With a (very?) low status…

In a review on a dissertation “Att leva som utbränd” or “Living as burnout” by Mia-Marie Hammarlin it stands (my maybe a little free translation):

“Being burnout is feminized with the help of media, where the word ‘burnout’ gets a clear low status face – the middle age woman in public sector. Men retire to loneliness [solitude] and seem to be afraid of the connection with shame [and nerve weaknesses]. ‘Real chaps don’t get stricken with nerve weaknesses.’”

This review triggered a lot of thoughts and emotions, not only connected to the topic burnout. Here are some of those reactions and thoughts. It resulted in a lot of threads. And will maybe result in more postings than this one. So this posting is loudly thinking once again, and in many directions.

Even if it isn’t straight outspoken one can hear (or is this projection, a symbolic reaction/interpretation from my part?):

“What weakling you are! Why not just… One can seek oneself to other environments! To get more healthy and sound you have to seek yourself to a healthy and sound environment![what that is? If it exists and where.]”

The contempt for weakness - and for all those incapable of controlling themselves!! Something we have seen here around the debate about social insurances, things I am reacting very strongly and angrily at.

Women are since long schooled to stay (vistas) in powerless places it stood in the review. 35 years ago women overly trained in a traditional patriarchal pattern went right out into the public sector and was locked in there. Their own fault? How stupid of them! Blaming themselves too: How stupid of me! My own fault! I should have been able to handle it better! See the Primary defence.

The author of the dissertation seems to mean that being burnout is deeply embedded in sex and class problems. And wonders if depression and diffuse aches and pains can be an expression for female dissatisfaction, if these things can’t be seen as downright political actions, as a sort of demonstrations.

I don’t know, maybe they are, but if so not consciously?

And the reviewer writes that she wants to scream

“OF COURSE!”

as a reply, and she also hear a choir of female anger, furiously filling in in her scream.

Yes, reading this triggered a lot of thoughts and probably emotions around things that have happened and things I have experienced recently!!

About blaming the victim, false power denial of needs, lack of empathy and understanding/enlightenment - and once again - contempt for weakness.

And all these phenomena are there for to protect the ones reacting (reacting with contempt and rejection, wanting to educate and maybe also punish the ones not having any “stake” as we say) against the truth, a too painful truth, a SO painful truth so we need to protect ourselves against it. Seeing it from the Miller-point-of-view!

But these protections (or defences) turn to problems, not only for ourselves but also for other people (self-destructiveness and destructiveness), so if not sooner we ought to work on this now as adults. Because they can result and have resulted in political decisions with grave and severe consequences and continue to result in such things.

Thinking further and loudly in an attempt to understand and grasp these phenomena (how can people be so stupid and insensitive?): And contempt for weakness is also a protection: a protection against the realization and to this connected feelings on HOW in fact powerless the child once was and how this power and helplessness was used by the ones that were/are supposed to care for us the most. Realizations we and many want to avoid at all costs. With all what that means.

In circles where people are supposed to be enlightened I have heard things in the style and with the meaning (in my feeling and interpretation):

“But take yourself in the collar!! The question is about seeking oneself to an environment which is healthier, with healthier people.”

And if one doesn’t succeed in this… Then one is only to blame oneself?
And I have heard from those (men) that it’s the mothers’ fault how things are. Yes, that’s true, the mother is the first one in a child’s life… Does this mean that dads – and men – have no responsibilities thus?

But don’t we all have responsibilities each one of us, and the same responsibilities and should also have the exact same demands on us, no more or no less, whether we are women or men? And especially as or if we are grown ups! We all have responsibilities to contribute in making things better, and each of us have a responsibility for ourselves? And exactly the same responsibility?

But then, if we actually have those means in all circumstances is another question and to what degree? The structures can contribute to less power – in some circumstances? Oh, what am I after?

The more power you have the more harm you can do? And some don’t have any other power than the one over their children!

Fields of Gold.

You'll remember me when the west wind moves
Upon the fields of barley
You'll forget the sun in his jealous sky
As we walk in fields of gold
So she took her love for to gaze awhile
Upon the fields of barley
In his arms she fell as her hair came down
Among the fields of gold

Will you stay with me, will you be my love
Among the fields of barley?
We'll forget the sun in his jealous sky
As we lie in fields of gold
See the west wind move like a lover so
Upon the fields of barley
Feel her body rise when you kiss her mouth
Among the fields of gold

I never made promises lightly
And there have been some that I've broken
But I swear in the days still left
We'll walk in fields of gold
We'll walk in fields of gold

Many years have passed since those summer days
Among the fields of barley
See the children run as the sun goes down
Among the fields of gold
You'll remember me when the west wind moves
Upon the fields of barley
You can tell the sun in his jealous sky
When we walked in fields of gold
When we walked in fields of gold
When we walked in fields of gold