relationship building, part 4

because of silly socially created western constraints about how men and women are allowed to talk about each other, and about their physical bodies, i will begin this post with a ps to blog #3.

ps - M, i'm quite sure, is fit.  i've heard about her schooling mountains with a heavy pack, and i've witnessed her: rocking an elliptical for over an hour on a couple occasions, going hard to the paint in some intense ultimate frisbee, and happily tackling some of the most physically demanding yoga i've ever done.  hell, she may have even been "skinny."  i really don't know, or care.  partly my not knowing would be due to her SA fashion style - loose fitting, comfortable clothing.  i respected the style.  that said, i wasn't really taking note of her in that way, regardless.  i could tell she had boobs (ahhh, how dare you notice!), which meant that she was either: female, transgendered, or a damned good female impersonator.  i did see her as beautiful, inside and out.  i see a lot of people that way.  especially when they're pushing through their fear and masks and hurt and being something approximating real.  i believe i came to see her, and refer to her, as my "female protege," because of reasons that go well beyond any physical attributes or lack thereof.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i_cImkpc_dc - probably the 1st lady gaga song i've enjoyed.  

i no longer have any real difference between a public/private persona, between a work/non-work persona.  my masks have been stripped.  the only difference is a small amount of crass language 'n humor.  i was super sensitive to the bareness, initially.  i just was never really taught to be me, no matter how many times i heard things like "be yourself."  there's a catch to instructed individualism. 

psychotropic drugs, recreational drugs, fashion, trends, popularity, questions of what's real, experience and innocence and naivety, insecurity, and fear, fear, fear.  comfort in following, joining, being a part of something, in the middle, in a home that resembles many other homes, eating foods and drinking drinks that others we know 'n like 'n respect eat and drink.  not to mention the pressure to think along accepted lines: repub vs democrat, we live in the best country in the world and partake in the best type of govn't available, psychology (and its constricts, pharmacology and programs like SA, and on and on) and politics are the philosophies that matter.  voting is power.  drugs are bad, unless uncle sam gives his seal of approval.  and on and on and on.  it can be easy to have things that weren't you, or aren't really you, become you.

in regards to there being no difference between a work me and a non-work me, my attitude was basically this - if it made sense in a particular context, i was willing to disclose anything and everything about myself.  otherwise, i would just be taking on the authority figure "i know better than you, do as i say, not as i do" attitude that i've despised since probably the 1st time i came in contact with it.  my attitude was more like - there is very little that separates me from these kids other than age.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Hf-B9Tqkss

my life, from one perspective, has been an exaggerated pull away from conformity and the powers that be.  i've enjoyed the soothing approval of big brother and his henchmen and women, despite sacrifices made to my mental functionality and common sense along the way.  well, as someone i knew from SA said to me, in regards to this philosophic stand i've recently taken, "what took you so long?"  i dunno.  partly fear.  maybe totally fear.  fear of being fired, stepping out of line, of the man.  giving into fear, making rules and laws and decisions based out of fear and concepts related to fear, i believe, has brought about many of my personal ills, many of what i see to be society's ills, and what i believe to be some of SA's ills.

for me - i have dutifully faced down scores of fears throughout the years.  still do.  the pop phrase "no fear" has never really resonated with me except as a fantasy, or at least a non-reality for me.  "face fear" makes sense to me, since that's my direct anxiety riddled and anxiety reducing experience, thus a piece to a personal philosophy that has brought about significant results.  often times those results are positive.  even relieving.  not always.  

sometimes, like now, in relation to writing about what was my long-term workplace, where i've made numerous friendships, i understand i may have gone over some metaphorical line, and likely ostracisized myself from a number of people, and potentially was the catalyst for a hurt feeling or two, it's less likely that in the short-term i'll feel this action as a happy-positive.  it's more likely i'll remain unaware of how most people reacted to this, unaware if it brought about any real change driven dialogue, but i'll also be aware that this was a step that i deemed necessary, and a step really only i could take.

why me?  because i was fired.  because i was told straight up that i am now basically blacklisted from ever working with kids again (for this, i pardon and forgive you, summit achievement.  pardon your pretentiousness.  your seeming close-minded read on a situation.  pardoning was not my first choice, that was using some summit inappropriate words.  that said, forgiveness is the quality choice) and therefore, quite unlikely to use SA as a reference.  because i was in and around the program long enough to see some good and bad about it.  to see a lot of what happens officially and unofficially.  and because i am okay with putting reality on the table for all to see.  and maybe more importantly, because i don't abide psychological theory that has a disease and/or disorder for nearly every human experience, a drug to help cope with that, and a stigmatizing label to last a lifetime.

i was a program kid.  i voluntarily chose at 17 to enter a residential treatment center (rtc).  i showed up with 2 bags - 1 with clothes and toiletries, 1 with books.  i ended up in an outpatient program.  two main concepts have stayed with me due to that experience.  1 - the relationships matter.  i remain in touch with a number of people i met and friended from those days.  2 - the norms for an rtc can be detrimental long-term.  however, since reflection and honesty are often taught alongside concepts like: zero tolerance, alcoholism, addiction, and mental diseases and disorders, rtc's offer both greater disease and freedom from that anointed disease.

what was detrimental from there?  AA.  i found the disease theory of alcoholism to be a diseased theory.  i don't just pull that idea out of my ass or thin air, either.  i grew up in a household with some substantial abuse. the trauma stemming from that pales in comparison to the effects of believing in powerlessness and being diseased to one's core.  these are core 12 step program concepts.  and i dutifully followed them for many years, thinking less and less of my powerless self all the time.

short story - i left that cult of non-personality.  and found myself in a similar position to when i was a struggling 17 yr old looking for answers to difficult questions.  identity, existentialism, meaning, and the coping with trauma came back around, necessitating numerous hard looks inward.

for people associated with SA, feel free to ask the therapeutic department their thoughts on trauma.  and ask for their opinions on why trauma does not show up in the DSM.  and wonder silently and/or aloud, "if trauma made its way into the DSM, would the DSM be 1 page long?  would that bankrupt the pharmacology industry??

debunking AA in this forum would take more effort than i'm willing to put forth right now, but i will mention what i stated at an AA meeting that i attended with about 14 people from SA: despite AA's "promises" making exaggerated claims, prophesying a future of mental freedom and the like, the person who wrote that section, a co-founder of the program, Bill W., had a very different experience 20 years into his sobriety.  he was turned on to LSD by aldous huxley, tuned into it, but didn't drop his sobriety date.  rumor has it he happily took other hallucinogens, in an effort to further the spiritual experience that 12 step programs talk about.  his sobriety dated never officially changed.  and at his end, during his last few death bed days, he purportedly asked for liquor more than once, and was denied.  

this Bill W. guy is responsible for much of the AA literature out there.  for its "how it works" and its "promises" and "big book."  and his experience seems to invalidate everything about it.  it'd be like jesus saying, "i was just bullshitting about all those miracles, about the second coming.  basically about everything," and then his disciples choosing to still believe in what came before that, because there's security in "knowing," even if the knowledge is false.    

again, believing one knows the answer can go a long way.  ask any born-again christian.  that doesn't mean it works.  or is right.  it more likely speaks to a placebo effect.  and a dangerous one, because it becomes a foundational belief.  a foundational belief of powerlessness and being diseased, as an explanation for a theorized disease that has yet to be verified by the real sciences.  but the pop science known as psychology validates it.  a pop science that loves telling humans they're just as wrong as any original sin type religion.  

part of my beef with rtc's like SA is they rarely offer a counterpoint.  addiction is trumpeted as real.  as fact.  ditto the psychological labels.  zero tolerance is the way.  as a fragile 17 year old, i grasped onto the rtc messages, the messages of psychological theory, and seemingly grew because of it.  it turned out to be a cancerous growth, but what did i know?  i wasn't strong enough then to ween myself off of an institutionalized provider.

over the last 4 years, i found many opportunities to be the rare voice in the rtc setting against addiction and addiction theory.  although, my anti-addiction theory rarely came out as "anti."  it often manifested itself in a common way for me - pro-thinking. i'd suggest the kids think about the idea of labeling oneself an addict or alcoholic. i'd suggest they read up on what it means to  be "alcoholic."  read, think, discuss - giving a new identity label proper time, rather than subscribing to rtc authority pressure to label, or to a snap decision label kids often seem to make when we bring them to what passes for an AA meeting in rural maine.

at some point i recognized the power of choice.  more than just theoretically, but from practice.  choosing belief systems.  choosing truth, absolute truth, if indeed there is such a reality.  and that was how i showed up at SA the first time around, with my original SA "about me" statement, "i don't believe many commonly held beliefs."  still don't.  probably less now than then.  it's one thing to say that in a few short words.  it's quite another to give the long version, which these series of writings seems to be.  the long version has probably led to that short-haired version of me removed from SA's upstairs former guide wall.  maybe i was stolen away to safety.  maybe left to fade away.  doesn't really matter.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgEygiieBwg - i karaoke'd this song recently

sobriety and length of sobriety are the connect-the-dots public face of rtc programs like SA.  and when coupled with post treatment drug testing, it equates to a rigged election being trumpted as democracy.  or maybe it equates to whatever passes for democracy in this here USA.  zero-tolerance programs offer nothing but a continued belief that nancy reagan was correct to lead a "just say no" philosophy, and america is of course right to continue to waging a war on drugs that has already cost us over 500 billion dollars.  but remember, drugs are bad, unless uncle sam gives his seal of approval, and rtc's follow the line, publicly.

look around and notice how many people currently associated with SA practice zero tolerance and sobriety in their own lives.  i'm pretty sure that answer is a big fat 0.  if you ask the brass at SA, you may recognize that zero-tolerance is really no more than a soccer mom/dad fantasy pop psychology fad that happens to be en vogue.

what mattered to me in relation to SA, besides the peer relationships, was guiding the youths in the way we truly effect them - critical thinking.  i enjoyed my direct questions and feedback leading to students thinking about themselves, what they're about, where they're at, what they're looking to do.  teaching to look inside, think for themselves.  critically think.  about oneself.  and when they wanted someone to let them know whatever they'd done was okay, i was there.  sometimes with a hug.  perhaps that goes against rtc philosophy, which clearly follows psychological theory (not fact), ie disease theory, but again, fuck psychological theory.  i'll take intuitive knowledge, the naturalistic creed of walt whitman, and someone like matt c, whom flagged in a couple times during his first week guiding the post wilderness team, merely to let the kids know that they were good kids.  i hadn't heard statements like that much in my many years in social work.  it was a needed breath of fresh air.  for me and for kids like M - she referenced that in her goodbye letter.  and it's a breath i'll breathe every day over more diseased ideas.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mTv1Dmu5CYc&feature=related - back to school.  worthy clip.

and no, i'm not done yet.  thus the weakish way to end this post.