Master suppression techniques...

In another circumstance I searched on the Master Suppression Techniques and found this, translated to English:

"The Master suppression techniques were a framework articulated by Berit Ås to describe five means by which women are or were subjugated in Western patriarchical societies.

The techniques are:

• Make Invisible [surround that person with silence for instance, as if she/he doesn't exist?]
  
• Ridicule
• Withhold Information
• Damn If You Do And Damn If You Don’t
• Heap Blame and Put to Shame"

The roots to this, to this need (whether it's conscious or not)? If I had time I would refer to things Ingeborg Bosch has written I think... The need of bullying (spela översittare).

But I want to add that Ås has pointed out that the use of these techniques can occur not only men towards women, but also women between etc. Used when someone need to exercise power, maybe feel more powerful and knowing, put her/himself above whether it is conscious or unconscious...

What legitimacies bullying of any kind? How big or small, even the most subtle... Can one blame early childhood abuse? And who is responsible for that early abuse actually? And later: is that early abuse to blame for what you do or say, for your actings today? Some small, silent wonders...

Hmmm, that about being well mannered... And what is actually done for my own good? Of real care? Of real concern? What matters and what is important actually?

PS. I have written a blogposting about "Women's voices"... About singing-technique and being able to raise your voice (even technically), even if singing is something I just slightly touched upon in my two music-educations. Over whose voices are dominating, everywhere, even on the net (and who is listened to and seen and heard?).

And it is a bit funny that I have been method-trained in teaching singing... I don't think I know much there... But enough to reflect on these topics (do I know anything about anything I wonder silently?).

About who defines the problem and wonders what “knowledge” actually is…

I got a tip about an article in a Norwegian newspaper on “Everything isn’t relative”.

Knowledge based (evidence based?) praxis puts the emphasis on diagnosis’. And as a friend wrote: WHO defines what the problem is actually??

When I am reading the debate article I come to think about that with empathy… And earlier thoughts about empathy deficits… I link all earlier postings with the label “empathy deficits” here; the eventual reader can chose what to read…

The beginning of the article in Norwegian:

”Hva er kunn­skap? Hva kan vi vite noe om? Hvor­dan kom­mer vi til er­kjen­nel­se? Dis­ku­sjo­nen om kunn­skaps­grunn­la­get for valg av til­tak på vik­ti­ge sam­funns­om­rå­der er for­ank­ret i de grunn­leg­gen­de vi­ten­skaps­teo­re­tis­ke spørs­må­le­ne.

De svar som gis, får et kon­kret, prak­tisk inn­hold idet de pre­ger hver­da­gen både for dem som gir og de som mot­tar vel­ferds­tje­nes­ter. Det­te er alt­så ikke aka­de­misk fli­se­spik­ke­ri, men en dis­ku­sjon om hva pa­si­en­ter skal bli møtt med i hel­se­tje­nes­ten, hva ele­ver skal bli møtt med på sko­len og hva for­eld­re og barn skal bli møtt med i bar­ne­ver­net.”

In Swedish (my interpretation and understanding, or misunderstanding, probably involved in the translation too):

”Vad är kunskap? Vad kan vi veta något om? Hur kommer vi till vetande/erkännande? Diskussionen om kunskapsunderlaget för val av hur vi handlar inom viktiga områden i samhället är förankrade i grundläggande vetenskapsteoretiska frågeställningar.

De svar som ges får ett konkret, praktiskt innehåll genom att de präglar vardagen både för dem som ger och dem som tar emot välfärdstjänster. Detta är alltså inte akademiskt språk, utan en diskussion om vad patienter ska bli mötta med i hälsovården, vad elever ska bli mötta med i skolan och vad föräldrar och barn ska bli mötta med i barnevernet (skydd för barn).”

In a sender-in in a local newspaper this morning a retired teacher wrote about what she thinks we value in school, and have always valued and the consequences of this, what we reward and, underlying; what does children learn about themselves in school? What have they learned? Which maybe strengthens (and have strengthened) what they have with them from home. And children are forced to go to school. I refer to this sender in here.

And all children aren’t acting out either, someone pointed to somewhere else (I don't know where now)… Some are playing the role extremely well of being satisfied, well adapted, clever… Hiding for the entire grown up environment how they actually feel and have it?

How shall I express this? I try: The way in which power is exercised can be very subtle, and maybe not always so conscious (denied from the part of the parent to such a degree), but the stronger the compulsion or coercion to exercise this power is and the subtler this is exercised (and the more denied this fact is from the part of the one in power/the parent) the more confused the child can become?

I think I know such a child very well…

In the middle of writing I got a phone-call from one of my nephews, turning 16 on Friday, January 25. He invited me for birthday celebrations on Saturday! :-) Of course I am booking that! I am so fond of my nephews (they are three) and niece...