Today's words - intersectionality and neurodivergent
For decades, radical and intersectional feminists have assured us that it's impossible to be sexist toward men because we live in a patriarchal society. Well, the American Psychological Association (APA) is working hard to prove those feminists wrong.
A few years ago, the
APA released practice guidelines for therapy with men and boys. An APA press release on the new guidelines made clear just what those guidelines amounted to: an assault on traditional men and boys.
"They draw on more than 40 years of research showing that traditional masculinity is psychologically harmful and that socializing boys to suppress their emotions causes damage," reads the press release. "The main thrust of the subsequent research is that traditional masculinity—marked by stoicism, competitiveness, dominance and aggression—is, on the whole, harmful."
The guidelines go on to explore this harmfulness, claiming that "conforming to traditional masculinity ideology has been shown to limit males' psychological development, constrain their behavior, result in gender role strain and gender role conflict, and negatively influence mental health and physical health." Traditional masculinity leads to violence, the guidelines claim. "An analysis of masculine norms may shed light on the context of violence against gender and sexually diverse people, as spaces where this discrimination occurs are often marked by traditional masculinity," the authors write. To correct for this, the guidelines recommend that "when working with boys and men, psychologists can address issues of privilege and power related to sexism in a developmentally appropriate way to help them obtain the knowledge, attitudes, and skills to be effective allies and potentially live less restrictive lives."
...
The authors of the guidelines are uniformly focused on the social construction of gender, ignoring biological inputs to both sex and gender identity. But even worse in my opinion, the APA's report is clearly disparaging of traditional men and their families, linking traditional, masculine values to an entire suite of negative mental and physical health outcomes—with no real scientific rationale.
Indeed, it was politics that motivated these conclusions. The guidelines were written from a radical, intersectional perspective. And this isn't my subjective opinion. In conversations I had with most of the authors, they acknowledged as much. "While the Guidelines were drafted by about 30 psychologists over a 13-year period, your comment about its emphasis on intersectionality is on target," one told me. "It is accurate to say that intersectionality over time emerged as a good way to frame understanding and accessing the multiple intersectional identities of boys and men," another admitted.
https://www.newsweek.com/american-psychological-association-waging-war-men-boys-opinion-1744998The sciences, especially social sciences, are highly politicised without acknowledging their political motivations. They are programmatic, not objective or disinterested, without revealing their persistent and pervasive sleight of hand.
This is just one example.
