Hey so no doubt you saw that alleged therapist's post abt "Anti Behavior"- I say alleged because there is no proof of license, and I can't just give someone the benefit of the doubt for something so crucial here... so let's talk about some of that. sources provided when applicabl

Firstly, my credentials are as a student of psych pursuing a degree, and I can and will show whatever I can to validate that (though I did post the credits I achieved recently).
Second, even if you are a licensed therapist, there is no reason to use authoritative language. (cont)

Saying "all x people behave like y" is using absolutes and is not at all something you should do in therapy, and also directly contradicts the idea of "empathy for all" that is being advocated in the posts. There is no reason to use absolutes here. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/promoting-empathy-your-teen/201109/the-problem-absolute-thinking

In psychology, Dialectical Behavioral Therapy is used to promote gray area thinking- something the post in question strongly seems to go against. A better position would have been: "This behavior is bad, regardless of who is doing it" but is instead "these people do this only"

The initial post states that she, an alleged therapist, is more concerned with "antis" as a whole- a term that has a very mercurial meaning depending on who you ask. The term is, therefore, unreliable. In therapy youre encouraged against terms like that, rather: "people who do x"

The verbiage above allows the listener to associate the behaviors with any person and recognize them, without a preconceived notion of who will do these behaviors. This verbiage is used to help abuse victims recognize abusive behaviors without associating them to a specific group

The post as a whole holds an authoritative and condescending tone, "sweetie, i'm concerned about YOUR behavior", especially because its targeting... who? anyone who reads it. it could be an abuse victim finally talking about their abuser. this language makes them uncertain.

It was especially noteworthy that one person even pointed out that she was posting, publicly about her clients. I shouldn't have to explain why that's inappropriate to do. While patient confidentiality is moreso about documents, there is an ethical dilemma here about this...cont

Her point was to treat all people with empathy and respect; wouldn't that include patients who may not want to be spoken of online? your therapist cant even network with your previous therapist without signed notice... so while names weren't used, this is extremely distressing.

This is an interesting take because in her previous post she mentioned antis, which establishes a precedence that her further points will be criticism of that-however this behavior exists in BOTH sides- so, why not ALSO mention the opposing side if you feel this way?

The 2nd point here is a little muddled, but if she is a therapist then she should know that cult abuse is rampant still and comparing these things to cult abuse is a disservice to the reality of cult abuse and the fact that the term is already used lightly
https://information.pods-online.org.uk/demystifying-ritual-abuse/

This is an interesting point, as she continues to talk about the support she gives to alleged clients who are CSA abusers, but then openly continues to use a social media platform to make broad accusations on CSA survivors- her empathy for all stance seemingly one sided.

Her account is locked now, and that's probably for the best. I'm NOT advocating for you to harass her, but I am advocating for some critical thinking here.
Another point that was made was that coping was encouraged publicly- but this isn't the case. Cont...

It's true, many people do have coping skills that may be considering out of the norm, and how you cope is between you and your therapist. THAT BEING SAID! i think we can all agree that some coping mechanisms should stay private because they can /hurt other people/, (cont)

She never addresses this, but if you DO produce content that features things deemed problematic, acknowledge it and tag it. Does it feature incest? Tag it. Does it feature pedophilia? Tag it. One CANNOT block or blacklist without those tags. You can't encourage 1 half of this

I HIGHLY recommend reading this post and the sourced studies included before stepping onto a black/white side of things. It has some great resources and debunks a massive untrue point she implied in the beginning: CSA abusers dont exist in fandom https://snailienz.tumblr.com/post/185246040113/maskseller-teasources-diabolicking

If anyone else would like to add on, encouraged.

https://schizokimblee.tumblr.com/post/617473550316617728/snailienz-maskseller-teasources here is that last thread but hosted at my discourse blog instead