Mothers (and fathers!) who point out the violations of their human rights in the “family courts” are also labelled as delusional, paranoid, with personality disorders. I wonder what diagnoses the disordered individuals who dole out false labels like that have.
For centuries white men claimed that women were less than human because they supposedly were in thrall to their emotions. In the 19th century men claimed women suffer from 'hysteria' hence they had to be controlled by their male masters aka their husbands! This did not apply to working class women because they were too busy struggling to survive and not be forced to go into a workhouse due to impoverishment. But they too were seen as non-human by the white powerful men who claimed these women caused their own poverty! Very similar to the dogma being uttered today by male polticians and their female handmaidens.
Nothing changes men who hold political/socio-economic power always claim the oppressed are suffering from a pseudo mental illness! As regards white men's lie concerning black men this too is all about white men maintaining power and control over black men. But what about black women are they not too labelled 'too aggressive, too out spoken, out of control' by white men?
It's a very difficult situation,I have been trying to talk to people about what their true identity is because I know what the answer is,but I describe it as the person that they are as an individual with emotions,when I start saying that it isn't the educated or professional person,I know what I mean,I mean that education can remove someone from the person that they are by placing them in conditions which can be seen as training them to understand what they do and don't know,and a profession can remove someone further from who they are,this description can be seen as based in my personal background,because both those elements resulted in my perceived present and future breaking down.Other people who I try to tell about this,so far,reject the description,because it is the way that things are done and people don't recognise a description that they are not and I don't know how much explanation and interaction it would take to convince them that this is the case,because I have my own knowledge based in psychological understanding that you can be you in truth and not someone who has been influenced to be someone by others.I don't know if Dr.Taylor understands this,I am writing as if she does.You can take an understanding of personality disorder or split personality and think about or understand what happens when people deal with incomplete descriptions and don't understand themselves that way. I have recently tried explaining that an understanding of someone and their psychological experiences can be that you consist of what you learn and consist of and you think you're fine,but your description isn't necessarily complete so when you become involved with other people and situations what you consider as fine can get broken down in situations and with people who don't match your description.I have found myself putting that together because I had a lengthy period of what would have been considered as psychosis,but the only description I came across was about psychotic episodes,which I believe are a diagnosis which separates someone from an entire description,but that isn't necessarily true without full information,but it did have a separation effect in my mind for a while.
Mothers (and fathers!) who point out the violations of their human rights in the “family courts” are also labelled as delusional, paranoid, with personality disorders. I wonder what diagnoses the disordered individuals who dole out false labels like that have.
I was considered paranoid for discussing family and domestic violence. What a crazy world we live in.
For centuries white men claimed that women were less than human because they supposedly were in thrall to their emotions. In the 19th century men claimed women suffer from 'hysteria' hence they had to be controlled by their male masters aka their husbands! This did not apply to working class women because they were too busy struggling to survive and not be forced to go into a workhouse due to impoverishment. But they too were seen as non-human by the white powerful men who claimed these women caused their own poverty! Very similar to the dogma being uttered today by male polticians and their female handmaidens.
Nothing changes men who hold political/socio-economic power always claim the oppressed are suffering from a pseudo mental illness! As regards white men's lie concerning black men this too is all about white men maintaining power and control over black men. But what about black women are they not too labelled 'too aggressive, too out spoken, out of control' by white men?
Thanks for writing Dr Taylor.
It's a very difficult situation,I have been trying to talk to people about what their true identity is because I know what the answer is,but I describe it as the person that they are as an individual with emotions,when I start saying that it isn't the educated or professional person,I know what I mean,I mean that education can remove someone from the person that they are by placing them in conditions which can be seen as training them to understand what they do and don't know,and a profession can remove someone further from who they are,this description can be seen as based in my personal background,because both those elements resulted in my perceived present and future breaking down.Other people who I try to tell about this,so far,reject the description,because it is the way that things are done and people don't recognise a description that they are not and I don't know how much explanation and interaction it would take to convince them that this is the case,because I have my own knowledge based in psychological understanding that you can be you in truth and not someone who has been influenced to be someone by others.I don't know if Dr.Taylor understands this,I am writing as if she does.You can take an understanding of personality disorder or split personality and think about or understand what happens when people deal with incomplete descriptions and don't understand themselves that way. I have recently tried explaining that an understanding of someone and their psychological experiences can be that you consist of what you learn and consist of and you think you're fine,but your description isn't necessarily complete so when you become involved with other people and situations what you consider as fine can get broken down in situations and with people who don't match your description.I have found myself putting that together because I had a lengthy period of what would have been considered as psychosis,but the only description I came across was about psychotic episodes,which I believe are a diagnosis which separates someone from an entire description,but that isn't necessarily true without full information,but it did have a separation effect in my mind for a while.