Supervision?

-

I'm sitting in the library, a notebook, mango juice - just eaten my supermarket sandwich before I go back to work . I was trying to draw a mind map, to gather my thoughts. But I think writing here will help me to clarify...

I'm very aware that complaints don't work out well for the person who complains. Recently a friend of mine walked out of her job. She had made a complaint about the behaviour of a male colleague - and her complaint was substantiated by other members of staff, but when she spoke about this with her practice manager things did not go well. She left her job. He got promotion. How this happened is so far inexplicable! Enough to say that she felt bullied and undermined by the complaints procedure itself. She felt that her conduct was instantly the focus of the complaint rather than the conduct of the person that she had complained about. 

How did that happen?

She felt 'as if the attack dogs had been released' and so she ran...

It looks like ignoring is safest, wisest, basically though it is self protection. But Kit's transgressive behaviour - even though it was mild and almost innocuous isn't something I can ignore. I experienced it viscerally, it felt like the ground vanished and I was bathed in flames. 

And I wanted more. 

This isn't therapy. 

Unless if you think being shot through with heroin is therapy?

It certainly made me feel a thousand times better. But the effect of withdrawal can be lethal, worse than the pain it took away. Withdrawal from Kit took me to a very bad place.

I remain very clear that if Kit's transgressions had come from a desire for me, I would have put his words into a context that preserves my respect for him. The image is of a salamander (alchemy) I lived in the flames. But if his transgression was light and flippant, throw away, if it was mindless and empty, then his level of communication is jarring and deeply insulting.

The opposite experience is when transgression comes from a knowing, intelligent and powerful place. This is key to BDSM. And the difference is? There is no disowning of intent. No pretending it isn't happening. It is heavy duty, and both people consent. There are protocols for the beginning, middle and ending of the scene. In fact calling it a scene is an incredibly important first step into liminal space.

I don't know if Kit was aware of what he did? 

Oh for goodness sake!

So...so I guess this, or some of it at least has to go to supervision. What makes me hesitant is that I still feel like I'm to blame, that my conduct was out of order, that 'I led him on' (!) and I'm responsible for his comments...Kit is the only subject I can't talk to my supervisor about, yet. The problem is me not my supervisor for sure. I've spoken with him about some really sensitive issues before and I trust him completely. But I still don't trust myself as far as this whole Kit thing is concerned...it is still all my fault, my contrary, my tangential.

Supervision is tomorrow...

Popular posts from this blog

Hope beyond despair.

-
Image
Well here we are.  And I have managed to avoid this book for over a year. I bought it way back, it accompanied me when I did my training in conflict resolution, May 2024.  I tried to read it. Simply couldn't do it. A year and six months later here I am. Dinner time. Tesco sandwiches . Library. Fortunately only three cases this afternoon because yet again something I've seen, heard, read, to do with 'erotic transfer ' has filled my eyes with tears. I am angry, saddened, I think the aim of true person centred therapy is awesome actually. But, it hurts me to read... Brian Thorne describes an experience of therapy that echoes my experience of ' The man of stars '. That when both people are vitally present, vulnerable, open, there is access to an almost external dimension of healing.  I don't have much time to write. But in the final chapters Brian describes his therapeutic relationship with Emma, how he fearlessly allowed himself to be completely honest with h...
Read more

Time.

-
Image
It has taken me four years to get enough distance on what happened to me, to begin to make sense of it. The importance of this is, now I know from the inside that it is unreasonable to think that victims instantly seek justice, or that they will be able to identify, name or explain what happened to them, straight away. The greater the impact of the emotional disturbance, the greater their bewilderment, shock and desire to just hide away. And making sense of it? Sometimes it takes decades. Sometimes it is never. It took me years to name the cause of the harm done to me during therapy as epistemic injustice. The inequality of power underlying the withholding of information was a real problem. The therapist and I both suffered because of it. But I was also risking my life. My need for him to see and hear me was so great. I felt threatened each time he became tight lipped. Each time he said 'this isn't working' it was as if acid had been poured over me. I imagine that he w...
Read more

Neutrality.

-
Image
Non engagement , 'keeping one's dignity' in the face of outrageous adversity, not ' feeding the trolls ', keeping your head held high, and 'not letting the b******s grind you down, are each a time honoured strategy used to maintain one's power.  Except it turns up as a client struggling with self attack and self abandoning . Silencing oneself because it is supposed to control others, often comes from anger. A feeling of anger indicates a need to protect oneself, playing dead - avoiding/disengaging - is a serious level of autonomic (dorsal vagal) affect.  As an off the shelf answer it is avoiding your answer. Silence as a strategy to control others is a cold anger portrayed in movies as strength, yet it so often contains contempt, and it is dehumanising... I don't see strength there. I see a mouse overwhelmed by fear and paralysed, but not running away when fight flight (self protection) kicks in.  Silence, a paralysis framed as neutrality, isn't ne...
Read more