>>11201492I disagree with his and the mainstream definition of SPD because of purely this alone: give me a personality type that can detach from society but also isn't considered a mental illness. You can't, because every detachment from society is automatically classified as your brain misfiring in some abstract way like you defending your fragile ego, because that's the purpose of modern psychiatry in the first place, to maximize productivity and minimize dissent of the population, and a reclassification of the asocial personality types that absolves them of the stigma and rebrands them as "just something natural that may as well be actually beneficial for the person as an individual but not society" will never happen, because it is society that decides what's acceptable or not in the first place, and a psychiatrist going against this and greenlighting the social isolation of his patients would be very unpopular by any form of society, hence why it is so universally demonized by everyone seeking to defend his reputation and career. Just imagine one of them publishing a paper on how he saw significant improvements in his early-20s patients' depression when he gave them the affirmation that it's ok to be a NEET and that "failure" is an abstract classification by society that changes its form in every generation, he'd first get swarmed by his colleagues for going against the establishment and then by the rest of society for irresponsibly "ruining their kids by making them lazy", and he'd be banned from practicing shortly after. Such a thing will simply never happen purely because psychiatry looks after society, not you as an individual, and so the individualist personality types like SPD and NPD are demonized even when there's actually nothing wrong (at least in most cases) with the individuals themselves, and whenever it's clear that there's nothing wrong, something is abstractly conjured to make them flawed and convince them that detachment is not the way.
