From: Andrew Phelps <dis_course@yahoo.com>
To: psysr-humanrights@googlegroups.com
Cc: Friends
Subject: Re: [PsySR-humanrights] Re: Timing of press stories on violence in Afghanistan
Date: Wed 08/18/10 03:14 PM
Hi
This is an intense discussion, although I think some of the import of my post yesterday hasn't been fully engaged yet.
I wrote (in part):
Another way to frame this is to identify the "culture lens" for what it is, and not psychologize that behavior (abstractly and out of context). The "culture lens" itself has problems because of the anthropological underpinnings of today's national security culture.
Since this is not an Anthropology - Human Rights list it isn't -professionally speaking - prepared to take up fully the "anthropology underpinnings" problematic, on those terms.
"Lived experience" psychology suggests getting involved more actively in ways that the behavior pattern from the "stoning" story infects our own cultural context. I've made outreaches from the client/survivor community to PsySR before: see
here where our SJCC student group invited Latika to speak, for instance (May, 2008). :-) In general this "networking" direction needs development, however.On Wed, 8/18/10, Gik wrote:
More on the stoning issue: I have noticed that all of a sudden lately the news media has been releasing stories about Taliban brutality in Afghanistan. This spate of articles about religious violence is coinciding in time with General Petraus' public campaign to prolong the Afghanistan war. Could these articles be timed in order to inspire the American public to change their minds about Afghanistan, thus turning the polls toward supporting the war instead of the current status, which is to require that the troops be withdrawn according to Obama's promised schedule? I am not saying they are not true (how were they verified?) but that they may be strategically timed.
The advantage of networking with the client/survivor activists is that ultimately the "strategic timing" of society gets impacted: Our human rights movement, finally speaking, has social consequences.
The APA honored Rosalynn Carter, who keynoted in San Diego last Thursday, against our Vision of "freedom and dignity" in the mental health area. She has also recently been presented in San Francisco, as an advocate
in favor of the "forced treatment" agenda Calif. AB 1421 "Laura's Law" being implemented there.Delphine Brody, Public Policy Director of the California Network of M.H. Clients, and recent presenter at the Boston PsySR Conference, is organizing a coalition defense against the implemention of "Laura's Law" in San Francisco and Marin Counties. I'm pleased to say that two strong psychologist/clinician voices from Ethical APA have been participating in this coalition, as well as the E.D. of
Psynergy, Inc. which practices treatment using a "clinical gaze" critique.I argue that this advocacy reflects what is a "strategic" opening to challenge the embedded position of the APA, one that extends the opening provided by their engagement with military torture.
"Stoning" (metaphorically speaking) is not an appropriate practice in our society, does not meet the standard of "do no harm."
Andrew Phelps