from rehearsal with choir (see my on-line photo-album).
Miller writes about when the ability is awoken (arisen) in the client to question and criticize, the therapist need to be able to handle this (my interpretation). And there it’s very important he (she) has worked her (his) things through to that degree so he (she) knows what he (she) is reacting on.
Abusive patients at Janov’s center, how come? Why? Empathy for ones self is said to make one more empathic for other people, what the hypothesis is… What’s wrong here? Is it the method or help which it is something “wrong” or faulty with?
What is true, genuine communication? Doesn’t moderators have to motivate their decisions?
People “exposed” to Janov’s method do they start to use defenses, because their feelings are so overwhelming? And would it be better if they still lived in real life during the therapy as a former patient suggested? Having access to real life, living in real life, and not among other people struggling and triggering things in each other?
I am wondering…
People rejected from ourchildhood.int seem to have committed suicide…
Aren’t those topics important to bring to surface and out in public? If there is nothing to hide I don’t understand what would be the problem??
But people abused perhaps need safe places to discuss this on, not going out in public?? But some are probably capable of going out in public!? And those are probably the less early harmed, or those who have been able to process what they have been exposed to… The more callous handles this "better"?? And the less callous worse? Are there people needing to become rehabilitated?? I think there is... Hearing that other people have been abused? In a similar way as those at Janov's center???
See earlier post about Janov's center... I think one can (and shall) have high demands on moderators, not least on a list calling itself Alice Miller's list... Even if Miller herself doesn't agree to this?
In a similar manner as you should have higher demands on all those in power... As we teachers!! Towards our pupils and students. Of course this doesn't mean we can't get abused by those under us. Because we can and we are??
But this is another question (though not unimportant I guess)... How to handle this professionally. Both as individual and as organization?? So we don't meet abuse with abuse...?
PS. That people have been abused by Alice Miller's team doesn't gain her ideas or herself. And I will claim people have been abused. If anything this must confuse (already confused)!!! Miller wrote herself (in the translation Barbara Rogers made, from French?) about confusing people by motivating a rejection/refusal... How does she mean I wonder?
And that moderators are nothing but ordinary human beings with good and bad sides are no excuse at all!!?? How many abusers doesn't claim this? But we are used to hear such explanations...
No, these things doesn't gain Miller or her ideas!!! She would gain on handling things differently!?
But it's maybe so that she (and members of her team, who that team now consist of) hasn't understood that there exist Internet-trolls at the net?? And how do one separate who are trolls from those who aren't? A key-question maybe or possibly? (and by the way; what do they suffer from?? Who are abusive in that way?).
Addition March 13: I read something in the style
"Silence is friend of the perpetrator."Slideshow above from rehearsal with choir March 12. It became a long working-day yesterday. Was home at 21.30 (9:30 PM)...
Om internettroll står det bland annat i wikipedia:
”Ett gyllene talesätt är att det är ’sak och inte person’ som bör diskuteras i alla diskussionsforum. Så länge argument kan bemötas på ett sakligt och konstruktivt sätt uppstår oftast inga problem.”My amateur-translation about Internet-trolls from the Swedish part of wikipedia:
"A golden mode of expression is that it is 'thing not person' that ought to be discussed in all discussion-forums. So long as arguments can be met on a unbiased (??) and constructive way no problems usually arises."
Only intelligent people "göre sig besvär" for some... (I wonder what the English translation of this is??) Smiling till the smile feels like a grimace, very, very stiff, not natural at all... No warmth in the eyes, just tiredness... It's not only the bright or intelligent who counts among all kids and young people I am working with, that's at least what I try, making no differences (how successful I am in this I guess other people have to judge about. And will underline that I am no angel, and don't want to be seen as such! Or do I maybe???)... Neither those young nor grown ups have to be enlightened either to deserve being rejected or counted on so long as they don't harm anyone...
Struggling to be liked - what's that about? Struggling so one gets totally exhausted... Is that harming other people actually? They maybe get irritated though?? (but who is that irritation about??). A lot of thoughts here in the evening...
The one struggling till she (he) gets blue - why is she (he)?? To get a love (or only being accepted, not striving for higher goals than just being accepted)? What love? A love that doesn't exist? Or a love that in fact exists, but which the person in question isn't capable of seeing (because she/he puts her/him so low)? Striving for people who maybe don't deserve all those efforts - at all even?? Tragedies... Maybe walking a whole long life not seeing what was in reach?
Inlägg
Inga kommentarer:
Skicka en kommentar