Beware the Ideologues in Psychologists' Clothing
The American Psychological Association (APA) recently released their Guidelines for Psychological Practice with Boys and Men (paralleling, in principle, their 2007 guidelines for girls and women).
It manages to be simultaneously predictable, reprehensible, infuriating and disheartening - no mean feat for a single document. Make no mistake about it: this document constitutes an all-out assault on masculinity, as such - or, to put it even more bluntly, on men. The coup of the APA undertaken by the ideologues and the second-raters is now complete. The field has been compromised, perhaps fatally. And the unforgivable Guidelines provides sufficient but by no means exhaustive evidence of that. The document opens with a series of terminological definitions. These serve perfectly to indicate the nature of the ideological substructure that constitutes the true motivation of the writers. Only a small number of words or phrases were chosen for definition, which means that it is those words that are of prime import. The intent is that the Guideline's readers will understand, assimilate and come to regard as self-evident the conceptual structure that both selected the words and defined them - and these, by the way, could not possibly be clearer indicators of the post-modern/victimhood ideology.
Here are the words and phrases: Gender, Cisgender, Gender Bias, Gender Role Strain, Masculinity Ideology, Gender Role Conflict, Oppression, Privilege, Psychological Practice, and Gender Sensitive. These are all presented, along with their interpretations and definitions (available here for your detailed perusal:
https://bit.ly/2Miaj05). Here's two, just for the flavor:
Comment: Also see: Stoicism is needed more than ever: A response to the APA's distortion of masculinity