the myth of self care

[meecie]

Someone I know posted this to facebook today (caution, some may find this hard to read if you've been in similar very difficult work conditions): http://tonotliveinvain.wordpress.com/2014/01/25/the-myth ( Read more... )

Comments

[meecie]

Chatty is good! I'm sorry it was triggering for you, I should probably have put a warning on the link. Good for you for stopping reading when you needed to.

I agree with that last part completely. Workers are not machines, no matter what.

[dionysus1999]

I was lucky enough to work for caring people, but I can definitely see where the author is coming from. Most of my pressure came from the bureaucracy, which is bloated and more concerned over protecting their own jobs than helping people.

The state agencies are horrific, especially when we have a GOP clown as governor. I don't know what the current climate is like, I'd be surprised if it changed much.

Easy for an organization to lose focus on what's important, like quality employees, and start treating people like disposable property.

[meecie]

I think that last statement is true in most big business. I'm glad you had support from the people you immediately worked for, though.

[semperfido]

Wow. I think that is true in most work environments, not just social or civil service type jobs. I think she was pretty much spot on. I've pretty much worked in abusive work environments for most of my life - from working for Miramax Films and the infamous Weinstein brothers. Another film company and a cocaine addicted boss who was always on a tirade over my shoulders (although sad, I felt vindicated when he died of an overdose because people thought I was exaggerating.) A male dominated sports management/tv production company, I was the scapegoat. Then the shelter… the difference there was just complete incompetence in addition to the egos. What you think about government employees seems oh so true there. Staying in jobs they are ill equipped to deal with because they are 10 years in - just waiting for their pensions. Yep. Let's squash initiative. We want employees to be a machine - no personality. And the shelter, we could only get comp time and vacation time. They did not allow more than one employee request off at a time. People

[meecie]

I've been very lucky for a long time. I work for a bureaucratic machine, but I have a good buffer with my boss, who's *mostly* good about not squashing initiative. I've had bad stretches, but overall I think I'm lucky. It's one of the things that makes me very leery of leaving academia.

[semperfido]

"Because first of all, we are a female-dominated profession. Women are informed throughout their lifetimes that society values them only as far as their functionality. Women are viewed as too emotional and vulnerable, so we spend our lives trying to prove society wrong by overcompensating - we repress our feelings and act strong even in the worst situations. It’s the only way we can fight to be viewed as equals by men. Our tolerance for bullshit is very high, higher than many men would tolerate

[meecie]

That paragraph did resonate with me, and while I don't think she's wrong, I also think that she's making a huge oversight too.

The way our culture values strength and toughness in men really gives mixed signals in professions where people encounter hard and horrible things. So while a woman who has an emotional reaction to, say, something horrible happening to a child might be viewed as "overly emotional," people wouldn't be shocked by her reaction. If a man had a reaction to something similar, he might be viewed as damaged, or not masculine enough. It's one of the ways that gender stereotypes is seriously harmful to men.

It's a really complicated topic - again I don't think she's wrong, there are certainly situations where women are viewed more suspiciously and seen as weak. But I don't think women are the only ones pressured to "repress our feelings and act strong even in the worst situations." Does that make sense?

[semperfido]

Too true. I thought less about it than thinking about that experience.

[sarahmichigan]

It's always good to be reminded that we can only do so much as lone individuals and we need institutional/community support as well. It's hard to do "self care" if doing so endangers your livelihood.

[meecie]

Exactly. Or even in volunteer situations, people get overwhelmed and feel like their efforts are negligible in the huge onslaught of bad things (dogs being euthanized, children being hurt, pick your profession). I'm interested in examples where organizations actively support self care - I know I've talked to someone who volunteers for the Huron Valley humane society, and he's told me about the manager keeping tabs on volunteers and making sure none of them are working "too hard," and enforcing breaks if she feels people need it. I know that hasn't always been a good place to work, I've heard horror stories from 15+ years ago, but the information I've gotten recently has indicated they're trying hard to keep the people in their care mentally healthy too.

[meecie]

in volunteer situations, obviously livelyhood isn't at risk, but people get into that mindset of "If I stop, dogs will DIE."