Psychologist Jason Mihalko has opened a discussion (an unexpected one apparently) on his blog The Irreverent Psychologist with a self-reflective post describing his meeting with an elderly man who offered his dog a dog treat--a dog biscuit. After reading the doctor's description of the gentleman, and the article, I was surprised at his harsh judgement of the man based on looks and appearance--and surprised that upon his second meeting, the doctor took the offered treat, yet pocketed the treat--only to not give it to his dog.
The the post is here.
After much discussion on twitter where you can see me "lose it" and call him pompous (sorry doc)after he said I was not capable of accepting others for who they are... and goes on to then say: "No one is color blind. Suggesting otherwise demonstrates lack of self reflection MT @soulflsepulcher i see the ppl themself, not appearance".
~~~
This is my comment I left at his blog:
"The reaction was the way it was--because of the profession, not because this is a man vs woman--and the dog bone is secondary. It is because the psychologist, in his describing what he calls his vulnerabilties, or human condition of bearing judgement upon others--feared this man based on how the stranger LOOKED. He met him twice, and due to giving him the time of day to take the 2nd offering of the biscuit tells me the man wasn't a danger to the doctor; I find the fear and assumption that the man *could* be a dog poisoner intriguing, and depicts another facet into this post on reflection. The doctor bases his assumption on his twitter feedback that the readers are not 1. Psychologists themselves 2. Lack self-reflection. I find this shallow, and a defensive tactic. I believe the doctor found the response by several people shocking or surprising, because he found that others in this world do not live or think the way he does; that others in this world actually DO (myself)accept others for who they are, I do not judge based on appearance--though the doctor will disagree as he did on twitter--I spend much of my time and have for over a decade working first hand with vulnerable populations, homeless individuals,special ed classroom kids, and have a disabled adult child. I can assure all that yes, I am able to see those human beings for themselves, not their appearance. I embrace the diversity, and I would gladly have sat down with the older man and had a talk, and yes, I would have taken the biscuit for my dog. It was surprising to me how many others would refuse the treat as well. I am pretty sure the man the doctor took the biscuit from and pocketed is not a dog poisoner, and I would also wonder what the man would think of this doctor's description of him, if he were to read this post.
I find the entire discussion fascinating, and mult-faceted. I find the "reasons" people are coming up with fascinating as well, because there are no clear-cut reasons--it is the human condition, to be different, and as a society it is our responsibility to care for and not judge those most vulnerable."
Interesting discussion.
*8.27.12 Addendum: Dr. Mihalko has chosen not to post my comment, which I left there and copied for this post. Though, he has responded to a comment left by Rossa Forbes, and others.
8.28.12My latest comment I left for approval end of day:
"This is the point I've been making, though my comments don't show up here. I asked the question earlier today on twitter for discussion more indepth--asking: "Am I judging you because of your profession?" exactly the response I was looking for in Becky's comment. Because, I ask 2-fold--do I expect more from someone *because* they are a doctor? yes! there is my pot calling the kettle black moment! I do hold many people to a high standard and in the mental health field in particular, I have great expectations. This can appear as judgement, though rest assured, it isn't. It's standards that are mine, and no one else's.
Thanks for the thought provoking post, doc. It's been a great discussion on many levels, with many people."
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder