Outline Speech About Depression: Fill & Download for Free

There should be no line.There must be no line if we don’t wish to slip into the abyss.I’m writing this after a massive, needless overreaction to Jo Brand’s terrible joke on the BBC in the UK.BBC defends Jo Brand over 'battery acid' jokeHere is what is the best gag I have seen regarding this issue. Do we think Ricky should get banged up as well?I’m somewhat loathe to defend the BBC too, because I have watched it decline so much in my lifetime that I find this an extremely depressing state of affairs.When I first moved to the United States I used to brag about the Beeb.I used to tell everyone that would listen, that they should get their news from the BBC because they were so clearly better at remaining impartial than the big American networks.“And up next on CNN, Trump, should we feed him to the wolves?”How things have changed in the last few years….I firmly believe that the vast majority of people have absolutely no issue with this type of thing, and I can prove it.The popularity of the biggest names in comedy prove it.It’s never those milquetoast, clean comedians that make shit quips on talk shows like Have I Got News For you.It’s the likes of George Carlin, Louis CK, Frankie Boyle, Billy Connolly, and Ricky Gervais, not a clean comic among them!We can pretend this is a debate that is raging in the western world, but it demonstrably isn’t.The big names, the ones that sell hundreds of thousands or millions of tickets, they are absolutely killing it. And they are only doing that, because the vast majority of people clearly support their right to joke about whatever the fuck they like.Frankie Boyle was unbelievable on his rise to prominence in England, he made really obscene gags about the Queens minge, sexual assault jokes regarding Katie Price, and Ricky Gervais has joked about bead babies.Nobody cares.I think the right-leaning people that bombarded the BBC with complaints are simply doing what we all do, and embracing tit-for-tat politics.The whole thing was started by the left, and it was outlined with great aplomb by John Ronson in his book “So You’ve Been Publicly Shamed”He wrote about how it was deeply illiberal and illogical, to hound people for what are obviously quips.Justine Sacco famously got savagely attacked by about a million people for hers….The other extremely annoying part of this is the rank hypocrisy of the BBC and those on the left.Carl Benjamin ran for UKIP, and there was such a storm about him I looked him up and I sat through some of his videos. It was a complete misrepresentation of the facts and a storm in a teacup, essentially he made a joke about a woman being ugly.He got hounded for weeks by Sky News and the BBC. Literally weeks of condemnation. It was the same when some Paratroopers stuck a number of comedy faces on their targets, and one of them was Jeremy Corbyn. They also defended Frankie Boyle, because he attacks conservatives.I hope we can finally draw a line under this, with my stalwhart defense of people to tell jokes.Nobody cares.Fuck me, the people they are haranguing are making jokes for fucks sake.When the king starts persecuting the Court Jester, that’s when you know for a fact you are well and truly fucked.“I knew we were in a spot of bother when the little twat had Ser Dontos whipped!”Seriously folks, nobody cares.And nobody cares, because the majority of people are fully aware that the freedom to joke, the freedom to make quips, IS freedom of speech, and freedom of speech is the bedrock of a free society.If it does not remain so, then we are no longer free.And if we embrace identity politics and outrage culture and start stifling what even comedians are allowed to say, well…We don’t deserve to be.

You say you may be ‘seriously’ depressed which is quite different from feeling down, or even weird? I think you would know the difference yourself if you were that depressed.When we talk about depression it means our ability to function.If you are able to get up at the right time, eat your breakfast, take a shower, get dressed, do your job, hold a conversation then I would have to say that you are not seriously depressed. You would not be able to do all those things if you were - maybe none of them.More than likely you would be experiencing something like this:It would be very difficult for you to get up in the morning because you would have insomnia. What is meant by that is either you can’t fall asleep, you have a disturbed night, or you wake up too early in the morning.Or when seriously depressed you may well sleep for 12–16 hours a day. This is called hyper-somnia. If you are really ill, you may be unable to get out of bed at all.Your eating would also be different. You may eat too much , or lose your appetite altogether. And you probably wouldn’t want to eat a healthy diet, preferring junk food as that takes little preparation.As for a shower and getting dressed, a person who is seriously depressed has so little energy that it may be totally impossible to take a shower - even brushing your teeth would be an effort.It is true that some depressed people do manage to go to work, indeed they need the money, but once again if you are seriously depressed no matter how much you want to work you will be too ill to do so.As for having a normal conversation with anybody, that would be very hard because your thinking processes would be slowed down, as would your speech, and you would not be able to concentrate on what the other person was saying. Also your topic of conversation would be very negative, and people might well get impatient with you.It is normal for a person who is severely depressed to feel sad, hopeless, worthless and guilty even though they have done nothing wrong. Likely, their thoughts would be about death and suicide.I think, with all I have outlined here, you will certainly be able to conclude whether you are suffering from a serious depression. If this is the case, you may need to see a doctor for treatment in order to get well again.I wish you luck.Please note: I am not a doctor, I write from my own experiences and research. If you need clarification on any of these topics, please see a medical professional.

Two of Tolkien’s letters explain why he decided not to pursue The New Shadow beyond the 13 pages you can read in chapter 16 of The History of Middle-earth - XII - The Peoples of Middle-earth. Letter 256 has Tolkien explain the basic idea behind the story, with Tolkien realising that he could have written a thriller. Tolkien says that the story would be “just that” and not worth doing. Tolkien was not interested in writing a thriller, and his other works were far beyond just writing a story for the sake of a story. His work was more a place for languages, cultures, history, fables, etc. It’s the creation of the Secondary World, the mythology. While I personally think The New Shadow could have been decades ahead of its time[1], I can understand Tolkien’s reasoning…‘I did begin a story placed about 100 years after the Downfall [of Mordor], but it proved both sinister and depressing. Since we are dealing with Men it is inevitable that we should be concerned with the most regrettable feature of their nature: their quick satiety with good. So that the people of Gondor in times of peace, justice and prosperity, would become discontented and restless – while the dynasts descended from Aragorn would become just kings and governors – like Denethor or worse. I found that even so early there was an outcrop of revolutionary plots, about a centre of secret Satanistic religion; while Gondorian boys were playing at being Orcs and going round doing damage. I could have written a 'thriller' about the plot and its discovery and overthrow – but it would be just that. Not worth doing.’J.R.R. Tolkien - Letter 256At Aragorn's tomb - By BohemianWeaselThe New Shadow would come only 100 years after the death of ElessarWe then have Letter 338 where Tolkien outlines a lack of writing in the Fourth Age of the World as a whole. He plainly states that the King’s Peace would contain no tales worth recounting. The wars of the Fourth Age would have little interest after Sauron’s grand defeat in the Third Age. A defeat that changed the destiny of Middle-earth and ushered in the Age of Men…‘I have written nothing beyond the first few years of the Fourth Age. (Except the beginning of a tale supposed to refer to the end of the reign of Eldaron about 100 years after the death of Aragorn. Then I of course discovered that the King's Peace would contain no tales worth recounting; and his wars would have little interest after the overthrow of Sauron; but that almost certainly a restlessness would appear about then, owing to the (it seems) inevitable boredom of Men with the good: there would be secret societies practising dark cults, and 'orc-cults' among adolescents.)’J.R.R. Tolkien - Letter 338What I think is important to note is that there is a certain finality to the ending of The Lord of the Rings and especially many of the events detailed in the Appendices. If we look at the end of the First Age, the World is not at peace. It’s like it has taken a deep breath or sigh of relief after the catastrophic events of that age. Morgoth has finally been physically removed as a threat, yet his stain remains. Some Elves remain in Middle-earth, others go West. Númenor is raised and Men are gifted, but not all of them. The World is broken in spirit and in actual physical terms, it lays in ruins after the First Age.From this point, Sauron sets about his own task[2]of putting things to order, becoming the Second Dark Lord in the process, a direct threat to Elves through the Rings of Power, and an eventual great threat to the other races. Despite Elves and Men fighting both Morgoth and Sauron, I’d say Morgoth is to Elves as Sauron is to Man, the greatest threat to them at a time when they are close to inheriting the World. Sauron is temporarily defeated at the end of the Second Age through the Last Alliance of Elves and Men, but again…there is no celebration. Countless lives are lost, great Kings of Elves and Men perish, Kingdoms fall, and Sauron still returns.The Third Age truly is when Men are set to be the ones to defeat Sauron. Thousands of years of hardship result in Aragorn coming forth, with aid from the West in the form of Gandalf. The race of Men, including Hobbits, defeats this God-like threat, the greatest in millennia. Is there then happiness at the end of The Lord of the Rings and this Third Age? Yes, more so than in any other. There is sorrow at the departure of most of the Elves, and wounds to heal with the World left stained by Sauron’s evil. However, you need only look at what happens with Man inheriting the World and Aragorn beginning his long reign. The Age of Men begins in the Fourth Age, a time for healing, rebuilding, and growth. There is much to mourn, but more to celebrate.Melkor and Sauron - By BohemianWeaselMelkor and Sauron, the last “supernatural” threats to ManAll of that hope, a main theme of Tolkien’s work, seems to be undone with The New Shadow. So son after the reign of Aragorn, Man has begun to waste what was earned. While I don’t mind some good depressive storytelling, I think it ruins what we were given at the end of the Third Age. This is why Tolkien would find it so sinister and depressing. The bad side of humanity wins in the end and that, in turn, means Morgoth wins. We aren’t naive to think that there won’t be evil after Sauron’s downfall, even Gandalf speaks of other evils that may come in his rousing speech in The Last Debate, but a political thriller desecrating the reign of Aragorn would have been depressing to Tolkien…‘Other evils there are that may come; for Sauron is himself but a servant or emissary. Yet it is not our part to master all the tides of the world, but to do what is in us for the succour of those years wherein we are set, uprooting the evil in the fields that we know, so that those who live after may have clean earth to till. What weather they shall have is not ours to rule.’The Lord of the Rings - The Return of the King - Book 5 - Chapter 9 - The Last DebateI think the idea of the greatest threat in existence leading to his lieutenant, and then to something internal and not external is a very interesting concept. No longer would can the external great and mighty Dark Lords be the focus of Man’s road to progress, but Man would have to look within. This leads me to think that there are pros and cons of The New Shadow as a concept, but Tolkien made his choice and if he had little passion for continuing the story then I am glad it was abandoned at an early stage.Footnotes[1] Steven Gibb's answer to Tolkien wrote an unfinished sequel to The Lord Of The Rings although he abandoned it considering it too dark and sinister. What do you think it is about?[2] Steven Gibb's answer to What exactly was Sauron's plan for Middle Earth? What was he trying to accomplish?