Teens posting numerous posing pictures on facebook: healthy or unhealthy behavior?

We all know the archetype: the stereotypical teenager that posts pictures of him or herself ‘posing’ in front of their mobile camera. Today I saw a discussion on facebook with parents who wrote that they forbid their teens to post such pictures to facebook, for it would be ‘unhealthy behavior’.

I found that a rather odd conclusion. The mother in question wrote that the teen ‘was allowed to post pictures of group events, and having fun in group context, but not of himself posing in front of his phone’.

As a philosopher, I would claim the exact opposite: it is healthy behavior in an unhealthy environment, rather than unhealthy behavior in a healthy environment. Let me explain that.

What you are really effectively saying when you forbid a teen to put up pics like that is: you can show the nice times, but you cannot show your insecurities. You can show the world your strong side, but not your weak one.

In reality, however, such ‘posed pictures’ are nothing but biological training of mimics to sharpen them for survival in society. As society is largely based on such mimics preventing your children from training or sharpening them is simply not a good idea. It will limit their possibilities for success in the hostile world they are surrounded by. What these teens are really doing is ‘measuring’ over facebook which mimics are the most effective ones to confront the world with, which is measured by the number of thumbs they generate. Take away this tool forcefully and the teen will have no ‘social mirror’ and likely be much less skilled in dealing with his or her environment.

It’s essentially healthy behavior within an unhealthy environment (facebook). But take note there too: all recent major psychopaths, such as Breivik and the Joker killer, did not have facebook accounts, so even in that regard the truth is a double-edged sword: in some sense facebook is actually really healthy as it trains ones social skills. The unhealthy aspect of it is the Big Brother and the commercial one: everything is recorded for eternity, for commercial use. But as a tool of itself chat and social media are in a limited sense healthy.

There are certain types of ‘psychologists’ out there, however, that want to make us believe the exact opposite: anyone posting anything about themselves on facebook is by definition a ‘Narcissist’. It has however nothing to do with ‘narcissism’ and everything with training of effective mimics. It’s biological survival, entirely genetic really. Let’s take a look at one of these infamous psychologists, an entity known as ‘Dr Sylvia Gearing’:

How to spot a psychotic psychology robot warning about being human on Youtube:

1. They typically open their films with robotical industrial imagery that make it look like they are some sort of cog in a giant machine, to prevent thinking they are overly personal. This is ofcourse smoke
screen tactic.

2. When you start speaking vehemently shake your hands up and down as if you are cutting sausages with them. This kung fu movement will impress the more idiotic viewers to think you have actually some sort of point.

3. Wear ridiculous large earrings, a solid necklace, and a weird white jacket that accentuates your boobs. This is to prevent male viewers from actually hearing you have nothing to say.

4. Clasp your hands nervously at the end of every line. Its like being good friends with yourself in front of the camera.

5. Look at how facial blush is used on this woman’s face to artificially make her look sexually viable in a cyborg sort of fashion. I find this video really perverse: a robotic psycho-sexuality is presented that tells us to delete nudity, in the interest of ‘health’ but its representative has need of artificial, martial warpaint that is used in a completely obscene manner to accentuate a Chronos like will to devour us, the viewers, as her children. Notice the blood-red, too dark lipstick.

6. What sort of psychologist would advice people to ‘avoid narcissists’? Why would anyone ‘avoid people’ who have some sort of problem? Isn’t this rather the psychotic branch of psychology that thinks ‘normality is avoiding whatever is weird’ and is all about ducking problems.

7. ‘They consider themselves fascinating’ – well, you consider yourself fascinating enough to post this shite to youtube, isn’t it?

8. Control over presentation. Well we can’t seriously accuse you of such, since you have never seemed to have learned a single thing about presenting yourself.

9. Oh my, nudity again. Nudists are narcists. Badly dressed people like you, who have no taste for clothing, are normal.

10. ‘If they are showing too much skin, delete them’. Well let me rather delete you, Miss psychopsychologist. Deleting people because they show too much shoulder on their pictures? How much more psychotic can society get?

The real message of such psychology robots is this one: delete everyone that different. Different is dangerous! For you mental health! If someone has a problem, ignore them! Ban them!

It’s hard to imagine an environment wherein such a quack could actually successfully pose as a ‘psychologist’. It’s like a soccer trainer who advises you to avoid any contact with ‘bad balls’. It’s like a wedding adviser that tells you you should duct tape your wife’s mouth if she ever starts to talk about her problems. Why on earth would we have to ban people who have problems – and I don’t even agree they are problems – from our lives? If this is the ‘new psychology’ rampant in America then it sure has turned into a scary place.