#donald's therapist likely has a new client

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Amanda Marcotte at Salon:

People are saying if you have a conservative family member, don't invite them to Thanksgiving or Christmas. Like, stay away from them," TikToker Brooker Tee Jones complained. "If that is happening, the devil is definitely winning."  After the November election, a rowdy debate erupted in online spaces over whether it's acceptable to cut off family and friends because of how they voted. Supporters of Kamala Harris expressed a range of views, from a reluctance to burn bridges to a "screw 'em all" mentality. "It's okay to shame someone for doing something shameful," feminist writer Jessica Valenti argued on Instagram. Shunning those who voted for Donald Trump, she added, was "a reasonable response by those of us who are disgusted, anxious, and afraid."

Some on the "Hysteria" podcast agreed with Valenti. But guest Megan Gailey said, "If you think you can bring them over, bring them over." Errin Haines agreed: "We cannot give up on our friends, our family. I think there was too much of that, frankly, after 2016." But that's a liberal podcast, so of course the panelists also offered reassurances that it's OK to disown family members if their Trump vote is "a symptom of larger issues." On the Trump-voter side of the debate, the sentiment has been nearly unanimous: It's an outrage if "woke" friends and family stop speaking to them. The only real disagreement among that cohort is whether this trend is literally the devil's work, or merely liberal "intolerance." One TikTok video that went viral featured a woman crying about being cut off and saying, "I'm completely heartbroken about my family taking it how they are. I never did this to them when Biden won." Conservatives have coined the phrase "vote-shaming," which seems to equate political and ideological conflict with personal choices regarding diet or sexuality. 

Estrangement has always been part of being human, but in recent months, we've seen a deluge of press coverage of the phenomenon. Most stories ignore the question of politics or mention it only in passing, instead blaming the seeming rise in family estrangement on social media, therapy culture and shifting cultural norms that prioritize individual happiness over familial duty. Yet an undercurrent of political tension rumbles right under the surface, a suspicion that this is tied to the increasing partisan polarization driven by the MAGA movement. Perhaps America's most famous estrangement story is the one involving Trump super-donor Elon Musk and his daughter Vivian Wilson, who has publicly denounced her father for refusing to accept her trans identity. Former Republican congressman Adam Kinzinger, who served on the House Jan. 6 committee, has repeatedly spoken out about members of his family disowning him over his opposition to Trump, who has threatened to throw Kinzinger in prison.  "On the day after the election, I had several calls from clients that they need to have an appointment as soon as possible," Dr. Farnoosh Nouri, a clinical assistant therapist at Southern Methodist University in Dallas, told Salon. She reports that colleagues across the state are reporting the same. "One colleague had 33 calls the day after the election, new clients who wanted to come in." Before 2016, Nouri said, she had not witnessed this kind of political stress on families. After Trump's first win, she saw a spike in college students "struggling with going back home for Thanksgiving holidays, for Christmas holidays." Now the fear and stress are ramping up again. Across social media, the stories are mounting, both from liberals who wonder whether it's time to go no-contact with MAGA parents and from Trump voters who complain about "childish" offspring who no longer speak to them. Nouri's experiences are backed by new statistics from the Public Religion Research Institute, which found that "Democratic voters (23%) are nearly five times as likely as Republican voters (5%) to say they will be spending less time with certain family members because of their political views."

Salon posted a request on Reddit to interview adult children who factored politics into their decision to go no-contact with parents. The response was overwhelming. Contrary to the stereotypes that adult children who make this decision are being callous, impulsive or foolish, the respondents — many of whom said they were in therapy — spoke eloquently about what was often described as a long and emotional decision-making process. 

"I literally thought being a Democrat was a sin"

“I don't know anybody who's gone no-contact with their family just because of politics.” In saying that, a woman Salon will call Ellie echoed a sentiment that came up in nearly every interview with children who have cut off right-wing parents: It's not fair to reduce the dispute to mere political differences. (All adult children and parents interviewed in this article are identified by pseudonyms to protect their privacy.) Ellie's parents, she said, were "extremely, extremely religious" and "very physically violent." This is not uncommon in fundamentalist Christian households, where the biblical proverb about "sparing the rod" is regularly wielded to justify corporal punishment.  The problem, Ellie said, is that in many cases it's not possible "to separate what people believe in politically with their values as a whole." She argued that "Donald Trump and his administration and all these Republicans have been justifying abuse forever," which she compared to the ways her family used religion to rationalize abuse. 

"Children who choose to estrange themselves aren't making a little decision on a whim," explained Joshua Stein, a researcher who tracks online trends, especially those that intersect with psychology and bioethics. Stein has been collecting data on the online discourse about estrangement and says that many children who were raised according to the fundamentalist teachings of James Dobson and Michael Pearl "are now adults and are estranged from their parents." For many such adult children, he says, "It's not the fact that the person is MAGA. It's the fact that you do not feel that it is safe to be around them." Maureen was also raised by parents she describes as devotees of Dobson, a famous proponent of spanking children. "I literally thought being a Democrat was a sin," she said, laughing. "I was very encouraged to get married young, to an older man," she said, but found herself becoming more liberal over the years and eventually left him. Trump's election further strained her relationship with her parents. "I was raised with all the shame, like having sex before marriage was bad," but "then my family was just completely willing to embrace Donald Trump." "All the things that they told me Christianity stood for? No longer matters," Maureen said. Like many of the adult children who spoke with Salon, she went full no-contact with her parents during the COVID pandemic. 

[...]

Blaming "woke ideology"

"I was not invited to my daughter's wedding," Darlene told Salon. "That's how sick these people are, because how do you do that to a mom?" Quite a few parents who have become estranged from their children expressed interest in speaking with Salon, but most declined after learning they would be asked questions about their political views. Darlene was the exception. Like the adult children interviewed, she also saw a connection between politics and her personal situation.  "There's a mindset, there's an entitlement" in younger people, she said, which she believes has led to the government being "out of money." She added, "I don't have beaucoup bucks to just throw it out so that somebody else can make the decision as to how it gets spent, when it's not on the same values that I have." Darlene's daughter is a practicing nurse and aspiring country singer. Darlene says she gave her daughter money to start her band and record an album, but believed that "I was to have no say in how we went about promoting" the music and managing the band. Things turned out differently, in her view: "I just was to give the money and she was at will to do whatever she wanted with it." Darlene also blamed her son-in-law, whose family is "more left" and "very controlling," she believes. (Her daughter did not respond to a request for comment.) She felt that her daughter's unwillingness to speak with her was indicative of a larger social problem: "What's happening to this country if you can't sit down and have a civil conversation?” She felt that Americans are not "discussing what's actually happening to this country" or "trying to find solutions," but "keep raising taxes" instead. Similarly, she said her daughter would not "sit down with me and discuss what was happening with the money," but implied that "I was just to be quiet" when it came to her daughter's music career. 

[...]

Authoritarianism starts at home

Most estranged children and their defenders use intuitive arguments to defend their belief that the personal and political are intertwined. Social science, however, backs them up. One of the best predictors of authoritarian political beliefs — and likely Trump support — is how a person answers questions about the most desirable traits in children:

independence vs. respect for their elders

curiosity vs. good manners

self-reliance vs. obedience

being considerate vs. being well-behaved

People who prefer obedience over curiosity, independence or consideration tend to have authoritarian personalities. As political scientist Matthew MacWilliams found, authoritarians are more likely to be strong Trump supporters. This linkage makes sense, MacWilliams told Salon, because authoritarianism is all about in-group versus out-group thinking. In that worldview, children are expected to "conform to in-group norms, be obedient, be orderly, be disciplined."  MacWilliams added that it's not surprising to see politics become intertwined with personality issues in family estrangement cases. He characterized authoritarianism as a "worldview, a predisposition" more than an ideology, adding that "values and worldview drive politics," not the other way around. Authoritarian values, he said, are the "poison root" from which far-right politics and regressive attitudes on child-rearing both flow.  In her new book "Wild Faith: How the Christian Right Is Taking Over America," journalist Talia Lavin devotes the second half to exploring the widely-read marriage and parenting manuals of Christian nationalist subculture. These books or websites explicitly argue for hierarchical relationships, with women and children chastened to live their lives in unquestioning submission to patriarchal authority. As Lavin lays out in painful detail, this worldview is frequently enforced through violence, at least on children. The parenting manuals treat physical discipline not merely as an aspect of parenting, but as a parent's main tool. 

[...] Similar logic is echoed throughout anti-estrangement articles, such as the New York Times noting that "estranged children are likely to lose access to financial and emotional resources." No equivalence is drawn the parent side, even though it's also true that a parent who refuses to make peace with an adult child runs the emotional risk of losing that relationship permanently. Once again, the implicit assumption is that the lower-status person has a duty to maintain or restore harmony.  It is clearly true, as Coleman has argued, that the growth of individualistic values and greater economic freedom have created a context in which adult children can cut off contact with their parents, something that was often impossible for earlier generations. It doesn't follow, however, that such people have given up on "connectedness and interdependency and mutual reliance," as Coleman told NPR.

Most adult children who spoke with Salon did not seem lonely or disconnected from life. Most cited strong relationships with friends, other family members and romantic partners as giving them the strength to separate from parents they felt were harmful. Many spoke warmly of Reddit, which provided connections to other people in similar situations. On the estranged-parent forums, the term "found family" is sometimes uttered with evident contempt. Many of the adult children say they have simply found community. 

Could going no-contact with MAGA cultist parents be the right thing to protect your sanity?

See Also:

Everything Is Horrible: It May Not Be Safe to Remain Friends With MAGA

[istra-ish-sucha-geek]

My Discussion Post for Practicum November 9

This topic is acutely apropos, even though this article was written before the precipitating even 8 years ago of the first election of Donald Trump. In the intervening eight years, political division has continued to rise, natural disasters are increasing, and the tools in this article are of even greater necessity. The primary conclusion of this article is that yes, therapists should speak to their clients regarding world politics and news. The article offered several was to broach the subject with clients: posting a letter publicly in the office, asking client's in session, and sending an email inviting conversation to clients. Recent online discourse has been revolving around if it is appropriate to ask your therapist how they voted during the election. This conversation is being picked up by therapists and clients. Clients, especially LGBTQIA+ and women clients are expressing that therapists who don't answer or who answer "Trump," are therapists they no longer feel safe with. Some therapists are arguing that revealing who you voted for is too much self-disclosure; others are saying this should not be a problem to disclose; others are vehement that not only should you disclose, it should be obvious who you voted for. This current discourse complicates some of the suggestions from the article, as an invitation to speak about things could be seen as an invitation to ask who you voted for, which is generally considered private information. However, withholding information could also clearly damage rapport.

In my own practice this week, I have had some clients with the current election on their minds, and some who did not care. The clients who were experiencing distress did not ask me how I voted, however, it was clear from their attitude they were certain of who I had voted for, and there was no need to ask.

Guidelines for political discussion were also helpful. The focus should be on how clients were impacted emotionally and socially by politics or world conditions. When clients "rabbit trail" down a rant, a counselor should redirect them back to how they are personally being impacted. Finally, it is recommend that when appropriate, the therapist share in their own human grief about world (or local) events,  and "join as a fellow human" in the emotional response to tragedy.

Civic engagement is a way clients can feel centered and empowered in the midst of political unrest and tragedy. It is a way to ground oneself and not be rattled by ongoing events. Loneliness can be a significant contributor to stress, anxiety, and depression symptoms. Being connected to other people in civic movements, protests, and activism, is a way to minimize fear and embrace the power a human does have (Hunter, 2024). That connection can also lead to community with resources to ride out political upheaval or natural disasters. Connection is vital for human survival, both as an individual and as a communal creature. Additionally, civic engagement and communal connection can give help humans envision a hopeful future. Hope is a necessary weapon for the human psyche against darkness and trying times.

While Buczynski had excellent points for the time of the article, there has been significant shifts in the ensuing 8 years. Globally, and nationally, we have experienced a pandemic the likes of which had not been seen for 100 years (the 1918 Spanish Flu),  a contentious election in 2020 with a violence breaking at the White House on January 6, several natural disasters that broke previous records of destruction, and a continuing political divide of extremism and rhetoric while political powers wrestle back and forth. It is difficult to research events as they unfold; hindsight is 2020, and 2020 is barely four years ago. The current discussion regarding therapists, client's feelings of safety in the therapeutic relationship, and voting disclosure, would not have happened 8 years ago. The landscape of social media has dramatically changed in the last 8 years with the advent of TikTok and its direct to user interface. For several people of younger generations, social media is their primary news outlet (Pew Research Center, 2024). This has contributed to an immediacy of information dissemination through the people (including significant inaccuracies or misleading information), and access to professionals and professional spaces that was not previously available. These all impact how a client receives information, relates to information, and reacts to information. Being civically engaged can look significantly different in 2024 than it did in 2016.

This can impact how therapists apply the principles and guidelines Buczynski recommends. Many therapists have a professional, online social media account, and use that to communicate with clients. Given the 2024 Pew Research Center information, a social media post may be more effective at reaching clients than posting a letter in the office, or even an email. Additionally, due to the same social media, it is foolish to suppose clients will be ignorant and uninfluenced by the discourse on social media between clients and therapists. It is possible a client come in and demand to know who their therapist voted for, or there may be a more subtle bid for information. Social media can also give clients greater access to emotional and community support, as well as more opportunities for civic engagement. However, depending on the spaces they frequent, social media could also increase hopelessness, frustration, and burn out. While the principals of Buczynski's suggestions are still relevant, it is important to consider how to apply them in the significantly different social, political, global and online world we live in now.

:

Buczynski, R. (2016, July 15). How to Help Clients Process Their Fears about World Events - NICABM. NICABM. https://www.nicabm.com/trauma-how-to-help-clients-process-their-fears-about-world-events/ Links to an external site. 

Hunter, D. (2024, November 4). 10 ways to be prepared and grounded now that Trump has won. Waging Nonviolence: People Powered News and Analysis. https://wagingnonviolence.org/2024/11/10-things-to-do-if-trump-wins/

Pew Research Center. (2024). Pew Research Center: Social Media and News Fact Sheet. United States.[Web Archive]. Retrieved from the Library of Congress: https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/fact-sheet/social-media-and-news-fact-sheet/

[duckapus]

Ducktales: Duke for a Day

During what was supposed to be a routine adventure, the treasure of the day-the fabled Tibetan Amulet of Aggression-ends up stuck around Huey’s neck. As the name implies, the Amulet is cursed, locking whoever wears it in a permanent state of pure rage. This would be a problem for anyone, but in Huey’s case especially it’s an absolute disaster, since he’s stuck as the Duke of Making a Mess until someone can figure out how to get the stupid necklace off, which means everyone not working on that solution is either trying to keep the Duke from doing something Huey will regret or trying to stay out of the blast zone.

Meanwhile, Steelbeak has just managed to get FOWL back into some form of order, now under his command since every other lead agent is either dead, in prison, a traitor, or a dumb bird. And unlike Bradford, he’s decided to make the organization’s presence in St. Canard and Duckburg known, and what better way than by challenging the two people who’ve managed to beat him on three separate occasions, only now without any brain boosts, metal armor, or time-stopping buddies to help them?

...A lot. there’s a lot of better ways to establish yourself as a villain than picking a fight you’ve lost before, but Steelbeak is doing this anyway..

And surprisingly, it actually does start working, at least once he makes a substantial enough threat to Duckburg to both lure in Launchpad and Huey and keep the other heroes at bay, and the fight starts out in his favor, since he’s about even with LP, just more vicious and with a dangerous weapon on hand, and the Duke really isn’t equipped to be a team player, so he and LP are sort of getting in each other’s way. At least, until Launchpad gets seriously hurt. That’s when things get interesting.

Apparently the Duke isn’t the limit of Huey’s anger. There’s a deeper, darker, hotter, more protective anger deep below the surface. One that brings the darkness and flames it hides in up with it when it bubbles to the surface, turning Huey’s feathers pitch black and his eyes a solid glowing red, and the Amulet shattering from sheer force of will. This is the true essence of the Black Rage of Clan McDuck, and he absolutely hands Steelbeak his ass, doing significant damage to his deadly namesake in the process.

After the adrenaline wears off, Huey goes back to normal and passes out, and when he eventually wakes up again he discovers he can access his new Blackrage form more-or-less at will, though he’ll need help from Donald and the rest of the family to properly harness it. Also Launchpad’s gonna be fine, don’t worry.

[saint-hildegard-of-bingen]

If you love our country, please read this article, and continue to work to save our democracy. And stay hopeful!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The despair felt by climate scientists and environmentalists watching helplessly as something precious and irreplaceable is destroyed is sometimes described as “climate grief.” Those who pay close attention to the ecological calamity that civilization is inflicting upon itself frequently describe feelings of rage, anxiety and bottomless loss, all of which are amplified by the right’s willful denial. The young activist Greta Thunberg, Time magazine’s 2019 Person of the Year, has described falling into a deep depressionafter grasping the ramifications of climate change and the utter refusal of people in power to rise to the occasion: “If burning fossil fuels was so bad that it threatened our very existence, how could we just continue like before?”

Lately, I think I’m experiencing democracy grief. For anyone who was, like me, born after the civil rights movement finally made democracy in America real, liberal democracy has always been part of the climate, as easy to take for granted as clean air or the changing of the seasons. When I contemplate the sort of illiberal oligarchy that would await my children should Donald Trump win another term, the scale of the loss feels so vast that I can barely process it.

After Trump’s election, a number of historians and political scientists rushed out with books explaining, as one title put it, “How Democracies Die.” In the years since, it’s breathtaking how much is dead already. Though the president will almost certainly be impeached for extorting Ukraine to aid his re-election, he is equally certain to be acquitted in the Senate, a tacit confirmation that he is, indeed, above the law. His attorney general is a shameless partisan enforcer. Professional civil servants are purged, replaced by apparatchiks. The courts are filling up with young, hard-right ideologues. One recently confirmed judge, 40-year-old Steven Menashi, has written approvingly of ethnonationalism.

In “How Democracies Die,” Professors Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt of Harvard describe how, in failing democracies, “the referees of the democratic game were brought over to the government’s side, providing the incumbent with both a shield against constitutional challenges and a powerful — and ‘legal’ — weapon with which to assault its opponents.” This is happening before our eyes.

The entire Trump presidency has been marked, for many of us who are part of the plurality that despises it, by anxiety and anger. But lately I’ve noticed, and not just in myself, a demoralizing degree of fear, even depression. You can see it online, in the self-protective cynicism of liberals announcing on Twitter that Trump is going to win re-election. In The Washington Post, Michael Gerson, a former speechwriter for George W. Bush and a Never Trump conservative, described his spiritual struggle against feelings of political desperation: “Sustaining this type of distressed uncertainty for long periods, I can attest, is like putting arsenic in your saltshaker.”

I reached out to a number of therapists, who said they’re seeing this politically induced misery in their patients. Three years ago, said Karen Starr, a psychologist who practices in Manhattan and on Long Island, some of her patients were “in a state of alarm,” but that’s changed into “more of a chronic feeling that’s bordering on despair.” Among those most affected, she said, are the Holocaust survivors she sees. “It’s about this general feeling that the institutions that we rely on to protect us from a dangerous individual might fail,” she said.

Kimberly Grocher, a psychotherapist who works in both New York and South Florida, and whose clients are primarily women of color, told me that during her sessions, the political situation “is always in the room. It’s always in the room.” Trump, she said, has made bigotry more open and acceptable, something her patients feel in their daily lives. “When you’re dealing with people of color’s mental health, systemic racism is a big part of that,” she said.

In April 2017, I traveled to suburban Atlanta to cover the special election in the Sixth Congressional District. Meeting women there who had been shocked by Trump’s election into ceaseless political action made me optimistic for the first time that year. These women were ultimately the reason that the district, once represented by Newt Gingrich, is now represented by a Democrat, Lucy McBath. Recently, I got back in touch with a woman I’d met there, an army veteran and mother of three named Katie Landsman. She was in a dark place.

“It’s like watching someone you love die of a wasting disease,” she said, speaking of our country. “Each day, you still have that little hope no matter what happens, you’re always going to have that little hope that everything’s going to turn out O.K., but every day it seems like we get hit by something else.” Some mornings, she said, it’s hard to get out of bed. “It doesn’t feel like depression,” she said. “It really does feel more like grief.”

Obviously, this is hardly the first time that America has failed to live up to its ideals. But the ideals themselves used to be a nearly universal lodestar. The civil rights movement, and freedom movements that came after it, succeeded because the country could be shamed by the distance between its democratic promises and its reality. That is no longer true.

Democrats and anti-Trump Republicans are often incredulous seeing the party of Ronald Reagan allied with Vladimir Putin’s Russia, but the truth is, there’s no reason they should be in conflict. The enmity between America and Russia was ideological. First it was liberal democracy versus communism. Then it was liberal democracy versus authoritarian kleptocracy.

But Trump’s political movement is pro-authoritarian and pro-oligarch. It has no interest in preserving pluralism, free and fair elections or any version of the rule of law that applies to the powerful as well as the powerless. It’s contemptuous of the notion of America as a lofty idea rather than a blood-and-soil nation. Russia, which has long wanted to prove that liberal democracy is a hypocritical sham, is the natural friend of the Trumpist Republican Party, just as it’s an ally and benefactor of the far right Rassemblement National in France and the Lega Nord in Italy.

The nemeses of the Trumpist movement are liberals — in both the classical and American sense of the world — not America’s traditional geopolitical foes. This is something new in our lifetime. Despite right-wing persecution fantasies about Barack Obama, we’ve never before had a president who treats half the country like enemies, subjecting them to an unending barrage of dehumanization and hostile propaganda. Opponents in a liberal political system share at least some overlapping language. They have some shared values to orient debates. With those things gone, words lose their meaning and political exchange becomes impossible and irrelevant.

Thus we have a total breakdown in epistemological solidarity. In the impeachment committee hearings, Republicans insist with straight faces that Trump was deeply concerned about corruption in Ukraine. Republican senators like Ted Cruz of Texas, who is smart enough to know better, repeat Russian propaganda accusing Ukraine of interfering in the 2016 election. The Department of Justice’s inspector general’s report refutes years of Republican deep state conspiracy theories about an F.B.I. plot to subvert Trump’s campaign, and it makes no difference whatsoever to the promoters of those theories, who pronounce themselves totally vindicated.

To those who recognize the Trump administration’s official lies as such, the scale of dishonesty can be destabilizing. It’s a psychic tax on the population, who must parse an avalanche of untruths to understand current events. “What’s going on in the government is so extreme, that people who have no history of overwhelming psychological trauma still feel crazed by this,” said Stephanie Engel, a psychiatrist in Cambridge, Mass., who said Trump comes up “very frequently” in her sessions.

Like several therapists I spoke to, Engel said she’s had to rethink how she practices, because she has no clinical distance from the things that are terrifying her patients. “If we continue to present a facade — that we know how to manage this ourselves, and we’re not worried about our grandchildren, or we’re not worried about how we’re going to live our lives if he wins the next election — we’re not doing our patients a service,” she said.

This kind of political suffering is uncomfortable to write about, because liberal misery is the raison d’être of the MAGA movement. When Trumpists mock their enemies for being “triggered,” it’s just a quasi-adult version of the playground bully’s jeer: “What are you going to do, cry?” Anyone who has ever been bullied knows how important it is, at that moment, to choke back tears. In truth, there are few bigger snowflakes than the stars of MAGA world. The Trumpist pundit Dan Bongino is currently suing The Daily Beast for $15 million, saying it inflicted “emotional distress and trauma, insult, anguish,” for writing that NRATV, the National Rifle Association’s now defunct online media arm, had “dropped” him when the show he hosted ended. Still, a movement fueled by sadism will delight in admissions that it has caused pain.

But despair is worth discussing, because it’s something that organizers and Democratic candidates should be addressing head on. Left to fester, it can lead to apathy and withdrawal. Channeled properly, it can fuel an uprising. I was relieved to hear that despite her sometimes overwhelming sense of civic sadness, Landsman’s activism hasn’t let up. She’s been spending a bit less than 20 hours a week on political organizing, and expects to go back to 40 or more after the holidays. “The only other option is to quit and accept it, and I’m not ready to go there yet,” she said. Democracy grief isn’t like regular grief. Acceptance isn’t how you move on from it. Acceptance is itself a kind of death.

[ancientwastedlores]

The Support System (Ch: 7)

SUMMARY: The Avengers have managed to collect all the infinity stones across the universe, and are currently keeping them in far corners of the world, only for research and to see if they can improve the planet and its people. Reader is a researcher with Tony Stark and Bruce Banner, as well as a field agent. Loki is currently serving time for his actions in New York City in 2012.

A/N: Find this chapter on AO3 here. This chapter has less Loki, only because I want to get a sense of Y/N’s character without Loki around. But dw, the next chapter will have Loki :) 

AO3: The Support System  Tumblr: Chapter 1, Chapter 2, Chapter 3, Chapter 4, Chapter 5, Chapter 6 

Warnings: N/A Audience: general.

______________________________________________________________

CHAPTER 7:

You do manage to arrive in Dubai at night time, and it looks every bit as breath-taking as you expected.

After landing, the door is popped open by the hostess and a man walks in with a clipboard, wearing a S.H.I.E.L.D windbreaker. You see to your surprise that it’s a familiar face. ‘Fury!’ you exclaim.

He nods at you and takes a seat. ‘Right, they’re all based in International City, which is quite a drive from here’.

‘International City?’ Clint asks. ‘Yeah, they have sectors of houses and shops within it, all built to represent different countries of the world’ you provide.

‘Looks like you got yourself a tour guide, then’ Nick points at you with his clipboard. ‘You are tourists, nothing more. You’re staying at the Premiere Inn. It’s not fancy, doesn’t have to be. It has to be close to where they are. They’re expecting visitors from London tonight, and meeting at a club in the middle of Dubai, but there will be no arms exchanges there. However, to be sure, I will be there with my team. The rest of you will be stationed in disguise in and around the China cluster, where we are expecting it to go down. Don’t go heavy on the equipment, take what’s quick, light and effective. These things happen in public there, so let’s keep casualties to a minimum’ he stands up, ‘you’ll be taking a tour bus to the hotel, I suggest you all change out of your gear, and then get your stuff in the bus. You’ll hear more from Stark later’ he salutes the group and leaves the flight.

The group, everyone except for Nat, Clint, and Thor, are in awe.

‘He is SO COOL’ one of the agents exclaim. ‘I know; he just saunters in with all that swagger…’ another agent gushes. ‘Alright then’ Clint says, rolling his eyes. ‘Change, let’s move’.

xx

You’ve laid out all the weapons you got for the mission out on your bed. A proper arsenal. Nat’s bed looks the same, knives, tazers, blasters, guns and various other things strewn across her bed.

‘Okay, when we say light… how light are we talking?’ ‘Anything we can conceal under a dress or a jacket’. ‘So these are out’ you sigh, throwing your katanas to the back of the bed, disappointed. ‘We're fighting men, not alien monsters, you can't use those' she says, chuckling.  'Let me dream, Nat'. You pick up another weapon. ‘If I wear a trench coat, I can take the Chitauri M4’. ‘I don’t know how people perceive trench coats here, but I give you my blessing’.

She grabs a small silver and blue handgun, which you recognise as being another Chitauri weapon that blasts an incapacitating screech in the direction it is pointed, rendering the victim completely helpless.

You decide on a C M4, a few knives concealed in your jeans and socks, your trusty Vibranium gloves, and two guns that Stark made which never run out of bullets.

Then you wait.

xx

Dubai sure is glamorous, but the spot you’ve all been assigned sure isn’t.

Of course, arms dealers aren’t trying to bring attention to themselves either.

You’ve stationed the ten people under you to various spots around the area, and are sitting in an outdoor coffee shop with Sam, overlooking where the exchange is expected to happen.

‘Got eyes on the entrance?’ Nat asks over the comm. ‘Yeah. I got a guy at the entrance pretending to wait for an Uber’. ‘Copy that. Nick said they’re on their way here, so any second now’.

You lean back in your chair and take a sip of your coffee.

‘How do you know so much about this place?’ Sam asks. ‘I used to live here’ you say. ‘Spent about five years here with my family before moving to New York three years ago’. ‘How was it?’ ‘Amazing’ you smile. ‘Gets hot as hell, but the winters are fantastic. And it’s so safe’. ‘Are you forgetting why we’re here’ he motions to the building across the street. ‘Well, I mean it’s one of those cities where women can stay alone and no harm comes to her. You can walk the streets alone at night and people don’t approach you. You can leave your laptop out in a coffee shop to visit the bathroom, and no one touches your shit’.

Sam looks sceptical.

‘You telling me no one even messes with your shit?’ ‘Yup’. ‘Are people just honest or do they assume they have more money than you anyway?’ ‘Wow, probably the latter’ you laugh. ‘Heads up, we got incoming’ you hear Clint on the comms. ‘Hey, where’s Thor?’ you ask. ‘You mean Dr. Donald Blake?’ Sam points at a guy in glasses across the street, leaning on his umbrella.

‘Pulling up at my 9 o’clock’ the guy you stationed to “wait for an Uber” says.

Three black Nissan Patrol Platinums pull up to the entrance.

‘When we moving in?’ Sam asks, ‘We can’t see past those cars’. ‘I do not have eyes on them. Clint?’ Nat says. ‘I see them' Clint replies, 'move on my signal’.

You set your coffee down and position yourself to stand up any second.

The cars drive away, and you see a group of men, dressed quite casually, cross the street and head to the coffee shop where you’re sitting.

‘Hold it’ Clint says.

They sit down and order some coffees. And you notice the other patrons of the coffee shop get up and leave as soon as they order their coffees.

‘Okay… what’s happening’ Thor says. ‘Obviously these guys know something we don’t’ you say. ‘The whole street has cleared’ Nat observes. ‘So it’s just us and them? Yeah, not suspicious at all’ Sam cracks. ‘Let’s move in now’. ‘I don’t see any weapons. We aren’t moving till we see arms’ Nat says.

Sam leans back in his chair, but you keep your position.

‘They may not take out any if they see us’ you point out.  ‘They know of four people watching them’.

You take a deep breath and stand up. ‘Send a black sedan for the agent across the street in five seconds. Thor, move out’. Sam stands up with you and you walk down the street.

You’ve left a microphone at the table where you were sitting, which is able to pick up audio from the next table.

They have a discussion in a foreign language.

‘He just asked him to check the surrounding buildings’ Nat says. ‘Are you in there?’ you ask. ‘You know you can't ask me that’.

You sigh and lean against the wall, waiting. 

After ten minutes of complete silence, Nat’s voice comes on the comms. ‘I see the weapons, we’re moving in. Two of you, move in from the east’.

‘Copy that’ you remove the C M4 you’ve been hiding under the coat and grin. ‘Finally, baby’. ‘You know; the love you have for weapons that tear people apart kinda turns me on’ Sam says. ‘I bet it does’ you wink. ‘Let’s go’.

xx

Oh, do bad guys never learn.

You take a look of the aftermath of the fight and laugh to yourself. You strap the C M4 back in and cover it with your coat. Stark foundation is already on the scene cleaning up the mess, and the cops have arrived to arrest the dealers. No casualties since the street was clear... well, except for the arms dealers themselves. 

After some negotiating between Fury and the cops, Fury manages to get full custody of the weapons to ship back to New York. Nat walks up to you. ‘Are you sure you don’t need to see a therapist?’

‘What’ ‘You were enjoying yourself a bit too much’ she points out. ‘Damn, there’s nothing wrong with that’ Sam defends you. ‘I’m fine, I just like a good fight, is that bad?’ ‘I guess not’ she looks at you up and down again, then walks back. ‘Anyone injured?’ you call out.

You get No’s as a response and officially call the mission a complete success.

xx

‘Can we not stay for a day?’ you ask Fury, on the way back to the hotel. 'We're ahead of schedule'.  ‘I would say yes, but Stark is impatient to open up his new toys, and says he promised you and Romanoff a crack at it first’. ‘Right…’ suddenly you no longer care about staying a day. ‘We’re cleaning up faster than expected’ Fury says. ‘Usually we just watch for about two days and then move in, but I got here first so this one went quick. You’re on your own in Hong Kong’. ‘Thanks Fury’ you smile at him. ‘For all your help’. ‘No problem. I’ll see you around’ he lets you off at the hotel. The rest get down and head to their rooms. ‘At least we spend the night in beds that aren’t flying’ Maria says.

Everyone agrees as they enter, say their goodnights, and retire for the night.

xx

The operations in Hong Kong, as promised by Fury, takes longer.

Nat, Clint and a few other agents were doing surveillance while you stayed in the stakeout van reading your papers for two days. No reason you can’t get ahead with the stones while you wait.

You hoped to have a breakthrough while sitting in that stuffy van with four other agents. None. You couldn’t even contact Stark to see how far he had gotten, but you suspected that it already took a lot of his energy not to pop open the crates with the weapons and go nuts, so maybe he hasn’t actually done anything about the stones.

Day 3 in Hong Kong, Day 5 of the mission: Nat enters your van.

‘They’ve already made the sale, so we have to split up’. ‘Can we do that?’ you put your papers aside. ‘Won’t we fall short?’ ‘We don’t have time to strike them separately, they can easily alert each other. It has to be tonight, and we have to split up’.

You nod, understanding.

‘I’ll go with Clint and Hill and 10 agents, Sam and you can lead the other 10. I’ll get the dealers, you get the clients’. ‘Who gets Thor?’ ‘Um…’

You can’t split Thor. And both of you need Thor, in case there is some sort of alien tech humans can’t touch.

‘You can take Thor’ you offer. ‘No, that’s fine, you take him, and we’ll wait for him to clean up with you and come to us’. ‘That’ll take too long, I have my Vibranium gloves, I’ll handle our clean-up’. ‘We don’t know if Vibranium can withstand the…’ ‘Why don’t we toss for it?’ you take out a coin. ‘Heads, you get Thor, tails, I don’t get Thor’. ‘Do you think I’m stupid’.

You grin. ‘Seriously take Thor. If it turns out I can’t use the gloves, I’ll hold the fort down till Thor comes to us’.

‘Fine’ she gives you a small salute and proceeds to leave. ‘My crew will move out in fifteen to their base, you stay here. The clients are right in this hotel…’ she points outside. ‘We strike at the exact same time’.

xx

‘We’re in position, where you at?’ Clint asks over the comms. ‘Um. Yeah, we can't move in right now’. you say. ‘What? Why?’ ‘Oh I don’t know, maybe because there’s a wedding happening!’ you roll your eyes. ‘There’s too many people in there’. ‘Do you see the clients?’ Nat asks. ‘Coffee shop. They’ve left the bags behind the counter though’.

Nat lets out an irritated sigh. ‘The dealers will move out any minute, we don’t have time to lose’. ‘Well, I can’t move in with a troop of 10 men with guns while there’s a wedding happening’ you say. ‘No worries’ Sam says. ‘I got ya’ll’ he winks at you. ‘I can practically hear Sam wink’ Nat says. ‘What is it’.

Sam removes a cylindrical object from his pocket, similar to the dealer boss in Queens.

‘You took the force field activator!’ you exclaim. ‘Sam…’ Clint warns. ‘We’re gonna discuss this later’ Nat says. ‘We’re moving in right now’.

 You wave your hand and let your crew out of the van. Your agents move out from the other surveillance vans and all enter the lobby in formation.

The clients have taken notice of the group move into the coffee shop, and they all stand up, cocking their guns.

Sam moves in before you, holding the force field activator behind his back. ‘Don’t make this difficult man’ he says.

‘I think it’s going to be difficult for you’ one of them say. ‘There’s a wedding happening in the hall across from this coffee shop, you wouldn’t want those many casualties, would you?’

In response, Sam smashes the activator on the ground, pushing a shield around the agents and the clients. One of the clients shoot, and Sam ducks, causing the bullet to ricochet off the shield and bounce back to hit the guy who shot it.

‘Smart move, jackass’ Sam laughs.

The clients charge, one of them yelling for someone to secure the bag with the weapons, but you’re already behind the counter.

‘Hi!’ you tell the man who tries to grab the bag, and hit his nose with the butt of your gun. He falls back, his nose bleeding.

‘Oh damn, I’m sorry, I know how much that sucks, I had a chronic nose bleed problem as a child’ you quip, dragging him behind the counter by his right leg. He kicks you in the stomach, screaming. 'But I wasn’t a little bitch about it’ you aim your gun at his head. He stops and glares at you. ‘Good boy, I’m gonna tie you up now’.

‘A little help?’ Sam yells, holding off two goons.

You stand up after having tied the guy and throw two silver balls at their torsos.

They scream and drop to the ground, sparks all over their body. ‘Oh shit no!!' you exclaim, 'I had something better, okay, next time you need a hand, call me’.

Sam gives you a thumbs up without even questioning it and runs off to help the other agents.

‘Listen, I’m gonna go help my friends’ you tell the guy tied and gagged behind the counter. ‘If you cooperate, I’ll put in a good word for… oh wait, you’re a terrible person. Never mind’ you jump over the counter, and in one swift motion, push yourself off with your hands and drop kick a goon.

‘Oy! Get this asshole’ Sam yells, motioning to a guy he’s holding by the throat. ‘You have the situation under control’ ‘Yes, but I wanna see what you got’

You grin and take out a little metallic disc from your pocket. ‘Drop him’ you say. Sam obliges.

You throw the disk at the man, and as soon as it touches him, a cage forms around his torso, extending to his arms, forcing them behind him. The metal extends to around his legs, forcing him to kneel on the floor, and finally, a slab of metal clangs around his mouth so he can’t talk.

‘DAMN what the hell is that’ Sam clearly looks impressed. ‘Little gift from Strange. He used it on Kaecilius’ you grin. ‘It used to be bigger, Stark made the whole cage sit in a tiny disc’. ‘I don’t know who the Kae dude is, but that’s dope as hell, I want one’.

Another mission wrapped up, and two days before the expected date!

xx

The flight back is relatively chill. You were expecting celebrations and drinks and singing, looking forward to it almost, but this vibe is not bad either. There’s some soft lounge music playing in the background while everyone reads, writes, is in conversation, or just looking out the window. You, as usual, sit across from Nat, who is trying to sleep before landing in New York in the morning. You can’t seem to fall asleep though, so you decide to sit with some research papers.

An hour in, and you realise your heart’s not in it, in fact you’re even a little sick of it. You take out your TV from the armrest and watch an older episode of Doctor Who, almost missing Loki sitting next to you asking questions. You had gotten into the habit of giving his palms a little massage while engrossed in the show, so you start massaging your own as you watch the shenanigans of the Doctor unfold. 

Five more hours before you land in New York. You put the TV away and look around for anyone awake to talk to. Everyone is tired out and asleep, so you pull your blanket up to your chin and try to sleep too.

______________________________________________________________

Lmk if you want to be tagged when I post new chapters, and fic requests are open. 

[howwelldoyouknowyourmoon]

Working with Shame in Cult Recovery! – Cathrine Moestue

ICSA Webinar for Mental Health Professionals

Working with Shame in Cult Recovery! Cathrine Moestue Date/Time of Presentation: 13 November 2022, 2 pm Eastern time (New York time)   Continuing Education CE Hours: 1.5 Register for CE units Register Free Without CE (donations appreciated but not required) Shame is at the core of the inner critic, perfectionism, depression, and low self-esteem. Shame has been at the core of my work since I became an Emotion Focused Therapist. I work with former cult members and all kinds of clients that have experienced relationship trauma.  Shame is different in each person, so therefore it is helpful to have tools for the therapist to help the client create a map of where the shame wounds are hidden, of where they are healed, and where the resources are to heal it. As we all know shame loses its grip when we turn towards it with kindness and curiosity.  However, self-compassion is not easily accessed in shame. Most clients who harbor underlying shame report that they do not know how to love themselves. For them, self-compassion feels like an impossible task because it makes them feel too vulnerable and subject to others’ judgment. In this session you will learn: 1. Emotion Focused approaches to treating shame. 2. Empathic Explorations Responses 3. Awareness of our own shame  (never good enough) as clinicians. 4. How talking about shame in terms of physiology can be de-shaming 5. How learning about principles of influence can be an antidote to shame Cathrine Moestue, Cand.Psychol., is a clinical psychologist who specializes in Emotion Focused Therapy and is an expert on social influence. She trained directly with Dr. Robert Cialdini, teaching his class on ethical influence. Since 2015 she has been engaged in the topic of «radical identity change» and the change of self image as it appears in the radicalization processes and how this knowledge can help us in countering extremism. Cathrine is also a member of the Radicalisation Awareness Network (RAN) in the European Commission.  She is the author of chapter 11  in the book Radicalization; Phenomenon and  Prevention that came out in Norway (2018). Her chapter discusses Interaction between vulnerabilities, motivation and manipulation in the radicalization process. Parts of her own story are also featured in the book FAR OUT by Charlotte Mc Donald Gibson, April 11th 2022. Cult experience: While attending Folk-University in Stockholm (1984–85), she encountered teachers who claimed to have a program to “save starving children '' and lured her to participate. The group, which drew on communist teachings, isolated her from her family and made her feel guilty for her privileged upbringing. After years of working hard to “save the world,” she became disillusioned and, after several attempts, in 1992 she successfully escaped this destructive group by running away. She worked in the advertising industry and managed a radio company before earning her degree in psychology at the university of Oslo and becoming a psychologist and eventually seeking therapy to deal with her traumatic experience. She is a psychologist in private practice in Oslo and is currently working on her memoirs. International Cultic Studies Association (ICSA) has been approved by NBCC as an Approved Continuing Education Provider, ACEP No. 6893. Programs that do not qualify for NBCC credit are clearly identified. ICSA is solely responsible for all aspects of the programs. International Cultic Studies Association PO Box 2265, Bonita Springs, FL 34133 Phone: (239) 514-3081 | Fax: (305) 393-8193 Email: mail@icsamail.com www.icsahome.com

[jerseydeanne]

OPINION: Can we talk about Jessica Mulroney?

I appreciate you might not be aware of her existence, unless you're Canadian. From what I can tell, many Canadians are heartily sick of Jessica Mulroney – but sucks to them, because it appears she's en route to world domination. Indeed, if I'm aware of her in Karori (which at times feels less plugged into cultural currents than Scott Base), then she's achieved it already. Achieving things, or as her therapist might term it, actualising her best self, seems to be her unique selling point.

Indeed, Jessica does many things. These include PR, and content strategy (nope, me neither). She's a stylist of clients, including Canada's First Lady, Sophie Gregoire Trudeau. She represents brands. She co-founded a charity providing makeup to women in temporary accommodation.

READ MORE: * Leah McFall: Meghan Markle has personality. Is that going to be a problem? * Leah McFall: Megan Markle, Princess Sparkle * Leah McFall: Meghan and Harry's cake is not just a cake * 'She wanted to be Diana 2.0': Meghan Markle gets the Andrew Morton treatment

She has an ardent Instagram following. She's married to a TV host who is himself the son of the former Prime Minister, so she's often referred to as one half of Canada's leading celebrity "power couple".

No phrase gives me the trots more than "power couple". It implies one of these two people is probably more than enough, but no – they had to weaponise their potential by getting together. This is mutually beneficial, but also denies people with rather less going for them the chance to hitch their wagon to a star and better achieve their goals.

For example, imagine what you could have done for world peace if Daniel Craig had chosen little old you, instead of gorgeous movie star Rachel Weisz? (More to the point, what could Daniel have done to you?)

WPA Pool

Jessica Mulroney was resplendent in blue on the day of Meghan Markle's wedding, on the steps of St George's Chapel, glossy, leggy, hard-bodied, styled to the last of her cells – a matron of honour in all but name.

Jessica Mulroney was doing just fine before she met and befriended Rachel Zane – I mean, Meghan Markle – but since Markle became engaged to Prince Harry, Jessica's become the planet's most powerful BFF.

Apparently, she helped cultivate their relationship by providing a Canadian safe house for the lovers when their relationship was secret. It's said she helped pick Markle's outfits as the affair became public knowledge, and guided Markle to choose the perfect wedding look. And she was right there on the day, on the steps of St George's Chapel, glossy, leggy, hard-bodied, styled to the last of her cells – a matron of honour in all but name.

Remember those twin boys, holding up Markle's veil? They're Jessica's! Incidentally, I liked the idea of boys doing something thankless that usually falls to bridesmaids, because it was weirdly feminist; in the same way that Beauty reading a lot of books while incarcerated by the Beast is weirdly feminist.

Ad Feedback

It represents an inch of progress.

Fascinated by what it takes to be a self-made woman in the digital age, I dipped into Jessica's Instagram this week. Unless you are already one half of a power couple, DO NOT DO THIS.

Jessica and her trainer were in the press up position, their ankles suspended in mid-air by resistance bands which dangled from the ceiling, performing a series of painful contortions. THIS WILL CHANGE YOUR AB GAME, it's captioned. Jessica is grimly determined in the video. Her manicure is unaffected.

Watching it will give you reflux. If I was dangling like that, the sphincter dividing my stomach contents from my windpipe would throw up its pink, gristly hands and huff: "You know what? You do you and I'll do me," and release a burning rivulet of acid into my mouth.

As I don't have that level of commitment to actualising my best self, I'll never be a famous woman's BFF. Jessica reminds me what I am, which is ordinary. Her Instagram is the opposite of inspirational and, in a way, this is her genius. YOU DO YOU, Jessica might as well be telling me. IT'S THE ONE THING YOU'RE GOOD AT.

Chris Jackson

Since Maghan Markle became engaged to Prince Harry, Jessica Mulroney has become the planet's most powerful BFF.

I'm not especially interested in Jessica, per se. I'm more intrigued that to be truly culturally powerful, a female public figure needs an equally ambitious fixer – think Michael Cohen and Donald Trump – to make strategy under the guise of sworn friendship.

As Cohen is on Trump's payroll, and because Trump is as skilled at human relationships as a boiled whelk, there's no real suggestion of friendship between them. But strangely, celebrity women are always pictured cuddling their fashion designer (Julianne Moore and Tom Ford), makeup artist (Kate Moss and Charlotte Tilbury) or personal trainer (can Gwyneth Paltrow please let go of Tracy Anderson, for the love of Pete?). It's as if a famous woman can't just pay the invoice for a professional service without also offering friendship. She can't just transact. She has to feel.

Anyway, Canada stands to benefit enormously from Jessica's ascendancy. It seems Harry and Meghan will honeymoon there, confirming it as the coolest little country in the Commonwealth. We need to change our ab game, New Zealand; it's our only hope.  

[cksmart-world]

The completely unnecessary news analysis

by Christopher Smart

April 20, 2021

ONCE UPON A TIME IN AMERICA

Once upon a time in America there were mass shootings every week. But no one knew what to do about it. Some people didn't care. Once upon a time in America there was a Big Lie that Donald Trump won re-election for president. No matter how much evidence to the contrary, most Republicans believed the Big Lie. The country was drowning in misinformation. But no one knew what to do about it. Once upon time in America there was a pandemic that was killing hundreds of thousands of people. Public safety officials asked everyone to wear a mask to keep the disease from spreading. But many, mostly Trump supporters, refused because the disease wasn't really real and besides, it stole their freedom. When scientist miraculously came up with vaccines against the disease, a lot of people refused them because you can't trust scientists. Once upon a time in America there was a thing called “personal freedom” where you could do anything you wanted: you could tell big lies that hurt people; you could buy guns and kill people; you could ignore public safety and if you helped spread a deadly disease, well, that was your right because personal freedom comes before anything else, no matter what. America — land of the free, home of the knaves.

BETWEEN SEX AND A HARD PLACE

Talk about being caught between a hard place and a hard thing, sex therapist Natasha Helfer is in double-dutch with the LDS Church after her blog post said masturbation is not a sin. (Hallelujah.) Suddenly, her blog has a lot more pull (no pun intended) with Mormons and ex-Mormons for what The Washington Post called “her frankness around sex.” Here's the rub: Helfer, who is a Mormon, is now facing possible excommunication for apostasy for publicly opposing LDS teachings. “They’re treating me like a pariah,” she said. One of the few licensed sex therapists familiar with the Mormon faith, Helfer said her clients have previously been advised to pray their sexual urges away. She also said that viewing pornography is not sex addiction and she supports same-sex marriage. Oh dear. After being castigated by her stake president, Helfer posted this on her Facebook page: “The last thing I want for my people is to replace one patriarchal prick for another... Beware of any person or organization that assumes they know better than you what you need.” She didn't exactly say, “If it feels good do it,” but for some, like Wilson and the band, that's close enough.

POOR BURGESS OWENS — BOO HOO HOO

Poor, poor Burgess Owens. Utah's Republican 4th District congressman is a victim — Salt Lake Tribune cartoonist Pat Bagley had the temerity to publicly compare him to a bigot. Poor Burgess. This is the same poor Burgess Owens who called President Joe Biden a dictator. “We don’t have anything close to a constitutional republic right now. We have a dictatorship.” Poor Burgess. And as for Black Lives Matter, the movement seeking to stop police shootings of African Americans, Owens, who is black, said this: “They hate God. They hate capitalism and they hate the family... .” Poor, poor Burgess. After visiting the Southern Border earlier this month, Owens told hard-right Newsmax TV: “Americans, this isn’t a border issue anymore. They are coming to your neighborhoods, not knowing the language, not knowing the culture, and there is a cartel influence along the way...  and it is done on purpose by a party who could care less about we the people.” When Bagley drew a parody of Owens next to a Klansman with a torch saying, “They are coming to your neighborhood,” Owens and Utah Republicans had a synchronized shit fit (difficulty 8.2). Nasty ol' Pat Bagley, look what he's done to poor Burgess Owens. It's just not fair. Boo hoo hoo.

Post script — Some good news: “U.S. to Get Out of Afghanistan.” After 20 years, $ trillions and 2,312 dead soldiers and marines, Joe Biden has had enough. Those stats don't include service members who were maimed or committed suicide or who suffer from PTSD. The war began on Oct. 7, 2001, less than a month after al-Qaida terrorists attacked the Twin Towers and the Pentagon. Soon thereafter, a small number of American special forces and the Northern Alliance overthrew the Taliban government, which had provided safe haven for al-Qaida and Osama bin Laden. A contingent of Navy Seals later killed bin Laden on May 2, 2011. The question: If we could surgically overthrow the Taliban and use a minimal force to kill bin Laden, why did we send the entire U.S. Armed Forces into Afghanistan? It's puzzling but not as strange as this: On May 19, 2003, the United States invaded Iraq because then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said there weren't enough good targets in Afghanistan and, oh yeah, Saddam Hussein had “weapons of mass destruction.” And by the way, did you hear the one about the attack on a U.S. warship in the Gulf of Tonkin off the coast of North Vietnam in August 1964?

Want to get away? How about a place where there's no shootings and sex is just part of nature. Hey Wilson, maybe you and the guys in the band can take us back to paradise — if just for a while:

I'm an ape, I'm an ape ape man, I'm an ape man I'm a King Kong man, I'm a voo-doo man I'm an ape man

I don't feel safe in this world no more I don't want to die in a nuclear war I want to sail away to a distant shore and make like an ape man I'm an ape man, I'm an ape ape man I'm an ape man, I'm a King Kong man, I'm ape ape man

Cos the only time that I feel at ease Is swinging up and down in a coconut tree Oh what a life of luxury to be like an ape man I'm an ape, I'm an ape ape man, I'm an ape man I'm a King Kong man, I'm a voo-doo man I'm an ape man

I'll be your Tarzan, you'll be my Jane I'll keep you warm and you'll keep me sane And we'll sit in the trees and eat bananas all day Just like an ape man, I'm an ape man, I'm an ape ape man, I'm an ape man I'm a King Kong man, I'm a voo-doo man I'm an ape man...

(Apeman — The Kinks)

PPS — During this difficult time for newspapers please make a donation to our very important local alternative news source, Salt Lake City Weekly, at PressBackers.com, a nonprofit dedicated to help fund local journalism. Thank you.

[orbemnews]

Less Drilling, Less Germ Spray: Dentistry Adapts to the Covid Era Ann Enkoji normally enjoys seeing her dental hygienist, but when her dentist’s office in Santa Monica, Calif., canceled her cleaning visit last spring, she felt relieved. She had been wary of keeping the appointment anyway, worried about someone else’s fingers and instruments exploring her mouth at a time when more than 25,000 Americans were contracting the coronavirus daily. “It’s just too up close in that mouth-nasal region,” said Ms. Enkoji, 70, a marketing design consultant based in Santa Monica. When she returned to her dentist’s office in September for a cleaning, she was asked to wash her hands and use an antimicrobial mouth rinse, steps that federal health guidance said might help curb the spread of germs in aerosol and splatter during treatment. Without a doubt, dentistry is among the more intimate health professions. Patients must keep their mouths wide open as dentists and hygienists poke around inside with mirrors, scalers, probes and, until recently, those cringe-inducing drills. Such drills and other power equipment, including ultrasonic scalers and air polishers, can produce suspended droplets or aerosol spray that may hang in the air, potentially carrying the virus that could endanger patients and staff. Today, dental offices operate in a markedly different way than they did pre-pandemic. Since reopening in May and June, they have been following federal guidelines and industry group recommendations aimed at curtailing the spread of Covid. Los Angeles County, where Ms. Enkoji lives, passed 1.4 million in cases, and New York City has reported more than half a million cases. And while vaccination offers fresh promise, there are new worries about more contagious variants of the virus as well as a months-long timetable for rolling out the vaccines to the general public. Many dental offices have stayed open in recent months, with dentists and hygienists geared up in face shields, masks, gowns, gloves and hair covers resembling shower caps. They have set aside aerosol-spewing power equipment, and hygienists instead rely on traditional hand tools to remove patients’ built-up plaque and tartar. Under the new practices, patients typically get called a few days before visits and are asked if they have any Covid symptoms. They may be told to wait in their cars until they can be seen. Their temperatures may be taken before entering a dental office, and they have to wear masks, except during treatment, all measures recommended by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Dental offices also look different now. Many dentists are allowing only one patient in the office at a time. At Exceptional Dentistry on Staten Island, the waiting area is bereft of magazines, and plexiglass shields have been installed at the front desk, said Dr. Craig Ratner, owner of the office in the Tottenville neighborhood. And visits may last longer, because scaling by hand is more laborious than applying ultrasonic scalers, and because some patients have built-up tartar, stains and plaque on their teeth stemming from pandemic-related gaps in visits, said Dr. Ratner, who is president of the New York State Dental Association. “It’s unfortunate, but understandable,” he said. This revolution in dental protective gear has been compared to the one that accompanied the HIV/AIDS pandemic, when many dental workers began wearing gloves and masks for the first time, according to an article in the journal JDR Clinical & Translational Research. “Dentistry has changed — it’s incredible how it has changed over the last few months,” said Dr. Donald L. Chi, a pediatric dentist and professor of oral health sciences and health services at the University of Washington. Covid-19 had barely touched the United States early last February when Dr. William V. Giannobile, dean and professor at the Harvard School of Dental Medicine in Boston, heard from a counterpart in Wuhan, China. The dean of the dental school in Wuhan, where the coronavirus was first been reported on New Year’s Eve in 2019, asked Dr. Giannobile if he would help get his team’s findings republished in the United States. The authors of the article, which would appear in The Journal of Dental Research, laid out basic safety measures that would later be adopted by thousands of U.S. dentists. “They showed that the provision of dental care is safe and that guidelines could be put in place to triage patients and provide dental care,” Dr. Giannobile said. Those guidelines include not only the now-ubiquitous use of staff protective gear, but also pre-visit questions and temperature checks and patients’ use of masks. And the Wuhan researchers stated that “in areas where Covid-19 spreads, nonemergency dental practices should be postponed” — advice endorsed early last year by the C.D.C. and the American Dental Association. Updated  Feb. 8, 2021, 7:52 p.m. ET The springtime shuttering of dental businesses caused a lot of hardship for many dental practices. Only 3 percent of those offices in the United States stayed open in March and April, and layoffs and furloughs led to the disappearance of more than half of dental-office jobs, said Marko Vujicic, the chief economist for the A.D.A. “This was an unprecedented event in dentistry,” Mr. Vujicic said. But when doors swung open later in the spring, the number of patients soared. His association has been seeking permission to provide tests for the virus nationwide, as well as to administer Covid vaccines. Dentists were allowed to administer the vaccine in 20 states, including California, Connecticut, New Jersey and New York, A.D.A. research showed. Dentists rank high on the priority lists for those eligible to get the vaccine, with Phase 1a status in 40 states. The C.D.C. recommends that dental hygienists and assistants also be included on the vaccine priority list. In New York City, the College of Dentistry at New York University suspended in-person visits last winter, but resumed urgent cases in late June. Since then, it has treated more than 700 patients a day, said Elyse J. Bloom, associate dean of the college. And its mandatory virus testing for students and members of the faculty and the staff has helped keep the college’s count of positive cases significantly lower than that of New York City over all, she said. Fear of job losses has rippled through the industry. “This was a very frightening time for many individuals,” said JoAnn Gurenlian, a professor of dental hygiene at Idaho State University who heads a return-to-work task force for the American Dental Hygienists Association. More than half of dental hygienists, dental therapists and oral health specialists reported that they were not working in a June 2020 survey conducted by the International Federation of Dental Hygienists. Half said they were deeply concerned that they would not have enough personal protective gear to treat patients. Patients, too, have been anxious. Some dentists have found themselves treating stressed clients who were grinding their teeth in their sleep and needed devices to prevent chips or fractures. “Honestly, I’ve made a lot of night guards,” said Dr. Todd C. Kandl, who has spent 13 years building up his family practice with a staff of eight in East Stroudsburg, Pa., tucked away in the Poconos. Forced to close the practice in mid-March, Dr. Kandl received a federal loan that allowed him to reopen on June 1. In between, he tried to diagnose patients’ conditions over the phone, he said. Now, most of his patients have come back. He and his staff follow C.D.C. guidelines by putting on a clean gown for each patient and changing it afterward. They launder all gowns at the office. He has installed a number of the upgrades recommended by the C.D.C., including high-efficiency particulate air, or HEPA, filter units to trap fine particles. And he purchased several suction systems that remove droplets and aerosols, as well as ultraviolet light to help sanitize. Dr. Kandl also chose to discontinue use of nitrous oxide, a gas used to mildly sedate and relax anxious dental patients. In the past, he rarely used the gas, but amid the Covid-19 outbreak, he grew concerned about his system, an older type that wasn’t worth the risk of exposing patients. Lynn Uehara, 55, the business manager for a Hawaii family dental practice, said that island living had resulted in shipping problems to obtain the protective gear that her employees need. “Our masks and gloves are being rationed by our main dental suppliers,” Mrs. Uehara said. Gowns ordered four months ago finally arrived. And prices are soaring. “We used to pay about $15 for a box of gloves. Now they are charging us $40 to $50 a box.” But like other dental workers, she is now a veteran of uncertainty. If the lack of protective gear means reducing the number of patients, “then that’s what we will do,” she said. The Uehara family has offices in Honolulu on Oahu and in Hilo, on the Big Island of Hawaii. The pandemic lockdowns hurt its practices. Family members commute between the two islands by commercial jet, posing another risk. The reopening went slowly, but patients have returned. “I’ve heard the sound of laughter back in the office,” Mrs. Uehara said. A surge in coronavirus cases among children has also posed challenges for pediatric dentists. In early December, the C.D.C. strongly endorsed school-based programs in which dentists apply thin coatings called sealants on the back teeth of children in third through fifth grades. Such sealants are especially helpful for children at risk of cavities and for children whose families can’t afford private dentists, the agency said. Dr. Chi, the pediatric dentist and University of Washington professor, said that dentistry was turning to more conservative methods of dealing with tooth decay now that some drills and tools might heighten the risk of contagion. Dr. Chi, who practices at the Odessa Children’s Clinic in Seattle, said that one way that he avoided drilling was to place silver diamine fluoride on a child’s baby tooth to prevent a cavity from growing. He can also select stainless steel crowns to block the growth of a cavity. Applying such crowns normally requires numbing the tooth, using a drill to remove decay and reshape the tooth, and then installing the crown. A more conservative approach: placing a crown directly on the baby tooth without removing decay or reshaping. Evidence suggests that it is as effective as the traditional approach, takes less time and is more cost-effective, Dr. Chi said. “Covid has really encouraged dentists to look at all the options you have to treat dental disease,” he said. Some dentists, however, may choose to leave the profession. The A.D.A. conducted a survey asking dentists how they would react if their patient visits remained the same for several months. “Our data show that 40 percent of dentists 65 and older would seriously consider retiring in the coming months if patient volume remains at what it is today,” Dr. Vujicic said. Over time, though, some patients have learned to adjust. Enid Stein of Staten Island has visited Dr. Ratner’s practice five times since it reopened, for implant surgery and new crowns. A self-described germaphobe who carries alcohol spray in her pocketbook, she brought her own pen to pay by check. “I’m done, thank God,” she said. “Not that I don’t mind seeing him and all the girls in the office, but I’m in good shape.” Source link Orbem News #Adapts #Covid #Dentistry #Drilling #Era #Germ #spray

[northamptoncouplestherapy]

Not long ago, I used to joke that as a feminist family therapist I was obsolete twice over: once for being a family therapist and a systemic thinker— instead of being, say, a CBT practitioner—and then once again for being a feminist. I mean, who cared about feminism anymore? The points had been made, the lessons learned, and to some degree at least, the battles won—or at least on the way to being won. Feminism seemed to be old news. Gender issues in therapy? If anyone spoke about that anymore, it was to reenvision the whole idea—trans-kids, gender-fluid kids, straight men sleeping with other straight men. As for the impact of traditional gender roles on couples, on society—as for conversations about patriarchy and its effects—psychotherapists seemed largely to have lost interest.

Then 2016 happened.

When I gave a workshop called “Working with Challenging Men” at the 2015 Networker Symposium, it drew an audience of about 50 participants. When I was asked this year to give the same workshop, it drew an audience of more than 250. What happened to swell the ranks of those interested? We all know the answer: Donald Trump.

No matter what your political persuasion, it’s hard to deny that we have a man in the White House who behaves in ways that are not only challenging, but atavistic, offensive, and often downright frightening. Trump has called women “fat pigs,” ridiculed their appearance on social media, objectified and mocked them in person, and in his most unvarnished moment, bragged about assaulting them.

He’s regularly displayed behaviors one might’ve thought disqualifying in a public official. Harvard President Lawrence Summers was ousted almost immediately for asserting that women may have less innate math abilities than men—gone, and for a good reason. But “grab ’em by the pussy” from the leader of the free world? Democrats certainly thought it wouldn’t wash, but their efforts to make Trump’s character the issue in the election didn’t work. Each time they were freshly outraged by Trump’s behavior, his poll numbers grew.

So here’s a sobering thought: suppose Trump was elected not despite his offensive, misogynous behaviors but, at least in part, because of them. Whatever other factors determined the outcome of the election, a significantly large number of Americans, both men and women, educated and less educated, appear to have wanted a bully—or, said differently, a strongman—to be their nation’s leader. In a time perceived as dangerous, a time when the government seemed too paralyzed to accomplish much, when conservatives portrayed Obama as weak, ruminative, even feminine, we turned to a self-stylized alpha male.

Trump is a type. He fits the mold of other uber-tough guys of either sex that he openly admires and emulates: Erdogan in Turkey, Orban in Hungary, the Brexit leaders and Theresa May in the UK, and of course, there’s his storied bromance with Putin. Rarely noted is the fact that not just in the US, but sweeping throughout the West, this new so-called populism is gendered. Its appeal doesn’t lie exclusively with men. Factions of men and women these days are feeling a powerful pull toward many of the notions of traditional masculinity—and not just those few that make for good character, like real courage or loyalty. What we’re witnessing is a reassertion of masculinity’s most difficult and harmful traits: aggression, narcissism, sexual assaultiveness, grandiosity, and contempt.

And yet we psychotherapists, as a field, have remained largely silent about this resurgence, hamstrung by an ethical code that prohibits diagnosis or clinical discussion of public figures from afar. In our offices, we assiduously practice neutrality with regard to anything that smacks of the debates going on in the political realm, petrified that we might impose our values on vulnerable clients. But is neutrality in these times really in our clients’ best interests? Consider a recent couples session in my office with Julia, a petite and straight-backed woman, who lost her customary poise as she recounted her troubled week with her husband, Bob.

“I’m shot,” she confesses. “Frayed. Like a horse that shies away from the slightest sound.”

“She’s pretty spooked,” the laconic Bob agrees.

Julia smiles ruefully. “My poor husband tried to make love the other night, and I practically bit his head off.” What was triggering her so acutely? Haltingly, little by little, the trauma story winds its way out of her. First, she recalls the “ick factor,” as she puts it, of feeling her selfish, boundaryless father notice her physical development as an adolescent. Then there was the time he danced with her and had an erection, and finally, the night he drank too much and out and out groped her. “No one stood up for me. No one protected me. And now, ever since the election, I won’t let Bob near me,” Julia cries. “Just here, sitting here with you two men, walking the streets, I feel so unsafe.”

I take a deep breath and say what’s hanging like a lead weight in the air. “Your father’s in the White House,” I tell her. She doubles over, weeping hard. But she also reaches for her husband’s hand.

All over America women like Julia, who have histories of molestation, have been triggered by the ascendency of Trump. Julia is certainly in need of some trauma treatment, obviously; but to my mind, that comes second. The first order of business with her is naming the reality of what she’s facing. There’s a sexually demeaning man in the White House. This is real, not just about her sensitivities. For me to take a neutral stance on the issue, emphasizing Julia’s feelings and deemphasizing the actual circumstance, comes too close to minimization or denial, a replay of the covert nature of her father’s abuse to begin with. It was important, I felt, to speak truth to power; it was important for me as her therapist to name names.

THE HAZARDS OF MASCULINITY Let me be clear. I haven’t been for 40 years, nor will I ever be, neutral on the issue of patriarchy in my work. Traditional gender roles are a bad deal for both sexes. And they’re particularly toxic for men. The evidence couldn’t be clearer. In fact, the World Health Organization (WHO) has issued a statement implicating traditional masculine values as inimical to good health.

Let’s take a stark, bottomline issue: death. Men live 7 to 10 years less than women do, not because of some genetic differences, as most people imagine, but because men act like, well, men. For one, we don’t seek help as often as women do; it’s unmanly. Indeed, as I once wrote about male depression, “A man is as likely to ask for help with depression as he is to ask for directions.” And men are more noncompliant with treatment when we do get it. Also, we take many more risks. That driver without a seatbelt—odds are that’s a man. Men drink more, take drugs more, are more than three times as likely to be imprisoned, and five times as likely to commit suicide.

As Michael Marmot of WHO puts it, men’s poorer survival rates “reflect several factors: greater levels of occupational exposure to physical and chemical hazards, behaviors associated with male norms of risk-taking and adventure, health behavior paradigms related to masculinity, and the fact that men are less likely to visit a doctor when they are ill and, when they see a doctor, are less likely to report on the symptoms of disease or illness.”

Traditional masculine habits not only hurt men’s physical and psychological health, but also produce the least happy marriages. Study after study has shown that egalitarian marriages—which often involve dual careers and always encompass shared housework and decision making—unequivocally lead to higher rates of marital satisfaction for both sexes than do “traditional” marriages, based on hierarchy and a strict division of roles. Yet most therapists, even today, act as if these choices in marriage were simply a matter of personal preference, of legitimate, sometimes clashing values.

Where do we stand on issues like toxic masculinity and paternalistic marriage? For the most part, we don’t stand anywhere. We blink. So let me ask, if we were a group of dentists, knowing that candy is bad for teeth, would we be silent on the issue? Would we consider tooth brushing a personal value, not to be judged, only a matter of preference to be negotiated between family members?

PSYCHOLOGICAL PATRIARCHY

The men and women who come to us for help don’t live in a gender-neutral world. They’re embedded in, and are often emblematic of, a raging debate about patriarchy and a certain vision of masculinity. Trump appeals to a gender-conservative narrative, which holds feminists (“feminazis” as Rush Limbaugh calls us) responsible for deliberately attacking the line between masculine and feminine, and for “feminizing” men.

In a recent National Review article on Trump and masculinity, for example, Steven Watts laments that “a blizzard of Millennial ‘snowflakes’ has blanketed many campuses with weeping, traumatized students who, in the face of the slightest challenge to their opinions, flee to ‘safe spaces’ to find comfort with stuffed animals, puppies, balloons, and crayons.” And Fox News’s Andrea Tantaros rails, “The left has tried to culturally feminize this country in a way that is disgusting. And for blue-collar voters . . . their last hope is Donald Trump to get their masculinity back.”

The 2016 Presidential Gender Watch Report summarizes several surveys this way: “Trump supporters [are] much more likely than Clinton voters to say that men and women should ‘stick to the roles for which they are naturally suited,’ that society has become too soft and feminine, and that society today seems to ‘punish men just for acting like men.’” But to understand fully the implications of this gender narrative, even the contemptuous nuance of a derogatory term like snowflake, deemed by the Urban Dictionary as “insult of the year,” one needs to look squarely at the nature and dynamic of patriarchy itself.

I use the word patriarchy synonymously with traditional gender roles—misguided stoicism in men, resentful accommodation in women. As I tell my clients, an inwardly shame-based, outwardly driven man, coupled with an outwardly accommodating, inwardly aggrieved woman—why, that’s America’s defining heterosexual couple, successful in the world and a mess at home. Certainly, 50 years of feminism have changed most women’s expectations for themselves and their marriages, and Millennial men, for all their vaunted narcissism, are in many ways the most gender-progressive group of guys who’ve ever existed. But Baby Boomer men are often a mixed bag, and Boomer couples are in deeply conflicted distress. Divorce rates among this group are alarming, and climbing, causing some to write of a “gray divorce revolution.” We can reliably attribute many factors to this trend, but here’s the one that strikes me: many men in their 60’s are cut from the old patriarchal cloth, while many women in their 60’s are now having none of it. Have we therapists tuned in to what’s changed and what hasn’t in our gender attitudes?

Frankly, most of us in the mental health community thought that the old paradigm was on its way out— and indeed it might be. But not without a fight. The old rules, and the old roles, are still kicking, and many of us progressives have just grown complacent. If anyone over-estimated the triumph of feminism, the past election has to be viewed as a stinging rebuke and rejection. To this day, like it or not, we’re fish, and patriarchy is the tainted water we swim in.

But let’s get specific about patriarchy. For most, the word conjures up images of male privilege and dominance, and a resulting anger in women. I call this level political patriarchy, which is, simply put, sexism: the oppression of women at the hands of men. Psychological patriarchy is the structure of relationships organized under patriarchy. It not only plays in relations between men and women, but undergirds dynamics on a much broader level—among women, mothers and children, even cultures and races. The men and women who seek out therapy most often arrive at our doorstep saturated in the dynamic of psychological patriarchy, and I think it yields extraordinary clinical benefit to know about and work with this dynamic.

I see psychological patriarchy as the product of three processes, which you can imagine as three concentric rings.

The great divide. The first of these rings renowned family therapist Olga Silverstein, author of The Courage to Raise Good Men, refers to as “the halving process.” With this process, it’s as if we gathered all the qualities of one whole human being, drew a line down the middle, and declared that all the traits on the right side of the line were masculine and all those on the left were feminine. Everyone knows which traits are supposed to belong on which side. Being logical, strong, and competent is on the right, for example, and being nurturing, emotional, and dependent is on the left.

The dance of contempt. In traditional patriarchy, the two bifurcated halves, masculine and feminine, aren’t held as separate but equal. The “masculine” qualities are exalted, the “feminine” devalued. What does this tell us? That the essential relationship between masculine and feminine is one of contempt. In other words, the masculine holds the feminine as inferior. As feminist psychologist and sociologist Nancy Chodorow pointed out, masculine identity is defined by not being a girl, not being a woman, not being a sissy. Vulnerability is viewed as weakness, a source of embarrassment.

If you think this dance of contempt doesn’t affect you, I suggest you take a look at Trump’s budget. Here’s how Erin Gloria Ryan put it in The Daily Beast: “The President’s budget, like everything he talks about, play[s] into his conception of over-the-top manliness. Cuts to education, the environment, are cuts to feminized concerns, really. After school programs and meals-on-wheels, those are caretaking programs. Education (and really, all childcare), also the purview of women. The arts, not for men like Trump.”

The core collusion. I believe one of the greatest unseen motivators in human psychology is a compulsion in whoever is on the feminine side of the equation to protect the disowned fragility of whoever is on the masculine side. Even while being mistreated, the “feminine” shields the “masculine.” Whether it’s a child in relation to an abusive parent, a wife in relation to a violent husband, a captive who develops a dependency on those who took him or her hostage, or a church that protects sexually abusive ministers, perpetrators are routinely protected. One dares not speak truth to power. Everyday in our offices we bear witness to traditional hetero relationships in which the woman feels a deeper empathic connection to the wounded boy inside the man than the man himself feels. If she could only love that boy enough, she thinks, he’d be healed and all would be well. This is the classic codependent, a prisoner of what psychiatrist Martha Stark calls relentless hope. It’s an intrinsic part of trauma that victims (the “feminine”) tend to have hyper-empathy for the perpetrator (the “masculine”) and hypo-empathy for themselves. I call this empathic reversal, and it’s our job as clinicians to reverse that reversal and set things right, so that the perpetrator is held accountable and the victim is met with compassion, especially self-compassion.

CUT FROM THE OLD CLOTH

Just observing the way 53-year-old Bill sauntered over to my couch, clearly owning the room, I was tempted to label him an Old-School Guy. Lydia, his wife of 20-plus years, who was on the verge of leaving him, had another label for him. “Basically,” she tells me right off the bat, “he’s been a dick.” She bends down to scratch her ankle. “A real dick,” she reiterates. “For years, decades,” she sighs. “And I took it. I loved him. I still do. But, well, things have changed.” They’d come to my office in Boston from their home in Texas for what Bill described as a Hail Mary pass.

Here’s the story. Bill is a type: driven, handsome, relentless, utterly perfectionistic, and vicious to himself and others when a benchmark isn’t cleared. As their kids were growing up, there wasn’t much Lydia could do right: the house wasn’t picked up, the kids were too rowdy, the food was late or bland or both. Bill was both controlling and demeaning.

Lately, he’d become obsessed with physical performance, and he wanted to share his passion with his wife. Unfortunately, the way he invited her to the gym with him was to tell her how overweight she was. “I’m just attracted to fit women,” Bill says, shrugging.

“Yeah,” Lydia adds bitterly. “He thinks it’ll motivate me when he says, ‘That fat hanging over your belt disgusts me.’”

“I don’t have a very high emotional IQ,” Bill confides to me, his expression bland, untroubled. I’m thinking that I agree with him. Lydia, by the way, had been a competing amateur tennis player, with a figure many women would envy. I turn to Lydia, raising my eyebrows in a question.

“I’m no doormat,” Lydia asserts, stretching each word in her slow Texas drawl. “Sure, I took up at the gym again, but I also started spending more time with my girlfriends—I have a lot of friends—and I started my own business.”

I’m impressed. “Okay,” I say. “You’re no doormat.”

“Right,” she says.

“You didn’t just sit there and take his mistreatment.”

“Right.”

“You, uh,” I continue, “you gathered up your courage and confront- ed your husband on how. . . .”

“Well, no,” she smiles shyly. “I sup- pose I fell short on that one, until now anyway. Now I do.”

“What changed?” I ask, although I’m pretty certain I know the answer from their intake write up.

“Marylyn is what changed, Terry,” she says. And then, after a pause, she adds, “Eighteen months with Marylyn behind my back is what changed.” Bill sits beside her stony. “And there were others. I’m not sure of them all. Call girls when he traveled.” Letting out a sigh, she turns to her husband.

“It’s true,” Bill finally says, shaking his head. “I don’t know what I was thinking.”

“Well,” I say, “what were you feeling?”

“Not much,” Bill tells me. Not satisfied, I press again, but he turns it back on Lydia, saying, “Well, you did pull away. I mean, between redoing the house, your business, your friends.”

“I pulled away because you were impossible!” Lydia wails in a quivering voice. “You kept harping at me about the damn gym!”

“Look,” he responds, more to me than to her, “I like the look of a fit woman. Shoot me. My parents were old in their 50’s, dead in their early 70’s. That’s not for me. I want to compete in triathlons in my 80’s. And I want my wife competing right by my side when I do.”

I’m starting to feel claustrophobic just hearing this. “Well, that’s fine, Bill. That’s what you want,” I tell him. “But have you ever asked Lydia what she wants?”

“I want you to talk to me,” Lydia finally screams, losing composure. She bends over and cries. “Jesus, just sit down and talk to me.”

“Okay, honey, I will,” Bill says to soothe her. But whether he will or won’t, he certainly hasn’t so far. “I’m just not good with emotion,” he tells me.“I just try to find a path and go forward. That’s my usual approach. Like the other night she woke me up in the middle of the night, crying, and I asked her if there’s anything she wanted, but. . . .”

“Just hold me,” she cries, “Just tell me you love me and that you want me!”

He turns on her, an accusing finger close to her face. “But you didn’t ask me for that, did you?” he says, making his point before some imagined jury. “Did you?” Now I can see the dripping condescension Lydia spoke of.

I lean toward him. “What are you so mad about?” I ask him, knowing that anger and lust are the only two emotions men are allowed in the traditional patriarchal setup. But much male rage is helpless rage. Burdened with the responsibility, and the entitlement, to fix anything that’s broken, including his wife, Bill sees Lydia’s unhappiness as an insoluble problem he must master, a rigged Rubik’s Cube with no winning moves. He describes his feelings as many men in his position do: frustration.

“I’m tired of being held responsible”—he takes a breath, visibly try- ing to regain his composure—“when I have no idea what she wants.”

“Oh,” I say. “So you feel helpless.” That brings him up short.

“Well,” he mutters, “I’m not sure thatI’d....”

“Right,” I say, heading him off. “You don’t do helpless, right? You don’t do feelings at all, except anger perhaps.”

“Yeah, that’s true.”

“Like most hurt partners, your wife needs to get into what happened, and like most partners who’ve had an affair, you’d like to move off of it as quickly as possible.”

“I don’t think wallowing in it. . . .” “She wins,” I tell him.“I’m sorry?” he asks.“The hurt partner wins. She gets to talk about it. She needs to talk about it.”

“And what do I do in the mean- time?” he looks at me, jaw stuck out, angry, a victim.

“Well, would you accept some coaching from me at this juncture?” I ask. He nods, though skeptically, and Bill and I begin to break down the idea of masculinity—or his stunted version of it.

For his entire life, Bill credited his success in life to his fevered drive for perfection. He thought his harsh inner critic, which he never hesitated to unleash on others, was his best friend, holding up the standard, goading him to achieve. I tell Bill that like most of the men I treat, even like Icarus winging it toward the sun, he thought it was the achievement of glory that made him worthy of love. And like Icarus, he was about to fall, and fall hard.

“But my drive is my edge, my equalizer. I may not be as smart as some of the boys in the office, but, man, I can work.”

“Let me help you out here,” I tell him. “I promise you that as we work together, you won’t lose your edge. All the guys I see worry about that. But you can be just as tough and, at the right times, just as driven.”

“So what will be so different?” he asks.

“You,” I tell him. “You’ll be different. Radically different if you want to save this marriage. You’ll have choice.”

Like most feminist therapists I know, I don’t want to “feminize” men any more than I want to “masculinize” women. I want choice. When the moment calls for combat, I want men to be ferocious. But when the moment calls for tenderness, I want men to be sweet, compassionate, soft. Mostly, I want men to be able to discern which moment is which and behave accordingly. I want men to hold fast to those elements that are good and right about the traditional male role—courage, loyalty, competence—but men like Bill also deserve to have access to emotion, particularly the vulnerable emotions that connect us to one another. He deserves to have more empathy for himself first of all, and for those he loves.

By the end of our long session, we all agree that Bill—or “the old Bill,” as I begin to call him—was selfish, controlling, demanding, and unhappy. He based his shaky sense of self worth on his performance, on whatever he’d amassed materially, and on his wife’s nurture. Although he’d have been loath to admit it before, Bill needed an overhaul.

“You’ve been acting in this marriage in a lot of ways as though you were still single,” I tell him. “Six hours a day at the gym, 10-hour bike rides, call girls when you travel. You need to learn to become what I call a real family man,” a term that deliberately harks back to some of the positive ideals contained in traditional notions of masculinity.

Contrary to what gender conservatives claim we feminists are after, I don’t want the men I work with to discard every aspect of masculinity. Rather, I talk to Bill about the differences between living life as a self-centered boy and living it like a family man. It’s not “repeal and replace” the entire notion of masculinity so much as “sort through, use the best, and transform the rest.”

“You played the old game: the competitive, don’t-rest-till-you-kill-them, grab-the-brass-ring game. Okay, you won at that one. Congratulations,”I say to him. “Now it’s time to learn a whole different game, different skills, different rules, if you want to stay married at least.” Bill’s nodding. He loves his wife, feels awful about how much he’s hurt her, would move mountains to keep his family intact. “Good,” I tell him.

“Because it’s mountains you’re going to have to move. This is about cultivating that wildly undeveloped part of you that you’ve actively tried to get rid of. It’s about redefining what you think constitutes “a man” and how he’s supposed to act in the world. You’ll need new skills that stress receptivity over action, like being curious about your wife, learning to be quiet and leave space for her, drawing her out, truly negotiating.” He seems game as he listens. “I’m happy for you,” I tell him. “May this day be the beginning of your new orientation, your new life.”

“Okay,” he says, a little skeptical still.

“The next time your wife wakes up in the middle of the night because she’s a wreck and she needs to talk,” I start.

“I know,” he interrupts.

“Listen,” I tell him. “Here’s your new compass. When in doubt, I want you to pause, take a breath, and then picture yourself as a generous gentleman.” Like the term family man, the opportunity for Bill to see himself as a generous gentleman offers him a model, a reference point, for giving more to his wife without feeling like she’s won and he’s lost. I repurpose a familiar ideal—gentleman—to inspire flexibility in Bill, a willingness to yield that doesn’t shame him. “The next time she wants something from you, ask yourself, What would a generous gentleman do at this moment?”

Becoming a generous gentleman requires Bill to move beyond his self-centeredness into compassion and bigheartedness, moving beyond sheer logic to feelings, both his and others. It’s a good example of using a mostly abstract ideal contained within the patriarchal lexicon to help a client move beyond patriarchy itself. Did I have an in-depth discussion with Bill about Donald Trump? No, though I certainly would’ve been open to it had Bill seemed interested. But did I talk to him about patriarchy in general? About women’s changing demands for more sharing, more intimate, more connected marriages? About the state of manhood in transition, from the old to the new? And was I clear with Bill about where I stood on these issues and why? The answer is an emphatic yes on all counts.

“Bill,” I tell him. “You’re a statistic. All over America, men like you are being dragged off to people like me so that we can help you learn how to be more relational, more giving, more empathic, more vulnerable—just a more thoughtful, connected person. There are hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of Bills in offices like this one. We can’t make it all about personal failings; there are too many of you.”

Bill looks at me. “But when we go home,” he sighs, trailing off. “It’s just hard to know what she wants from me.”

“I know,” I commiserate. “This isn’t easy. But you have a wonderful source of information sitting right next to you.” Then I turn to Lydia. “Of course, you’ll have to do things differently, too,” I tell her. “At this stage in the game, you’re more comfortable giving Bill feedback about all he does wrong than vulnerably asking for what he might do right.” Like many of my female clients, Lydia had spent most of her marriage vacillating between stuffing it and losing it. For the most part, she was silent and resentful, so Bill brushed off her occasional rants as hysteria. “You told your truth when you were ready to fight with him, but you did it in a harsh, critical way, which people in general, and men in particular, won’t listen to.”

“Listen,” she says, revving up, “I tried everything under the sun to get him to hear what I was saying.”

“I’m sure that’s true,” I say. “But Lydia, that was then, and this is now. I have a saying: an angry woman is a woman who doesn’t feel heard. But pumping up the emotional volume doesn’t work. However, I think I have good news for you. I think you’ve been heard today, by Bill and by me. I understand what you’re saying I get it, and I’m on it. I want you to let me work with Bill now. I can get through to him in ways you’re not positioned to be able to do. I’m an outside party; you’re his wife.”

Over the years, I’ve found this to be an enormously helpful position to take in therapy, no matter if the therapist happens to a man or a woman. I often say to female clients like Lydia, “I’ve got him. You don’t have to be his relational coach or teacher anymore. Give that job to me. You can afford to relax and start enjoying him again.” By stepping in, acknowledging the asymmetry in their relational skills and wishes, and explicitly offering myself as her ally, I hope to help women like Lydia resign from their role as their partner’s mentor. “I’ll coach Bill,” I tell Lydia. “You breathe, relax, let your heart open up again.”

Earlier in the session, I’d said I was excited for Bill. But with Lydia at the threshold of her own relational learning on how to break the traditional feminine role of silence and anger, I’m thrilled for her, too. I’m eager to teach her how to stand up for herself with love, how to switch from statements like “I don’t like how you’re treating me!” to ones like “I want to be close to you. I want to hear what you’re saying. Could you be kinder right now so I can hear better?”

Both partners need to learn how to be more skilled. But moving each toward increased intimacy requires leaving behind the old roles for them both. Real intimacy and patriarchy are at odds with each other. To the degree that a couple approaches the former, they move beyond the latter. As the old roles seek to reassert themselves in our society, it seems more important than ever to take a stand in favor of new ones, new configurations that provide more openness in men like Bill and more loving firmness in women like Lydia.

AGENTS OF CHANGE

For years, I quipped that, as a couples therapist, I was a medic in the vast gender war, patching up men and women in order to send them back out into the fray. But in the age of Trump, I don’t want to be a neutral medic anymore. I’d rather take a stand for healthy marriages. Pathology is rarely an aberration of the norm so much as an exaggeration of it. The way Bill had routinely controlled and savaged his wife, and the way she’d reacted, with distance and occasional rage of her own, were right out of the patriarchy playbook. Could I have done the same work with them without ever referencing gender roles, or masculinity? Perhaps, but why would I want to, when silhouetting a couple’s issues against the backdrop of gender roles in transition makes so much sense to people?

In 2013, sociologist Michael Kimmel wrote Angry White Men, about a group of people many now claim make up a large part of Trump’s base. Central to Kimmel���s findings was a sense of what he called “aggrieved entitlement,” which, from a psychological perspective, looks to leave the person they’re with as much as they want to leave the person they themselves have become. And it’s not that they’re looking for another person, but another self. But even happy people cheat, and affairs aren’t always a symptom of something wrong in the marriage or in the individual.

A lot like the fusion of shame and grandiosity, a perpetual sense of angry victimhood—in a word, patriarchy. In a new work, Kimmel looks at four organizations that help deprogram men who leave hate groups like white supremacists and jihadists. What he found implicit in all these hate groups was traditional masculinity: the more rigid the vision of the masculine, and the more fervently the man held onto such rigid beliefs, the more vulnerable he was to extremist politics and violence. Countering this vision of masculinity was key to the deprogramming.

With this as our cultural context, what we therapists are being called upon to do is what the WHO has already done—explicitly declare traditional masculinity a health hazard, not just to men, but to the families who live with them. We should continue to develop techniques for openly challenging toxic patriarchal notions like the one that says harsh inner critics are good for us, or the one that says vulnerability is a sign of weakness. We need to invite each gender to reclaim and explore its wholeness, as sexy, smart, competent women, as well as bighearted, strong, vulnerable men. We must check our own biases so as not to sell men short as intrinsically less emotional, for example, or to sell women short by not explicitly helping them find a voice in their relationships that’s simultaneously assertive and cherishing.

In these troubled times, what do we clinicians stand for if not the plumb line of intimacy? But we must remember that intimacy itself is a relatively new, and contentious, demand. Marriage wasn’t historically built for intimacy in today’s terms, but for stability and production. Under patriarchy, emotional intimacy itself is coded as “feminine,” as is therapy, for that matter. The intrinsic values of therapy—communication, understanding, empathy, self-compassion, the importance of emotion—these are all downplayed as “feminine” concerns in the traditional masculine playbook.

I want us therapists to put these concerns on the table, and stand up and be counted as agents for the historically new idea of lasting, long-term intimacy, and with it the increased health and happiness that study after study has shown it leads to. I want us to be more explicit—both in public discourse and in the privacy of our offices—in articulating the painful psychological costs of the old, patriarchal world order, which is asserting itself again in our lives. Democratic relationships simply work better than hierarchical ones in marriages, and both sexes are better off liberated from the dance of contempt. It’s healing for all our clients to move beyond the core collusion and speak truth to power. It’s healing for us therapists to do the same in the presence of those who want our guidance.

We’re the people who are being turned to for help when the old ways no longer work. We can merely patch things up, or we can aim our sights on transformation and offer an entirely new vision. The path toward sustained intimacy can’t be found in the resurgence of a patriarchal past. It’s part of our job and responsibility to point our clients toward the future. If we therapists are to be true agents of healing, we must first be true agents of change.

Terry Real is a nationally recognized family therapist, author, and teacher.  He is particularly known for his groundbreaking work on men and male psychology as well as his work on gender and couples; he has been in private practice for over thirty years. Terry has appeared often as the relationship expert for Good Morning America and ABC News. His work has been featured in numerous academic articles as well as media venues such as Oprah, 20/20, The Today Show, CNN, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, Psychology Today and many others.

This blog which originally appeared in the Psychotherapy Networker, was republished on NCCT with permission from the author.

Author: Terry Real

Check out a 2-Day Training with Terry Real of The Relational Life Institute

[drwillmiller]

Here I am again, stuck about how to focus on our national health. The roiling currents have many of us nauseous. And of course I’m in the rocking boat too and it’s not easy to think clearly and, importantly for me, clinically about what’s going on and where we’re headed. Like everyone else I’m a stumped citizen.

The impact of the new era of political and social disruption ushered in with Donald Trump presidency has everyone looking for the railing. And the impression we get from all news sources is that the American population, and perhaps the world’s population as well, is divided in half between those who support him and those who don’t. But there surely must be some nuance here with those who are conflicted and uncertain and in between. All the noise of course is from the inflamed sides, those with impassioned convictions here. Among a thousand other variables a major factor is the money-motivated media that covers the stories from these outer edges. There’s no media pop talking to the muddled and befuddled middle streams. So it’s a version of that old news saw, ‘if it bleeds, it leads.’

Ok so do I have anything to contribute here? I’m reminded that therapists are trained to resist being pulled into the middle of a client’s emotions. Empathy is of course essential, but participation in their arousal is not. The key is to stand apart from the emotional confusion and see the broader picture. What is the problem that brought them to counseling and why is it so overwhelming for them? And this of course opens a big can of repressed, unconscious issues and experiences that need to be brought out and have some dots connected.

Generally the smart pundit class in all media try to take this stance and offer some interpretations and insights into the drivers of the passions igniting our politics. And there is general reliability when thoughtful cultural observers talk about the Trump base of people feeling ignored, forgotten and dismissed by those they depend on. And on the other side are those who found an object of their fury at the irrationality of those who ignore and dismiss their esteemed intellect and penetrating insights. It’s screw you versus how dare you. And it’s locked down and bolted to the floor.

At this point only a national event can release us. Even the events of recent day and weeks hasn’t done it.

[lewepstein]

Close Encounters With the Truth

I was recently listening to a recording of Anthony de Mello, an inspirational Jesuit priest and psychotherapist when something he said stopped me in my tracks.  The story that he told seemed to go to the heart of what it means to be honest with ourselves.  It also spoke to what has gone terribly wrong in our society regarding what we call The Truth, a  problem that seems to have reached some kind of critical mass in the era of Trump.             

 De Mello describes a lecture that he was giving to a group of fellow Jesuits regarding certain tribal cultures.  The central idea had to do with how innocent and good these people were before ever having read  the gospel or known anything of Christianity.  Following the presentation, he was approached by an elderly Catholic missionary who had devoted the last forty years of his life to working with the very tribes de Mello had been speaking about.  The question that this clergyman posed struck me as remarkable for its courage and its candor.  He said the following:

 “ I’ve been reflecting on what you spoke about today and wonder if I haven’t spoiled these people  by introducing Christianity into lives that already possess  innocence and goodness.”

 One thing that I take away from this story has to do with the willingness of an individual to consider a view of the world contrary to what he had always believed to be true - to allow doubt to cast a shadow on something he once thought of as God’s work.  Regardless of what we may personally believe or feel about the work of missionaries, we can still marvel at the strength and faith that this priest displayed.  When confronted with evidence challenging the value of what had been his life’s work, he was willing to question whether his efforts had been of any value at all.

 I can’t say whether or not the truth will always set us free or even that we’ll feel better having faced a truth.  What  I can say from my experience as a family member and from what I’ve learned from my work with families is that our life-long relationship with the truth is possibly the most important connection that we will ever have.

 Sometimes I find myself asking clients faced with an important life decision, “In your heart of hearts what do you believe to be true?”  Often, the underlying questions I am asking are: “How well do you really know yourself?”  and,  ”Do you honestly feel that you can live with this situation or relationship in your life without it eroding your sense of self?”

 Polonius’s final words of advice to Hamlet in Shakespeare’s most performed play is: “Above all else to thine own self be true.”   The wisdom that he offers Hamlet beyond the virtue of being honest with himself  has to do with being courageous in the face of difficult realities.  I take this to mean that we place ourselves in jeopardy when we ignore or deny what we underlyingly know to be true.  The reason that we avoid exploring things more deeply is usually because they frighten us or take us out of our zone of comfort.

 Close encounters with the truth can also arise in our jobs and careers. One run-in that I had with the truth had to do with my work as a family therapist.  With the benefit of hindsight I can say that in the 1990s I had  “fallen in love” with an approach to treatment called family systems therapy and the theories of Murray Bowen.  This approach had been very helpful to me in my work on my own family issues and some clients of mine reported growth in other parts of their lives after having examined and established more mature relationships with extended family members.                                                                                                                            

The danger I fell prey to was believing that the theory should work in all cases even when some of my experiences with clients didn’t support that conclusion.   I was finding that there were clients of mine with more severe symptoms - usually eating disorders and post- trauma problems - who seemed to derive little benefit from this type of treatment.   It was emotionally difficult for me to let go of my belief in the universality of this approach.  But I would have eventually faced my own crisis of honesty and integrity had I continued to apply a method that was contradicted by the evidence that I was witnessing in my daily work.                                                                                                                            

“The Fog of War,”  a 2003  documentary memoir of  Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara was a film that left me with a deep respect for truth telling as confessional - a  public figure’s way of making amends for policies that wreaked death and destruction on entire populations.  McNamara was a figure reviled by the American Left in the 1960’s, one of the architects of the Vietnam War and a Pentagon number cruncher who always came across  to me as devoid of feelings and humanity.   But watching this frail eighty-five year old bare his soul and humbly admit to the miscalculations and moral failures of himself and others during that era was a lesson in humility.  I felt like I was witnessing  a different kind of power in his willingness to tell the truth.  And this in turn left me with a begrudging respect for a man whom I had once held in contempt.

 It is important that we bring truth to bear in our careers and in examining the regrets we may carry around past decisions that we have made, but it is our intimate relationships that challenge us to face the most difficult truths about ourselves and others.  As a couples’ counselor I have found that  almost all marital problems are crises of honesty in one form or another.  Resentments build when people ignore or deny the sincere criticisms and requests their partners offer them.  Our narcissism becomes the enemy of the truth when we are unwilling to take a closer look at the negative and sometimes even destructive aspects of ourselves.   

 Another reason that we are susceptible to lying to ourselves and distorting the truth is because of our early need to be cared for and to trust our caregivers.  This leaves us forever vulnerable to the self-deception of being seduced.  Life partners, friends and relatives can become surrogate and symbolic caregivers who can abuse their positions of power and exploit the powers that we hand over to them.  This kind of adulation can extend to gurus and politicians who we deeply want to believe in.

  I have sat in my office with emotionally and even physically battered women who have defended the husbands who abused them daily.  They would insist that, “ Underneath his hurtful behaviors I know that he really loves me.”  When I have inquired further about any evidence they might have to support that belief they generally have had little to offer.  When we create mythologies around other human beings and brainwash ourselves into believing that they are OK when they are not, we do so at our own risk.  We also harm the other person whose distorted ideas and behaviors remain unchallenged.

 The denial of reality that I have witnessed in women who defend their abusive partners is part of what we are witnessing in the election of and continued support by large segments of our population for Donald Trump.  The idea that underneath his crass bombast he is really a good guy who is looking out for us, the common people, is almost identical to the myths that women create about their abusive partners. The fact that Trump is himself a chronic liar is compelling in itself, but the daily reports of his breaking major campaign promises is something  that few can deny.  And yet that denial of reality is exactly what is happening with his political base.  The cruel irony of the Trump phenomenon is that the people who saw him as the authentic, straight-talking, non-politician who would “drain the Washington swamp” and fight for the little guy now have significant evidence to prove that they were betrayed once again.

 Trump’s assault on the truth is part of an epic, global battle that will probably determine the direction of the entire world.  The Russia connection and Putin’s placing his thumb on the American electoral process by hacking into computers and planting fake news on the internet is designed to create confusion and undermine our democratic institutions, raising the question, “is there anything that we can believe in or trust?  On-going investigations will soon determine whether there was collusion between Putin and Trump’s election campaign that could have tilted the election in Trump's favor.  Many people are left with the question: Who do we believe? - the press and investigative agencies or a leader and his own media entourage who daily attack mainstream journalists and declare that what they are exposing is  “fake news?”

 The Trump regime certainly seems to have an Orwellian character built on distortion and lies.  In the dystopian novel 1984, Big Brother’s credo for the masses is, “War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery and Ignorance is Strength.”  In this absolutist, totalitarian state the “Department of Justice” is the agency of torture and mind control.  But is this “new-think” much different from the Environmental Protection Agency in the era of Trump which is headed by the very man who sued it multiple times in the past, is rapidly dismantling regulations on the chemical and oil industries, and is being “advised” by the lawyers of the corporations that it is charged with regulating?  Is this all part of what activist Naomi Klein has called the “Shock Doctrine?” - a flipping of reality on its head and sowing confusion about what is real? - a further softening us up as a prelude to our acceptance of  the authority, protection and wisdom of the Great Leader?

 Much is at stake in the willingness of people to be open enough to re-examine what they hold to be true.  What is in jeopardy has to do with some people’s very survival - the  coverage they receive in our American healthcare system and the environmental fate of our planet.  The direction we move in as a nation may be based in large part on the willingness of a portion of our society to take an honest look at the political package they were sold and to consider fighting back against the beginnings of  tyranny.  Or, on the other hand, will people double down on what they'd rather believe to be the truth out of some misplaced loyalty and shame, without ever considering the facts or other possibilities?

 If we connect the dots, we can begin to draw a line between the Jesuit priest who was listening to the DeMelo lecture, Defense Secretary McNamara’s early look backs at his role during the Vietnam War, the person in a relationship who knows that she is not being treated in the way that she deserves and the citizen in a democracy who is confronted with critical political choices that challenge his ingrained prejudices and group loyalties.  What each is being called upon to struggle  with is his relationship with the truth.  This is the part of our humanity that may be even deeper than the influences of social class, gender, race and  culture.  It has to do with the qualities we all need to cultivate in order to get things right in our personal lives and in our society -  curiosity, honesty, courage and the willingness to be open to new ideas.  They are the parts of our humanity that may unsettle us, but may also bring on the necessary internal shake-ups that challenge our narrow, tribal beliefs.  Hopefully, they will keep us on a never ending quest for what is true.    

[deniscollins]

At Talkspace, Start-Up Culture Collides With Mental Health Concerns

What would you do if you were a Talkspace employer and realized the  anxieties and depressing thoughts in the anonymous therapy case being shared as a learning example was actually that of a current employee also in the room: (1) nothing, (2) interrupt the presentation and verify that the case employer was okay with the group knowing of his inner psychological struggles that had been initially confidentially shared, (3) something else, if so, what? Why? What are the ethics underlying your decision?

In 2016, Ricardo Lori was an avid user of Talkspace — an app that lets people text and chat with a licensed therapist throughout the day. A part-time actor in New York City, Mr. Lori struggled with depression and anxiety, and he credited the app with helping him get out of an abusive relationship. He was a believer in Talkspace’s stated mission to make “therapy available and affordable for all,” and when the start-up offered him a job in its customer support department, Mr. Lori was ecstatic.

Talkspace, which has raised more than $100 million from investors, had an office in the old Studio 54 building in Midtown Manhattan, with all the usual perks — a Ping-Pong table in the conference room and beer and wine in the company fridge, plus all the therapy employees wanted. “I felt like I was at the best place in the world,” Mr. Lori said.

After he wrote a general account of his therapy sessions on the company blog, an executive named Linda Sacco came to Mr. Lori with an intimate request. She wanted to give employees a sense of a typical user’s experience. Could she and one of the company’s co-founders, Roni Frank, read through two weeks of his therapy chat logs and then share excerpts with the staff?

Mr. Lori thought about his sessions, which included deeply personal information about his sex life and insecurities. Ms. Sacco assured Mr. Lori that they would keep him anonymous. “If I wasn’t such a true believer, I probably would have said, ‘Are you nuts?’ But I was so enamored of the place,” said Mr. Lori. He agreed.

At an all-hands meeting on a Friday afternoon in December 2016, employees gathered in a 13th-floor conference room. The Ping-Pong table was folded up so that Ms. Sacco and Ms. Frank could sit on the floor, cross-legged and back-to-back, for a dramatic reading. Ms. Sacco played the role of the therapist; Ms. Frank played a female version of Mr. Lori.

As Mr. Lori drank a tall glass of red wine and watched, he noticed that a few employees kept glancing his way. Afterward, a member of the marketing department approached and asked if he was OK. Later, Oren Frank, Ms. Frank’s husband and the chief executive, thanked him in the elevator. Somehow, word had gotten around that Mr. Lori was the client in the re-enactment.

Mr. Lori began to reconsider whether Talkspace was the dream employer he’d imagined — and whether it could be trusted to protect the privacy of its users.

“Everything was done with employee-informed consent,” said Ms. Sacco, who no longer works at Talkspace. John Reilly, a lawyer for Talkspace, said, “At the time, the employee expressed great pride over their Talkspace treatment with their therapist, and willingly told multiple co-workers that the transcript was theirs.” Mr. Lori said he did so only after it became clear that his identity was widely known.

Despite the embarrassing episode, Mr. Lori stayed with the company for two more years, until he was let go in 2018. He sued Talkspace for discrimination and wrongful termination, claiming he was told that his anxiety and depression were interfering with his work. The lawsuit settled at the beginning of 2020. Mr. Lori asked the company to take down his blog post; the company didn’t, which is part of why Mr. Lori decided to share his story with a reporter.

Mr. Lori and other former Talkspace employees, who asked not to be named for fear of being sued, describe a company with an admirable ambition to destigmatize therapy — but that they say has questionable marketing practices and regards treatment transcripts as another data resource to be mined. Their accounts suggest that the needs of a venture capital-backed start-up to grow quickly can sometimes be in conflict with the core values of professional therapy, including strict confidentiality and patient welfare.

This year, with a pandemic, a recession and an election shredding Americans’ nerves, those concerns are relevant to more people than ever before: In May, Talkspace told The Washington Post that its client base had jumped 65 percent since mid-February.

“The app-ification of mental health care has real problems,” said Hannah Zeavin, a lecturer in the English department at the University of California, Berkeley whose book about teletherapy is scheduled to be published next year by MIT Press. “These are corporate platforms first. And they offer therapy second.”

“Talkspace has democratized access to therapy and psychiatry by meeting patients where they are in their lives and making treatment more affordable,” said Neil Leibowitz, Talkspace’s chief medical officer. “The need is profound, especially now in this time of unease, and we are so proud of what our team of therapists is achieving.”

Burner phones

Signing up with Talkspace is quick. Users create an account, fill out a questionnaire, and get a choice of therapists, who work for the platform as independent contractors. Those who sign up for the “Unlimited Messaging Therapy Plus” plan, at $260 a month, can send a therapist messages at any time and are promised daily responses. Higher-priced subscription tiers offer “live sessions” of 30 minutes. While users can send messages by text, audio and video, Talkspace is known popularly as a platform for texting.

The company was founded in 2011 by Oren and Roni Frank, an Israeli couple who felt inspired after their relationship was “saved” by marriage counseling. Mr. Frank had a background in marketing, and Ms. Frank was a software developer.

Ms. Frank is the company’s head of clinical services; as of Aug. 6, her LinkedIn page said she had a master’s degree in psychoanalysis and psychotherapy from the New York Graduate School of Psychoanalysis, but she never completed the program. The degree claim was deleted after an inquiry from The Times. Mr. Reilly said Ms. Frank “studied for an M.A. but left her program before completion to launch Talkspace. Her LinkedIn profile was created while she was studying, the inadvertent error was corrected as soon as the NYT brought this to our attention.”

The app launched in 2014 to positive press but lukewarm customer reviews, with ratings of about three stars out of five on both the Google and Apple app stores, according to a Times analysis. Users complained about glitchy software and unresponsive therapists.

In 2015 and 2016, according to four former employees, the company sought to improve its ratings: It asked workers to write positive reviews. One employee said that Talkspace’s head of marketing at the time asked him to compile 100 fake reviews in a Google spreadsheet, so that employees could submit them to app stores.

Mr. Lori said that Talkspace gave employees “burner” phones to help evade the app stores’ techniques for detecting false reviews. “They said, ‘Don’t do it here. Do it at home. Give us five-star ratings because we have too many bad reviews,’” Mr. Lori said.

Mr. Reilly, the Talkspace lawyer, disputed this account, saying that employees were free to write reviews any way they liked. “We alerted employees if they were to leave a review, to do it from their personal phones — not from the Talkspace office network, as that would cause issues with the app store,” Mr. Reilly said in an emailed statement. “To be clear: We have never used fake identities or encouraged anybody to do so; there is no event involving ‘burner’ phones, and the idea in and of itself is nonsensical relative to the large number of reviews outstanding.”

Mr. Lori still has the iPhone 4 that Talkspace gave him. On the back, there is a white sticker on which someone has written “#7 App Store login,” along with a Yahoo email address and password. Two other former employees said burner phones were made available to workers.

“Fake reviews are deceptive to consumers,” said Eric Goldman, co-director of the High Tech Law Institute at Santa Clara University. If the Talkspace employees didn’t disclose their role when leaving reviews, “then the company-encouraged reviews are problematic on multiple legal fronts,” Mr. Goldman said.

Posting fake online reviews is considered a deceptive business practice and can violate laws against false advertising. The New York attorney general and the Federal Trade Commission have fined companies for posting such reviews, though consequences can also be less severe. After the F.T.C. accused the cosmetics brand Sunday Riley of posting fake reviews, it simply made the company agree not to do so again.

Google and Apple forbid developers from soliciting fraudulent reviews. Apple says violators may have their apps removed from the App Store.

Irreverence unusual to health care

Talkspace has also seized on moments of national anxiety as opportunities for promotion. On Nov. 9, 2016, the morning after the election of Donald Trump, Mr. Frank wrote on Twitter: “Long night in NYC. Woke up this morning to record sales.” The company told reporters that users were flocking to the app to help process the news. CNBC and The Washington Post published stories about Talkspace’s “7-fold spike in traffic,” and Mr. Frank shared a Fast Company link claiming a “7x spike in sales.”

According to data from two app analytics firms, App Annie and Sensor Tower, the number of Talkspace downloads declined in the months after the election. The Times analyzed more than 3,600 reviews of the Talkspace app. There was no significant increase in the number of reviews, positive or negative, following the 2016 election.

Dr. Leibowitz, Talkspace’s chief medical officer, who joined the company in 2018, said in an email: “We saw an uptick in use after the election, including, as the piece mentions, an uptick in traffic from existing clients concerned about election results. App analytics fail to capture a few elements: Much of our traffic is on the web.”

The Trump election tweets are examples of the sometimes unfiltered social media presence of Mr. Frank and Talkspace — an irreverence familiar among start-ups but unusual among organizations devoted to mental health care.

In 2016, a man named Ross complained on Twitter that the company’s subway ads “were designed to trigger you into needing their services.” Talkspace’s official Twitter account responded, “Ads for food make people hungry, right?” and added, “I get what you’re saying, Ross, but medical professionals need people to buy things.” The company later deleted the messages and blocked the man. (Ross wrote about the exchange in a Medium post; when The Times asked for comment recently, he deleted it and asked that his full name be withheld, citing personal reasons.)

From his own Twitter account, Mr. Frank called the man a “sweet bored troll” and mocked him for spending $20,000 a year on therapy, saying Talkspace could offer “a more affordable alternative.” The company declined to comment about the episode.

‘We need data. All of our data.’

Therapy sessions are incredibly sensitive by their nature — they are intended to be a sacrosanct space for people to confess their secrets and share their deepest vulnerabilities.

Talkspace’s website promises users that their conversations will be ���safe and confidential,” but people may not have as much control as they might think over what happens to their data. Users can’t delete their transcripts, for example, because they are considered medical records.

Talkspace’s privacy policy states that “non-identifying and aggregate information” may be used “to better design our website” and “in research and trend analysis.” The impression left is a detached and impersonal process. But former employees and therapists told The Times that individual users’ anonymized conversations were routinely reviewed and mined for insights.

Karissa Brennan, a New York-based therapist, provided services via Talkspace from 2015 to 2017, including to Mr. Lori. She said that after she provided a client with links to therapy resources outside of Talkspace, a company representative contacted her, saying she should seek to keep her clients inside the app.

“I was like, ‘How do you know I did that?’” Ms. Brennan said. “They said it was private, but it wasn’t.”

The company says this would only happen if an algorithmic review flagged the interaction for some reason — for example, if the therapist recommended medical marijuana to a client. Ms. Brennan says that to the best of her recollection, she had sent a link to an anxiety worksheet.

Talkspace also has been analyzing transcripts in order to develop bots that monitor and augment therapists’ work. During a presentation in 2019, a Talkspace engineer specializing in machine learning said the research was important because certain cues that a client is in distress that could be caught during in-person sessions might be missed when a therapist is only communicating by text. Software might better catch those cues.

Last year, Mr. Frank wrote an opinion article for The Times encouraging people to make their health data available to researchers. “We need data. All of our data. Mine and yours,” he wrote, arguing that analysis of anonymous data sets could improve treatment.

The anonymous data Talkspace collects is not used just for medical advancements; it’s used to better sell Talkspace’s product. Two former employees said the company’s data scientists shared common phrases from clients’ transcripts with the marketing team so that it could better target potential customers.

The company disputes this. “We are a data-focused company, and data science and clinical leadership will from time to time share insights with their colleagues,” Mr. Reilly said. “This can include evaluating critical information that can help us improve best practices.”

He added: “It never has and never will be used for marketing purposes.”

‘Engagement’-based therapy

Many licensed therapists sign up with Talkspace for reasons similar to why drivers work for Uber. The company provides a steady stream of clients, takes care of administrative tasks and deals with some insurance issues.

“The beauty of text-based therapy is we are meeting clients where they are, and giving them access to something different,” said Reshawna Chapple, a Talkspace therapist whom the company made available for an interview. “It’s about convenience for me.”

“The thing that Talkspace allows me to do is to put my hands in a lot of different pots,” said Dr. Chapple, who communicates with 30 clients via Talkspace, treats 15 in person, and works as a full-time professor at the University of Central Florida. She also has a contract with Talkspace to advise other therapists.

The approximately 3,000 therapists who work on the platform are paid by “engagement,” according to the company, based on the number of words they write to users or how often they talk by video or audio, with bonuses for client retention.

According to multiple therapists, Talkspace paid special attention to their interactions with clients who worked at places like Google, Kroger and JetBlue — “enterprise partners” that provide Talkspace to employees as a perk. (The New York Times offers Talkspace to its workers as a benefit.)

A college professor who provided therapy via Talkspace for two years said the company reached out to her when it thought two clients from Google had been waiting too long for a response.

“Like all businesses, we focus on clients based on size and scope,” said Dr. Leibowitz, the chief medical officer.

Last year, Talkspace introduced a new feature: a button that users could press after sending a message that required the therapist to respond within a certain time frame. If the therapists don’t respond in time, their pay can be docked.

Some therapists on the platform were alarmed, in part because the function required them to work on demand, rather than on their own schedule. More significantly, they asked: Is it harmful to give clients with anxiety and boundary issues a button to press for immediate gratification?

“That’s a corporate model: You need to respond to the customer no matter what,” said Shara Sand, a psychologist with her own practice in New York. “Limit-setting and boundary-setting is part of the therapy. If you can’t manage not to talk to your therapist for four hours, you are very ill and need a higher level of care than a texting app.”

Pushback on clinical benefits

Talkspace is advertised to users as unlimited, “24/7” messaging therapy. “Your therapist will see your messages and respond to you throughout the day,” the company says. Therapists get a different pitch: “Set your business hours, and check in on your clients daily, five days per week.”

The company says the two messages are not in conflict. “I don’t think it’s a discrepancy in expectations,” said Rachel O’Neill, a licensed therapist at Talkspace whose title is director of clinical effectiveness. “It’s not 24/7 therapy, it’s 24/7 ability to communicate.”

Some traditional mental health professionals question the free-flowing format, saying that the benefits of therapy stem from regular, scheduled check-ins — sessions with clear beginnings and endings that help mark progress.

“It’s called the ‘frame’ in psychoanalysis. It’s the room. It’s how long the session will last. How much it will cost,” said Berkeley’s Ms. Zeavin. “Boundaries are really important to the history of therapy. If texting is equated with no boundaries, that’s a real problem.”

There has been limited study into how effective teletherapy is. Much of it either has been conducted by Talkspace itself or has involved therapy via video sessions, not just text.

“Talkspace’s No. 1 priority is quality of care for patients and driving the clinical outcomes desired by patients,” Dr. Leibowitz said. “Talkspace has conducted research in partnership with many of the top academic universities,” he said, adding that the work has yielded “10 vetted papers in peer-reviewed journals.”

Lynn Bufka, the senior director for practice transformation and quality at the American Psychological Association, or A.P.A., said the research on text-based therapy has been based on surveys of whether people find it satisfactory.

“There’s been much less research into whether there’s a clinical benefit,” Dr. Bufka said. “We would offer cautions around relying on text therapy, particularly when there is greater severity in terms of symptoms. We would urge people to seek direct care, which at this time would be by phone or video.”

In 2018, a therapists advocacy group called the Psychotherapy Action Network wrote a letter to the A.P.A. and to the Olympian Michael Phelps, who has appeared in ads for Talkspace, calling the company a “problematic treatment provider who aggressively sells an untested, risky treatment.” After receiving the letter, the A.P.A. changed its policy on therapy-tech ads and stopped letting Talkspace exhibit at conferences.

In 2019, after Talkspace signed a deal with Optum, a unit of the health care giant UnitedHealth, to provide teletherapy to its two million customers, the advocacy group wrote another letter of “alarm” to the A.P.A. Talkspace sued the group for defamation, claiming damages of $40 million. The lawsuit was dismissed for jurisdictional reasons.

“Maybe their products and services are helpful to certain people,” said Linda Michaels, a founder of the Psychotherapy Action Network. “But it’s just not therapy.”

Until 2018, the Talkspace user agreement said the same thing: “This Site Does Not Provide Therapy. It provides Therapeutic conversation with a licensed therapist.” The company has since removed the clause.

“That is very old,” Dr. Leibowitz said. “The company has evolved quite a bit.”

Mr. Lori no longer uses the Talkspace app. But he is still seeing the therapist, Ms. Brennan, whom he originally met via the platform.

“Even through this toxic company, wonderful things can happen,” he said. “It’s such a sad story in totality, of what the company could have been versus what it is.”

Susan Beachy contributed research.

[jobsearchtips02]

Coronavirus survivor shares details surrounding COVID-19 healing

Premium

Phillip Guttmann

.

2020-07-30 T20: 27: 49 Z.

.

Phillip Guttmann.

Phillip Guttmann.

This story is available exclusively to Service Expert subscribers. End Up Being an Insider and start checking out now.

Phillip Guttmann is an author, producer, and licensed therapist who resides in Los Angeles. He took a trip to New York City in March and contracted COVID-19

He remembers calling his household to state his last goodbyes prior to being put in a medically caused coma for breathing failure. He likewise recalls having scary problems while in the coma for 23 days.

Guttmann is now recovering and wants to inform others on post COVID-19 signs. His body is just now recovering from stage-four bedsores, but he suffers from extreme peripheral neuropathy (pins and needles and burning discomfort).

His biggest plea to Americans is to wear masks and practice social distancing.

This article includes images that some may find stressful.

Visit Business Expert’s homepage for more stories

I was on a work trip in New York City in between March 3 and March 14.

When my plane took off from LAX bound for JFK, I knew that people in Italy were dying and that a couple of cases had actually discovered their way to mainland U.S.A..

I was mindful of a cruise ship that was stranded with ill travelers somewhere off the Pacific coast.

I do not understand where I got it and I do not know how– and I’ll never ever know the minute of my transmission, the location, or the circumstances.

Walking around New York City, March2020

Phillip Guttmann.

I was in court spaces, in the train, in crowded bars and restaurants– I was on the relocation and hectic, working, seeing the news like the rest of America as things began to progress.

A number of days prior to I needed to fly back house to LA, I prepared to shelter in location and looked for a mask and gloves for my flight since things were getting scarier.

I landed in LA on Saturday, March 14, and for a minute I felt safe, as if I ‘d evaded a bullet.

But within 36 hours, I began feeling off: I was fatigued and had body pains. By Monday, my temperature level increased to 101.2 °. Naturally, I understood I had actually contracted COVID-19

I went into the ER that exact same day and was practically turned away– regardless of my fever and coughing– up until they learned I ‘d just left a plane from New York City 2 days previously.

They hurried me right inside after that, if that tells you anything about the state of NYC mid-March. (If you remember, New york city had been the center of the novel coronavirus.)

I can’t keep in mind taking the actual tests, however my flu test came back negative and medical professionals entered into my ER space to tell me that they thought I had COVID-19 My coronavirus test results can be found in positive a few days later on.

The next couple of days were a blur. I was admitted to a regular healthcare facility space and remember seeing the eerie blue Scientology building outside my health center window and getting flipped out (I personally discover the structure unsettling).

The Scientology structure beyond my hospital window.

Phillip Guttmann.

I remember a nurse delicately informing me that a great deal of his patients with COVID-19 were crashing and being put on ventilators. I asked if that would happen to me– I was frightened. He responded, “I sure hope not!”

I keep in mind the food. My first night in the health center I had missed dinner and was tossed a dry turkey-and-cheese sandwich in a plastic container. I consumed it, bland as it was, because I was in fact starving.

There was another night where they forgot to bring my supper. I was famished and among the nurses was kind sufficient to bring me a container of Chinese takeout food.

How could I be hungry when I was otherwise so sick and had no energy? However for the first couple of days I was. I remember there was pudding, Jell-O, graham crackers, and gleaming apple juice.

I remember some phone calls and sobbing in discomfort from coughing so hard.

And I noticeably keep in mind wanting to warn everybody on social media to use a mask and to be careful– though I do not in fact keep in mind taking my selfie and publishing it to Facebook.

The day prior to I was intubated at Hollywood Presbyterian Medical Facility on March 22,2020

Phillip Guttmann.

And I do not keep in mind much after the 3rd or 4th day.

I am told that I entered into respiratory failure on March 23, and I was rushed as much as the ICU where I was intubated and positioned into a medically induced coma.

I have no memory of being placed on the ventilator or the defining moments before. I have a worry of passing away young, or something going wrong and losing on this excellent present of life, so I’m grateful I do not keep in mind anything leading up to my coma.

I was informed later on by nurses and physicians that I was frightened in the minutes leading up to my intubation, due to the fact that I just knew the chances of making it through on a ventilator were slim.

I managed to call a couple of loved ones, and I bid farewell, as in, “I’m contacting us to say goodbye, I am being intubated and do not think I’m going to endure.” Having no memory of those moments has actually spared me extra suffering.

But I do remember the lots of problems I had on the ventilator while in a coma. One of my headaches was of my good friend putting me in a well and physically abusing me with electric shocks while I struggled for oxygen. This was one of perhaps 30 various headaches I experienced. It was pure hell, and the horrific nightmares still haunt me deeply.

I likewise remember the flashes of medical professionals and nurses coming in and out of my space and putting feeding tubes down my nose while commanding, “Swallow, Phillip, swallow!” I had to have my arms restrained since I was pulling the tubes out

I remember flashes of “Frasier” or morning news programs playing on the TELEVISION in my ICU system as makers beeped and alarms went off and turmoil happened all around me.

I remember being moved and prodded by medical workers, ordered to take deep breaths, and being asked to specify my name and open my eyes.

I remember having a hard time to breathe.

I remember being cold, being hot, hearing nurses recommending medical professionals what my vitals were. I keep in mind being naked and not caring (typically my worst problem), and other bits and pieces.

But I didn’t stress over passing away so much. I stressed over it a little, but I was mainly too tired and too sleepy.

I hallucinated and thought I might make phone calls by purchasing Siri to dial my good friends and household. I imagined that I was calling out, asking them to come rescue me.

No one came.

For 23 days, I was on that ventilator and in and out of that coma. For another 2 weeks after that, I was semi-lucid in the ICU, attached to machines and withstanding coronavirus test after test.

My IV was pumped with drugs while nurses cried to me about another patient on my floor passing away; they stated that they could not take anybody else dying.

I was rushed to the ICU, intubated and put in a medically induced coma.

Phillip Guttmann.

One night a tired nurse held my hand and thanked me for not passing away. He told me I was only the 2nd individual in the unit to come off the vent alive.

When they moved me to a step-down rehab hospital, the nurses and techs gathered and applauded and cried– someone they dealt with had in fact endured. It was a great day.

Among my nurses, Elisabeth, who was on loan from a health center in Chicago, reminded me about our agreement: “There is not ‘I can’t.’ There is only ‘I will try.'”

I decided then and there that I would attempt.

And I pursued 18 more days in another health center and I have actually attempted since May 19, the day I returned house.

In overall, I was hospitalized for 65 days– 39 days in the ICU and 23 days on the ventilator.

Over 2 months of my life was lost to medical facility beds, tubes, machines, and painful nightmares– all without seeing a single familiar face.

I have actually been preventing being active on social networks and connecting with individuals because being discharged from the medical facility. I required time to ponder what had taken place to me (and what had actually practically happened to me).

It’s lastly sunk in– but not totally. I’m still trying to cover my head around it, while likewise attempting to figure out what’s taking place in our nation right now. COVID-19 and systemic racism is a lot to be considering at the same time.

President Donald Trump and other political leaders have so much blood on their hands. They urge individuals to laugh at masks and reject bigotry exists. George Floyd was eliminated in my hometown, in Minneapolis. Where is the love and how did we ever get so divided, so negligent and so broken?

On the other hand, everyone lovingly asks “How are you?” and I’m not sure precisely how to respond to that concern.

An image of my trach website after my tracheotomy, an intrusive treatment where a cut is made in the windpipe to insert a tracheal tube. The procedure is for critically ill clients who need more time on a ventilator.

Phillip Guttmann.

I am remaining for a little while with among my buddies in San Francisco, since while I recuperate, I can’t be alone and require the support and aid.

I’m OKAY– not fantastic– however I’m hanging in there. These are the 3 things I actually wish to say to anybody who encounters my story.

1. Lots of people are already knowledgeable about COVID-19 symptoms, but there are post signs that individuals haven’t become aware of.

I have extreme peripheral neuropathy (tingling, weak point, and burning pain) in my hands, left forearm and parts of my toes. This took place since the nerves in my neck were compressed throughout my coma.

I had stage-four bedsores that are lastly healing well after more than 2 months of excruciating discomfort.

I am tired daily and have actually restricted energy that differs everyday– and while I can stroll 20 to 30 minutes at a time, I can’t run or lift weights like I did before.

The initial look at my heart is favorable, but I’m still waiting on a full summary from my physician. I’ll discover quickly if I sustained any damage to other crucial organs and the exact state of my minimized lung capacity and scar tissue (inside my lungs).

The way my pulmonologist has put it is that my lungs never ever be 100%of what they were, however that simply possibly they’ll get them to 90 or 95%over time: “Put it this way, I wouldn’t anticipate to run marathons once again.”

I never ran marathons before COVID-19, so perhaps that’s a repercussion I can cope with.

The list of other disorders that follows is akin to a long and winding roadway with limited presence on outcome. Frequently heard problems from members of online support groups (such as Survivor Corps on Facebook and Body Politik on Slack), consist of however are not restricted to:

fatigue and tiredness

pains and pains

chest tightness

shortness of breath (or, as is typically shortened, SOB)

2. Life is a present.

I am acutely knowledgeable about how close I came to being in the ground.

I am grateful– more than you can imagine– that God pulled me through and chose I wasn’t rather done. I’m grateful to be here to tell you that I love you and to live another day.

My circumstance came so close to going the other way. I marvel each day when I stroll in the park, by the ocean, and even when I hear the voice of my dad on the phone.

Life is still a present, even while at the exact same time it feels like the biggest challenge I have actually ever faced and causes me consistent pain.

3. The most important thing I wish to state is, please use a mask.

I can not express sufficiently how surreal it feels alone to be walking outside among the living, mixing in, “passing” for a “typical” and healthy person, however when I see individuals gathered on parks and walkways not using masks and disregarding social distancing standards, I want yell, ” Are you joke me ?? Do you really not get it ?? Do you not understand that the easy act of putting a fabric mask in between you and me can conserve a life, perhaps yours?”

I can’t comprehend why some Americans just refuse to acknowledge fundamental truths and refuse to put others. I thought we were better than that.

When I was 23, I remember enjoying in wonder as New Yorkers helped one another throughout 9/11 Numerous donated blood and plasma, and some experts drove hours to show up and volunteer to assist any place they were needed.

And while I see some traces of that throughout the pandemic, some individuals still decline to social distance and use masks. There are viral videos of people shouting in Walmart saying they decline to have their “freedoms and rights violated.”

As a COVID-19 survivor, this is overwhelming.

My physical therapist, Virginia Fung, is helping to lead Select Physical Treatment’s COVID-19 recovery program. Select Physical Treatment has numerous areas along the West Coast and is among the couple of physical treatment centers to provide a coronavirus healing program.

Christine Matsuda.

My appeal to Americans and anybody reading this (specifically to those who think wearing a mask is for the elderly, the infirm, or the weak) is to please take a look at the image of me in a coma and inform me that my life– or anyone’s life– isn’t worth what amounts such a tiny sacrifice, for a momentary time.

The director of the CDC, Robert Redfield, just recently stated he thinks we could greatly flatten COVID-19 in the United States if all Americans would dedicate to using a mask for the next four to 8 weeks. If you do the math, that means that by Labor Day we might turn this disaster around and conserve who knows the number of lives.

The photo of me in a coma this April is one that I never thought I would show anybody. I personally can’t stand to take a look at the picture because it advises me too much about the limitless nightmares I had while in the coma, and I really attempt not to consider them.

But if it will keep just one person safe, if my photo will make one individual unpleasant adequate to decide to use a mask, then sharing my image deserves it.

A selfie I took just recently.

Phillip Guttmann.

I’m also sharing a photo of myself from today due to the fact that this is also a story of healing and getting better, and I want to sign off with a bit of hope and gratitude. Take a look at me now and how far I have actually come considering that April.

And I’m almost myself once again. Not completely, but practically. That deserves something in an otherwise hard, unmatched time.

Phillip Guttmann is a writer, producer, and licensed therapist. He holds an MSW from New York City University and an MFA from The New School in New York, where he lived and worked between 2002 and2017 He moved to Los Angeles in 2017 to refocus on his composing profession and particularly television and movie writing. He has actually written three short movies that have actually won numerous awards. His last short film, “Black Hat,” evaluated at over 40 movie festivals worldwide including the Tribeca Movie Festival, the American Structure at the Cannes Movie Festival, Cinequest, British Film Institute, and more. It won grand reward in the 2019 Iris Prize. Follow him on Instagram and Facebook

.

Loading Something is filling.

.

Loading Something is filling.

More:

BI Prime Functions Personal Essay Thought Management

Chevron icon It shows an expandable section or menu, or often previous/ next navigation options.

.

%%.

from Job Search Tips https://jobsearchtips.net/coronavirus-survivor-shares-details-surrounding-covid-19-healing/

[bountyofbeads]

An anxious nation finally votes. Some hope that will ease divisions. Others see a permanent state of ‘trench warfare.’

By Marc Fisher | Published February 02 at 2:57 PM EST | Washington Post | Posted February 2, 2020 |

Finally, after three years of a presidency like none other, after street protests and raucous rallies, after awkward Thanksgiving dinners and broken friendships, after predictions of fractured democracy and celebrations of disrupted government, Americans will begin voting Monday.

They will vote on whether to turn away from smash-mouth politics or double down on a presidency that serves as a national blowoff valve. They will vote on whether they prefer a restoration of quieter governing or a wholesale change of the economic system. Above all, they will vote on whether they have had enough of President Trump — and what to do about the direction of a country that all sides seem to agree faces significant trouble.

When Iowa voters assemble in caucuses Monday evening to begin selecting presidential nominees, they will lead off a tightly packed parade of opportunities for Americans to state their verdict, including potentially bitter Democratic primaries culminating with the ultimate decision day on Nov. 3.

This vote feels momentous, said Chris Buskirk, publisher of American Greatness, a conservative website, because Trump supporters “hope that his reelection would finally legitimize him as president” and because the president’s opponents see one last opportunity to get rid of the man they blame for exacerbating the country’s divisions.

“But actually, I’m not optimistic that this election will solve anything,” Buskirk said. “The divisions and stresses in the country may be worse than they were three years ago. It’s almost a World War I mind-set now — it’s trench warfare and you fight and scramble and you get nowhere.”

In Iowa, for almost half a century the place where Americans begin the selection of presidents, the vote follows more than a year of intense campaigning. Ben Mowat, a 19-year-old from Colorado, chose to attend Drake University in Des Moines because he wanted to participate in the first-in-the-nation caucuses.

“It feels weird,” the freshman said. “2020 was this idea, and now it’s here.”

Mowat, a volunteer for Pete Buttigieg, the former mayor of South Bend, Ind., said he has been driven by the prospect of ejecting Trump from the White House, but his excitement is tempered by a sense of responsibility and even, sometimes, the dread of a possible loss.

“I feel guilty when I’m not knocking doors,” he said.

Katie Cameron and Susan Tille, sisters who drove more than two hours from Livermore, Iowa, to attend Trump’s rally in Des Moines on Thursday night, can’t wait to vote to assure a second term for a president they say has given the economy a healthy boost.

“He’s made a lot of positive changes,” said Tille, citing the growth in her 401(k) retirement account. “He’s done a lot of good for the economy.”

The sisters, who own a swimming pool store, want to send a message to Trump’s opponents, telling them to stop fighting his every move. Cameron, whose 2016 vote for Trump was her first after a lifetime of steering clear of politics, said she has become more politically engaged in the past three years and considers herself a member of his base. She’s no fan of some of Trump’s tweets, but she said Americans have gotten used to “how he communicates.”

By now, Frank Luntz figured that emotionally exhausted Americans would be hungry for unity, eager to embrace moderate messages and candidates who promised to find and claim common ground.

But Luntz, a longtime Republican consultant who conducts focus groups for news organizations, has been taking the temperatures of voters in Iowa, New Hampshire and other states, and he has found that “people are desperate to vote, but the center has collapsed.”

“They want the pitchfork message, not the unity message — on both sides,” he said.

“I wish I was wrong, but that fear of losing the country is deep and very emotional, on both sides,” Luntz added. “The Trump side believes the left is trying to overturn democracy, and they will fight like hell to prevent it. And the Democrats have a disdain for Donald Trump that I’ve never seen. This isn’t as bad as 1968, but it’s pretty damn bad.”

In the ’68 election, amid the Vietnam War, riots in American cities, political assassinations and a widespread sense that the country was spinning out of control, Richard Nixon won the presidency with chilling TV ads reflecting the fear of crime on dark city streets and a slogan that spoke to existential angst in the electorate: “This time, vote like your whole world depended on it.”

A similar root anxiety about the future of the country and the planet pervades many voters’ attitudes now.

Psychologists hear it from clients whether they are pro- or anti-Trump. “It is a collective anxiety and it is bipartisan,” said Washington therapist Elisabeth LaMotte. “This is not a trusting time.”

On the anti-Trump side, LaMotte sees people for whom politics is a significant driver of stress, “but it’s more complicated than that.”

“I hear much more concern about the environment and the future of the planet than I did two years ago.” she said.

In the pro-Trump camp, she said: “I hear people say they can’t talk to certain people anymore. They’re feeling isolated and frustrated, like there isn’t permission to say what you think and feel, even to close friends.”

Many people have found it necessary to step away from the political fray: They limit their news diet, avoid talking to certain friends and get involved in community activities. Others have become more politically active.

“I tell people with political anxiety to do something productive or proactive, like volunteering for a campaign,” said Jennifer Contarino Panning, a clinical psychologist in Evanston, Ill. “Voting is a crucial part of that; in 2018, I saw people find some relief in voting. It gave a sense of hope, and people are desperate for that.”

At a Buttigieg campaign event in Ankeny, Iowa, flight attendant Tamara Galeazzi, 52, could hardly wait for Monday’s caucuses.

“It’s almost like, ‘Thank God it’s almost over,’ ” she said. “Being in Iowa, we hear it from day one until the caucus. When the commercials start slowing down the day after, it’s like, ‘Thank goodness, normalcy.’ I’m nervous. Very nervous. This cannot go on for another four years. Just pick someone on our side and stick with it. It’s very nerve-racking.”

But for many people, the vote is neither a sufficient salve to the stress of the Trump era nor a big enough cudgel to break through to people on the other side of the divide.

“I work primarily with progressives and they looked to the Mueller report and the impeachment trial for some relief and then nothing changed,” Panning said. “They felt hopeless and fatigued. Now they’re really hesitant to believe in anything.”

LaMotte said her patients in Virginia, Maryland and the District have edged away from politics over the past few years, choosing instead to engage in their local communities, finding relief from the stress of national news in getting involved with a Girl Scouts group or volunteering at a neighborhood school. She sees hope in a growing resilience, even if it’s not necessarily associated with voting.

Luntz has heard little such hope. The voters he has been surveying “have weaponized grievances and are seeking revenge against the other side,” he said. “Whatever the result of the election, half the country will believe America has been saved and half will say it’s been destroyed. These two Americas do not eat together, do not play together. They say it’s too late for unity. They have simply lost trust."

Some voters who crave a unifying message fear that their fellow Americans are too frustrated or exhausted to bring about change. Austin Bayliss, 32, sees worrying signs that antipathy to Trump may not be enough to carry Democrats to victory. That recipe failed four years ago, he said, “and sometimes I feel like I’m right back there.

“What are the Democrats going to do to close the enthusiasm gap?” said Bayliss, who runs a professional wrestling company near Iowa City. “You’d think the chance to hit back at Trump would be enough, but I went to Joe Biden’s event yesterday in Muscatine, and there were 60 people there and 45 media. I was the youngest person there.”

The enthusiasm gap Bayliss worried about was palpable at Trump’s rally Thursday. Martha Ahrens, a retired court system worker who traveled to the event from Boone, Iowa, said the Democrats’ persistent attacks on Trump have bolstered her support of the president, who she said can be “arrogant” but has done well with the economy.

Like a number of others at the Trump rally, she said she’s more excited to vote this year than she was in 2016. “Everybody is so tired of everything. They’re tired of the Democrats constantly since he was elected going after him,” she said. “It’s just one thing after another, you know, instead of focusing on what they’re going to do as president.”

Rep. Abigail Spanberger, a Democrat who represents suburbs outside Richmond, unseated a conservative Republican in 2018 and spends many weekends meeting with constituents, making a particular effort to sit down with pro-Trump voters. She sees a divide so deep that one election cannot heal it.

“We used to debate ideas,” she said. “Now it’s just, ‘You think this, therefore you’re bad,’ a zero-sum game, us versus them. We’ve been moving to this place where our entertainment is disagreement.”

Nonetheless, the congresswoman believes many voters this year “want a restoration of, just, decency, just respecting people.” To get there, however, will take many one-on-one encounters, not just a political platform and a bunch of ads.

“I walked into a place and a woman started wagging her finger at me, saying, ‘I love Donald Trump,’ ” Spanberger recalled. “I said, ‘Ma’am, a lot of people do.’ She saw me and expected a fight. I don’t know that she wanted a fight, and that’s an important distinction. But I changed the tone and acknowledged what she said and she softened, and we had a really good conversation.”

The yearning for a return to a less combative politics is palpable among many Iowans who plan to attend the Democratic caucuses. Mary Amborn, 78, from Ottumwa contemplated traveling to Des Moines on Thursday to protest at the Trump rally there, but decided instead to stay closer to home and hear Biden speak at the local American Legion Hall.

Amborn, who is leaning toward voting for Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) but was still considering Sen. Amy Klobuchar (Minn.), said she’s doing well but feels compelled to vote against Trump on behalf of her 26 grandchildren and great-grandchildren, including three who served in the military and one who is a homeless veteran “who can teach college calculus but he can’t keep a home.”

“I am very, very happy,” she said. “I have a great retirement. I have wonderful medical. I worked the factory for years and years at John Deere. Now, the folks who have my job, when they retire, they will not have medical. And so I am worried about those that follow me. If I get it wrong, my 26 grandkids — they will suffer.” She wiped away tears. “I can hardly talk about it. I’m voting for them.”

After a 2016 election in which the long-standing leadership in both parties seemed out of sync with voters’ frustrations and concerns, Luntz sees a similar disconnect developing this time: “The Trump campaign seems overconfident,” he said. “Trump energizes people at his rallies but not beyond that hardcore group. They don’t understand the fatigue that some Trump voters feel. People are tired of having to defend Trump’s language.”

Luntz doesn’t see Democratic candidates clicking with voters either. “The Democratic message is so over-caffeinated against Trump that it’s overwhelming people who are already suffering from insomnia,” he said. “I have no idea what’s going to happen.”

______

Toluse Olorunnipa and Isaac Stanley-Becker in Des Moines, Cleve R. Wootson Jr. in Ottumwa, Iowa, and Chelsea Janes in Ankeny, Iowa, contributed to this report.

*********

The Trailer: 'Beat Trump': The Democrats' closing arguments in Iowa

By David Weigel | Published February 02 at 5:42 PM EST | Washington Post | Posted February 2, 2020 |

In this edition: The closing messages in Iowa, the anti-Trump Republicans on the trail, and how 2004 made the modern caucuses.

The real Des Moines Register poll was the friends we made along the way, and this is The Trailer.

DES MOINES — Bernie Sanders has been selling “Bernie Beats Trump” swag for months. Joe Biden's final ads close with four words: “Vote Biden, Beat Trump.” Amy Klobuchar's caucus night T-shirts take a little longer to say it: “Amy Klobuchar will defeat Donald Trump.”

And Andrew Yang makes his closing pitch with math.

“I am the heaviest betting favorite to defeat Donald Trump in a head-to-head matchup of anyone in the field,” Yang said at a Saturday night rally that packed more than a thousand voters and canvassers into the Des Moines Marriott. “I am at 3 to 2 as a head-to-head favorite against Donald Trump. The next-best candidate is even money. I'm not much of a gambler myself, despite the Asian-ness.”

In the final hours before caucus doors open, the seven Democrats actively campaigning in Iowa here have started to converge on one theme — electability — while putting together very different closing arguments.

Their advertising, which ignored the president for most of last year, now puts him or his voters front and center. Their rallies, where voters jostle for space with tourists and journalists, sketch out the reasons they could put together a coalition that unseats the president. Here's what it looks like inside the final campaign events before the caucuses, with the candidates listed by the irresistible (and sometimes deceiving) metric of crowd size.

Bernie Sanders. Visibly frustrated at how the impeachment trial grounded him in Washington, Sanders has filled his schedule with rallies before a few hundred people and with hours-long concert/teach-in events that have pulled out at least 5,000 people in total, easily the biggest crowds of the caucuses.

At a Friday night concert in Des Moines with Bon Iver, Sanders called in with a version of his stump speech; at a Saturday night concert in Cedar Rapids, he delivered it live. “The reason we are going to win the Democratic nomination is because we are a campaign of us, not me,” he said, starting in on the agenda he'd run on since 2015: “single-payer Medicare-for-all,” tuition-free public college, criminal justice reform, an end to the drug war, and the rest.

Sanders hardly mentions Trump at all, referring briefly to the president as a “pathological liar” who can be defeated with “high voter turnout.” The only reference to the issues around the impeachment is a quick condemnation of a president who “does not believe in the separation of powers.” Trump returns to the stump only when Sanders needs to make a point about how affordable a democratic socialist agenda would be.

“If Donald Trump and his friends can give a trillion dollars in tax breaks to large corporations and the top 1 percent, we can cancel all student debt in America,” he said in Cedar Rapids. The message: He can win the election in a walk so long as he gets the nomination.

Pete Buttigieg. The phenom from South Bend, Ind., has consistently portrayed the president as a “symptom” of America's problems; as a result, Trump gets only some cameo roles at Buttigieg events. Buttigieg still asks crowds to imagine the day when Trump is finally gone (an instant applause line) but spends more time arguing against the Democrats polling closest to him, with Joe Biden “trying to meet fundamentally new challenges with a familiar playbook” and Sanders promising “revolution” without a Plan B.

Buttigieg describes a country that is moving inexorably toward liberalism and progress and gets some of his loudest applause when he thanks Iowa for making it possible for him to wear a wedding ring, evoking the state Supreme Court's legalization of same-sex marriage. Democrats win, he says, when they roll the dice and go for what they actually want.

“Every single time my party has won the White House in the last half-century, it's been with a candidate who was looking to the future, who was not associated with Washington, either didn't have an office there or hadn't had one for very long, and was opening a door to a new generation,” Buttigieg said on CBS on Sunday morning.

Elizabeth Warren. In November, Warren changed her stump speech, slicing it down and leaving more time for questions. In January, she changed her ad campaign, emphasizing her support from former Republicans and from Democrats who backed either Sanders or Hillary Clinton in 2016. Over the weekend, signs that read “Unite the Party” materialized at Warren's events, turning her subtext into … well, text.

But Warren speaks even less about Trump than Buttigieg or Sanders, spending most of her time using questions to accentuate the agenda she'd bring to the executive branch. There's an increased emphasis on how electing her could make history, the first female president, finishing the business Democrats thought they were finishing in November 2016.

“I will do everything a president can do — I love saying this! — all by herself on her very first day,” Warren said on Sunday in Cedar Rapids.

Warren does not mention specific polling unless pressed, when she will point out that the wealth tax, the idea that powered her rise, is popular with Republicans.

Andrew Yang. The candidate with the least political experience in this race has become one of its most consistent political speakers, with jokes that falter only if the crowd is too familiar with him. Yang used to be able to ask the crowd if they've ever “heard a politician talk about the Fourth Industrial Revolution,” but at this point, they have. (The punchline was: “Just now, and I'm barely a politician.”)

Yang is exuberant, describing a coming Iowa victory that no pollster sees as possible and reciting poll numbers about his crossover appeal to say that he can win more Trump voters than any Democratic rival. Yang is also perhaps the grimmest candidate, describing the economic problems that enabled a Trump win in the first place.

“We're being told how great things are all of the time,” Yang said in Des Moines on Saturday. “Record high GDP, record high stock market prices, record low unemployment. But we're looking around and thinking, I'm not sure things are actually that great. And we are right. We have record high corporate profits in this country, yes, but what else are at record highs in the United States of America right now? Suicides. Depression. Overdoses. Income inequality. Homelessness. Debt, student loan debt, medical debt. Anxiety.

Joe Biden. There are two types of Biden speeches: the ones that rely on a script, and the ones where he largely wings it. The closing days have relied on a more spontaneous Biden, who talks more and more about Trump's outrages and implies that if voters select another Democratic candidate, it would risk reelecting him.

“I don't think you've ever had a greater responsibility than you have this time, not because I'm on the ballot,” Biden said on Saturday in Cedar Rapids. “You owe it to the country to make sure that Donald Trump is not the next president of the United States.”

No Democrat spends more time on the stump warning about Trump as the only impediment to a Democratic Party agenda. There are mournful Trump references, as when Biden recalls the scenes from the 2017 “Unite the Right” march of white supremacists on Charlottesville. “Close your eyes and remember what you saw on television,” Biden says. There are fiery Trump references, such as when Biden refers to a card he carries, detailing the total of military casualties in Afghanistan (“Not roughly 6,000, but 6,095!"), a way of calling the president callow.

Amy Klobuchar. The senator from Minnesota is getting the biggest crowds of her year-long campaign, and she will say so, taking her time on the way to her microphone to work the audience, before being introduced as the Republican-slayer from up north.

“All she does is win,” said Minnesota Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan, one of the surrogates who had campaigned for Klobuchar during the bulk of the Senate trial, then rejoined her on the trail.

The Klobuchar stump is long, usually running to 35 minutes, and starts with a rundown of her many legislative endorsements and often ends by detailing just how she won her races.

“I am someone that has won every race, every place, every time,” she said Saturday in Cedar Falls. “I have won in the most rural districts, including the one bordering Iowa, by big margins. I have won the one bordering North and South Dakota in big margins. I have won in the north part of Minnesota, where there's currently a Republican congressman, and I have won in Michele Bachmann's district.”

Klobuchar makes no references to her rivals and only gently refers to how some of them have plans that might not ever get passed. Trump appears intermittently, and Klobuchar finishes talking about him by warning that the Democrats of 2016 “had a great message but chased him down every rabbit hole.” One year after declaring her candidacy during a snowstorm, she still recalls her Twitter comeback to Trump: “I'd like to see how your hair fares in a blizzard.”

Tom Steyer. An underappreciated irony of the caucuses is that Steyer, who spent years campaigning for Trump's impeachment, saw it unfold just in time to bury presidential campaigns — his included. He, too, has “Beat Trump” signs, leading the field in conciseness. He, too, has a campaign bus, which has crisscrossed the state even as polls show him doing much better in Nevada and South Carolina.

Steyer draws the smallest crowds of the candidates still in Iowa, but voters do show up and settle in for town halls that stretch to an hour long. On Sunday night, in Waterloo, he took questions about climate change (his “number one priority”), the electoral college, infrastructure and student loan debt. That last question led him into a story about lobbying in California for a bill to crack down on companies that exploit students with debt and finding that legislators viewed it cynically.

“I walked in for a meeting, and I said, I'm here for a Bill of Rights for students,” Steyer says. “And this senator goes: 'Do you care about this?'" Steyer recreated his dumbfounded look. “Do I care about giving my students far more money so that they can get an education and be more productive people and better citizens? Come on! Who doesn't care about that?”

Steyer's electability pitch is unique, an argument that only a candidate who has succeeded in business and never been tied to Washington can effectively compete with him. Iowa might not be the state where he proves that.

*********

Democratic presidential candidates make final push to rally a skittish, and largely undecided, Iowa electorate

By Matt Viser and Dan Balz | Published

Feb 01 at 11:02 PM EST | Washington Post | Posted February 2, 2020 |

DES MOINES — The Democratic presidential candidates returned to Iowa in full force Saturday, using a brief break from impeachment proceedings to rally supporters ahead of Monday's caucuses with renewed pitches to an electorate that remains highly skittish and deeply undecided.

Joe Biden used his closing argument to present himself as the safest choice for voters worried most about finding a nominee who can defeat President Trump. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), who like other senators in the race had been stuck in Washington until this weekend for the impeachment trial, made an explicit appeal to women — and pitched herself as the one who can, as signs behind her read, “Unite the Party.”

Pete Buttigieg’s campaign tried to rally the party behind his call for generational change, while Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), using weekend concerts and rallies, sought to mobilize what many strategists here consider to be an army of dedicated supporters.

Several of the candidates played to overflow crowds, a contrast to earlier in the week when the absence of the senators damped the energy normally associated with the final days.

Virtually every campaign has come to predict privately that Sanders could turn out more people on Monday night than any other candidate. Due to the arcane rules of the Iowa caucus system, his rivals hope they can overcome that advantage when the final delegate counts are tallied.

“I think it’s going to be a cluster,” Biden said in an interview after an event late in the week. “It’ll be relatively close, you know, probably three of us that are fairly close.”

Biden and Sanders have been at the top of most polls in Iowa this month. But Democrats hoping for more clarity got a unwelcome surprise Saturday night when the Des Moines Register, CNN and Selzer & Co. pulled back from the much-anticipated release of the results from the final Iowa poll, long considered the most reliable pre-caucus snapshot.

The decision, which added to the chaos and uncertainty in the final days, came after the Buttigieg campaign alerted those overseeing the poll that his name was left off of the list of candidates read by one of the interviewers, according to a person familiar with the problem who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

With Sanders appearing to surge in recent weeks, all of his rivals were eagerly working to manage expectations. Some close to Warren said privately that the fight was now for a second-place finish. Those in Buttigieg’s camp say they believe finishing ahead of Biden would provide the springboard they need for future contests, both to build support and to reload their campaign war chest.

“It’s so tight that we just got to keep our heads down and maintain a kind of an underdog mentality all the way through,” the former mayor of South Bend, Ind., said in an interview. When pressed about what expectations he needed to exceed, he demurred, but did say, “We’re in it to win it.”

The hunger to defeat Trump — and the likelihood the Senate will vote to acquit him this week — has had the effect of leaving many voters immobilized, creating an unusually large undecided pool and injecting more than the usual uncertainty over how the coming days will play out.

Among the overriding questions still hovering at the start of what could be a long fight for the nomination is whether the continued indecision will dampen participation Monday. Earlier predictions for record turnout have been scaled back in the past weeks.

The caucuses Monday night will be the culmination of more than a year of campaigning and a steady churn of candidates entering and exiting. Collectively, the campaigns have spent $70 million on TV ads here. When they are done, Iowans will have played their traditional role of stress-testing — and winnowing — what had been a historically large and diverse field.

While the party over the past three years has struggled to answer a basic question — How do you beat Trump? — the results here will offer the first moment of clarity. It is a test of whether the party wants to move toward candidates preaching bold and unsettled change that would bring a Democratic revolution to counter Trump’s Republican one, or whether the party wants a more traditional, return-to-normalcy nominee who would run on more kitchen-table, uncontroversial issues.

In what is the starting gun for a sprint toward contests that will grow more and more costly — and with Mike Bloomberg pouring hundreds of millions of his own money into the race — several campaigns are in dire need of a win that could fuel donations into campaign accounts that have dwindled.

The contest has been largely free of the kind of negative campaigning that has marked other years, but that hasn’t eliminated sniping. Top advisers to Buttigieg on Saturday morning went after Biden, suggesting that his long career in Washington would be a detriment to the party’s ability to defeat Trump if the former vice president is the nominee.

“The idea that we are going to take on someone like Donald Trump with the old playbook by saying I understand the ways of Washington, I hung out with Strom Thurmond, you know, 20 years ago — that’s not going to happen,” Lis Smith, a senior Buttigieg adviser, told reporters during a breakfast hosted by Bloomberg News.

Mike Schmuhl, the campaign manager, later jumped in with another data point.

“Since World War II, our party has nominated three vice presidents. They’ve all lost,” he said. “Our party goes for youthful, visionary, next-generation leaders.”

Warren has had a prized organization in the state — along with several late, sought-after endorsements — but has also fallen in recent polls as others have cut into different parts of her base. She is competing with Buttigieg for college-educated voters, with Sanders for liberal voters and with Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) for voters eager to see a woman as the nominee.

Ahead of Warren’s event Saturday in Iowa City, a group of elected officials tried to lead the crowd in a chant: “It’s time! It’s time! It’s time for a woman in the White House!”

Warren has generally avoided questions about how she might do in Iowa. But her campaign manager Roger Lau recently sent out a memo warning of the “breathless media narratives” likely to emerge from the early states and focusing on their 1,000-strong staff fanned out in 31 states.

Klobuchar has cast herself as a not-too-hot, not-too-cold candidate who can appeal to a wide swath of the party. But what is unknown is whether the fact that she, along with Warren and Sanders, had to be in Washington during the final week of campaigning had hindered her ability to capi­tal­ize on the fresh look many were giving her.

Entrepreneur Andrew Yang and businessman Tom Steyer have each averaged around 4 percent in the polls, which would put them below the 15 percent viability threshold. But their supporters could play a significant role in determining the night’s final outcome if they switched to another candidate on the second tally.

With concern bubbling among establishment Democrats over whether Iowa could launch Sanders forward with momentum, the party was caught up Saturday in a replay of 2016 tensions between Sanders and Hillary Clinton.

After Clinton again criticized Sanders, Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), a top Sanders surrogate, playfully urged a crowd to boo Clinton during a rally on Friday night. But in yet another sign of the skittishness of most campaigns to get into a bitter brawl, Tlaib apologized Saturday and Sanders emphasized that he would support whoever the nominee is.

Sanders’s campaign advisers say they have identified as many supporters who are coming to caucus Monday, in a crowded field with at least five competitive candidates, as came to caucus for him in 2016, when it was essentially a two-person race. They are banking on a large turnout among young voters, and those who typically don’t participate in local politics.

“They have not engaged with the party structure,” said Kurt Meyer, chairman of the Democratic Party in three rural counties. “Maybe that is a great leap forward. Maybe they know something the rest of us don’t and they’ll get an additional 10 or 20 or 30 percent who have never caucused before to magically show up. But I honestly don’t know who my Sanders organizer is.”

Warren grew a bit nostalgic as she returned to Iowa, reminiscing about all of her previous trips. “You’ve whispered dreams into my ears, you’ve told me about your lives, about issues, about ideas, about how we could make things better,” she said in Cedar Rapids. “In this year you have made me a better candidate, and you will make me a better president. Thank you.”

Unlike past campaign stops, Warren did not stay around for a photo line, instead leaving her dog Bailey behind to appear in pictures with supporters.

The caucuses are the first major test of whether Biden’s claims of electability will draw voters to his candidacy. While his events can feel lethargic and with crowds smaller than for other candidates, his campaign advisers have been banking on the goodwill he has built up over nearly five decades in public life.

Asked in an interview about the seeming lack of enthusiasm at his events and whether that worries him, Biden said: “I don’t get a sense of that at all. . . . We spent a lot of time in a lot of small venues, deliberately going to make sure we cover rural Iowa.”

Former Iowa governor Tom Vilsack said Biden is a known commodity and that Iowans who support him don’t feel the need to come to Biden’s rallies but will be there on caucus night. It is a mistake, he said, to assume that “there’s a direct parallel between enthusiastic rallies and turnout and results.”

His campaign organization has also been a frequent topic among Iowa operatives and county chairs, who say it has lacked the kind of vigor needed in a caucus system that rewards passion and organization more than it does widespread but thinner support.

The coalition Biden is trying to assemble includes voters over age 50, blue-collar households, veterans, African Americans, Latinos and Catholics. His campaign is running specific programs focusing each group, based on lists developed from voter files, property tax rolls and other sources.

Because many people no longer answer their telephones unless they recognize the caller’s number, the campaign has put extra emphasis on sending volunteers and paid canvassers to people’s homes.

The decision to hire paid canvassers — offering $20 per hour for the last two weeks — raised eyebrows among some of Biden’s rivals, who took it as a sign of weakness in the organization. But campaign officials say they believe the additional help has allowed them to get into as many neighborhoods as possible and during days of inclement weather.

Although Monday night’s weather is expected to be brisk with no snow in the forecast, it remains to be seen if turnout will be historically high.

While some still predict it could match or exceed the 240,000 who turned out in 2008, others say it is likely to fall between that number and the 171,000 who attended in 2016.

Just who would benefit from a low turnout is a matter of some debate.

Biden’s candidacy tends to attract traditional caucus-goers who might have the added incentive to participate this year because of their desire to defeat Trump in November.

But a lower turnout could give the advantage to candidates who have attracted newcomers, such as Sanders, or who are generating real enthusiasm at rallies.

The campaigns have been preparing for what could be a confusing night of potentially conflicting results, and multiple candidates seeking to shape a public impression that they scored a symbolic victory if not a numerical one.

The state party will report three numbers on caucus night. The first will be the number of people who show up for each candidate. The next two will reflect results after supporters of candidates who do not meet the 15 percent threshold in a precinct realign to support another candidate.

There will be two measures of that realignment, first the raw number of people in support of the remaining viable candidates and then how that translates into delegates — or, as they will be called Monday, state delegate equivalents. Those two numbers should track relatively closely but there could be a notable difference between the entrance percentages and the delegate percentages.

For several candidates — particularly Buttigieg, Klobuchar and Warren — a bad finish could be devastating. It could also begin to clarify the question of whether the campaign is headed toward a long, divisive primary or whether it could conclude more swiftly. The candidates will quickly head to New Hampshire, where there will be an eight-day sprint that includes a Friday debate.

Biden, amid growing concerns that he is having more difficulty raising money, has bought or reserved only $215,000 in New Hampshire, according to Advertising Analytics, which puts him at a fraction of his rivals. His allies are hoping a strong showing in Iowa could trigger a rush of donations, but even then there is some debate over how heavily he will focus on a state that Sanders carried handily four years ago and that neighbors Warren’s home state of Massachusetts.

There have been private deliberations among those leading Biden’s super PAC over how heavily to concentrate on New Hampshire and whether to instead pour resources into Nevada, the next state on the calendar.

But any decision is dependent on what happens in Iowa on Monday night.

______

Annie Linskey contributed to this report.

*********

[teeky185]

Bloom, representing two alleged victims of financier, says being a survivor ‘has enabled me to have a lot of compassion’Lisa Bloom in London, on 8 May 2017. Photograph: Tom Nicholson/REX/ShutterstockLisa Bloom, the powerhouse lawyer who has risen to prominence in the MeToo era, has spoken of suffering sexual abuse herself.The experience, she said, left her feeling suicidal.“I blamed myself,” Bloom told the Guardian. “I thought it was my fault. I had no idea who to talk to, or what to say.”At the age of 18, she said, she found her way to a therapist.“I think experience as an abuse survivor has enabled me to have a lot of compassion and understanding for my clients,” she said. “I know everything they’re going through because I’ve gone through it myself.“I understand the shame and fear, but I also understand how empowering and liberating it is to tell your story. I tell my clients ‘this happened to you, but it does not define you.’”In recent years, Bloom and her mother and fellow attorney Gloria Allred have stood prominently counter to a parade of mostly white, middle-aged and famous men accused of sexual misconduct.Both are media-savvy practitioners of the law of women’s rights. Both are veterans of the courtroom and press-call soundbite. Both have, in one way or another, stood against the crimes or alleged but uncharged conduct of Bill Cosby, Harvey Weinstein, Jeffrey Epstein, Les Moonves, Roger Ailes, Charlie Rose and Donald Trump.In an email to the Guardian, Bloom named her alleged abuser. The Guardian was however not immediately able to contact the man for comment.“I don’t know if he is still alive,” Bloom wrote, in part. “I assume so. I have spoken about being sexually assaulted/abused but I have not named him before publicly.” ‘A good measure of justice’Amid a slew of MeToo cases, Allred and Bloom have remained prominent. Where there is no criminal case, often because the statute of limitations has expired, there is still the court of public opinion. There is a news conference to name the alleged perpetrator, followed by relentless media coverage. Eventually the scales tip, advertisers are spooked and, in the case of many media figures, corporations are forced to act.A case in point was Bloom’s takedown of the Fox News host Bill O’Reilly.“He would never talk to her, not even hello, except to grunt at her like a wild boar,” Bloom told the Hollywood Reporter, recounting the claims of an African American Fox staffer. “He would leer at her. He would always do this when no one else was around and she was scared.”> We still have an opportunity in the civil system, and that is to demand full and fair compensation for Epstein's victimsFor Bloom, “Operation O’Reilly” culminated when she said the nickname her client said O’Reilly gave her: “Hot Chocolate”. Amid a deluge of reports of settled sexual harassment suits, TV’s most feared pro-Trumper was toast.Bloom is now representing two alleged victims of Epstein, the financier and convicted sex offender who was friends with the rich and powerful but who killed himself in a Manhattan jail two weeks ago.Speaking in New York during her lunch break on Friday – from litigating, she said, a sexual harassment case she was confident would result in multimillion-dollar judgement – Bloom said her mission in representing the alleged Epstein victims was “to deliver justice that was denied when jail authorities allowed Epstein to kill himself”.Bloom has filed suit against Epstein’s estate and an alleged co-conspirator, named in court documents as Sue Roe. The suit alleges that two hostesses at the Coffee Shop in New York City’s Union Square were approached regarding “opportunities” to “perform what they thought were massages on [Epstein] for cash payments”.Unbeknown to the women, the suit says, the financier went on to “sexually touch” them “against their will and force them to watch him masturbate”.Epstein’s death, Bloom says, meant the women “were denied accountability in the criminal justice system. But we still have an opportunity in the civil system, and that is to demand full and fair compensation for his victims from his estate.”Money, she said, “is a good measure of justice in many ways”.“It makes a big difference. It’s a deterrent for people who do bad things and it can help victims get therapy, pay medical bills, go back to school, pay off debt and start a new life. It’s very meaningful to to them.”Epstein faced federal charges more than a decade ago but in a controversial deal pleaded guilty to a lesser state charge in Florida and was permitted to serve a 13-month sentence in which he spent six days out of seven at his office. It now appears he continued to receive visits from young women. His sentence completed, he returned to public life, largely unscathed.For offenders who enjoy the protective cocoon of extreme wealth, Bloom reasons, the only thing that really makes a difference is a loss of privilege.“Power corrupts and extreme wealth corrupts,” she said. “Wealthy people believe they are above the law because in many cases they are above the law. Look at Jeffrey Epstein. He got away with this for years. He had a system of recruiters to bring underage girls to him. Anytime a predator gets away with this, they feel impervious to legal consequences.” ‘Represent the underdogs’Bloom’s initiation into the world of women’s rights and the law came through her mother, an attorney who achieved celebrity herself. Among her high-profile cases, Allred was the first woman to challenge the Friars Club of Beverly Hills, because she was denied certain benefits of membership. She also sued the archdiocese of Los Angeles over sexual abuse by Catholic priests and represented the family of Nicole Brown Simpson, the murdered ex-wife of OJ Simpson.Lisa Bloom and Janice Dickinson announce a settlement in their defamation lawsuit against Bill Cosby in Woodland Hills, California, on 25 July. Photograph: Frederick M Brown/Getty ImagesBloom attended Yale Law School, she has said, because she “wanted to represent the underdogs”. She and her mother have worked well together: they were once profiled in W magazine under the headline “Defenders of Women in 2017”.Bloom’s practice is now 100% for the victims of sexual misconduct and she has given up representing accused men. That decision came after she found herself on the wrong side of the Weinstein story.While her mother took on two of Weinstein’s alleged victims, in initial stages of the case Bloom advised the accused. It was a surprising choice: Weinstein had optioned her book about the slain Florida teen Trayvon Martin.> The pendulum needs to keep swinging … because we’ve been living through an epidemic of sexual harassment and assault> > Lisa BloomBloom initially defended her work, saying the former Hollywood producer was trying to change his ways.Now, she said: “The problem was that Harvey Weinstein ended up being about a great deal more than inappropriate language. When the first woman accused him of sexual assault I was out of there. When the deluge came, I just felt mortified I’d ever associated with him.”Some suggest famous men accused of sexual misconduct have lost the right to clear their name, given the highly public cases of Weinstein, O’Reilly, Ailes, Cosby and others.Bloom recognizes that men have been going through their own awakening to the realities of sexual harassment. But she doesn’t believe the pendulum has swung too far.“The pendulum needs to keep swinging in favor of women because we’ve been living through an epidemic of sexual harassment and assault,” she said. “I believe the MeToo movement is long overdue and profoundly important.”Ultimately, she said, it’s a question of due process, of going to court and trying cases there.“I love being in that environment where there has to be evidence and witnesses,” she said, “not just people swinging allegations back and forth. The brave women who are standing up now are sending a message to predators that their day of reckoning is coming.”

from Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines https://ift.tt/2KUb14Q