: Detective Work and Disputation
Module 6 explores how you can examine and challenge unhelpful thoughts by expanding the thought diary described in Module 4. PDF document: 239kb.
- Module 7: The End Result
This module describes how you can summarise how you have challenged unhelpful thoughts by producing a balanced thought. PDF document: 303kb.
- Module 8: Core Beliefs
Core beliefs are often at the root of unhelpful thoughts that are particularly difficult to change. This module looks at core beliefs and how to change them. PDF document: 217kb.
- Module 9: Self Management
This final module describes how to maintain gains and continue the progress that has been made throughout the previous modules. PDF document: 216kb.
Some niggas reasoning for liking Ariana grande has majority to do with how young she looks but I c u u fuggin losers
!!!!!!!! I’m saying??? Like I’m keeping a careful eye on my mutuals who are unusually attracted to cuteness/naivete/innocence. Like im truly watching yall wit my own two eyeballs. Always watching yall as you blog. Always
"I have had friends bear witness to white people at a rally for Mike Brown in LA this past Sunday co-opt and erase antiblackness and lead chants of “We are all Mike Brown” when they will never be Mike Brown." via owning-my-truth
That is how white supremacy works. The misdirection and deflection of issues pertaining to Blackness to centralize whiteness is what it does. You don’t even have to be cognizant to what you’re doing to participate. It has been this way for so long, that it’s as natural as breathing. Whiteness must usurp the victim. Many white “allies” can’t just offer solidarity and fight alongside you for justice. They want to pretend that the plight of Black people is theirs as well.
After Trayvon Martin was murdered, white “allies” did the same thing. They chanted “we are all Trayvon Martin”. I know, I saw them at rallies in NYC. It is quite off-putting to witness a white person say that they too are Trayvon Martin. A white mom at the Union Square Trayvon Martin rally with her white son in tow said “I’m afraid for the future. This could be my son too.” Someone told her that her son could never be Trayvon Martin because he is white. She then feigned ignorance and relegated back to the comfort of a colorblind world. She said “I don’t see color, we all bleed red”. Here she was, at the rally of a boy who was followed and murdered because he was Black, and she’s spouting colorblind ideology.
This is a problem with the mentality of many white “allies”. They erase Blackness to generalize issues that directly affect Black people. Anti-Blackness affects Black people and no one else. White people have an aversion to using terms like anti-Blackness and white supremacy in discourse on discrimination and injustice because those are not ambiguous terms open to interpretation. It points directly to the problem and the perpetrators. For comfort, they will hide behind the cloak of a term like “racism” instead. Racism goes both ways in their estimation. They too can be victims of it. Big bad Black meanies are “reverse racists” all the time. One time, a scary Black person called them a “honky”. Armored vehicles are rolling in on Ferguson, but “reverse racism” y’all!
When you say white supremacy, there is no dancing around that. This is why when Black people bring up issues pertaining specifically to Black people and anti-Blackness, it becomes a problem for many whites. Merely addressing the problem is a problem for them. They will accuse you of “playing the race card”. Issues pertaining to Black people must be sanitized and rebranded as “human issues” “class warfare” etc. Intersection does not exist for them. If Black issues are not rebranded, they will be misdirected or deflected. They will say “It happens to everybody” as the streets remain crimson with Black blood.
This mindset doesn’t only manifest itself in tragedy, it manifests itself in anything pertaining to Black people that whiteness wants to consume. It could be the arts. Black arts are communal. It’s for everyone. You can’t even discuss the origins of the art itself without whiteness taking issue. See Black music for instance. Participation in the culture for whiteness is not enough, whiteness must own it.
Whiteness has a parasitic relationship with Blackness. Blackness is their host body. Whiteness will claim ownership over the Black body, even in death. From Sarah Baartman to Henrietta Lacks to Trayvon Martin. They must possess you. If not literally, then figuratively. This is how they too have become Mike Brown.
Is the real point of my life simply to undergo as little pain and as much pleasure as possible? My behavior sure seems to indicate that this is what I believe, at least a lot of the time. But isn’t this kind of a selfish way to live? Forget selfish — isn’t it awfully lonely?
But if I decide to decide there’s a different, less selfish, less lonely point to my life, won’t the reason for this decision be my desire to be less lonely, meaning to suffer less overall pain? Can the decision to be less selfish ever be anything other than a selfish decision?
Is it possible really to love other people? If I’m lonely and in pain, everyone outside me is potential relief — I need them. But can you really love what you need so badly? Isn’t a big part of love caring more about what the other person needs? How am I supposed to subordinate my own overwhelming need to somebody else’s needs that I can’t even feel directly? And yet if I can’t do this, I’m damned to loneliness, which I definitely don’t want … so I’m back at trying to overcome my selfishness for self-interested reasons. Is there any way out of this bind?
David Foster Wallace — from “Joseph Frank’s Dostoevsky” in Consider the Lobster (via slothnorentropy)
I got into trouble thinking like this in college. It’s an important thought process to go through, and so well articulated here. In the end, though, love is like a limit in calculus (I need a better or more relatable simile…). You never quite get to the supposed ideal of it. But really you do. If you keep walking halfway to the door, you will eventually get there because your feet are bigger than the halves that will go on infinitely.
And, in the end, love accepts neediness. Don’t overcome your selfishness. Share it.