With statements such as -
"my mission is to fill in some of the gaps between these groups, discuss certain controversial topics, allow members to have a better understanding of what has been said and the context of these discussions, then maybe their opinions of certain people and groups for that matter will be a little less biased."
"what I plan to do is a build the bridge between groups, expose those people who jump from group to group and bad mouth people, the ones that create drama where drama isn’t found"...... "I do intend to provide enough information for those involved to be able to work out what is going on."
Does anyone else find this a little patronising? Seems we are all apparently so misguided that we actually have no real idea as to what is going on in the Facebook groups we are in. Or worse! we are actually that insanely clueless, that we have no idea that we in fact, had no idea!
Forgive me if I am wrong but I am fairly certain that no matter what is posted in this therapy blog it's not going to change peoples opinions of certain other people. You can psychoanalyze all you like. The fact is the words on Facebook are sometimes written one way and read another. People will read stuff exactly the way they want to read it and interpret it exactly the way they want to. Just as I have read the therapy blog and am now interpreting it. (which by the way seems I am not the only one that has come to some of the same conclusions).
An example of something being written and how it was turned into something else. Some got all twisted up inside about a comment in a group hoping a certain someone would get raped by a baseball bat covered in barb wire. Now when i read that originally I thought "OH DEAR!! that's a little violent." o_O <---(thats me, wide eyed and shocked). But knowing the background of what had happened, after my inital shock and slight disgust I did understand her anger and my commonsense kicks in and tells me that it was a heat of the moment comment. I don't agree with it. I wouldn't ever write such things myself. BUT that doesn't mean I can't be empathetic to her situation and reasoning behind it. Now for those that appear to be lacking in the commonsense department and want to judge
The definition of threat = "a declaration of an intention or determination to inflict punishment, injury, etc., in retaliation for, or conditionally upon, some action or course"There was no declaration or obvious intent in the words written in that post. Hoping for something is not threatening. And if i remember the post correctly she was big enough to admit that she had gone to far with the wording and rephrased it.
So what we learn from situations as above is princesses need to calm themselves, read the actual words written. Don't read something then change it around to suit a vigilante witch hunt to make others look like some sort of psychopath. Pretty sure we have ALL said dumb shit at some point in our lives.
Anyway, a little off topic ...back to the psychologist...I could easily sit here all night picking apart and questioning bits and pieces of each post. But seeing as though I get easily bored when spending too much time on something here are just some of the things that jumped out at me when I read it.
"expose those people who jump from group to group and bad mouth people, the ones that create drama where drama isn’t found"
How can people be "exposed" when pseudonyms are used. And if they are actually doing it, going from group to group bad mouthing, then are they not exposing themselves anyways.
"I do intend to provide enough information for those involved to be able to work out what is going on." I'm confused. If they are involved don't they already know what is going on? why do they need an anonymous blogger to recount it for them.
I think this part is one of my favourites "allow members to have a better understanding of what has been said and the context of these discussions" - my bad, I was under the impression that I had my own mind and could easily understand things for myself. After all I do have this rather unique ability to be able to decide if the context didn't make sense then clearly I have missed something so I ignore that post and move along. (this unique ability I like to call commonsense, if your lucky you have it to)
And then we have some contradictions -
First it is the intent to copy and paste discussions from FB into the blog but then the next post it's not about copying and pasting at all but about discussing the personalities of these people. Because you can definitely tell exactly what kind of person someone is from behind a computer screen with only the minimal amount of info they actual give.
Then there is "I’m kinda a silent member, for a couple of years now I’ve been a member of these types of groups and although I say very little in fact usually nothing at all..." but then " I do not intend to upset the majority, many of who have been of great support to me in the past and I hope will be in the future." - So how do you get great support if you are a silent member.
ok thats all I can be bothered with now. While I can kind of, and I really mean kind of as in can see in a small tiny miniscule way what the attempt is with the therapy blog it has started off with an extremely flawed thought process. I am guessing that is why it went down for a little while and was slightly edited to remove and words that related it to Defence. But guess what?! I can copy and paste too! I have the original posts that state exactly what "workforce" it is in reference to ;)
Even with that minimal change I still think the idea is flawed and from the get go has pretty much got everyone off side. It has made some genuine people now fear posting anything at all due to the fact that their privacy has indirectly been threatened. It is irrelevant if pseudonyms are used as it will not be hard to go into the actual group and figure out what the real name is. And yes i know the groups have been given pseudonyms also. But once the psychoanalyzing really begins its not going to be hard to deduce what group is what and therefore the people involved.
It will be interesting to watch over the coming time to see if it can redeem itself. I don't know how that will be possible but hey you never know!
So lets all lie back on the couch, and let the psychoanalyzing begin. But Really in the grand scheme of things nothing anyone anonymous says will change the original thought of someone no matter how much you think you can "fill in the gaps". Most of these women that get bees in their bonnets about trivial stuff are too stubborn and stupid to ever think they could be wrong about an individual. OH! just remembered another thing while on this subject...The "mission" of our psychologist is to "fill in some of the gaps between these groups, discuss certain controversial topics, allow members to have a better understanding of what has been said and the context of these discussions, then maybe their opinions of certain people and groups for that matter will be a little less biased." BUT dear Psychologist also says "In the time I have personally spent reading these pages I have a list of people in my head to avoid, those who cause trouble, those who complicate things..." hmmmm so Psychologist can have a list of people they want to avoid based solely on what they have read from said people in FB groups but apparently the rest of us need it spelled out to us by Psychologist because clearly we can not deduce the same outcome on our own!. LOL. Seriously. LOL.
Anyway my personal opinion of it all is that it is a serious violation of privacy, respect and common courtesy amongst fellow Defence partners. Not to mention rather insulting in the fact that we are now apparently someones little guinea pigs that they are using to study for their own benefit. Someone correct me if I am wrong but don't you have to agree to be part of a "study"? Little bit disturbing I think. But I will admit that the most recent post has given me a slither of a positive feeling as I do agree with some of the things stated ie bullying. actually thats probably it. Encouraging people to be all PC and follow 'Group Etiquette' seems to me like blog suicide. Without controversial posts and comments the whole point of starting in the first place seems rather futile. Though lucky no one is really going to actually change the way they act save for not acting at all due to the fear of being publicly psychoanalyzed.
One final quote from the Psychologist "Theres always 3 sides to every story, one side, the other side and then there’s the ugly truth, which I hope you will find on my blog" - Um who made you judge, jury and executioner??! what makes your truth the right truth?
OK that is enough from me now. I keep going to finish off and then remember more. I better stop now before I remember anything else and just end up sounding like another ranting raving lunatic. oh. wait. hang on.