I find it funny you post things about the wrong people becoming therapists yet you want to be a social worker and actively defend rapists and abusers 💀
CW: mentions of SA/cycles of abuse.
you must think you're really clever. the therapy industry has a huge amount of problems (like any other industry built on service to other humans, like the medical industry), and i think even the people who want to work within the therapy field (whether as a psychiatrist, a counselor, a therapist, a social worker, a sex therapist, etc) can still critique the many issues within it, mainly the racism, eurocentrinism, and the individualistic values that much of talk therapy promotes. I don't know where you got the second part of your statement, because not only is it widely inaccurate of what I was thinking of doing in social work, it also is just not a great idea to hold about people who work with people who do harm.
there are therapists/social workers who work exclusively with cops/law enforcement, and ethically those people CANNOT work with people who are victims of law enforcement or people who "break the law" (incarcerated folks). It just doesn't work, because if you work with both, it can create a conflict of interest. this is the same with people who work with victims of assault (SA or not). these therapists/etc who work with victims of assault/abuse CANNOT work with abusers. The same is vice versa, as in people who work with those who do serious harm cannot work with their victims.
I think your self righteousness is misplaced. You clearly have a lot of work to do in regards to removing your own feelings and judgement from the work that many therapists and social workers do. I don't know if you know this, but everyone (yes, even people who do serious harm) are deserving of basic human necessities, like oh i don't know. Housing, healthcare, or therapy. It is not my job as a future social worker to judge people, that is wickedly different from holding someone accountable. Judging is like sending someone to prison for 25 years, further removing them from the communities and resources that could generate accountability. Further, no one can hold anyone accountable unless said person consents to being held accountable. There are different procedures for whether they do or not. My job, as a future social worker, is to help people, because I believe all people deserve to ask for help and receive the help that they need.
Not sure if you know, but I'm against incarceration/punishment. I believe we hold punishment as the way to "teach people a lesson", but if you do not work with people and actively step in and disrupt cycles of trauma (housing crisis, hunger, substance abuse, interpersonal abuse, racism, ableism, etc), you will only find that people re-offend unless they are given the resources they need to be better. Yes, there are people who genuinely want to do harm, but harm does not exist in a vacuum, and if you are unwilling to acknowledge that, then I genuinely wish compassion to anyone who slips up around you and shows you that anyone is capable of any level of harm.
People who do serious harm are victims of the same cycle abuse as everyone else. You white knuckling your self righteous black and white morality is the reason why you cannot understand that even the worst kinds of people deserve the same access to care as victims of harm. You think that people who work with individuals who do harm as them defending them, when the reality is many of us with the brains built to do this kind of work want to stop this harm and correct abusive behavior. Unfortunately for you, people are capable of change. No one is asking you to like anyone or their actions (because I don't have to like the people I work with either, freak), but what people like me are asking you is to accept the fact that all people do harm, and when people are given the community and resources to, they can change for the better and recognize the serious harm they have caused.
Not everyone who goes into this work wants to aim their energy into the "socially acceptable" work. I think social justice morality and the sanitization of revolutionary politics has rotted our brains into believing that we must do and be the most "woke" person ever, channeling our energy into victims of harm. But what we fail to recognize through that is that some people would rather divest their energy into de-radicalization of fascists, or others want to put their energy into theory, others want to learn how to connect with the land and be sustainable, and others want to learn how to help others. And just like them, there are people who are willing enough to use their skills and compassion for conflict/resolution, accountability practices, and to help those who have harmed. Because, unfortunate for you, activists should NOT be juggling being the theorist, farmer, therapist, spiritualist, leader, mediator, protestor, rioter, etc and etc. Some people are simply built to put their energy into what they are good at. This doesn't mean that the farmer does not encourage the theorist to continue thinking and writing their theory. And I am sure the theorist, one who cannot farm and till, is grateful for the skills the farmer brings once dinner comes around.
it's funny really because I still am not sure about what I want my focus to be in social work, and for you to assume that I am "defending" abusers/rapists by thinking about working in extremely hostile, tense, and exhausting environments in the attempt to disrupt cycles of violence is me "defending" these individuals...it just reveals more about you than myself, anon. Many people already work with abusers/rapists (many of those therapists being victims of abuse/SA as well), so you may as well call the ones who are actually doing the work rn "defenders" of abuse. see how that bodes for you.
that's all I have to say.
82 notes
·
View notes
This RomCom Hater Was Blown Away by What Happens Later
Trailer wasn't my cup of tea; but hooray for David Duchovny and Meg Ryan.
Saw the horrific reviews: in-depth, agreeing with each other. Saw the good reviews: short, didn't do much to advocate for themselves.
Read @amplifyme's praise. Intrigued. Trust her taste. Hunted the movie down.
Adored it.
Despite the constant back-and-forth carrying the scenes forward, this movie is quiet, beautifully so. In spite of nonstop scene changes, conversations, roadblocks, steps forward (and backward and forward), and-- of course-- loud intercom tunes, it doesn't distract from the heart: two mature people easily reconnecting but slowly reopening with each other. The plot holds up and follows all the way through. Excellent acting (of course.) Drama perfectly balanced by characters who act like people rather than written lines on a page. The chaotic "to be continued" resolution amazingly pulled off. The dreaded romcom three-quarter act expertly aced. What Happens Later weaves in reconciliation and grief and healing more than the potentially awkward jitters and "whoopsies!" of seeing an old flame in a (poorly written) reunion; more importantly, it shows that the love between these two people was never gone, only that it had been buried in their denial and mutual inability to put all their cards on the table. Now they do, because now they can.
Speaking of which, this film did not merit the excoriation it got. And that's saying a lot; because, truthfully, I am extremely picky about storylines and characterization and execution of those elements. This was an easy positive; and it baffles me why others rated it so badly. Willa is not annoying and she and Bill do not lack chemistry and the man over the intercom is only mildly a "character" and is not directly addressed by either until more than halfway through act (and even then Intercom Voice doesn't interfere so much as guide the characters with literal signs for them to follow if they choose.) And, no, there isn't a reason to walk out of the theatre right after the 45 min. mark, no matter how many reviews say otherwise (and I'm not going to say they were bots, buuuuuuuuuuuuut they all wrote the same thing, kind of verbatim. Meanwhile, I waited with bated breath as 5 minutes turned into 10, 20, 30, 40, 45... 46, 47, 48; and was simultaneously pleased when nothing "happened" and angered at the injustice of those reviews.) What Happens Later doesn't follow current film trends but it isn't out of style; furthermore, it doesn't feel experimental (though it is)-- flowing along seamlessly from one shot to the next without drawing attention to itself. And it doesn't try to make a statement, prove a point, or be anything other than a top-rate romcom. So, all that's left is... wrong timing? Hollywood disillusionment? Or were the crowds, like me, drawn in by the trailer, expecting a different movie; and walked out when they didn't appreciate what they were seeing?
At any rate, this is up there. Way up there. Highly recommend it to anyone.
24 notes
·
View notes
The Cure of Troy
By Seamus Heaney
Human beings suffer
They torture one another,
They get hurt and get hard.
No poem or play or song
Can fully right a wrong
Inflicted and endured.
The innocent in gaols
Beat on their bars together.
A hunger-striker’s father
Stands in the graveyard dumb.
The police widow in veils
Faints at the funeral home.
History says, Don’t hope
On this side of the grave…
But then, once in a lifetime
The longed-for tidal wave
Of justice can rise up,
And hope and history rhyme.
So hope for a great sea-change
On the far side of revenge.
Believe that a further shore
Is reachable from here.
Believe in miracles
And cures and healing wells.
Call miracle self-healing:
The utter, self-revealing
Double-take of feeling.
If there’s fire on the mountain
Or lightning and storm
And a god speaks from the sky
That means someone is hearing
The outcry and the birth-cry
Of new life at its term.
It means once in a lifetime
That justice can rise up
And hope and history rhyme.
11 notes
·
View notes