Arcadia Power

Author Topic: Replies To Steve  (Read 50 times)

forbitals

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 132
    • View Profile
Replies To Steve
« on: July 02, 2019, 04:32:53 pm »

Yes Rachel777, I am very glad that you did not harm yourself.

We gain our will to live back, when we start fighting back. We need to find comrades, and we need to find ways of fighting back.

I say one of the best is in putting some Psychiatrists and some Psychotherapists our of business, as well as in finding ways to make the law protect children instead of perpetrators.



**************************


If someone is a survivor then the course of their life has been irreparably altered.

While there is no way to undo this, actively fighing back makes it the perpetrator’s problem. Whereas “live and let live” makes it still the survivor’s failing.


*****************************



And when people talk about “parenting” they are letting them off the hook and they are encouraging child exploitation.

“Parenting is a tough job”

Parents often don’t listen the a therapist, but they will listen to a judge. We cannot let therapists play God, has to be court supervision.

And the court needs to have realistic options, like something resembling an Israeli Kibbutz. This should be the norm, not the exception.




*********************************



Steve, it all goes round and round, the abused become the abusers.

So where does it stop?

Well people can do all kinds of stupid stuff, and then be forgiven.

But where we have to draw the line is in using children.

Now, we can’t tell people not to have children. They won’t listen.

But when they do, and when their are problems, we hold the parents accountable. They are the ones who are not living up to their own values, they are the ones who are using pedagogy manuals to break the wills of children.

No, this could not be punished criminally, but the parents can still be held accountable financially. No disinheritance, like it is in other industrialized nations. This will make a big change. It makes it harder to scape goat a child.

And then we can’t eradicate the middle-class family, but we can mitigate it. A Kibbutz like Children’s Home, drop in center, temporary center, and the child having regular experience there.

The reason we don’t have this today is because of the Self-Reliance Bogus Ethic, because children are being used to control adults economically, and this is completely unfair to the children.

And we don’t have such things because they would serve all races and social classes, and so many are against such.

We can’t change everything, but we can take apart this right so many feel to use children.

A dependency court judge, a CASA, sometimes also the child having a lawyer, and therapists cannot operate in isolation, because they are being hired by parents, so they placate the parents.

We can take apart this sense of entitlement to use children, and the justification behind it, in the talk about “parenting”.



********************************************





Steve wrote, “I am not sure you’re really getting what I’m talking about, and I find your comments here more than a bit dismissive of my reality. I ABSOLUTELY was encouraged to fully experience all the pain and confusion and loss that was the reality of my childhood, with tears and hopelessness and anxiety and angry swearing and the whole 9 yards.”

No, that’s my whole point, what they are telling you is that your pain is over things which happened long ago, when this is completely untrue.

They used to tell minor children who speak of ongoing sexual abuse that they are imagining. Today if they tried that, mandatory reporting should land them in prison.

So they do it differently. “Sure I feel your pain, I’m sorry that happened to you.”

They pretend to be on your side. But really they are not because their primary position is to get you to accept what has happen and to seek no redress, and to believe that this was just errors of the past, old editions of the pedagogy manual.

What they want is for you to be spouting the language of the new pedagogy manuals, empathy, nurturing, attachment, communications skills. They want you to be restored to worshipping the Holy Family, and they want you to side with parents instead of the children, so that you can then be seen as an adult yourself.

They want you to believe that your pain is over things which happened long ago, and hence has nothing to do with the present. In the end they are going to want you to “just get over it”.

This is my own experience, and it is also what is carefully explained here:

https://www.amazon.com/Against-Therapy-Emotional-Tyranny-Psychological/dp/0689119291/ref=sr_1_4?qid=1562100988&refinements=p_27%3AJ.+Moussaieff+Masson&s=books&sr=1-4&text=J.+Moussaieff+Masson

But the truth is something very different. The pains people feel are not primarily because of things which happened long ago. But your therapist does not want you to know this.

The pains you feel are primarily because your social and civil standing are voided, TODAY. You don’t have a legitimated biography, and so you are not accepted. So your survival is being threatened.

When abuse alters the course of your life, and when you won’t worship the Holy Family, and when your attempts to educate yourself and develop a career and find long term relationships have been undermined, you are looked down on.

So this means that you could be considered culpable, even expendable. So evolution has given us emotional pain, to let us know that things are not okay.

It is communicated to us in a 1000 ways every day.

Your therapist wants you to ignore this, as they also do.

They want you to stop trying to protect you’re inner core, and accept the Middle-Class Family. So the therapist does say things which exonerate the parents.

As where as the Middle-Class Family was not completely able to break you and make you accept the Self-Reliance Ethic, your therapist is there to finish the job.

Therapy is extremely manipulative, because it is itself another form of liberal pedagogy.




*****************************************


Phoebe, Thanks for the comment.

The Kibbutz Movement started because Zionists wanted to return Jews to the land. And they wanted women to be free from domesticity.

So they set up these children’s homes.

Sometimes these worked well, and sometimes there were problems.

And some Americans have criticized the Kibbutz Movement.

The biggest reason that its future is in question is simply because of the rise of the Likud Party and Neo-Liberalism. You could say, in Israel today, there are lots of ways to make money because since they have their national sovereignty, they have courts to protect absentee ownership. So it is no different from any other industrialized country, like say, the United States.

So it is only a minority who are interested in the Kibbutzes.

And fusing Zionism and Marxism always was a difficult project.

As one writer put it though, the Kibbutzes, never more than 4% of the population, supply Israel with more than 1/3 of its elite military, and with 1/2 of its fighter pilots, a disproportionate share of its agriculture and manufacturing, and town wives schedule their pregnancies with the openings in the Kibbutz Day Care Programs.

All I am suggesting is that we need to supply US children with group homes, and a couple of sets of back up parents. This is what gives the children citizenship, rather than forcing them to remain as property. They need to have back up, need to have other places to go.

The reason we don’t have such today is because children have always been used to impose a kind of economic regulation on the parents, and because such a group home and foster program would serve those of all socio-economic levels and all racial groups. Many are deeply opposed to this, as they see children as property and as a source of adult identity.

We can’t eliminate the middle-class family, but we can mitigate its effects.

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter


forbitals

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 132
    • View Profile
Re: Replies To Steve
« Reply #1 on: July 31, 2019, 06:55:55 pm »
Well some have said that Psychotherapy works well when the therapist lives in more non-conformist ways than the client.

But this is usually not the case though because the clients tend to be more socially marginalized, where as the therapist enjoys a good degree of wealth and legitimation.

I imagine that when David Smale did therapy sessions that they were more like Philosophical Counseling, and that this new Diagnostic Manual is intended to steer it more that way.

Please tell me if I am correct.

Okay, but do we really want people making appointments with counselors of any type?  How about peer relationships and political activism?

If John Brown had consulted with a therapist, would he have raided Harper's Ferry?

If Huey Newton and Bobby Seale had consulted with a therapist, would they have founded the Black Panther Party for Self Defense and then approached Oakland Police while carrying fire arms?

Here Shari Karney, she did see a therapist, but only for a while.  Then she committed herself and worked tirelessly to find a way around SOL's, finally just having to get the laws changed.  This took about 10 years and involved much conflict.  But as she said on her web page, this is why the US Roman Catholic Church has had $2 billion in judgments against it.

Excellent made for TV movie:
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0108110/

I believe that is she stayed in therapy, or was the sort of person who would stay in therapy, then her legal fight never would have proceeded.

Karney is a survivor of early childhood familial sexual molestation.  And she never was able to sue her own parents.  But she opened the door to all such suits, though most have been against large institutions.  Seems to me that people are still not ready to deal with abuse within The Family.

But no one would ever accuse Karney of just doing nothing, or of aiding the perpetrators.  She is ferocious.

So I put this forward as a question, and please tell me if I am wrong or right.  Seems to me that a universal among therapists is that they are not interested in political fights over anything other than therapy.  They are certainly not interested in revolutionary activities.  Their view is that the issues and the solutions exist between the client's two ears.  While they won't anymore do like Freud and call the client's liars, they still see the client's basic complaints as being unimportant.  Rather their objective is to help the client learn to live with thins as they are.

So I ask this as a question, and it is the basis of my claim that all forms of Psychotherapy revolve around something like Original Sin.

Other's know more than me have said this about Freud, that it is all based on a religious world view, and that it comes down the client being the one who is wrong.

I see Life Coaching as wrong or foolish for the same reasons.  But Life Coaching is likely to be shorter term and of more narrow focus, and it is not government endorsed.

In the 70's feminist groups would meet and discuss things like Incest, ****, and other horrors of a life restricted to domesticity.  They saw these rightly so as political issues.

But in the 80's concern of these issues spread to a broader and hence more conservative portion of the populace.

Hence, it all became fodder for Therapy and Recovery.

Susan Faludi
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIC4uKSFpL0

https://www.amazon.com/Rocking-Cradle-Sexual-Politics-Happened/dp/0201624710

Today I read that psychtherapists say that the number one concern of millennials is that they will not be able to save enough money to retire.

Okay, so is their therapist going to change anything?

Why are they not at political meetings and in political protests and writing political articles, to try and bring this country to Social Democracy, and to end this politics of private wealth accumulation and of inflating the stock and real estate markets?

When one emerges from the office of their therapist, what objective circumstance of their life has changed.

I say, only if you believe in Original Sin, would you say that something has changed.

Yes, the clients are part of the problem, they seem to always be attached to reactionary social and political views, and to me this is the source of their problem.

But you don't find therapy clients leading the charge for legal redress.  In a civilized society wrongs are redressed by law suits.  And most other industrialized countries do not even allow disinheritance.  But try to talk about this with therapy clients and they are mortified.  They don't want to even look at such ideas, because that would mean breaking out of the fantasy which therapy has created and seeing just how abusive this world really is.

I talk online to people from other countries and they talk about how their parents abused them.  I ask them about their countries inheritance laws, and they have zero knowledge of such.  And I am talking here about even civil law countries where the client will not even need a lawyer to collect.  Therapy has put them into this world, created by reflected memories made into a story line, and this is not how cognition works.

Where you find people who want to fight, its in those like Shari Karney and in those like the Munchausen's Survivor Julie Gregory, people who very early on excused themselves from Psychotherapy and Recovery.

Gregory ends her book, not in therapy, but dialing Montana CPS, because her mother has got a foster child, and a whole new pile of medical books, and she seems to be doing the same stuff all over again.

So I feel that the basic premises of therapy is that it is better to keep it within the therapist's office.  If this were not true, then therapists would have vast experience and knowledge about legal and political fights.

We want people hooking up with political comrades, people who are willing to take to the barricades.

What does the therapist think their sessions do, unless they believe in Original Sin or otherwise have a low opinion of the client.

Jeffrey Masson says that virtually all of the stuff discussed with a therapist would be better discussed in some other venue.

forbitals

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 132
    • View Profile
Re: Replies To Steve
« Reply #2 on: July 31, 2019, 07:11:30 pm »
Well some have said that Psychotherapy works well when the therapist lives in more non-conformist ways than the client.

But this is usually not the case though because the clients tend to be more socially marginalized, whereas the therapist enjoys a good degree of wealth and legitimation.

I imagine that when David Smale did therapy sessions that they were more like Philosophical Counseling, and that this new Diagnostic Manual is intended to steer it more that way.

Please tell me if I am correct.

Okay, but do we really want people making appointments with counselors of any type?  How about peer relationships and political activism?

If John Brown had consulted with a therapist, would he have raided Harper's Ferry?

If Huey Newton and Bobby Seale had consulted with a therapist, would they have founded the Black Panther Party for Self Defense and then approached Oakland Police while carrying fire arms?

Would suffragettes in jail have gone on hunger strike, if they had first consulted with a therapist?

Here Shari Karney, she did see a therapist, but only for a while.  Then she committed herself and worked tirelessly to find a way around SOL's, finally just having to get the laws changed.  This took about 10 years and involved much conflict.  But as she said on her web page, this is why the US Roman Catholic Church has had $2 billion in judgments against it.

Excellent made for TV movie:
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0108110/

I believe that if she stayed in therapy, or was the sort of person who would stay in therapy, then her legal fight never would have proceeded.

Karney is a survivor of early childhood familial sexual molestation.  And she never was able to sue her own parents.  But she opened the door to all such suits, though most have been against large institutions.  Seems to me that people are still not ready to deal with abuse within The Family.

But no one would ever accuse Karney of just doing nothing, or of aiding the perpetrators.  She is ferocious.

So I put this forward as a question, and please tell me if I am wrong or right.  Seems to me that a universal among therapists is that they are not interested in political fights over anything other than therapy.  They are certainly not interested in revolutionary activities.  Their view is that the issues and the solutions exist between the client's two ears.  While they won't anymore do like Freud and call the client's liars, they still see the client's basic complaints as being unimportant.  Rather their objective is to help the client learn to live with things as they are.

So I ask this as a question, and it is the basis of my claim that all forms of Psychotherapy revolve around something like Original Sin.

Other's knowing more than me have said this about Freud, that it is all based on a religious world view, and that it comes down the client being the one who is wrong.

I see Life Coaching as wrong or foolish for the same reasons.  But Life Coaching is likely to be shorter term and of more narrow focus, and it is not government endorsed.

In the 70's feminist groups would meet and discuss things like Incest, ****, and other horrors of a life restricted to domesticity.  They saw these rightly so as political issues.

But in the 80's concern of these issues spread to a broader and hence more conservative portion of the populace.

Hence, it all became fodder for Therapy and Recovery.

Susan Faludi
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIC4uKSFpL0

https://www.amazon.com/Rocking-Cradle-Sexual-Politics-Happened/dp/0201624710

Today I read that psychotherapists say that the number one concern of millennials is that they will not be able to save enough money to retire.

Okay, so is their therapist going to change anything about this?

Why are they not at political meetings and in political protests and writing political articles, to try and bring this country to Social Democracy, and to end this politics of private wealth accumulation and of inflating the stock and real estate markets?

When one emerges from the office of their therapist, what objective circumstance of their life has changed?

I say, only if you believe in Original Sin, would you say that something has changed.

Yes, the clients are part of the problem, they seem to always be attached to reactionary social and political views, and to me this is the real source of their problem.

But you don't find therapy clients leading the charge for legal redress.  In a civilized society wrongs are redressed by law suits.  And most other industrialized countries do not even allow disinheritance.  But try to talk about this with therapy clients and they are mortified.  They don't want to even look at such ideas, because that would mean breaking out of the fantasy which therapy has created with its bad models of cognition, and seeing just how abusive this world really is.

I talk online to people from other countries and they talk about how their parents abused them.  I ask them about their country's inheritance laws, and they have zero knowledge of such.  And I am talking here about even civil law countries where the client will not even need a lawyer to collect.  Therapy has put them into this world, created by reflected memories made into a story line, and this is not how cognition works.

Where you find people who want to fight, its in those like Shari Karney and in those like the Munchausen's Survivor Julie Gregory, people who very early on excused themselves from Psychotherapy and Recovery.

Gregory ends her book, not in therapy, but dialing Montana CPS, because her mother has got a foster child, and a whole new pile of medical books, and she seems to be doing the same stuff all over again.

So I feel that the basic premise of therapy is that it is better to keep it within the therapist's office.  If this were not true, then therapists would have vast experience and knowledge about legal and political fights.

We want people hooking up with political comrades, people who are willing to take to the barricades.

What does the therapist think their sessions do, unless they believe in Original Sin or otherwise have a low opinion of the client?

Jeffrey Masson says that virtually all of the stuff discussed with a therapist would be better discussed in some other venue.  I have yet to see anything myself which contradicts this.

Deleuze and Guattari say that Psychoanalysis, but meaning Psychotherapy too, have been created by Captialism and that they are completely parasitic.

There is this 4 hour BBC documentary, Century of Self.  It is a deep and cutting critique of all forms of Psychoanalysis, Psychotherapy, and Psychology, and its effect on politics.

They start by showing this Psychoanalysts Ball held annually in Vienna.  People say that because of Psychoanalysis, people can speak freely.  Example, say someone is a maid.  If they tried to complain about this they would be rebuked for not accepting their social position.

Whereas with Psychoanalysis they are free to say what they feel.

Well, is this really true?  A most basic area will be the exploitation and abuses which are the middle-class family.  So the client starts to speak.  But does the therapist really side with them?  Usually the therapist will say things which tend to exonerate the parents, and which tend to excuse what happened as being of the past, the old pedagogy manuals.

And Jeffrey Masson writes that it is part of the training to at a certain point stop listening and shift to drying to get the client to accept what has happened and to forgive.

And isn't it true that Psychotherapy is just Pedagogy Round 2?

Try to get the client to kneel down and worship the Holy Family, while acknowledging that there have been mistakes and errors, and that the old pedagogy manuals were worse than the new ones.

But the client must not see that the entire system is rotten, and all Pedagogy Manuals are just lessons in how to abuse children and get away with it.  The angry client is to be turned into a helpless neurotic.

forbitals

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 132
    • View Profile
Re: Replies To Steve
« Reply #3 on: July 31, 2019, 07:11:51 pm »
Well some have said that Psychotherapy works well when the therapist lives in more non-conformist ways than the client.

But this is usually not the case though because the clients tend to be more socially marginalized, whereas the therapist enjoys a good degree of wealth and legitimation.

I imagine that when David Smale did therapy sessions that they were more like Philosophical Counseling, and that this new Diagnostic Manual is intended to steer it more that way.

Please tell me if I am correct.

Okay, but do we really want people making appointments with counselors of any type?  How about peer relationships and political activism?

If John Brown had consulted with a therapist, would he have raided Harper's Ferry?

If Huey Newton and Bobby Seale had consulted with a therapist, would they have founded the Black Panther Party for Self Defense and then approached Oakland Police while carrying fire arms?

Would suffragettes in jail have gone on hunger strike and had to endure the feeding tube, if they had first consulted with a therapist?

Here Shari Karney, she did see a therapist, but only for a while.  Then she committed herself and worked tirelessly to find a way around SOL's, finally just having to get the laws changed.  This took about 10 years and involved much conflict.  But as she said on her web page, this is why the US Roman Catholic Church has had $2 billion in judgments against it.

Excellent made for TV movie:
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0108110/

I believe that if she stayed in therapy, or was the sort of person who would stay in therapy, then her legal fight never would have proceeded.

Karney is a survivor of early childhood familial sexual molestation.  And she never was able to sue her own parents.  But she opened the door to all such suits, though most have been against large institutions.  Seems to me that people are still not ready to deal with abuse within The Family.

But no one would ever accuse Karney of just doing nothing, or of aiding the perpetrators.  She is ferocious.

So I put this forward as a question, and please tell me if I am wrong or right.  Seems to me that a universal among therapists is that they are not interested in political fights over anything other than therapy.  They are certainly not interested in revolutionary activities.  Their view is that the issues and the solutions exist between the client's two ears.  While they won't anymore do like Freud and call the client's liars, they still see the client's basic complaints as being unimportant.  Rather their objective is to help the client learn to live with things as they are.

So I ask this as a question, and it is the basis of my claim that all forms of Psychotherapy revolve around something like Original Sin.

Other's knowing more than me have said this about Freud, that it is all based on a religious world view, and that it comes down the client being the one who is wrong.

I see Life Coaching as wrong or foolish for the same reasons.  But Life Coaching is likely to be shorter term and of more narrow focus, and it is not government endorsed.

In the 70's feminist groups would meet and discuss things like Incest, ****, and other horrors of a life restricted to domesticity.  They saw these rightly so as political issues.

But in the 80's concern of these issues spread to a broader and hence more conservative portion of the populace.

Hence, it all became fodder for Therapy and Recovery.

Susan Faludi
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIC4uKSFpL0

https://www.amazon.com/Rocking-Cradle-Sexual-Politics-Happened/dp/0201624710

Today I read that psychotherapists say that the number one concern of millennials is that they will not be able to save enough money to retire.

Okay, so is their therapist going to change anything about this?

Why are they not at political meetings and in political protests and writing political articles, to try and bring this country to Social Democracy, and to end this politics of private wealth accumulation and of inflating the stock and real estate markets?

When one emerges from the office of their therapist, what objective circumstance of their life has changed?

I say, only if you believe in Original Sin, would you say that something has changed.

Yes, the clients are part of the problem, they seem to always be attached to reactionary social and political views, and to me this is the real source of their problems.

But you don't find therapy clients leading the charge for legal redress.  In a civilized society wrongs are redressed by law suits.  And most other industrialized countries do not even allow disinheritance.  But try to talk about this with therapy clients and they are mortified.  They don't want to even look at such ideas, because that would mean breaking out of the fantasy which therapy has created with its bad models of cognition, and seeing just how abusive this world really is.

I talk online to people who believe in therapy from other countries, and they talk about how their parents abused them.  I ask them about their country's more favorable inheritance laws, and they have zero knowledge of such.  And I am talking here about even civil law countries where the client will not even need a lawyer to collect.  Therapy has put them into this film representation type world, created by reflected memories made into a story line, and this is not how cognition works.

Where you find people who want to fight, its in those like Shari Karney and in those like the Munchausen's Survivor Julie Gregory, people who very early on excused themselves from Psychotherapy and Recovery.

Gregory ends her book, not in therapy, but dialing Montana CPS, because her mother has got a foster child, and a whole new pile of medical books, and she seems to be doing the same stuff all over again.

So I feel that the basic premise of therapy is that it is better to keep it within the therapist's office.  If this were not true, then therapists would have vast experience and knowledge about legal and political fights.

We want people hooking up with political comrades, people who are willing to take to the barricades.

What does the therapist think their sessions do, unless they believe in Original Sin or otherwise have a low opinion of the client?

Jeffrey Masson says that virtually all of the stuff discussed with a therapist would be better discussed in some other venue.  I have yet to see anything myself which contradicts this.

Deleuze and Guattari say that Psychoanalysis, but meaning Psychotherapy too, have been created by Captialism and that they are completely parasitic.

There is this 4 hour BBC documentary, Century of Self.  It is a deep and cutting critique of all forms of Psychoanalysis, Psychotherapy, and Psychology, and its effect on politics.

They start by showing this Psychoanalysts Ball held annually in Vienna.  People say that because of Psychoanalysis, people can speak freely.  Example, say someone is a maid.  If they tried to complain about this they would be rebuked for not accepting their social position.

Whereas with Psychoanalysis they are free to say what they feel.

Well, is this really true?  A most basic area will be the exploitation and abuses which are the middle-class family.  So the client starts to speak.  But does the therapist really side with them?  Usually the therapist will say things which tend to exonerate the parents, and which tend to excuse what happened as being of the past, the old pedagogy manuals.

And Jeffrey Masson writes that it is part of the training to at a certain point stop listening and shift to trying to get the client to accept what has happened and to forgive.

And isn't it true that Psychotherapy is just Pedagogy Round 2?

Try to get the client to kneel down and worship the Holy Family, while acknowledging that there have been mistakes and errors, and that the old pedagogy manuals were worse than the new ones.

But the client must not see that the entire system is rotten, and all Pedagogy Manuals are just lessons in how to abuse children and get away with it.  The angry client is to be turned into a helpless neurotic.

Alice Miller writes about artistic representations of the Sacrifice of Isaac.  Why is Isaac mute and compliant.

She says that if Isaac were to raise his hand against Abraham, then "that would start the war that we all fear."

Well this is where we see the limitations of Alice Miller.  Its her Psychoanalytic training, its the effects of religion, and I say that also she was weakened by her experiences in the Warsaw Ghetto.

She finally wants Isaac to just ask "Why?"

I say that we have to strike back, we have to bring on a revolution, whether we fear it or not.  I do not fear it.

Paul Mones says that most of what we know about familial child abuse comes from the Richard Janeke  patricide case from Cheyenne Wyoming.

People learn when thing happen, and they happen regularly.  And we all learn when we act.  I learned a huge amount from being intensely involved in a child sexual molestation prosecution.

I say that it never will be like this in the therapist's office, and that someone is a therapist because they have committed themselves to the view that it is better to keep it in the therapist's office.  And I see this as being a universal truth.

forbitals

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 132
    • View Profile
Re: Replies To Steve
« Reply #4 on: July 31, 2019, 07:35:20 pm »
Well some have said that Psychotherapy works well when the therapist lives in more non-conformist ways than the client.

But this is usually not the case though because the clients tend to be more socially marginalized, whereas the therapist enjoys a good degree of wealth and legitimation.

I imagine that when David Smale did therapy sessions that they were more like Philosophical Counseling, and that this new Diagnostic Manual is intended to steer it more that way.

Please tell me if I am correct.

Okay, but do we really want people making appointments with counselors of any type?  How about peer relationships and political activism?

If John Brown had consulted with a therapist, would he have raided Harper's Ferry?

If Huey Newton and Bobby Seale had consulted with therapists, would they have founded the Black Panther Party for Self Defense, and then approached Oakland Police while carrying fire arms?

Would suffragettes in jail have gone on hunger strike and had to endure the feeding tube, if they had first consulted with therapists?

Would Michel Foucault have gone on to be what he was, if he had submitted to the national renowned psychoanalyst his parents had sent him to in the 30's?

Here Shari Karney, she did see a therapist, but only for a while.  Then she committed herself and worked tirelessly to find a way around SOL's, finally just having to get the laws changed.  This took about 10 years and involved much conflict.  But as she said on her web page, this is why the US Roman Catholic Church has had $2 billion in judgments against it.

Excellent made for TV movie:
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0108110/

I believe that if she stayed in therapy, or was the sort of person who would stay in therapy, then her legal fight never would have proceeded.

Karney is a survivor of early childhood familial sexual molestation.  And she never was able to sue her own parents.  But she opened the door to all such suits, though most have been against large institutions.  Seems to me that people are still not ready to deal with abuse within The Family.

But no one would ever accuse Karney of just doing nothing, or of aiding the perpetrators.  She is ferocious.

So I put this forward as a question, and please tell me if I am wrong or right.  Seems to me that a universal among therapists is that they are not interested in political fights over anything other than therapy.  They are certainly not interested in revolutionary activities.  Their view is that the issues and the solutions exist between the client's two ears.  While they won't anymore do like Freud and call the client's liars, they still see the client's basic complaints as being unimportant.  Rather, their objective is to help the client learn to live with things as they are.

So I ask this as a question, and it is the basis of my claim that all forms of Psychotherapy revolve around something like Original Sin.

Other's knowing more than me have said this about Freud, that it is all based on a religious world view, and that it comes down the client being the one who is wrong.

I see Life Coaching as wrong or foolish for the same reasons.  But Life Coaching is likely to be shorter term and of more narrow focus, and it is not government endorsed.

In the 70's feminist groups would meet and discuss things like Incest, ****, and other horrors of a life restricted to domesticity.  They saw these rightly so as political issues.

But in the 80's concern of these issues spread to a broader and hence more conservative portion of the populace.

Hence, it all became fodder for Therapy and Recovery.

Susan Faludi
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIC4uKSFpL0

https://www.amazon.com/Rocking-Cradle-Sexual-Politics-Happened/dp/0201624710

Today I read that psychotherapists say that the number one concern of millennials is that they will not be able to save enough money to retire.

Okay, so is their therapist going to change anything about this?

Why are they not at political meetings and in political protests and writing political articles, to try and bring this country to Social Democracy, and to end this politics of private wealth accumulation and of inflating the stock and real estate markets?

When one emerges from the office of their therapist, what objective circumstance of their life has changed?

I say, only if you believe in Original Sin, would you say that something has changed.

Yes, the clients are part of the problem, they seem to always be attached to reactionary social and political views, and to me this is the real source of their problems.

But you don't find therapy clients leading the charge for legal redress.  In a civilized society wrongs are redressed by law suits.  And most other industrialized countries do not even allow disinheritance.  But try to talk about this with therapy clients and they are mortified.  They don't want to even look at such ideas, because that would mean breaking out of the fantasy which therapy has created with its bad models of cognition, and seeing just how abusive this world really is.

I talk online to people who believe in therapy, from other countries, and they talk about how their parents abused them.  I ask them about their country's more favorable inheritance laws, and they have zero knowledge of such.  And I am talking here about even civil law countries where the client will not even need a lawyer to collect.  Therapy has put them into this film representation type world, created by reflected memories made into a story line, and this is not how cognition works.

Where you find people who want to fight, its in those like Shari Karney and in those like the Munchausen's Survivor Julie Gregory, people who very early on excused themselves from Psychotherapy and Recovery.

Gregory ends her book, not in therapy, but dialing Montana CPS, because her mother has got a foster child, and a whole new pile of medical books, and she seems to be doing the same stuff all over again.

So I feel that the basic premise of therapy is that it is better to keep it within the therapist's office.  If this were not true, then therapists would have vast experience and knowledge about legal and political fights.

We want people hooking up with political comrades, people who are willing to take to the barricades.

What does the therapist think their sessions do, unless they believe in Original Sin or otherwise have a low opinion of the client?

Jeffrey Masson says that virtually all of the stuff discussed with a therapist would be better discussed in some other venue.  I have yet to see anything myself which contradicts this.

Deleuze and Guattari say that Psychoanalysis, but meaning Psychotherapy too, have been created by Captialism and that they are completely parasitic.

There is this 4 hour BBC documentary, Century of Self.  It is a deep and cutting critique of all forms of Psychoanalysis, Psychotherapy, and Psychology, and its effect on politics.

They start by showing this Psychoanalysts Ball held annually in Vienna.  People say that because of Psychoanalysis, people can speak freely.  Example, say someone is a maid.  If they tried to complain about this they would be rebuked for not accepting their social position.

Whereas with Psychoanalysis they are free to say what they feel.

Well, is this really true?  A most basic area will be the exploitation and abuses which are the middle-class family.  So the client starts to speak.  But does the therapist really side with them?  Usually the therapist will say things which tend to exonerate the parents, and which tend to excuse what happened as being of the past, the old pedagogy manuals.

And Jeffrey Masson writes that it is part of the training to at a certain point stop listening and shift to trying to get the client to accept what has happened and to forgive.

And isn't it true that Psychotherapy is just Pedagogy Round 2?  It promotes the ideology of the family.

Try to get the client to kneel down and worship the Holy Family, while acknowledging that there have been mistakes and errors, and that the old pedagogy manuals were worse than the new ones.

But the client must not see that the entire system is rotten, and all Pedagogy Manuals are just lessons in how to abuse children and get away with it.  The angry client is to be turned into a helpless neurotic.

In D and G's Anti-Oedipus they have a very funny little skit which Jacques Lacan had published, making fun of psychoanalysis over this.

And they quote Antonin Artaud saying something which shows the neuroticism which Psychoanalysis and Psychotherapy are predicated on.

D and G call this "Oedipalizing".  And the schizo is someone like Artaud, who cannot be Oedipalized.  So of course this is where the mental health system would really bear down.

Alice Miller writes about artistic representations of the Sacrifice of Isaac.  Why is Isaac always mute and compliant?

She says that if Isaac were to raise his hand against Abraham, then "that would start the war that we all fear."

Well this is where we see the limitations of Alice Miller.  Its her Psychoanalytic training, its the effects of religion, and I say that also she was weakened by her experiences in the Warsaw Ghetto.

She finally wants Isaac to just ask "Why?"

I say that we have to strike back, we have to bring on a revolution, whether we fear it or not.  I do not fear it in any way at all.

Paul Mones says that most of what we know about familial child abuse comes from the Richard Janeke  patricide case from Cheyenne Wyoming.

People learn when thing happen, and they happen regularly.  And we all learn when we act.  I learned a huge amount from being intensely involved in a child sexual molestation prosecution.

I say that it never will be like this in the therapist's office, and that someone is a therapist because they have committed themselves to the view that it is better to keep it in the therapist's office.  And I see this as being a universal truth.

forbitals

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 132
    • View Profile
Re: Replies To Steve
« Reply #5 on: August 01, 2019, 05:46:00 pm »
The presumption though is that matters should be handled in the therapist's office.  Otherwise the client would not be there, and the therapist would not even have an office.

And so the presumption is that anyone who is angry or disgruntled, "Needs Therapy".  And so our population is thus kept in check, and it is very hard to change laws because survivor exist without public honor..  And the middle-class family and the self-reliance ethic continue.

This is so similar to how Psychiatry and the Mental Health System have worked, keeping survivors marginalized.

"Unconsious feelings" and a need to "process them" is a huge distraction.  It very rarely leads to action, so a reasonable person could assume that it is another denial strategy.

Cognition does not work that way.  The distresses which you have experienced become part of the light by which you see new experiences.  They are not primarily things which can be remembered or recalled, that is just a pale reflection of what you have experienced.  You want to know your experiences, look at the entire course of your life and look at who and what you are.  This is very difficult, way beyond the scope of anything the therapist can help with.

If you look at how hard it is to challenge the Self-Reliance Ethic, then one sees how deep the denial systems run in our society, and how deep the scars created by the middle-class family.

Psychotherapists do not challenge this, runs too deep, and too close to their own denied experience.

"It certainly did involve confronting family members about how I had been treated,"

Settlement sums?  Incarcerations?  Or just go along to get along and keep it private?  Therapist may not say so openly, but this is how they want things settled, as it exonerates the perpetrators. 

Confronting a habitual abuser without a law suit or other consequence behind it, is just an exercise in self abuse.

I helped three girls put their father into the state prison.

Writing to the court, I made it clear that if we want survivors to defy their church and their parents in coming forward, then they must expect to be vindicated.  So there must be a long sentence.

Penalties for Perpetrators, Reparations for Survivors.  This is what Shari Karney did, and this is what Julie Gregory is working on.

"She most definitely helped me move from being angry at myself to being angry about social injustice, not because she told me to feel that way, but because she helped me find and connect with my own sense of righteous indignation. And as I said before, without this experience, I would never have gotten to advocacy as a career and life path. "

Again, penalties for perpetrators and reparations for survivors, not just moving away from personal anger to righteous indignation.

We live in a war zone, and it is a being perpetrated against children in the name of the self-reliance ethic.  And as it stands, it is very rare that a perpetrator gets any penalty.

But here is one example:
http://www.vachss.com/guest_dispatches/excerpt_battle_11.html

So Steve, if knowing all of this about you, a client came for psychotherapy and tried to talk about familial abuse issues, they should expect to be delegitimated and humiliated, because you don't seem to see redress as important.

Say a woman goes to a police station to report that she has been raped.  Should she be told about psychotherapy, and about how she can confront the perpetrator?

No, this would amount to what activists have long identified as "second ****".

Shari Karney tried confronting the perpetrators, but they went ballistic.  Then though she turned to the law books, and finally to getting laws changed.  No one would ever accuse Shari Karney of living a life without public honor.

"
So my therapist did not fit your model of “teach you to adjust to injustice” or “accept your lot in life.” It was much more about, “If you have an issue, what are you going to DO about it?” Which certainly fits into your framework of encouraging people to take action against their oppressors.
"

Your words say one thing, but what they indicate is the opposite.

Penalities for perpetrators, reparations for survivors.  This is how you restore your public honor.  Otherwise you are just continuing to eat and **** in the very small space which the abusers have left, and making the mistake of calling that "life".

Jeff Anderson has recovered hundreds of millions on behalf or survivors.  He has driven Catholic dioceses into bankruptcy.

We need people who have the same zeal for going after the middle-class family, and after Psychiatry, and after Psychotherapy, that Jeff Anderson has for going after the Catholic Church.  And he  has gotten laws changed and is getting all the records and taking it down diocese by diocese.

"But to pretend that there is some generalized agreement among therapists that their job is to prevent people from holding their oppressors accountable is to me simplistic and not supported by the fact. "

But if they are not in favor of the denial system known as "Live and Let Live", then why are they therapists?  How could someone be a therapist if they did not believe in that?

"Therapists are not lawyers"

Then why are they getting people to take the huge risk of disclosing their personal affairs?

"but there’s nothing to prevent a therapist from making referrals to lawyers for class action suits and the like, and I certainly have done that with many a person in my social worker days. "

But this is going to be after the fact, after the client has severely compromised themselves by disclosing affairs to someone who is not their attorney.  And most actions which attack the middle-class family are going to be cutting edge law, practiced by those who want to extend the envelop of civil accountability.  This is going to be a special breed.  And why would one want to talk with a therapist, instead of an attorney, in the first place?

Here a survivor can talk safely, knowing that their claim to reparations will not be written off, that they will not be subjected to anything like "second ****".

"
Today in Manhattan, survivors, advocates and the law firm of Jeff Anderson & Associates are: · Releasing The Anderson Report on Sexual Abuse in the Archdiocese of New York containing the identities, histories, photographs and information on 310 clerics accused of child sexual abuse in the Archdiocese of New York; · Demanding full disclosure by the Archdiocese of New York, Archbishop Timothy Dolan, and the religious orders, of the identities, histories, and current whereabouts of all clergy accused of child sexual abuse who worked in the Archdiocese; · Discussing a new law, the New York Child Victims Act, which opens a one-year “window” in mid-August for survivors of child sexual abuse to take legal action against the perpetrator and the institution that may have protected the perpetrator, regardless of when the abuse occurred.
"
https://www.andersonadvocates.com/

Psychotherapy is Con Artistry, making people believe that it is in their interests to disclose their personal affairs to someone who is not able to do anything to help them with the affairs of their lives.

Some seem to see it as the alternative to psychiatry, but this is a ruse.  The proper response to psychiatry is simply FU.

Why do people believe that their is some benefit in talking with the psychotherapist?  Why not some peer level grouping, and something which is overtly political and legal action focused?

Churches have been a total failure.  And this was the vacuum which Freud stepped into.  But there are still other kinds of things like esoteric, occult, humanist, and eastern oriented groups.

Finding one's way in life is usually difficult.  But why would anyone think that the non-peer and highly regulation influenced relationship with a Psychotherapist is a productive use of their time, or a worthwhile risk to operational security.

To be a psychotherapist, doesn't one have to agree that anger is not okay, and that it is morally superior not to try and hold perpetrators accountable?

Progress often does depend upon being able to discern universal truths.

forbitals

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 132
    • View Profile
Re: Replies To Steve
« Reply #6 on: August 05, 2019, 04:24:26 pm »
Denouncing Psychotherapy:

Fiachra wrote, "but that psychological method does"

The psychological method does work?  Work to do what?

All it does is let people talk themselves out, and eventually get them to accept the premise that they should not try to redress wrongs.  Its just talking them down.  Its exactly what police do, except that they will keep you handcuffed to a table in an interrogation cell for the talk down.

And you wrote of recovery from ~schizophrenia~, "Its mostly about dealing with Anxiety and coming off drugs safely."

Well then why do you want to call it ~schizophrenia~?  Why not just call it anxiety and drug addiction?

~Recovery~ is just a way of further invalidating survivors, making it look like they are the problem.

Steve wrote, "Most therapists have been coopted by the psychiatric industry and the DSM."

But even if the psychiatric industry and DSM did not exist, I have never seen any evidence the psychotherapy has anything good about it.

If you have been in the mental health system, or in psychotherapy, then you do not have a biography anymore, because the course of you life has been disrupted by something which is considered invalid and worthless.  So you cannot present your biography in an honorable way.

And isn't this correct, the way it should be?  If you have been in psychotherapy, what is honorable about that?  And how could psychotherapy ever do anything to remedy objective issues?

Your psychotherapist is not going to place themselves at risk to vanquish foes.  Yet vanquishing foes is the gold standard for restoring your public honor.

Great Book:
https://www.amazon.com/Path-Everyday-Hero-Important-Challenges/dp/0976220202

Parceval vanquishes foes on a continual basis.  But the most important is the Red Knight.  The first time Parceval approached him, unarmored, unarmed, untrained, he told him to surrender.  He didn't and kept terrorizing the countryside.  So the next time Parceval approach him, he put a javelin into his helmeted forehead.

While I realize that I do not know every last therapist, and so I cannot rule out the possibility of their being one exception, it seems that the whole premise of psychotherapy is that it happens in the therapist's office, because it pertains to what is going on between the client's ears.

So I say, psychotherapy is a horrible sham, a con.  And I think everyone really knows this, and has always known this, certainly going back to Freud.  So if I say that I am in psychotherapy I am telling people that I can be easily conned, I can be convinced that my problems lie between my ears, and I do not care about restoring my public honor.  And that is how people will hear it, they will see me as a neurotic.

And then psychotherapy is using a horribly discredited model of cognition.  Maybe only the Criminal Justice System, Religion, and Psychotherapy still use this Representational or Cartesian Model.  Its the model that tells us that somewhere in your dog's head, there is a representation of the dog's name.

People know that it does not work this way.  Cognition is embodied.

https://www.amazon.com/Tree-Knowledge-Biological-Roots-Understanding/dp/0877736421/ref=sr_1_1?crid=32XJNSKD1V14X&keywords=tree+of+knowledge+book&qid=1565037385&s=gateway&sprefix=tree+of+knowl%2Caps%2C185&sr=8-1

^^^  best introductory explanation around.

An often used idea from this school of thought, Autopoeisis, is:

"All knowing is doing" and "All doing is knowing."

http://www.enolagaia.com/AT.html

This is very compatible with Martin Heiddeger's 1927 "Being In Time".

He showed us that the Cartesian kind of detached thinking is not everyday consciousness.  Rather what Heidegger called everyday consciousness was what he called being, "Always Already Thrown" to language, or more commonly "Being In The World".

What Psychotherapy operates on, Cartesian ideas, with Freud's addition of the Unconscious, IS A DISTRACTION.  It does not get to your actual life experience, it is merely an abstracted reflection.  It is a ruse, it is a type of Witch Doctoring.

So if I say, "I know that there is widespread abuse which creates an underclass of marginalized people, and I know that we must put a stop to this", then the proper question is, "What are you doing about it"?

If my answer is "nothing" or "I am talking with my therapist about it", then the proper conclusion is that I do not really know what I claimed to know.

If I did know, I would be acting.  When you see someone trying to stop the abuses that are the middle-class family, and that are psychiatry and drugging, and that are the con game that is psychotherapy, then they are actually someone who knows.

http://icpla.edu/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Dreyfus-HL-Alternative-Philosophical-Conceptualizations-of-Psychopathology.pdf

forbitals

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 132
    • View Profile
Re: Replies To Steve
« Reply #7 on: August 05, 2019, 04:28:40 pm »
Denouncing Psychotherapy:

Fiachra wrote, "but that psychological method does"

The psychological method does work?  Work to do what?

All it does is let people talk themselves out, and eventually get them to accept the premise that they should not try to redress wrongs.  Its just talking them down.  Its exactly what police do, except that they will keep you handcuffed to a table in an interrogation cell for the talk down.

And you wrote of recovery from ~schizophrenia~, "Its mostly about dealing with Anxiety and coming off drugs safely."

Well then why do you want to call it ~schizophrenia~?  Why not just call it anxiety and drug addiction?

~Recovery~ is just a way of further invalidating survivors, making it look like they are the problem.

Steve wrote, "Most therapists have been coopted by the psychiatric industry and the DSM."

But even if the psychiatric industry and DSM did not exist, I have never seen any evidence the psychotherapy has anything good about it.

If you have been in the mental health system, or in psychotherapy, then you do not have a biography anymore, because the course of you life has been disrupted by something which is considered invalid and worthless.  So you cannot present your biography in an honorable way.

And isn't this correct, the way it should be?  If you have been in psychotherapy, what is honorable about that?  And how could psychotherapy ever do anything to remedy objective issues?

Your psychotherapist is not going to place themselves at risk to vanquish foes.  Yet vanquishing foes is the gold standard for restoring your public honor.

Great Book:
https://www.amazon.com/Path-Everyday-Hero-Important-Challenges/dp/0976220202

Parceval vanquishes foes on a continual basis.  But the most important is the Red Knight.  The first time Parceval approached him, unarmored, unarmed, untrained, he told him to surrender.  He didn't and kept terrorizing the countryside.  So the next time Parceval approach him, he put a javelin into his helmeted forehead.

While I realize that I do not know every last therapist, and so I cannot rule out the possibility of their being one exception, it seems that the whole premise of psychotherapy is that it happens in the therapist's office, because it pertains to what is going on between the client's ears.

So I say, psychotherapy is a horrible sham, a con.  And I think everyone really knows this, and has always known this, certainly going back to Freud.  So if I say that I am in psychotherapy I am telling people that I can be easily conned, I can be convinced that my problems lie between my ears, and I do not care about restoring my public honor.  And that is how people will hear it, they will see me as a neurotic.

And then psychotherapy is using a horribly discredited model of cognition.  Maybe only the Criminal Justice System, Religion, and Psychotherapy still use this Representational or Cartesian Model.  Its the model that tells us that somewhere in your dog's head, there is a representation of the dog's name.

People know that it does not work this way.  Cognition is embodied.

https://www.amazon.com/Tree-Knowledge-Biological-Roots-Understanding/dp/0877736421/ref=sr_1_1?crid=32XJNSKD1V14X&keywords=tree+of+knowledge+book&qid=1565037385&s=gateway&sprefix=tree+of+knowl%2Caps%2C185&sr=8-1

^^^  best introductory explanation around.

An often used idea from this school of thought, Autopoeisis, is:

"All knowing is doing" and "All doing is knowing."

http://www.enolagaia.com/AT.html

This is very compatible with Martin Heiddeger's 1927 "Being In Time".

He showed us that the Cartesian kind of detached thinking is not everyday consciousness.  Rather what Heidegger called everyday consciousness was what he called being, "Always Already Thrown" to language, or more commonly "Being In The World".

What Psychotherapy operates on, Cartesian ideas, with Freud's addition of the Unconscious, IS A DISTRACTION.  It does not get to your actual life experience, it is merely an abstracted reflection.  It is a ruse, it is a type of Witch Doctoring.

So if I say, "I know that there is widespread abuse which creates an underclass of marginalized people, and I know that we must put a stop to this", then the proper question is, "What are you doing about it"?

If my answer is "nothing" or "I am talking with my therapist about it", then the proper conclusion is that I do not really know what I claimed to know.

If I did know, I would be acting.  When you see someone trying to stop the abuses that are the middle-class family, and that are psychiatry and drugging, and that are the con game that is psychotherapy, then they are actually someone who knows.

http://icpla.edu/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Dreyfus-HL-Alternative-Philosophical-Conceptualizations-of-Psychopathology.pdf

forbitals

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 132
    • View Profile
Re: Replies To Steve
« Reply #8 on: August 06, 2019, 08:36:35 pm »
Well Steve, suppose we had a man who was angry because he was living in a state of slavery. Because of his obvious anger he might get directed to a psychotherapist. After all, most people see it as angry people are not really enjoying mental health. This is the basis of the questionnaires used to write the articles on this forum.

So he might end up with some of the Mad Italy people who want to promote this psychotherapy and recovery model, without labels or diagnosis.

Or he might end up with some of the people who use this new PTMF manual.

So hopefully he will get a therapist who is good at listening. I think most aren’t. But there will be so some who are. I am not a therapist and I have no interest in ever being a therapist. But there will be some who are good listeners.

So the therapist listens to his story and this takes a number of sessions.

The therapist shows especial interest when he talks about his childhood. Its because this deals with things which happened so long ago that redress is usually impractical. So the therapist always wants to steer the focus here.

But what about the fact that he is a slave? Well the therapist can’t really do anything about that. That is a matter of law. We all have to learn to live with the lot life has handed us. The therapist learned this when he was in therapy, and this is why he became a therapist.

If the client really believes that slavery is wrong, then the therapist, though they may listen, they couldn’t possibly agree with the client. If they really agreed then they would not be paying rent on their consulting office, they would be out trying to start a slave revolt like John Brown had.

Originally no one sided with Brown. But as time passed and VA executed him, views changed.

Lincoln had said that Brown’s actions were “misguided”. But fearing that he would lose the 1864 election he called Frederick Douglas to the White House and offered him troops if he could make raids into the Upper Confederacy and free as many slaves as possible. He wanted Douglas to become John Brown.

Harriet Tubman had always counseled non-violence. But she still helped Brown recruit. Than after the raid had failed, but so spectacularly, she rescued a suspected fugitive slave from the court house, twice in the same day, and getting him safely off to Canada.

Then,


It’s May 1863. Outgeneraled and outgunned, a demoralized Union Army has pulled back with massive losses at the Battle of Chancellorsville. Fort Sumter, hated symbol of the Rebellion, taunts the American navy with its artillery and underwater mines.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/194892434X/ref=dbs_a_def_rwt_bibl_vppi_i2

Tubman plans and leads a masterful raid, behind enemy lines, Combahee River South Carolina, liberating hundreds and hundred of slaves, and turning around the army’s malaise.

People are changed when they are offered the chance, and they decide to get involved.

I was offered the chance, completely out of the blue. I was known as someone who sides with criminal defendants. Social circumstances had brought me into contact with a fundamentalist Pentecostal man.

He decided to confide in me. He explained in a broad brush manner the felony charges which he had pending. He then started getting more and more agitated, explaining that it was all because of his eldest daughter, and then jumping up and down and making wild arm gestures, he explained that “Its all because of the problems she has with Alcohol, with Drugs, and with Sex”. And then pointing at bushes in a park, “She even had sex in the bushes”.

Well, as it would unfold, in each communication to the Prosecution and the Court, I would always lead saying that he never said anything to me which directly indicated guilt. But right off I could see that he had a huge amount of emotional energy invested in scapegoating his eldest daughter. He would say other things about her too. And so as I explained, to me this indicated that this girl had lived a long time being made the scapegoat. Usually things like sexual and physical abuse are coming out of a context of emotional abuse.

See, this guy was saying that the police had blown this out of proportion, and they were denouncing all efforts to protect children. This is after all at the central evangelical core of their religion, an anti-government position.

But I knew right off, I stand with Alice Miller, and she always stands with the child.

So I only needed to hear his emotional performance once, and I was involved.

I read the case file, abusing children is not a private matter, and I saw that the sentence he could get could well exceed his life expectancy.

I believe that our system is too harsh, and I have seen how criminal cases have spun out of control.

And then, do I really want the state doing my bidding, doing what I would not do myself?

Well as I worked into it, I decided that yes, if we lived in that kind of a society, then I would follow the example of John Brown in Kansas, dragging this guy out of his home and hacking him to pieces with a broad sword.

But as it went, I am very happy with the results because it educated police, prosecutors, and judges. Don’t know how many cases like this get prosecuted, when the accused parents are still married and still financially solvent.

They had tried to send the girls to Psychotherapy, “so that they wouldn’t have to be carrying these false memories around with them.”

They tried to send them to Eye Movement Reprocessing Therapy. And I would go on to make much of this with the Prosecution and the Court.

And the mother tried to get the eldest daughter to agree to a dinner, to settle the whole thing. But she refused, saying, “This isn’t the sort of thing which gets settled with a dinner.”

Well I could say more, but that guy is locked up for a long long time and I am very happy about it. I had expected my role to be very small, but in fact it turned out to be huge.

Hey, you do not turn your back on the Burning Bush. There was no reason that I should have been given the chance to get involved in this. But there it was. I knew that what kinds of things I would be offered in the future, depended entirely on how I handled that opportunity.

I have seen how we have a huge huge underclass of Family Scapegoats. And where to they end up? In Psychiatry, Psychotherapy, Recovery, and Salvation Seeking.

Really it comes down to what can be lawfully gotten away with, and with how hard people are willing to push for civil remedies.

The mother is still going around saying that the conviction was wrong and that the girls were liars. Their church is like that, everyone has a scapegoat child, and usually a scapegoat sibling too.

To Be Continued

forbitals

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 132
    • View Profile
Re: Replies To Steve
« Reply #9 on: August 08, 2019, 04:51:43 pm »
https://www.madinamerica.com/2019/08/toward-critical-self-reflective-psychiatry-interview-pat-bracken/?unapproved=159370&moderation-hash=5520504dee905933904aafd5481dead8#comment-159370

Steve just because you say that Psychotherapy made you feel good, that does mean that I or anyone else have to go along with it.

Personal experience narratives are always interpretations. Evangelical Religion generates them. The Recovery Movement generates them. Psychotherapy generates them, as do lots of other things.

I say people learn more and grow more then they are actively involved and placing themselves at risk in the fight for justice and restored social and civil standing. In the vast majority of cases, psychotherapy steers people away from such. But publicly vanquishing worthy foes is always going to be the central pillar of public honor.

The therapist of course believes that the problem and the solutions lie between the client’s ears, and some people will go along with this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d9FN1LMdhic