TruXta
tired
Less so when she has chosen her own life to make a media story of.Isn't it rather distasteful to speculate on a stranger's health problems?
Less so when she has chosen her own life to make a media story of.Isn't it rather distasteful to speculate on a stranger's health problems?
But, 10 years ago, were consultants really saying sufferers had to smile and act girlie to show compliance and get their passports stamped?
Is the context 'treat and discharge as quickly as possible (there's lots of people who need the beds)' or is it 'my professionalism means i will do it my way however long it takes' (given that wearing trousers isn't linked to anorexia as Laurie Penny points out)?
I don't agree.Less so when she has chosen her own life to make a media story of.
Isn't it rather distasteful to speculate on a stranger's health problems?
Is the context 'treat and discharge as quickly as possible (there's lots of people who need the beds)' or is it 'my professionalism means i will do it my way however long it takes' (given that wearing trousers isn't linked to anorexia as Laurie Penny points out)?
Why?I don't agree.
They were assuming that the root cause of her anorexia was a failure to accept her gay/bi/queer/whatever-label-you-like sexual identity, and that by embracing a more feminine lifestyle (dress, make-up, hair) and (more disturbingly) demure/submissive 1950s housewife mannerisms, she would be 'cured'. I felt it wasn't strictly accurate for that passage to be presented as you did - that the treatment for her was being LP forced into being traditionally ultra-feminine.
Less so when she has chosen her own life to make a media story of.
It is.Isn't it rather distasteful to speculate on a stranger's health problems?
It's tricky tho. On the one hand she's brave to put stuff about her MH issues out there. OTOH.... well.although this too
However if what others have posted is correct about consultant behaviour, it means the consultant(s) did force that upon a teenage patient.
(I think it's an unclear writing style that's the problem. That's what I'm coming round to.)
Isn't it rather distasteful to speculate on a stranger's health problems?
It's tricky tho. On the one hand she's brave to put stuff about her MH issues out there. OTOH.... well.
Yeah...but nobody's doubting the fact of the anorexia, just the course of treatment she describes, which seems at best irrelevant and at worst distinctly harmful....
or possibly just 'imaginatively reinterpreted' for artistic/ polemical considerations....sorry, there's a word for that but I can't remember it.
I don't see why what you said makes speculating on Penny's past mental health any less distasteful.Why?
Fine.I don't see why what you said makes speculating on Penny's past mental health any less distasteful.
But, 10 years ago, were consultants really saying sufferers had to smile and act girlie to show compliance and get their passports stamped?
No more than the other pages and pages of drivel.This is a bit irrelevant isn't it?
Isn't it rather distasteful to speculate on a stranger's health problems?
Yeah...but nobody's doubting the fact of the anorexia, just the course of treatment she describes, which seems at best irrelevant and at worst distinctly harmful....
or possibly just 'imaginatively reinterpreted' for artistic/ polemical considerations....sorry, there's a word for that but I can't remember it.
No more than the other pages and pages of drivel.
To paraphrase my preferred colour-named commentator, in many ways this thread is a lot like life.bad taste hasnt stopped this thread yet, cant see what would
It doesn't suprise me, I've seen all manner of 'corrective' behaviours set down by psychiatrists - especially if any gender/sexuality related issues are 'apparent.
I'm not even convinced there is a coherent political standpoint underpinning her work.
Actually, this is a bit of a bull shite. While I have no doubts people claim to be polyamorous to justify sleeping around, I do happen to know people for whom polyamory is a functional, stable relationship pattern. I get that you probably have seen the term abused one too many times, but no need to try and undermine the whole thing. It works fine for some, probably no worse than regular monogamy.
Polyamory is perfectly compatible with monogamous relationships AFAIK. It's the old thing about separating deeds from identity or intention. If the expectation between a regular couple is that the relationship can take more people, then that's polyamory in my book. Anyway.... ain't what the thread's about mate.i'm sure it does work fine for some, it's just that it doesn't really need to be part of one's identity. if i am in a monogamous relationship through choice, am i no longer part of the polygamy identity? am i still in the gang?