I’ll elaborate further over the weekend on this one, but, this Bonnie Burstow, who is a regular post writer at MIA, really, is there endless depths to the abyss of no shame to these antipsychiatry charaterological hack jobs?
Is it just me, or aren’t scholarships named after people of fame who have died, or someone at an institution who is beyond an Emeritus level of accomplishment? I guess this University of Toronto must really think she is larger than life to name a scholarship after herself, “The Dr. Bonnie Burstow Scholarship in Antipsychiatry”, I mean, wow, I’m surprised the post doesn’t have fireworks going off around the edges of it!
Here’s the link, for what really is intended to be a laugh on my part, but, this is what defines the MIA antipsychiatry movement, and how brown it really is, eh?
A near 50 paragraph ramble, that one commenter tried to diplomatically call her on, but, you know what characterological folks do when someone has the gall to bring reality into their jaded perspectives, eh?! (unfortunately, there was a comment about the length of her post and the commenter was calling her on it, but, as usual, the censoring of any dissent or fair negativity has typically made it gone today, how surprising!)
Anyway, I am about to leave work, but I had to write about this in some form before my drive, as I read that yesterday and just said to myself, “isn’t the projection, deflection, and denial these folks practice day in and out just pathetic!?”
Makes you wonder if the Democrats will come out with some program or honor program of “The Bill Clinton shameless sexual escapade wannabe awards”…
and start off with Trump as their first winner???
more to follow per this MIA post, if interested…
Addendum Oct 15 12 Noon:
Per Francesca’s comment here from the morning, she ends with this:
“…That’s unacceptable [alternatives to care needs] and the reason why antipsychiatry will never be taken seriously, nor should it. There’s a curious absence of genuine discussion at MIA. They have there what’s known as a ‘ circlejerk.’”
And that is my point, in general mind you and not directed to Francesca, the antipsychiatry crowd is moreso populated with folks who are most likely charaterologically impaired, and their lack of benefiting from treatment interventions relates to the possible personality disorder that is often not so much treatment resistant, but not easily impacted just with meds alone.
My point to this evolving post is people like Dr Burstow are just vapid speakers or leaders for a “cause” that is not really intending to help the public, but just promote their narrative and agenda, which is plain hate and wanting unwarranted vindication for the whole profession, and not the specific providers who might have legitimately mistreated, if not just failed at having the best impact options.
More to this, I have to run errands for my family…
Addendum 2PM: Actually, reading the above addendum earlier, I would rather correct myself here than just erase what I wrote in “…wanting unwarranted vindication for the whole profession,…”. I was close, but, it is about Dr Burstow and her choir being VINDICTIVE, as maybe a Freudian slip on my part as I would be the one wanting VINDICATION. But not for the losers that are my “colleagues” who do give some VALIDATION to the antipsychiatry crowds’ endless rants and ravings for punishment and expulsion.
That said, getting back to Dr Burstow’s post, she writes this:
“Examples of what can realistically be done at this point—and to varying degrees some of us have been doing this for decades—is to rigorously integrate an antipsychiatry analysis into our classes, involve students in our antipsychiatry research, and mount conferences in which antipsychiatry is highlighted—e.g., the historical PsychOut conference (seehttp://individual.utoronto.ca/psychout/). Via such routes, very real reframing happens. Some students (both ones new to antipsychiatry and old hands at it) go on to conduct their own research into some aspect of psychiatry, thereby contributing to this growing area of scholarship. At the same time, academia puts the stamp of credibility on such “knowledge”, in essence, legitimates it in the public eye.”
What the hell is going on at universities these days that is considered education, when it is just cultivating a cult following of very impaired and characterological agendas to spew hate and control?!?!
Is it me, or maybe my poor choice in analogy, but, seems to resemble the mentality that spawns the rise of hideous, pathetic reasoning that we have witnessed in Nazism, ISIS, the various forms of socialism, and other extremist agendas that just want to indoctrinate, not educate! And as it relates to a recent post of mine, these folks like Dr Burstow use these immature, dysfunctional defenses like projection, denial, deflection, and minimization of the dissenters who naively try to engage these antipsychiatry zealots and be willing to listen and consider concerns about psychiatric inappropriateness, that does exist in some places.
But, isn’t that what I try to educate to anyone who does not know the beast of Personality Disorder, fueled by a foundation of rigidity and inflexibility, thus why moderation and negotiation are seen as only a threat and to be intolerated.
One more part to her post to relate why it is both sad and frightening people like her are not only allowed to teach, but given an opportunity to be seen as possibly “esteemed” educators and be given an alleged honor to have a scholarship named after her:
“Which brings me to the question of direct opposition—a problem that leads many privately highly critical colleagues to “soft peddle” their message. Of course there is opposition, just as there has always been opposition to anything which challenges accepted orthodoxies and runs counter to vested interests. And indeed, I have commonly encountered over-the-top opposition myself as well as more subtle obstruction. More generally, inevitably in every single university in which I have taught, because I am uncompromisingly antipsychiatry and known to be so, at some point or other, there have been efforts to derail both me and my agenda. What is significant here, however, is that none of it ever came from students. Moreover, the opposition has been monumentally unsuccessful. Indeed, if anything, it has but added to my credibility and detracted from the credibility of those out to silence my analysis. The point is that academic freedom is a principle that universities hold dear. And strange though this may seem, it offers very real protection.”
Wow, isn’t that a frightening way of saying basically “I am bigger than life and my narrative trumps anyone who does not genuflect completely”???
Please read the whole 50 paragraph post, which I view equally as a rant as much as selling alleged validity to her scholarship. But, just remember this, and I hope to write further tomorrow, this is a woman who is a frequent writer at MIA, or as I have come to see them as PSYCH LIES MATTER folk, or the acronym PLM.
And Robert Whitaker tolerates, if not encourages this type of writing, so he is complicit at the end of the day. We are judged to fair degree by who we associate with, especially if with regularity.
Enjoy your Saturday afternoon, if not your weekend if you read here much later, I hope you have better things to do than sit in front a screen much of the day, as I hope to get out after finishing this sentence…
Addendum Sunday Oct 16 9AM: last one, and will try to keep it short and to the point to minimize the accusation I am ranting. Well, maybe I am..
Imagine the gall of people asking for donations to causes that ask for exterminating, ostracizing, and belittling people who are as a group providing a legitimate service or benefit for the community as a whole.
Yes, we get it, you antipsychiatry “victims”, you most likely were mistreated, mismanaged, and perhaps even harmed for some time, maybe irrevocably, by physicians who disregarded their oath of serving the public, who were and perhaps still are the pathetic cretins that their States have not caught up with and revoked their licenses.
But, you antipsychiatry folk, as a general group, NOT ALL OF YOU, are jerks, because these zealots just rail about how everyone who is a psychiatrist who don’t kiss this zealot narrative agenda’s feet are scum of the earth. Every thread at MIA per a post that just blatantly advocates for ruin of psychiatry shows the characterological bent many there have for psychiatrists. And it deserves the spotlight I shine in these occasional posts here to remind readers, the narrative and agenda of MIA is no better or less threatening than that of Black Lives Matter (who MIA wants to align with!), Xenophobes across this country, and even the general missive statement of ISIS. If you are not with them, then not only are you against them, you must be passionately, if not cruelly, dismissed and derided.
And realize additionally, not only do the MIA folk want psychiatry erased from the country, they offer NOTHING as alternative treatment options for those who do have legitimate mental health problems. Sorry MIA supporters, there are real and disruptive psychological struggles out there, your pathological denial, minimization, and sheer ugly and nasty rationalizations that basically conclude “that’s just the way it is”, that is abandonment and malfeasance back at ya, liars!
So, to wrap up this post, Bonnie Burstow doesn’t deserve recognition, respect, or even donations for a cause that outwardly wants the termination of my profession. And the University of Toronto perhaps equally deserves some marginalization if not downright ostracizing for supporting such fringe behavior.
But, all these precious snowflakes being cultivated to be our equivalent to an ISIS movement within the borders of America, albeit Toronto is a Canadian city but with much American influence across the town, well, to those reading who think that to be an extreme analogy, the extremists and zealots count on people to continue to minimize and rationalize there is no real harm or danger to what is being preached.
Think about the term “cultivate”, hmm, seems to have that word “cult” in there, so is that applicable, or not?
Good luck 3 weeks from Tuesday, just realize this, irregardless of what party takes the White House next January, we will have a serial liar and sexual predator leading this country. Think about it!!! And then read at MIA who is happy with whomever wins. Just reinforces my opinion that it takes a personality disordered electorate to gleefully support a personality disordered candidate!
addendum Tue Oct 17: sorry, but this email from the new “editor” at MIA needs shared, along with my rebuttal, and then per “S–t”head comment in the thread of this pathetic post of Dr Burstow’s, go to the link at the bottom to read someone else being critical of a scholarship for discrimination and hate:
first the emails:
Hello Joel Hassman, MD,
My name is Hana and I am the new Community Manager for Mad In America. I am emailing you to let you know that I had to moderate your recent comment. According to our Posting Guidelines discussing Moderation is considered off-topic and is generally not permitted. If you would like to edit out your references to moderation in your comment it can be approved and posted on the site.
[what I wrote as a comment:]
To AA and other interested readers:
Of course I wrote about this post, because I have to see what MIA continues to promote; I know this comment will be a two minute waste of time because Ms Mead will strike it from the record. Spin my post at my blog however you folks want, including Dr Burstow, and maybe some will step back and wonder what is going on here. It is a free country, thank you for the hopeful opportunity to comment, I know I do thank and acknowledge commenters at my blog.
Joel Hassman, MD
Board Certified Psychiatrist
Here is a link to our Posting Guidelines for your reference.
If you have any questions about this moderation please feel free to email me.
While I hesitantly say thank you for at least bringing this to my attention, it only reinforces what I was saying to your predecessor, Ms Mead, that you selectively moderate people because you have an agenda/ narrative that needs to be maintained.
So I will not edit my comment at your convenience, if the comment is not acceptable nor meets appropriate quality then you will not print it.
You should know that at my blog, can’t medicate life.com, I bring attention with some regularity to this censoring that your site does to readers / commenters who are trying to provide responsible and appropriate dissent to what your site is claiming as valid criticism of Psychiatry.
But, you allow people like Old head, AA, and others who are blatantly rude, vindictive, and absolutely vicious at times to have a comment printed immediately, to perhaps be removed days to weeks later, shows the inconsistency and disconnect you try to bring to my attention as I need to cooperate with your efforts to moderate.
So, good luck with being the replacement of Ms Mead, I’m sure the usual suspects who were out to just demean and deride people who are trying to be responsibly critical will bring profound validity and acceptance to the general debate your blog offers!
If you don’t read the sarcasm in that last sentence, I’m obviously telling you that it is…
Thank you and good luck.
Joel Hassman MD
And this new post about Burstow’s scholarship:
Leave ya with this in it:
“Called the Bonnie Burstow Scholarship in Antipsychiatry, it is being praised by Scientology. As a graduate with two degrees from the U of T, I’m offended as are many others.
What next, a scholarship to study anti-evolution or anti-vaccination?”