The sexes and biologism...

Jenny Westerstrand.

Nina Björk.

A blogger Jenny Westerstrand wrote about sexes and biologism yesterday in the posting "In the middle of biology - I and other smart women." When I read it today I had to smile and my eyes started to glitter. She is often so angry and ironical! Sarcastic? My amateur-translation and maybe also interpretation:

“I see that Gudmundsson writes about [a sort of] biologism he means rules the world, the one that Nina Björk has slightly opened the door to, even in her choice of partner (jeeezz…). And, yes thank you, the biology is about that the man shall be superior to the female animal, if not, this [the relation?] doesn’t work. I have to reject this nonsense powerfully. Us between Stanky [her partner with whom she has a son?] and I have established more than once that I am both much smarter and muuuuuuch better educated than he is, so this, no, I just don’t believe in it. Stanky on the other hand is considerably both much more good-looking and richer than I am, so the equation evens itself out. We have established this too. So where do we stand? Where does the nature stand? Are we on the train? One wonders. But, god, how hopeless to search for a smarter man as hetero – are people having a single life in sight?” :-)

This Nina Björk seems to have written that she only gets interested in men whom are superior to her according to this Gudmundsson. He thinks an evolutionist-biologist could have foreseen this, something a left-feminist (as Björk is?) not really want to acknowledge. He also writes about surrender or submission… Phew!

But in wikipedia it stands that Nina Björk is member of the Swedish Christ democrats (the hypocrisy party in my eyes really)!! And the Christ Democrat party isn't a left-party!

See earlier postings with the label Jenny Westerstrand. And on hypocrisy and biologism.

John Read and Models of Madness...

[Slightly updated May 24]. The blog ”Do nothing day” wrote in a blogposting about an “Interesting radio-programme on madness and science” which was about schizophrenia and the professor in psychology (?) at the University of Auckland, John Read.

From the introductory chapter to the book "Models of Madness: Psychological, Social and Biological Approaches to Schizophrenia" (Brunner-Routledge, 2004) or ”Galenskapens gåta - Psykologiska, sociala och biologiska modeller för schizofreni” ISBN: 9789187852435 edited by John Read, Loren R. Mosher and Richard P. Bentall it you can read (translated to Swedish):

“De flesta lekmän, många professionella och de flesta som kallas ‘schizofrena’ inser att psykiska problem har sitt ursprung i livserfarenheter. Bara en mäktig yrkesgren, den biologiskt inriktade psykiatrin, insisterar på att överbetona biologi och genetik. Den har en makt som hör ihop med stödet från läkemedelsindustrin.

Utöver att Galenskapens Gåta ger alternativ — och övertygande bevis som stöder dessa alternativ — går den igenom de historiska, ekonomiska och politiska förhållanden som givit denna förenklade biologiska ideologi en så skadlig dominans. Vi gör det för att inte svikta i den kamp som väntar alla, som vill föra psykosvården in på en humanare och mer effektiv väg. För att övervinna hindren krävs att alla deltar — personal i den psykiska hälsovården (inklusive psykiatrer), de som brukar kallas ‘schizofrena’, deras närstående, forskare, sjukvårdsadministratörer och politiker. För vår del har vi sammanställt de forskningsresultat som kan användas i denna kamp, för dem vars sinne är öppet för den ganska enkla tanken att förtvivlan oftast orsakats av andra människor, och att det är människor som kan avhjälpa den bäst och inte kemikalier.

Vårt bidrag består delvis av en uppdatering av bevis, delvis av ett återuppväckande av glömda eller tabubelagda resultat, och delvis av en introduktion av nyare synsätt, tex att förstå den roll barndomstrauman spelar. Det är också en rak, frimodig uppfordran till medvetenhet. Alla berörda borde göra något, efter sina möjligheter, för att få slut på denna galenskap.”

Taken from here. Here an article about the book in Swedish. Silently thinking: labeling and diagnosing another human being is a power-tool. And used by the power it can cause a lot of harm, and has caused a lot of harm... Used as a justification for quite abusive measures, in both medical, psychiatric treatment as in politics. And used to cover things up. Addition May 24: the Swedish leader-writer Göran Greider in fact writes about things paralleling this in the leader "The cold glance of the bureaucrat," about how disabled people are treated. When I return from work I will blog about this I think... Words came for me when I read this leader such as: humiliation, lousy politics, gratefulness, human worth... Übermensch-ideals, almost fascistic ideas...

And here you can read (parts of?) the book. There it you can read:

“Chapter 1

'Schizophrenia' is not an illness

John Read, Loren R. Mosher and Richard P. Bentall

'Schizophrenia is a chronic, severe, and disabling brain disease'. In June 2003, this was the opening statement of the US government agency, the National Insititute for Mental Health, on its public information website about the topic of our book. Such an opinion can be found in most 'educational' material, from Psychiatric textbooks to drug company sponsored pamphlets. We disagree.

The heightened sensitivity, unusual experiences, distress, despair, confusion and disorganization that are currently labelled 'schizophrenic' are not symptoms of a medical illness. The notion that 'mental illness is an illness like any other', promulgated by biological psychiatry and the pharmaceutical industry, is not supported by research and is extremely damaging to those with this most stigmatizing of psychiatric labels. The 'medical model' of schizophrenia has dominated efforts to understand and assist distressed and distressing people for far too long. It is responsible for unwarranted and destructive pessimism about the chances of 'recovery' and has ignored-or even actively discouraged discussion of-what is actually going on in these people's lives, in their families and in the societies in which they live. Simplistic and reductionistic genetic and biological theories have led, despite the high risks involved and the paucity of sound research proving effectiveness, to the lobotimizing, electroshocking or drugging of millions of people.

The research we have gathered together in this book supports our belief that our efforts to understand and assist people experiencing the 'symptoms of schizophrenia' will benefit greatly from a fundamental shift away from unsubstantiated bio-genetic ideologies and technologies to a more down-to-earth focus on asking people what has happened and what they need.

We have not attempted an even-handed, 'objective' approach. What is required, after a hundred years or more of the dominance of an approach that is unsupported scientifically and unhelpful in practice, is a balancing stance rather than a balanced one. The traditional viewpoint is omnipresent in textbooks, research journals and the media. Other views have had difficulty being heard [because of the denial in general, in society and individuals?].

---

Kapitel 1.

Schizofreni är inte en sjukdom.

’Schizofreni är en kronisk, allvarlig/svår och handikappande hjärnsjukdom’ detta var det inledande påståendet från the US government agency, the National Insititute for Mental Health, på dess allmänna informationswebbsida i juni 2003 angående ämnet för vår bok. En sådan åsikt kan man hitta i det mesta ’undervisningsmaterialet,’ från psykiatriska läroböcker till broschyrer sponsrade av läkemedelsbolag. Vi håller inte med.

Den ökade känsligheten, ovanliga erfarenheter, nödläge, förvirring och desorganisation som för närvarande etiketterats/diagnostiserats som schizofreni är inte symtom på en medicinsk sjukdom. Idén att ’mental sjukdom är en sjukdom som alla andra’, kungjord av biologisk psykiatri och läkemedelsindustrin, får inte stöd av forskning och är extremt skadande för dem som får denna den mest stigmatiserande av psykiatriska etiketter/diagnoser. Den ’medicinska modellen’ för schizofreni har alltför länge dominerat ansträngningarna att förstå och hjälpa plågade och plågande personer. Den är ansvarig för obefogad och destruktiv pessimism om chanserna för ’återhämtning’ och har ignorerat – eller till och med aktivt avskräckt/slagit ned diskussioner om – vad som egentligen pågår i dessa personers liv, i deras familjer och i samhället i vilket de lever. Förenklade och reduktionistiska genetiska och biologiska teorier har, trots de höga riskerna och den knappa tillgången på sund forskning som bevisar effektiviteten, lett till lobotomering, elektrochocker och drogandet av miljontals människor.

Den forskning som vi har samlat i denna bok stöder vår tro att våra ansträngningar att förstå och hjälpa människor som upplever ‘schizofrenisymtom’ skulle tjäna enormt på ett fundamentalt skifte bort från obekräftade biogenetiska ideologier och teknologier till ett mer jordnära fokus genom att fråga människor om vad som hände och vad de behöver.

Vi har inte försökt [oss på att hålla] ett opartiskt, objektivt angreppssätt. Vad som erfordras är en balanserande snarare än en balanserad hållning efter hundra år eller mer av dominans från ett angreppssätt som inte är vetenskapligt stöttat och vilket inte hjälper i praktiken. Det traditionella synsättet är allestädes närvarande i läroböcker, forskningsjournaler och media. Andra synsätt har haft svårighet att göra sig hörda [p.g.a. det allmänna förnekandet? Och kraftfulla ekonomiska intressen; från t.ex. läkemedelsbolagen]“

Compassion for people struggling to come to terms...

[Updated during the day]. Here some silent reflections. Who and what is worth our condemnation?

---

And once again see this article: Against Biologic Psychiatry by David Kaiser, M.D.

“If one uncritically cling to old methods' alleged infallibility and blames the client for failures, you inevitably land in the same fairways (waters) as the sect-guru, who also promises entire liberation. Such promises only produce self-destructive dependence which stands in the way for the individual’s liberation.” (Alice Miller in “Paths of Life” in my amateur translation from the Swedish edition of this book).

And also read this blogposting, which was so wise, about being in control and check and needing external validation…

The blogger (a man) writes in the end:

“The actual point of me being like this is that I’m supposed to be a good servant of civilisation. Otherwise known as being a good professional. I’m supposed to be good at sacrificing everything that’s important to me as a person so that I can serve the machine better - and I’m supposed to do it without trying to rebel. Here again my father’s influence; even though I was often cautious in social situations I didn’t lack the thoughtfulness to question my role in society or the courage to leave it so I guess I wasn’t properly broken in either - they broke me at the emotional and body level but they didn’t get my mind.

The weird thing, which I just realised today, is that I make these decisions in my mind and then set about implementing them like a good professional, which is to say with total disregard for my own needs.”

Something struck me: is it different when a woman (girl) needs validation though? Was it more different earlier?

Addition after lunch: Oh, this music is difficult listening to… I listened to it when I ate lunch.

Almost eight years ago I played on a concert during a master-class (for pianists and singers) in a beautiful old church in the north of Sweden, where one of the people in the audience was one of the flutists in the Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra (he was teacher for the flutists in a parallel master class). I felt very uncomfortable in this whole situation and during this whole occasion and wished I was invisible and I felt very out of place (malplacerad), but I probably wasn't even if I thought so then. On top I have problems with stage fright and shaky hands. Don’t thinking I am good enough. The typical extremely sensitive “artist”, sensing, feeling, taking in (which of course doesn’t exclude insensitivity, but on the other hand a psychiatrist and psychotherapist once said that he thought I saw very clearly).

I had tried the Grand earlier during the day and thought it was great. At that time there was so much in my life, and so much had happened the previous six years, so my body was extremely tense, so tense so one of the teachers noticed it. Something I didn't really realize. I got surprised when he said it during a lesson, because I complained over problems I had, which I hadn't had before.

When I started to play (accompanying an opera-singer in a romance by Schubert or Brahms, I don’t remember, a singer whom I didn’t feel comfortable with at all) I got a shock. The keys were suddenly heavy like lead! (and the other pianists said the same afterwards, that the keys were so heavy *). So it was like chopping wood really. I played and played and wished I could disappear.

But the piano-teacher (professor in piano here in Sweden) thought the singer and I matched each other. She was really colourful, red-haired and daring to “play out”, and sang really well. A mature singer, both seen to voice and expression, who also had finished her studies since some years (in her midst 30s?). And he also said I played so well… Despite I don’t work as pianist, but have a lot of pupils and students (and thus limited time practicing really), and by then had worked as piano-teachers for 22 years…

And I am the only one in my family working with music. The only one who has too, noone has in the generations before me either. And noone among my cousins or uncles and aunts have had either. So in a way I am very lonely in this.

But my dad took singing-lessons in Stockholm for an opera-singer, Augustin Kock **, when he studied to agronomist in Uppsala. And dad also played violin during his childhood (which is a little surprising) and later in the orchestra at the gymnasium where he was student.

Mom didn’t have any such opportunities when she grew up.

All my siblings have played instruments, but they didn’t continue with it. As a rebellion towards mom and dad?

But I had never thought of having this as my living, but doing something else; in nature science or as architect.

* I wonder if the accompanist to the flutists wanted heavier keys for some reason? And the piano-technician had changed them to suit him? He didn't want to play so loud to the flutists? I don't know.
** he died 1956.

In the evening: watch how people lived in the north of Sweden more than 6000 years ago!


And maybe 200 years back from another open air museum.

Biologism…

from a walk April 17, 2007.

See this posting (in Swedish) about biological engineering and increased prescriptions of medicine (not least antidepressants). The blogger thinks we are going back to the total-biologist society again. Last time was in the thirties (and what followed?). Then the biologism meant a blind faith in the genetic heritage and what that heritage said. People the over class and the physicians then thought weren’t valuable became sterilized.

She thinks the social engineering, so scoffed at by the cultural elite, is now replaced with the biologist engineering.

A female scientist seems to have said that where one earlier tried to arrange the life to suit even “lower standing and/or less worthy” (my ironic and a little free interpretation) people, through trying to create good social and societal conditions for as many as possible, one are now stunning, benumbing, silencing worried, stressed, eliminated and so called troublesome people, with biochemical means or instruments, from the crib to the grave and to a too early death for many.

See the blog Psych 101 Revisited again about Empathy Deficits in (some) scientist (my italics):

“Autistic individuals have a deficit in their capacity to perceive the feelings which other people experience in social situations. They also have difficulty recognizing that circumstances and events can be interpreted in a variety of ways by different individuals. Simon Baron-Cohen refers to this type of deficit as Mindblindness (the title of one of his books)./…/

There are milder forms of autism in which cognitive functions are not impaired, and some individuals can have exceptional mathematical, musical or artistic abilities./…/

The range of impairments, from mild to extreme, is referred to as the 'Autism Spectrum,' and encompasses cases of Asperger's Syndrome. Components of these various disorders include poor social skill, poor communication skill, poor imagination, exceptional attention to detail, poor attention-switching and a narrow focus of attention. Not all of them are necessarily present in each individual case./…/

…[a] report [which is linked on the site I have linked] states:

‘Among the group of 840 students, scientists scored significantly higher in autism spectrum traits than humanities and social sciences students, confirming an earlier study which showed that autistic traits are associated with scientific skills.’

Within the subgroup of science students, mathematicians, engineers, physical, and computer scientists were found to have the highest scores, followed by biologists, experimental psychologists and medical students./…/

By contrast, bio-psychiatrists assert the existence of hypothetical 'chemical imbalances' and 'genetic predispositions' for which they have no incontrovertible evidence. By and large they ignore family and societal factors. They are content to administer drugs of dubious worth to adults & children regardless of the aetiology of their symptoms [about etiology: see the end of this posting]. Part of the problem is that, in medical school, they are mainly taught about anatomy, physiology, biochemistry and genetics. So they try to shoehorn explanations for all types of psychological distress into those categories. Instead of a last resort, their first resort is to mask the symptoms of distress by drugging people.”

PS. Eskil is home again (152 km from here). My brother came here to fetch him just before I should start work. So instead of cycling to the school I should be I took the car to the animal’s hospital to see and greet Eskil! He hadn’t eaten anything. Wanted to go home the woman we met thought.

Traumatizing to be left alone like that? It sounded as e was a little reserved now at home, and he was a bit to me too ):-.

Took a bike ride before lunch. On the tour my mobile phone rang and I answered cycling. It was a young man, quitting the aesthetic programme this spring. He wondered if I should be at the music-school this afternoon. No, I shouldn’t. He wanted to go a piece through till tomorrow when he is going to play (sing?) at the Conservatory here. He is trying to get a place there this fall. I got a bit surprised, because I don’t really know who he is, I have only heard his name, but he is no student of mine!! I don’t even have a face on him. But of course fun he thought he could get good help from me?

But oh, how tired I am…