I thought I wouldn't jump back in, but the temptation is real (especially with the quarantine
)
I can't speak for Revolutionary Jack, but I understood these to be forms of self-sabotage as well. I wasn't speaking of mental illness alone. However, none of these traits equate to the sacrifice of altruism (the man who risks his life to save another for no tangible benefit) or of living by a strict moral/ethical code (like nuns, monks, the Amish, etc.)
Having trouble stating your needs can lead to unfulfilling relationships. Procrastination and negative self-talk can lead to poor outcomes in a variety of contexts. As opposed to altruistic or ethical behaviors, there are no positive outcomes to be gained from any of these qualities. They are all purely maladaptive/harmful to varying degrees. They all inhibit people from achieving their fullest potential.
The point here is that Peter using his powers to save lives (and sacrificing some degree of success financially/occupationally/relationally to do so) IS him achieving his fullest potential. It gives him a level of emotional fulfillment and satisfaction that the alternative (not intervening and allowing someone to die for a tangible benefit) would not. The positive outweighs the negative. Therefore, it cannot be called self-sabotage.
This isn't splitting hairs either. To label Peter's sacrifice as self-sabotaging is to imply that the outcomes are generally negative, that Peter is generally unhappy, and that he would be more fulfilled if he gave up being a superhero. I understand that sometimes people misspeak and convey messages that aren't intended. But there definitely seems to be a defense of the specific term as being accurate in this thread. Hence, the rebuttal.