Many of those 'advisers' to the OP don't realize that when core ethical principles are chattered - universal and innate to all human understanding -people can get enraged. And rightly so.
Ever watched Zetalot playing Priest. Suffering all the time. The fact that card design is inherently unfair and the destribution of balance through the classes is even worse he was behaving himself quite civil. But he was dying inside. That is the prize to pay if only you serve a target audience.
There are two groups. The ones that figure out the best way to reach their goals no matter what circumstances - those with poor ethical pedigree. The other protest agains bad circumstances put into their way by those in charge. The obvious solution if you can't change those in charge is revolution. And if you can't just break your TV.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
We make our world significant through the courage of our questions and the depth of our answers.
"Let's look at the facts. The OP got angry and frustrated. He threw a fan in frustration because he was pissed and accidentally broke his TV. Based on that alone, people immediately jump to the conclusion that he needs to seek professional help? Give me a fucking break."
Why do you say you want to look at the facts and then leave out pertinent facts? As I've said twice now, the issue as I see it isn't the action itself, the issue is the attitude towards the action and seeming belief that there's nothing to be done about it. I have heard very similar attitudes toward more serious action, and it's concerning to me. If you disagree, fine. But if you expect "a fucking break" yourself, do the courtesy of not deliberately misstating others' statements.
EDIT: The above stands regarding Casm's statements, but it should be mentioned in addition that I either missed the OP's statements about being in therapy or they were made after my first post. Either way, glad to hear it.
Helpful Clarification on Forbidden Topics for Hearthstone Forums:
Enjoying Americans winning in the Olympics is forbidden because it is political. A 14 plus page discussion of state-sponsored lawsuits against a multi-national corporation based on harassment, discrimination, and wrongful death allegations is apparently not political enough to raise an issue.