Porn is one of the many issues that feminist tend to have heavy debates over. There are certain facts I agree with the anti-porn feminists about- 1. porn is tough work and 2. people are exploited when they do it. Most anti-porn feminists want porn banned. I definitely do not agree that society would be better if porn were banned.
One of my main concerns is that if porn gets banned, where does the censorship stop? Many people know the saying that they can't put into words what porn exactly is and how it becomes obscene or offensive but they know it when they see it. My imagination goes to the extreme-- when would a picture or painting of a naked body be allowed? I worry that people would become very sensitive to any nudity, whether or not it was art or porn or artistic porn, and that there would be no naked pictures. Two areas that I'm concerned about is where would people find informative pictures about their bodies and would videos about techniques or "how to spice up your sex life" type movies be allowed? I also wonder about romance novels and erotica literature. Do they get banned too? I don't have the answer for those questions. In the past, when porn has been banned from being mailed, great works (such as Playboy and Lady Chatterly's Lover) as well as information about women's bodies and birth control were constricted. I am very concerned about this happening again if porn were banned.
If there were no naked pictures, there would be some consequences to this. One, people would not be informed about their own body. There are some medical artists who would be able to do justice to an informative representation of a penis, vagina, or breast. It would not have the same effect as seeing real pictures of the body. While the medical pictures can be descriptive of what is average, it cannot entirely describe the variety of vaginas and penises that are out there. Two, there are people out there who aren't great at socializing. It may be because they are mentally or physically handicapped or just socially awkward. You may or may not know someone like this. Without porn and without nude photos, these people would be at a disadvantage. Just like everyone else, they have the right to happiness and for some, that can be masturbation in leui of a relationship with another person. Most of the time these articles written by anti-porn feminist are focused on the perceived inner workings of violent men. They make claims that men watch porn, begin treating women like objects, and raping and murdering them. And there are a few people out there like that. Those people also watch TV and drink water (yes, that was a flippant statement, made in jest). Those aren't the people I'm talking about. I'm talking about the sweet people. The ones who yearn for relationships. The ones who go into their fantasy world of having wife or husband or lover, someone who takes care of them, someone who they would love and adore. They're the ones who want sex and to make love. Yet, they don't. They don't have that and that goal may or may not ever be achieved in their lives. They have the right to view porn, if they choose. I dare say, it can even be healthy.
The other main concern is that if porn continues, there needs to be strict standards. Companies should be boycotted if they allow actors and actresses to wear out their bodies i.e. work for hours, doing multiple penetration, etc, to not wear protection, and not get independent health check ups on a regular, 3 months at least; 6 months at most, basis. There are some porn companies who already have these type of standards. What I would really like to see is people going into Russia to change their porn industry. I understand this is a big thing. I have found Russian porn is the most offensive. They really do make you believe that they are raping and murdering women. If it's not the real thing, it sure looks like it.
An important factor that I consider if how much more women are paid compared to men in the porn industry. Most research focuses on men watching porn and women as the actresses in porn. I tend to focus on the opposite-- women who watch porn and men as the actors in porn. In all the research and opinion articles, women who watch porn are ignored. There is little said about the men in porn movies. It seems that others dismiss them. By ignore them, it could be possible that these writers are objectifying them or minimizing their role. I imgine that the reason is "Oh, they're just a penis" or "They enjoy having sex with women anyway."
All-in-all, it's best to consider the other ways that porn impacts society. Allowing porn to continue opens up the pathways to have easy access information about the human body. Porn also benefits those who are socially inept. Still, there needs to be better standards of care for all actors and actresses who choose to work in this industry.
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
Friday, March 11, 2011
It's Unethical
Being a therapist and counselor puts me in a field with some amazing people and with some people who know how to get through school and take tests. I have known people who will do anything for their patients/clients and have known people who have no idea what they're doing. I seem to have a never ending "a therapist did that!?" list.
One of those moments came a few days ago. I saw video of Dr. Drew talking about Charlie Sheen. Dr. Drew said that he had not spoken to Charlie Sheen. Dr. Drew made it a point to mention his 20 years of experience, he has seen this many times so he is able to talk about the symptoms and his diagnosis of Mr. Sheen.
Although I've been in this field for a short time, I find it offensive that Dr. Drew is being his usual entitled and intrusive way. Dr. Drew not only felt it necessary to give an opinion about someone who he has not talked to but felt that he needed to justify it with his expertise.
As a part of my education, I had to take an ethics class. This usually meant having more questions than answers. There were some absolute guidelines. Most of those were surrounding the client/patient. However, we discussed at length about boundaries. There are lots of boundaries in this world. And one of them is to not to make assessments or diagnoses on people who has not met with a particular therapist. Another is that even if you have an opinion about someone, keep it to yourself.
One thing that stood out to me is being aware of myopia. When a therapist becomes myopic, they only see what they know. I had a supervisor who only worked with people diagnosed with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. Eventually, she only saw art work in terms of psychosis. She once had a patient who drew a fountain the day before he tried to commit suicide. So, every colorful fountain seem to be a symbol, in her mind, of suicidal thoughts. While I respect any therapists' years of experiences, it may mean that they might only see what they want to see and are used to seeing.
In my experience, people are different when they are a celebrity, in the public eye all the time, and expect cameras to be around than when they have privacy and are in their own home. Everyone has a public persona have a private persona-- i.e. differences between being at home, at a doctor's office, and being at work. To judge only what one person does in public is not getting the full picture of the person.
I saw another doctor on Access Hollywood on a clip from the show "The Soup" (seen here ). The Soup's host said that the doctor was not dressed like a doctor and sarcastically said "Access Hollywood did the responsible thing and had a doctor diagnose Charlie in a completely unprofessional setting off a poorly made video, edited together with scary music." I think even Joel McHale can sense the unethical nature of these doctors who are willing to go on TV to diagnose a celebrity or someone who they have not met.
There's two issues I want to talk about briefly here:
One is that often the TV media outlets have a list of professions in various fields. For example, one of my professors had been on a TV show talking about robbery. When Winona Ryder was caught shoplifting, someone from the media contacted my professor, who had to explain she could not give her opinion about shoplifting since her expertise was in robbery (and the difference between the two). Anytime a TV show needs a professional, they go to this list. I have seen some crazy things on shows that use these lists.
The second item I want to bring up, which I have written about before, is when a person asked an art therapist to judge someone's artwork without watching the artwork being made. A woman approached me and asked me to do this regarding colors. I don't think that one color means the same thing to everyone so I didn't say anything about color. I did talk briefly about the patient's focus and what she said about the artwork that was made. In The Secret World of Drawings, author Gregg Furth does just this. He goes through various children's pictures as well as some pictures by famous artists. He writes a "how to look at pictures and analyze them" type of book. While there are some insights he makes about artwork, there are others that are very much up to interpretation. Basically, I wouldn't feel comfortable using his insights in practice. I would want to talk to the person, observe them making the artwork and if I couldn't do that, I'd at least want the person to tell me about the artwork.
Bottom line here is that these TV doctors have to keep up with boundaries and understand that diagnosing someone without talking to them is unethical. It seems that there are many doctors and therapists who have boundary issues and who feel entitled to diagnose or make assumptions based on whatever they find important or intriguing. I hope that these are just a few bad examples and that most people can see that this is all wrong.
One of those moments came a few days ago. I saw video of Dr. Drew talking about Charlie Sheen. Dr. Drew said that he had not spoken to Charlie Sheen. Dr. Drew made it a point to mention his 20 years of experience, he has seen this many times so he is able to talk about the symptoms and his diagnosis of Mr. Sheen.
Although I've been in this field for a short time, I find it offensive that Dr. Drew is being his usual entitled and intrusive way. Dr. Drew not only felt it necessary to give an opinion about someone who he has not talked to but felt that he needed to justify it with his expertise.
As a part of my education, I had to take an ethics class. This usually meant having more questions than answers. There were some absolute guidelines. Most of those were surrounding the client/patient. However, we discussed at length about boundaries. There are lots of boundaries in this world. And one of them is to not to make assessments or diagnoses on people who has not met with a particular therapist. Another is that even if you have an opinion about someone, keep it to yourself.
One thing that stood out to me is being aware of myopia. When a therapist becomes myopic, they only see what they know. I had a supervisor who only worked with people diagnosed with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. Eventually, she only saw art work in terms of psychosis. She once had a patient who drew a fountain the day before he tried to commit suicide. So, every colorful fountain seem to be a symbol, in her mind, of suicidal thoughts. While I respect any therapists' years of experiences, it may mean that they might only see what they want to see and are used to seeing.
In my experience, people are different when they are a celebrity, in the public eye all the time, and expect cameras to be around than when they have privacy and are in their own home. Everyone has a public persona have a private persona-- i.e. differences between being at home, at a doctor's office, and being at work. To judge only what one person does in public is not getting the full picture of the person.
I saw another doctor on Access Hollywood on a clip from the show "The Soup" (seen here ). The Soup's host said that the doctor was not dressed like a doctor and sarcastically said "Access Hollywood did the responsible thing and had a doctor diagnose Charlie in a completely unprofessional setting off a poorly made video, edited together with scary music." I think even Joel McHale can sense the unethical nature of these doctors who are willing to go on TV to diagnose a celebrity or someone who they have not met.
There's two issues I want to talk about briefly here:
One is that often the TV media outlets have a list of professions in various fields. For example, one of my professors had been on a TV show talking about robbery. When Winona Ryder was caught shoplifting, someone from the media contacted my professor, who had to explain she could not give her opinion about shoplifting since her expertise was in robbery (and the difference between the two). Anytime a TV show needs a professional, they go to this list. I have seen some crazy things on shows that use these lists.
The second item I want to bring up, which I have written about before, is when a person asked an art therapist to judge someone's artwork without watching the artwork being made. A woman approached me and asked me to do this regarding colors. I don't think that one color means the same thing to everyone so I didn't say anything about color. I did talk briefly about the patient's focus and what she said about the artwork that was made. In The Secret World of Drawings, author Gregg Furth does just this. He goes through various children's pictures as well as some pictures by famous artists. He writes a "how to look at pictures and analyze them" type of book. While there are some insights he makes about artwork, there are others that are very much up to interpretation. Basically, I wouldn't feel comfortable using his insights in practice. I would want to talk to the person, observe them making the artwork and if I couldn't do that, I'd at least want the person to tell me about the artwork.
Bottom line here is that these TV doctors have to keep up with boundaries and understand that diagnosing someone without talking to them is unethical. It seems that there are many doctors and therapists who have boundary issues and who feel entitled to diagnose or make assumptions based on whatever they find important or intriguing. I hope that these are just a few bad examples and that most people can see that this is all wrong.
Friday, December 24, 2010
CT from a CA perspective
I grew up in California. Currently, I live in Connecticut. I'm starting to "pass" as a Nutmegger or New Englander. Yes, the people who are from Connecticut or live in Connecticut are called Nutmeggers. In the winter, I seem to notice the particular differences between CA and CT.
One of the first thing I noticed was the hooks and coat racks. When people are out dinning, they can either leave their coats at the door or they put them on hooks conveniently located around the place. I've seen this and had to do this at bars and restaurants. Since the winters in the Bay Area and on the coast of Southern California are mild compared to the East Coast so, these hooks are not required.
I lived with roommates and during the fall, they started making comments about the weather and the leaves. This is part of the culture of a East Coaster. As kids are growing up, they watch the news as they comment on how the weather is going to effect the color of the leaves. My crazy roommates were saying that it was too dry and the leaves were going to turn brown. I didn't care much for this. I didn't see the big deal. As I drove my 30 minutes to work, I noticed the trees along the side of the freeway were in various states of green, yellow, orange, red, and brown. There are some great undulating roads, perfect for seeing the foliage.
During Spring, the showers of rain are really heavy. They're almost torrential. And people know how to drive in this. They even drive fast. They do not worry about oil on the roads. Sometimes it floods, yet, CT is mostly flat so they don't have to worry so much about the mudslides or flash floods. The hilly areas aren't around the coastal areas and the coastal areas are the places that flood. Also, people know how to drive in the snow.
People know if they have gas, electric, or oil heating. This becomes a debate. Which one is more expensive? I've had mostly electric heating. So, my electricity bill goes up about 100 to 200 dollars during the winter months. I lived in one place with oil heating. The shower was cold for about 15 minutes before it was scorching and then went back and forth between scorching and lukewarm. This did not make for a happy me. When the oil went out, I didn't really notice. The water didn't heat up for about 25 minutes and then was lukewarm. I didn't get the heater to work in my room so, I didn't know it was colder than usual. When it was fixed and I had to learn more about oil and the machinery in the basement that I had formally ignored, it was complicated and weird. It was all pipes, levers, and doodads. "And if it gets cold again, quickly switch this on and off to release the water, it'll be hot." I moved out about a month later. It was around $400 up front for the oil. My coworker recently had problems with his oil and it was $150 up front to get someone to come out to even look at the thing. Some places have free heating. It's definitely a selling point.
"Do you have front wheel or rear wheel drive?" I didn't know this was something important until I moved and was asked about it for the first time. My Toyota was a rear wheel drive. This is good for the snow. I also have drum breaks. This is also good because they don't have as much issues as cars with break pads. The drum breaks also help during the snow as long as snow doesn't get stuck in there. I spun out about three times (one in 2008 and two in 2009 on the same day). The first time, there was damage to my car. I hit the center divide. My coworker had the suggestion to follow trucks because they'll set the pace for what's safe to drive during the snow. The other two times, I was able to remember to take the hands off the wheel and the brake so I wouldn't try to overcompensate and fishtail. Yes, a person basically does nothing when they are sliding on snow and really, it's less scary that way. With front wheel drive, it's difficult to drive in snow.
I bought a car. Now, in California, you shop, you pick, you buy, and you drive away that day. You get a sticker to put in your window and go on your way. The title is on colorful paper with an embossed seal on it. CT is very different. You shop, pick, and then sign. You wait three days before driving off the lot. If you want to drive the car before then, you get to put on "Dealer Plates" with a piece of paper giving you permission to have those plates. Then, you sign, sign, sign, and then you get new plates for the car, they send back the old plates, and you get print out. That is title to the car. I think it's weird to have new plates every time you buy a car. If CT wanted to save money, they could get rid of that whole process and keep old plates on the cars.
The attitudes of people are very different between New Haven and the Bay Area. This was expected. When I lived in the Bay Area, my friends would easily cut me out of their life if I did something they didn't like. It was if they didn't have to worry about having other friends because there were millions of people to choose from anyway. New Haven is a small city. I think New Havenites understand psychology better. Although, they are not always smiling and welcoming as people in CA, they are friends for the long haul-- not superficially. If you mess up, they throw back a beer, either they tell you you f**ked up or they say that things need to change or don't do something and they continue being your friend. My friends and I joke that there are only 10 people in New Haven and you'll run into them at some point. And sometimes, there are only 5 people, it's just that they have different masks that they wear. There have been many a times when I was walking somewhere with a friend only to hear my name being called from a friend to join in on festivities.
I don't know how many people have told me that they either think I'm crazy for moving from San Diego to New Haven because everyone wants to live in San Diego. My thought is, "Yeah? You move there." Many people say they'd rather have tornadoes and hurricane winds than earthquakes. People are afraid of earthquakes. I say, "They're not that bad." I talk about being in the 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake and some other earthquakes, including one while shopping near the beach in San Diego. There were lots in the middle of the night-- the bed shakes and then it's over. I think it's funny. I can't believe how many people say the same thing-- "They have earthquakes out there."
I don't know where this little gem came from but for a long time, I heard people talk about how California has "that free education." People apparently go out to CA and they have a free college education. I wish I would have known about this because I would have liked to have a free education. However, my education cost significantly less than even the community colleges here. My undergraduate work at San Diego State cost around $1,000 for the first semester (with 17 units) and around $1,300 by the time I was a senior. My graduate courses cost around $3,000 for two classes. Community colleges cost around $300 per UNIT, one class is around $1,000. In San Diego, one class is around $300 for a community college.
I thoroughly enjoy driving around 3 hours and being in a different state (if not two states), which is way different than CA. The whole length of CA is more than a 12 hour drive.
As my experiences grow, I will be able to write about more differences.
One of the first thing I noticed was the hooks and coat racks. When people are out dinning, they can either leave their coats at the door or they put them on hooks conveniently located around the place. I've seen this and had to do this at bars and restaurants. Since the winters in the Bay Area and on the coast of Southern California are mild compared to the East Coast so, these hooks are not required.
I lived with roommates and during the fall, they started making comments about the weather and the leaves. This is part of the culture of a East Coaster. As kids are growing up, they watch the news as they comment on how the weather is going to effect the color of the leaves. My crazy roommates were saying that it was too dry and the leaves were going to turn brown. I didn't care much for this. I didn't see the big deal. As I drove my 30 minutes to work, I noticed the trees along the side of the freeway were in various states of green, yellow, orange, red, and brown. There are some great undulating roads, perfect for seeing the foliage.
During Spring, the showers of rain are really heavy. They're almost torrential. And people know how to drive in this. They even drive fast. They do not worry about oil on the roads. Sometimes it floods, yet, CT is mostly flat so they don't have to worry so much about the mudslides or flash floods. The hilly areas aren't around the coastal areas and the coastal areas are the places that flood. Also, people know how to drive in the snow.
People know if they have gas, electric, or oil heating. This becomes a debate. Which one is more expensive? I've had mostly electric heating. So, my electricity bill goes up about 100 to 200 dollars during the winter months. I lived in one place with oil heating. The shower was cold for about 15 minutes before it was scorching and then went back and forth between scorching and lukewarm. This did not make for a happy me. When the oil went out, I didn't really notice. The water didn't heat up for about 25 minutes and then was lukewarm. I didn't get the heater to work in my room so, I didn't know it was colder than usual. When it was fixed and I had to learn more about oil and the machinery in the basement that I had formally ignored, it was complicated and weird. It was all pipes, levers, and doodads. "And if it gets cold again, quickly switch this on and off to release the water, it'll be hot." I moved out about a month later. It was around $400 up front for the oil. My coworker recently had problems with his oil and it was $150 up front to get someone to come out to even look at the thing. Some places have free heating. It's definitely a selling point.
"Do you have front wheel or rear wheel drive?" I didn't know this was something important until I moved and was asked about it for the first time. My Toyota was a rear wheel drive. This is good for the snow. I also have drum breaks. This is also good because they don't have as much issues as cars with break pads. The drum breaks also help during the snow as long as snow doesn't get stuck in there. I spun out about three times (one in 2008 and two in 2009 on the same day). The first time, there was damage to my car. I hit the center divide. My coworker had the suggestion to follow trucks because they'll set the pace for what's safe to drive during the snow. The other two times, I was able to remember to take the hands off the wheel and the brake so I wouldn't try to overcompensate and fishtail. Yes, a person basically does nothing when they are sliding on snow and really, it's less scary that way. With front wheel drive, it's difficult to drive in snow.
I bought a car. Now, in California, you shop, you pick, you buy, and you drive away that day. You get a sticker to put in your window and go on your way. The title is on colorful paper with an embossed seal on it. CT is very different. You shop, pick, and then sign. You wait three days before driving off the lot. If you want to drive the car before then, you get to put on "Dealer Plates" with a piece of paper giving you permission to have those plates. Then, you sign, sign, sign, and then you get new plates for the car, they send back the old plates, and you get print out. That is title to the car. I think it's weird to have new plates every time you buy a car. If CT wanted to save money, they could get rid of that whole process and keep old plates on the cars.
The attitudes of people are very different between New Haven and the Bay Area. This was expected. When I lived in the Bay Area, my friends would easily cut me out of their life if I did something they didn't like. It was if they didn't have to worry about having other friends because there were millions of people to choose from anyway. New Haven is a small city. I think New Havenites understand psychology better. Although, they are not always smiling and welcoming as people in CA, they are friends for the long haul-- not superficially. If you mess up, they throw back a beer, either they tell you you f**ked up or they say that things need to change or don't do something and they continue being your friend. My friends and I joke that there are only 10 people in New Haven and you'll run into them at some point. And sometimes, there are only 5 people, it's just that they have different masks that they wear. There have been many a times when I was walking somewhere with a friend only to hear my name being called from a friend to join in on festivities.
I don't know how many people have told me that they either think I'm crazy for moving from San Diego to New Haven because everyone wants to live in San Diego. My thought is, "Yeah? You move there." Many people say they'd rather have tornadoes and hurricane winds than earthquakes. People are afraid of earthquakes. I say, "They're not that bad." I talk about being in the 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake and some other earthquakes, including one while shopping near the beach in San Diego. There were lots in the middle of the night-- the bed shakes and then it's over. I think it's funny. I can't believe how many people say the same thing-- "They have earthquakes out there."
I don't know where this little gem came from but for a long time, I heard people talk about how California has "that free education." People apparently go out to CA and they have a free college education. I wish I would have known about this because I would have liked to have a free education. However, my education cost significantly less than even the community colleges here. My undergraduate work at San Diego State cost around $1,000 for the first semester (with 17 units) and around $1,300 by the time I was a senior. My graduate courses cost around $3,000 for two classes. Community colleges cost around $300 per UNIT, one class is around $1,000. In San Diego, one class is around $300 for a community college.
I thoroughly enjoy driving around 3 hours and being in a different state (if not two states), which is way different than CA. The whole length of CA is more than a 12 hour drive.
As my experiences grow, I will be able to write about more differences.
Saturday, December 4, 2010
The Travelings of Middle Class White Women portrayed in Pop Culture
I've been reading the book Tales of a Female Nomad. I've been thinking about the culture of traveling to "exotic" places and it's role lately in popular culture. With movies such as "Eat, Pray, Love," "Sex and The City 2," or popular books like Medicine Woman. It seems that women, on the brink of divorce or with nothing better to do, go traveling to foreign (non-Western) countries or to visit non-Western cultures. With the exception of Tales of a Female Nomad, these books and movies include predictions from the very wise non-Western people from these "exotic" cultures. It gives the impression that every older non-Western person must have psychic abilities.
When I think about it, I think that's it's not only rude to the "exotic" culture, it's rude to the people in United States. Where are the movies about the men going on adventures in foreign places, the ones that don't include guns? Where are the movies or reality TV shows about letting a poor person of any race go on a grand vacation to some place they would never dream of or to those hard hit areas where assistance is needed? Where are the documentaries about the countless church goes who are building houses, going to orphanages, and who are assisting people in countries outside the United States? Are there good documentaries about cultures outside the United States, maybe ones where you just observe, no narration about what outside cultures who don't speak the language think that these other cultures are doing? I would rather see those and hear about those than to have these ideals about women in foreign countries and how safe, amazing and bourgeois it is.
When I think about it, I think that's it's not only rude to the "exotic" culture, it's rude to the people in United States. Where are the movies about the men going on adventures in foreign places, the ones that don't include guns? Where are the movies or reality TV shows about letting a poor person of any race go on a grand vacation to some place they would never dream of or to those hard hit areas where assistance is needed? Where are the documentaries about the countless church goes who are building houses, going to orphanages, and who are assisting people in countries outside the United States? Are there good documentaries about cultures outside the United States, maybe ones where you just observe, no narration about what outside cultures who don't speak the language think that these other cultures are doing? I would rather see those and hear about those than to have these ideals about women in foreign countries and how safe, amazing and bourgeois it is.
Wednesday, November 17, 2010
Art Therapy and PTSD
PTSD and Art Therapy
With Veteran's day passed, some people have been raising awareness about post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). This happens when a person goes through something like war, persistant abuse, rape, and other traumatic events. Sometimes it can be a singular event (a person gets robs at gunpoint) or it could be a series of events (childhood abuse).
There are many symptoms to PTSD such as flashbacks, hypervigilance, anxiety, and depression. If you want to know more about PTSD symptoms, check out: http://www.webmd.com
Doing and Undoing
Freud talked about this as a defense mechanism. Say you thought something badly against someone and to undo that thought, you were extremely nice to them.
There are two ways that this comes out in art therapy:
1. Repetitive drawings.
There was a kid who was in the behavioral health hospital who went through a fire on Christmas. He drew Christmas trees over and over again. Sometimes he cross them out. Other times the firefighters came and put it out; then, the Christmas tree would turn to a scribble of blue. Sometimes the fire engulfed the tree and it turned to all yellow and orange scribbles.
2. Piecing back together
There was a Veteran who saw someone's hand blown off. He made a hand out of clay. The clay messed up. He was in tears, trying to get the hand back together. Eventually, he did put it back together and then was able to move onto peaceful pictures of jungles.
In both cases, the people in therapy were trying to control the things that had happened to them. The construction paper and the art materials themselves were a way for the trauma to be contained. They could regain themselves.
Revealing
The point of therapy is to get out what is on a person's mind. Trauma tends to stick with a person and they can't always talk about it to everyone. Sometimes these events and the issues surrounding the event come out anyway.
Talking isn't always a container. Sometimes when a person talks about events, they tend to feel raw and unsteady emotionally as well as have difficulty calming down. The advantage of art therapy is that people can talk about their art. Sometimes they don't even have to talk about their art or about their issues. They get to keep their secrets. The pictures will reveal what has been on their mind. Art gives a person a chance to reveal something without having to talk about it. This could be important for a person who has difficulty sharing. It may even lead to a person disclosing about traumatic events.
Regaining Control
When a trauma is happening, a person doesn't have control over the event. Some people with PTSD assign a great amount of blame to themselves, more than they actually had, as one way to gain control.
Another way to gain control is to gain mastery over art materials. This could be as simple as making a collage or as learning a new art technique. It also can be that on their paper/canvas, they can do what they want. As was seen with the kid with repetitive drawings, he could try out new endings for the event.
Art can help to manage symptoms of PTSD in several ways, including doing and undoing, revealing and regaining control. In using art, people with PTSD can start to process events and symptoms.
With Veteran's day passed, some people have been raising awareness about post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). This happens when a person goes through something like war, persistant abuse, rape, and other traumatic events. Sometimes it can be a singular event (a person gets robs at gunpoint) or it could be a series of events (childhood abuse).
There are many symptoms to PTSD such as flashbacks, hypervigilance, anxiety, and depression. If you want to know more about PTSD symptoms, check out: http://www.webmd.com
Doing and Undoing
Freud talked about this as a defense mechanism. Say you thought something badly against someone and to undo that thought, you were extremely nice to them.
There are two ways that this comes out in art therapy:
1. Repetitive drawings.
There was a kid who was in the behavioral health hospital who went through a fire on Christmas. He drew Christmas trees over and over again. Sometimes he cross them out. Other times the firefighters came and put it out; then, the Christmas tree would turn to a scribble of blue. Sometimes the fire engulfed the tree and it turned to all yellow and orange scribbles.
2. Piecing back together
There was a Veteran who saw someone's hand blown off. He made a hand out of clay. The clay messed up. He was in tears, trying to get the hand back together. Eventually, he did put it back together and then was able to move onto peaceful pictures of jungles.
In both cases, the people in therapy were trying to control the things that had happened to them. The construction paper and the art materials themselves were a way for the trauma to be contained. They could regain themselves.
Revealing
The point of therapy is to get out what is on a person's mind. Trauma tends to stick with a person and they can't always talk about it to everyone. Sometimes these events and the issues surrounding the event come out anyway.
Talking isn't always a container. Sometimes when a person talks about events, they tend to feel raw and unsteady emotionally as well as have difficulty calming down. The advantage of art therapy is that people can talk about their art. Sometimes they don't even have to talk about their art or about their issues. They get to keep their secrets. The pictures will reveal what has been on their mind. Art gives a person a chance to reveal something without having to talk about it. This could be important for a person who has difficulty sharing. It may even lead to a person disclosing about traumatic events.
Regaining Control
When a trauma is happening, a person doesn't have control over the event. Some people with PTSD assign a great amount of blame to themselves, more than they actually had, as one way to gain control.
Another way to gain control is to gain mastery over art materials. This could be as simple as making a collage or as learning a new art technique. It also can be that on their paper/canvas, they can do what they want. As was seen with the kid with repetitive drawings, he could try out new endings for the event.
Art can help to manage symptoms of PTSD in several ways, including doing and undoing, revealing and regaining control. In using art, people with PTSD can start to process events and symptoms.
Friday, October 22, 2010
First Amendment Rights to Porn
I read an article (Here ) interviewing Gail Dines about her new book Pornland: How Porn Has Hijacked our Sexuality about the porn industry. Her basic idea is that porn has become more violent and it's taking a toll on the bodies of the women involved in porn. Since 11 years old is when a boy usually looks at porn, then they are seeing these things and are affected by them. The more a man looks at porn, she cites, the less likely he will be able to form and maintain an intimate relationship. So, ban porn.
All throughout this interview, all I could think of is, "How does this relate to me?" She did not drive this point home. Porn is not the only reason why people are having less romantic relationships. While she mentioned that media takes ideas from porn, I don't believe this. It's society as a whole that encourages people to be selfish and encourages people to have superficial relationships where "they get theirs" and "only for fun." This can come from people who don't watch porn or watch non-violent, normal porn. The idea that sex is just for fun (not about intimacy) has emotional consequences that are not addressed by media or a support system since sex is a private act and most people don't want to talk about it. Sometimes support systems (friends, family, coworkers, acquaintances) encourage the behavior that may be destructive to the person and their health. The idea that sex is for fun affects everyone, not only men.
Also, Dines only focused on men and boys. What about girls? It is the assumption of society that girls and women don't look at porn. In fact, sex and porn are a big taboo and I don't see how a girl could resist something that is so taboo. The idea of girls and women looking at porn is such a taboo, people don't even want to research it. It might be that women are negatively affected by porn-- they may not have the body for it. They may not experience sex the same way as the women in porn. For me, when I've been interested in seeing an aspect of sex such as female ejaculation, I've found videos of it. I rarely watch porn, though. Maybe I'm not the average American but I have a feeling that there are a majority of people who rarely watch porn. Where do they fit into Dine's article? Are they affected at all? I also don't watch TV very often. How are people who don't want much TV affected by porn? Porn and sex advice/sex technique videos can be informative sometimes. Yet, more research would have to be implemented to look more closely at women who watch porn.
There was a time when I believed that porn was degrading to women, it objectified women, and that it would be better to ban it. It wasn't until college when I started to look at the converse of this belief. I wanted to know why porn was still around if it was so terrible. I found a book called Porn 101: Eroticism, Pornography and the First Amendment. Some of the articles were amazing. One was written by a sex therapist, Marty Klein. Another written by a lawyer (whose name I can't find at the moment). Marty Klein wrote about how censorship harms people. For example, when was the last time you saw a loving couple on TV who began to have a healthy sexual interaction-- kissing, foreplay, and eventually sex. What about the last time you saw someone on TV talking about the emotional aspects of sex? There might be some shows but it's not a lot. People get the extremes of sex, it's either nothing or crazy, violent porn, and people don't see the healthy aspects of sex. People might turn to porn to learn about physical aspects of sex. What other resources are readily available to a person to learn about sex? The lawyer fights for the right for the porn industry to continue. While it does fall under freedom of speech, it also is a good idea to have regulations on the industry so that preventative measures can be put in place to protect against gonorrhea of the eye or AIDS. Also, whenever there's a feminist whose trying to ban porn, I think about the porn made by women and the porn by feminist. Where does that fit into a ban on porn?
Now, I open it up for discussion. What was your first experience with porn? What impact does this have on you?
All throughout this interview, all I could think of is, "How does this relate to me?" She did not drive this point home. Porn is not the only reason why people are having less romantic relationships. While she mentioned that media takes ideas from porn, I don't believe this. It's society as a whole that encourages people to be selfish and encourages people to have superficial relationships where "they get theirs" and "only for fun." This can come from people who don't watch porn or watch non-violent, normal porn. The idea that sex is just for fun (not about intimacy) has emotional consequences that are not addressed by media or a support system since sex is a private act and most people don't want to talk about it. Sometimes support systems (friends, family, coworkers, acquaintances) encourage the behavior that may be destructive to the person and their health. The idea that sex is for fun affects everyone, not only men.
Also, Dines only focused on men and boys. What about girls? It is the assumption of society that girls and women don't look at porn. In fact, sex and porn are a big taboo and I don't see how a girl could resist something that is so taboo. The idea of girls and women looking at porn is such a taboo, people don't even want to research it. It might be that women are negatively affected by porn-- they may not have the body for it. They may not experience sex the same way as the women in porn. For me, when I've been interested in seeing an aspect of sex such as female ejaculation, I've found videos of it. I rarely watch porn, though. Maybe I'm not the average American but I have a feeling that there are a majority of people who rarely watch porn. Where do they fit into Dine's article? Are they affected at all? I also don't watch TV very often. How are people who don't want much TV affected by porn? Porn and sex advice/sex technique videos can be informative sometimes. Yet, more research would have to be implemented to look more closely at women who watch porn.
There was a time when I believed that porn was degrading to women, it objectified women, and that it would be better to ban it. It wasn't until college when I started to look at the converse of this belief. I wanted to know why porn was still around if it was so terrible. I found a book called Porn 101: Eroticism, Pornography and the First Amendment. Some of the articles were amazing. One was written by a sex therapist, Marty Klein. Another written by a lawyer (whose name I can't find at the moment). Marty Klein wrote about how censorship harms people. For example, when was the last time you saw a loving couple on TV who began to have a healthy sexual interaction-- kissing, foreplay, and eventually sex. What about the last time you saw someone on TV talking about the emotional aspects of sex? There might be some shows but it's not a lot. People get the extremes of sex, it's either nothing or crazy, violent porn, and people don't see the healthy aspects of sex. People might turn to porn to learn about physical aspects of sex. What other resources are readily available to a person to learn about sex? The lawyer fights for the right for the porn industry to continue. While it does fall under freedom of speech, it also is a good idea to have regulations on the industry so that preventative measures can be put in place to protect against gonorrhea of the eye or AIDS. Also, whenever there's a feminist whose trying to ban porn, I think about the porn made by women and the porn by feminist. Where does that fit into a ban on porn?
Now, I open it up for discussion. What was your first experience with porn? What impact does this have on you?
Saturday, May 15, 2010
There Is Such a Thing
*Trigger Warning* Sexual violence*
Someone told me the other day that if a person was a prostitute, they cannot be believed when they said they are raped. I simply dismissed the statement and said, "Prostitutes can still be raped." She hemmed and hawed saying, "Yeah, well," in a rather uncomfortable way. I felt like screaming. I think there's a tendency to blame the victim or even dismiss the victim under the circumstances. It may be that the only accepted form of rape is a woman being raped by a stranger when she's not walking down a dark alley (because hey, if she's walking down the dark alley, she may be "asking" for it by putting herself in a dangerous situation). We easily dismiss women (or men) who were drinking and could not consent to sex-- well, she shouldn't have drank that much or she should have known what was in her drink. I know of someone who was blamed for her rape. One girl was told by her roommate at the time, "You had to be a big girl and go out on your own." Really, going to a bar by herself meant that she was open to being raped? She was meeting friends and it was one of the friends that raped her. It's not like she met a stranger. She was comfortable with the person.
I also think it's easy to dismiss marital rape. Yes, a husband can rape a wife just as a wife can rape a husband. I bet such things goes under reported. In traditional Christian marriages, the woman is the servant (or to submit) to the husband. It may be my opinion, but this makes it sound like she is also obligated to have sex with him whether she wants it or not. It's also easy to dismiss marital rape because the couple may decide to stay together. This is a different idea from the mythology that only strangers rape people and they never see each other again.
Another issue I think plays into this is that generally, people don't want to believe that this happens. I was trying to convince my neighbor that even in church sex abuse scandals, people blame the victim or refuse to believe the person and stick by the priest. My neighbor had a difficult time understanding the concept.
On top of that, there are police. I'm not sure if police have any idea what they are doing when it comes to rape or sexual abuse. A person I knew who was raped at a young age by an older man and she was told that there was a difference between rape and regretting sex. They insinuated that she actually regretted sex and was not actually raped. It took years for her to talk about and more to even talk about how it felt like rape. Another person reported that the police didn't believe her since she was drugged and woke up three days later without her clothes. They said she could arrested for a false report. So, when it happened again, she was resistant to coming forward. What if they didn't believe her again? What if she was arrested for a false report?
I have no doubt that there are people who abuse the system. They blame people who were not to blame. A friend told me that his ex accused a man of rape and the guy was sent to jail because she didn't want to admit that she had sex with him. She knew that admitting that she had sex with him meant that my friend would not date her again. I wish that people like this friend's ex did not exist. They ruin things for others who had real experiences. In reality, people lie and there's no way to protect against these type of liars because that would mean that people might blame the victim more often than they do. We saw this in the Kobe Bryant case where the media was saying that this woman tried to say that Eminem raped her so she could get money. No matter if that's true, it is still possible that Kobe Bryant raped her.
When I encounter opinions like this, I really wonder about how many other people think the same way. I also worry that these people are also in the therapy field. What if someone did not realize that this was a bias and was seeing a patient/client with these problems? I hope they would not doubt them. I try very hard to make sure I'm educated about what's helpful for someone whose been through rape and sexual abuse because I don't want to be like that friend, roommate, or police officer that blames the victim.
Someone told me the other day that if a person was a prostitute, they cannot be believed when they said they are raped. I simply dismissed the statement and said, "Prostitutes can still be raped." She hemmed and hawed saying, "Yeah, well," in a rather uncomfortable way. I felt like screaming. I think there's a tendency to blame the victim or even dismiss the victim under the circumstances. It may be that the only accepted form of rape is a woman being raped by a stranger when she's not walking down a dark alley (because hey, if she's walking down the dark alley, she may be "asking" for it by putting herself in a dangerous situation). We easily dismiss women (or men) who were drinking and could not consent to sex-- well, she shouldn't have drank that much or she should have known what was in her drink. I know of someone who was blamed for her rape. One girl was told by her roommate at the time, "You had to be a big girl and go out on your own." Really, going to a bar by herself meant that she was open to being raped? She was meeting friends and it was one of the friends that raped her. It's not like she met a stranger. She was comfortable with the person.
I also think it's easy to dismiss marital rape. Yes, a husband can rape a wife just as a wife can rape a husband. I bet such things goes under reported. In traditional Christian marriages, the woman is the servant (or to submit) to the husband. It may be my opinion, but this makes it sound like she is also obligated to have sex with him whether she wants it or not. It's also easy to dismiss marital rape because the couple may decide to stay together. This is a different idea from the mythology that only strangers rape people and they never see each other again.
Another issue I think plays into this is that generally, people don't want to believe that this happens. I was trying to convince my neighbor that even in church sex abuse scandals, people blame the victim or refuse to believe the person and stick by the priest. My neighbor had a difficult time understanding the concept.
On top of that, there are police. I'm not sure if police have any idea what they are doing when it comes to rape or sexual abuse. A person I knew who was raped at a young age by an older man and she was told that there was a difference between rape and regretting sex. They insinuated that she actually regretted sex and was not actually raped. It took years for her to talk about and more to even talk about how it felt like rape. Another person reported that the police didn't believe her since she was drugged and woke up three days later without her clothes. They said she could arrested for a false report. So, when it happened again, she was resistant to coming forward. What if they didn't believe her again? What if she was arrested for a false report?
I have no doubt that there are people who abuse the system. They blame people who were not to blame. A friend told me that his ex accused a man of rape and the guy was sent to jail because she didn't want to admit that she had sex with him. She knew that admitting that she had sex with him meant that my friend would not date her again. I wish that people like this friend's ex did not exist. They ruin things for others who had real experiences. In reality, people lie and there's no way to protect against these type of liars because that would mean that people might blame the victim more often than they do. We saw this in the Kobe Bryant case where the media was saying that this woman tried to say that Eminem raped her so she could get money. No matter if that's true, it is still possible that Kobe Bryant raped her.
When I encounter opinions like this, I really wonder about how many other people think the same way. I also worry that these people are also in the therapy field. What if someone did not realize that this was a bias and was seeing a patient/client with these problems? I hope they would not doubt them. I try very hard to make sure I'm educated about what's helpful for someone whose been through rape and sexual abuse because I don't want to be like that friend, roommate, or police officer that blames the victim.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)