Escapist Entertainment
http://www.foxnews.com/health/2010/11/12/life-pinned-rock-hard-place/
Dr. Ablow, a frequent contributor for Fox News, takes a position I agree with--that shows that encourage us to empathize with other people (and ourselves) help us function better.
He also takes a position I don't agree with, and he doesn't make a decent case, or any case at all, to support that position.
His target is the virtual reality game, Second Life, but the disdain he displays frequently gets used against online gaming, first person shooter games, even books and television.
What these virtual environments (including books) have in common is that they aren't running us through the emotional wringer, except through adrenaline. Instead, they're taking us out of the real world and into an artificial one--and artificial one where things always go well for the hero or heroine. Even games where you "die" all the time, death is not permanent.
Of course, I'm biased. I produce escapist entertainment. The novels John and I did together aren't heavy on actual battles, but they do have an operations, action, adrenaline focus. People in combat zones read them. People home from combat read them. The same people read the milSF books written by my friends and other authors I admire the hell out of.
During the Great Depression, the movie industry did really well, especially flicks like the Wizard of Oz. People were hurting, and they wanted to escape the hurt for just a little while.
There have been news stories about book sales being down, but the authors I've talked to are all enjoying pretty decent sales. If anything, the sales are more than we expect. And it's for the same reason that all those other forms of escapist entertainment are doing well.
We serve as a cathartic safety valve for people's pain. A couple of drinks now and then, in moderation, are good for you (unless you have certain medical problems). Escapist entertainment is, in moderation, good for people. By "good for them" I mean it helps people keep going--and ordinary people know this, just as a matter of common sense.
Pickling your liver with heavy drinking is bad for you. Drunk driving and a whole lot of other problem drinking behaviors are bad for you. That is, when it adversely impacts your medical health or major life functions.
Spending your life in Mommy's basement playing Call of Duty is bad for you. Spending your life hiding in bodice-ripper novels is bad for you. Any escapist entertainment becomes bad for you if you escape into it to the point of adversely impacting your medical health or major life functions.
People don't become addicted to substances because alcohol exists. People become addicted to alcohol or other substances because they have underlying problems, nature and nurture in whatever balance. Alcohol doesn't break people. Addictive over-use of alcohol (further) breaks people. The dose makes the poison.
People don't become compulsive users of escapist entertainment because things like Second Life exists. People who get caught up in compulsive loops do so because they're locked into avoiding something aversive that causes anxiety. However strong or weak the compulsion, that's the root of it, and that's why when you take away one escapist compulsion, another quickly fills its void. The dose makes the poison.
My grandmother smoked most of her adult life. When the general public became aware smoking was bad for you, she put the cigarettes down and quit. No cravings. She just stopped and walked away. There's a whole continuum of how strongly or weakly our vices have a hold on us, generally rooted in how messed up we are with whatever it is we're dodging.
Some people can walk away from the X-box and quit killing zombies, at any time, and start real life socializing with real people and spending time with family and getting off their butts and getting some exercise, and getting more productive shit done. Some people have a minor or major case of the Idonwannas and can kick themselves in the ass and turn off the football game and go mow the lawn.
Other people can't leave the house most days, or talk to people in person without being horribly awkward let alone date, or motivate themselves to get active--even to get out and walk for half an hour a day. I mean multiple "can'ts" to the extent it really screws up their lives. I don't mean they're passive-aggressive about wanting to make everyone else do everything for them--no hostility. I mean they start feeling panicky when they try to do what they should, and the more they push to doing it anyway, the more panicky they feel--so they usually don't push to the point of actual panic attacks.
Once it rises to the level of screwing up their lives, it's not an "addiction"--but it is a compulsion, and getting rid of one just gets it immediately substituted in with another. An example would be someone addicted to alcohol who starts going to AA and manages to (at least for awhile) break loose from their physical addiction--but only by substituting it with the compulsion of going to AA meetings.
Whether you want to stick a label on it, at that point--messing up major life function--it's a clinical level anxiety problem, which is quite treatable. The treatment isn't for a football fan to stop following football, or a fanatic golfer to stop playing golf, or someone who likes Second Life to stop spending some time online there, or for a book lover to stop reading. The treatment is to get people functioning--which is absolutely necessary to reducing their use of escapism down to a sub-clinical level.
Football fans, golfers, bibliophiles, Second Lifers, MMORPG-ers---the dose makes the poison, and using one or a combination of the above to a "poison" level indicates an existing, underlying problem that was not caused by (but is caught in a vicious cycle with) the escapism.
So, Dr. Ablow, I must respectfully disagree with you.
Compulsive over-use of Second Life is a symptom of psychological harm, not the cause.
Dr. Ablow, a frequent contributor for Fox News, takes a position I agree with--that shows that encourage us to empathize with other people (and ourselves) help us function better.
He also takes a position I don't agree with, and he doesn't make a decent case, or any case at all, to support that position.
His target is the virtual reality game, Second Life, but the disdain he displays frequently gets used against online gaming, first person shooter games, even books and television.
What these virtual environments (including books) have in common is that they aren't running us through the emotional wringer, except through adrenaline. Instead, they're taking us out of the real world and into an artificial one--and artificial one where things always go well for the hero or heroine. Even games where you "die" all the time, death is not permanent.
Of course, I'm biased. I produce escapist entertainment. The novels John and I did together aren't heavy on actual battles, but they do have an operations, action, adrenaline focus. People in combat zones read them. People home from combat read them. The same people read the milSF books written by my friends and other authors I admire the hell out of.
During the Great Depression, the movie industry did really well, especially flicks like the Wizard of Oz. People were hurting, and they wanted to escape the hurt for just a little while.
There have been news stories about book sales being down, but the authors I've talked to are all enjoying pretty decent sales. If anything, the sales are more than we expect. And it's for the same reason that all those other forms of escapist entertainment are doing well.
We serve as a cathartic safety valve for people's pain. A couple of drinks now and then, in moderation, are good for you (unless you have certain medical problems). Escapist entertainment is, in moderation, good for people. By "good for them" I mean it helps people keep going--and ordinary people know this, just as a matter of common sense.
Pickling your liver with heavy drinking is bad for you. Drunk driving and a whole lot of other problem drinking behaviors are bad for you. That is, when it adversely impacts your medical health or major life functions.
Spending your life in Mommy's basement playing Call of Duty is bad for you. Spending your life hiding in bodice-ripper novels is bad for you. Any escapist entertainment becomes bad for you if you escape into it to the point of adversely impacting your medical health or major life functions.
People don't become addicted to substances because alcohol exists. People become addicted to alcohol or other substances because they have underlying problems, nature and nurture in whatever balance. Alcohol doesn't break people. Addictive over-use of alcohol (further) breaks people. The dose makes the poison.
People don't become compulsive users of escapist entertainment because things like Second Life exists. People who get caught up in compulsive loops do so because they're locked into avoiding something aversive that causes anxiety. However strong or weak the compulsion, that's the root of it, and that's why when you take away one escapist compulsion, another quickly fills its void. The dose makes the poison.
My grandmother smoked most of her adult life. When the general public became aware smoking was bad for you, she put the cigarettes down and quit. No cravings. She just stopped and walked away. There's a whole continuum of how strongly or weakly our vices have a hold on us, generally rooted in how messed up we are with whatever it is we're dodging.
Some people can walk away from the X-box and quit killing zombies, at any time, and start real life socializing with real people and spending time with family and getting off their butts and getting some exercise, and getting more productive shit done. Some people have a minor or major case of the Idonwannas and can kick themselves in the ass and turn off the football game and go mow the lawn.
Other people can't leave the house most days, or talk to people in person without being horribly awkward let alone date, or motivate themselves to get active--even to get out and walk for half an hour a day. I mean multiple "can'ts" to the extent it really screws up their lives. I don't mean they're passive-aggressive about wanting to make everyone else do everything for them--no hostility. I mean they start feeling panicky when they try to do what they should, and the more they push to doing it anyway, the more panicky they feel--so they usually don't push to the point of actual panic attacks.
Once it rises to the level of screwing up their lives, it's not an "addiction"--but it is a compulsion, and getting rid of one just gets it immediately substituted in with another. An example would be someone addicted to alcohol who starts going to AA and manages to (at least for awhile) break loose from their physical addiction--but only by substituting it with the compulsion of going to AA meetings.
Whether you want to stick a label on it, at that point--messing up major life function--it's a clinical level anxiety problem, which is quite treatable. The treatment isn't for a football fan to stop following football, or a fanatic golfer to stop playing golf, or someone who likes Second Life to stop spending some time online there, or for a book lover to stop reading. The treatment is to get people functioning--which is absolutely necessary to reducing their use of escapism down to a sub-clinical level.
Football fans, golfers, bibliophiles, Second Lifers, MMORPG-ers---the dose makes the poison, and using one or a combination of the above to a "poison" level indicates an existing, underlying problem that was not caused by (but is caught in a vicious cycle with) the escapism.
So, Dr. Ablow, I must respectfully disagree with you.
Compulsive over-use of Second Life is a symptom of psychological harm, not the cause.