Working with Men
boadi...@gmail.com
change our therapeutic approach to better connect with the men who
come to therapy either under their own steam, in the company of their
partners, or because they are obliged to.
Perhaps the men that appear not to be comfortable with the approach
that they find in a consulting or group room, are not necessarily
resistant but aren't getting what they need to resolve the issues that
they have.
I agree that there are issues around men that can be difficult to deal
with - Grevis gave a good list:
a life denying emotions
fear of losing control which, until very recently, has been
overwhelmingly in favour of men
use of their physical strength to solve problems
lack of positive strong masculine role models both in early life and
in their current situation
What are the things that we can do as therapists to make our practice
welcoming to men, and helps them to deal with the issues that they
have. My bet is that there are many men who know that they need help,
and would love to get it, but don't feel comfortable with what is
available.
What would happen if work with men was done in a different environment
to a consulting office? I understand that there has been a very
successful program called Men's Sheds in Australia the website is
http://www.mensheds.com.au Is there something that could be learned
from that program for people doing Family or couple Therapy? Another
thought is how men who were traumatized by their involvement in
Vietnam are being helped? What is the Vietnam Vets Counselling
Service finding about dealing with traumatized men?
There is an increasing awareness that men and women are actually
hardwired differently in a range of areas in thier brains. This
affects the way we perceive and approach the world. Perhaps it is
important to take this into account when we work with men who are
having problems with relationships.
Many men (especially older ones) have had a lifetime of being told
that their emotions are not for sharing. It is very daunting for many
of these men to admit to their emotions, and the pain they are going
through, even if they know the burden of that pain is too much for
them. They aren't resistant or avoidant, they just have no appropriate
mechanism to deal with this part of them. What can we do to help them
to develop mechanisms that work for them?
As Michael and Jan said we are not at war, we are working with people
who are damaged by the systems in which they are involved. The
different people in those systems will be hurt in different ways. We,
as the people who are helping the men women and children in these
systems, need to develop skills and approaches that will assist them
to work healthily. That means that we don't expect them to fit into
what we are comfortable with, or fits with our agency, but we work to
develop tools and techniques which are of use to the people we serve.
Yael Clark
1) I think the issues are different for work with older men rather than the
under 50s (approx). The Vietnam Vet age is particularly difficult I have
found. And of course the sons of these men are deeply affected by their
fathers' trauma and parenting style ("husbanding" style too).
2) I have found that recognising the strength it has taken a man to seek
counselling or to agree to come, genuinely praising him for doing something
so very different to anything he had been taught to do by his male role
models or society often helps the client to feel better about coming and to
see his coming as a strong, brave thing to do -which it is. In response to
a man shedding tears or expressing a "softer emotion" I have been moved to
let him know that I am in awe of his ability to do differently to the last
generation- the generation that hurt him. "How have you found this strength
within yourself?" I ask and as we explore this the man discovers qualities
in him which he had been taught to repress or deny.
3) I also do a guided meditation where I lead the man -and his partner if
she is in the session- back to his childhood and revisit a time when his
father wounded him. The meditation is strongly sensorial in that he
re-experiences smells, sounds, touch etc. This has been so powerful for the
men I have worked with and has provided fertile grounds for a) addressing
their hurts and b) exploring how to parent differently based on using his
pain to empathise with his children's needs.
Lastly, I have a difficulty that I experience that I would like to throw
open to you all for comment:
As a female therapist I have had men try to use controlling behaviours with
me ( a previous post did mention this from another angle). In particular, I
have seen men try to win me over by acting the "good little boy" who has
done his homework, by moving their chairs up close to mine (and shutting the
wife out of the circle) or by appearing to work very hard in the session
when the wives tell me none of this is transferred out of the session. I
see the wives roll their eyes or shake their heads and I know I am being
"seduced". One wife cried to me (in front of her husband), "He opens up to
you and not to me. What do you have that I don't?" This was so difficult to
work with; I framed it in terms of the therapeutic process and
depersonalised it from me as a woman or even a person but as simply a part
of therapy that needs to be addressed, uncovered and challenged. I also
suggested that he was "using" me to say things to her that he was too scared
to say and he hoped I would reframe, re-express and help her understand him.
To address Mr Chair Mover, I spoke to them about triangulation and used the
whiteboard to explore the various triangles in their life (kids, in-laws,
work etc). I then opened up a discussion about how the therapist must be
very careful not to become another "exit" for either partner or a part of
the triangle. Both these approaches seemed to help but I am interested to
hear from others how they would deal with these situations.
Have a good day,
Yael.
David Steare
I can't answer your question from a female POV but as a potential male
client reading your post, I imagine that I would feel validated by your
approach.
Perhaps this is something that the men's partner, kids, own family members
of origin, colleagues, bosses, etc. need to do more of to systemically
reinforce the sessional work. I suspect that if men don't get this kind
of out of session support they will begin to look to you for a long term
relationship to get the validation they may want and need.
Best wishes
David
R & B Darracott
There is a common thread to what you are all saying, and it is not a
comfortable one. You are all suggesting (particularly Grevis) that there is
a problem for men which is bigger than the family system. As such, it is not
an easy fix, but we need to be aware of it and work on it.
I think the problem had been brilliantly delineated by Rosalind Miles in her
often funny, but disturbing book, "The Rites of Man, Love, Sex and Death in
the Making of the Male." Grafton Books, London,1991.
Miles has drawn from an amazing range of sources - history, psychology,
literature and science to try to answer the question why men commit the vast
majority of violent crime in all its forms, both against other males as
well as females.
Miles suggests that men are culturally taught to see themselves in a
particular way, by men, and by women,in the pursuit of dominance and in the
suppression of feelings at an enormous emotional cost, which society has to
pay through male suicide, early death, child abuse, rape, domestic violence
and so on.
Miles suggests that boys have to have positive male models, so that they can
look up to men who demonstrate an ability to acknowledge and express their
feelings,so that they do not identify with the macho swagger of the male who
in fact is dependent on the female as mother substitute (read Yael's
comments), to seriously target bullying in schools,(and elsewhere). Above
all, she says it is imperative that vulnerable boys must be identified and
helped from a young age, supported in father-son programmes, before they are
acculturated in violent crime, where the gang dominates his identity.
As Edgar puts it, ..."the way boys are reared, often encouraged to take
greater risks,, scorning the expression of fear,any emotional vulnerability,
has a lot to answer for. But so too, has the world of work,and of public
life, designed by men for men,but in the end, killing them." "Edgar, D.
Men, Mateship and Marriage", Harper Collins, Sydney. 1997.
Robin Darracott
__________ NOD32 2167 (20070403) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com
Yael Clark
so beautifully. Yes, the issue is a systemic, societal one many generations
in the making. I explore the social constructions of manhood with my clients
and invite them to challenge these constructs, to "give the finger" to a
society that dictates how they can be male. This, of course, externalises
the behaviours and allows the men to critique them more safely. Then they
can decide if they want to allow these beliefs and behaviours to dictate to
them anymore. I learned a lot from Alan Jenkins' book "Invitations to
Responsibility" and my understanding of it is that the men can critique
these behaviours, accept responsibility for choosing to use them but also
not drown in self-blame as the behaviours were "borrowed" unconsciously.
Hmmm...not sure if that's clear. I mean, I don't "blame" the men or
insinuate that they are inherently violent etc. I assist them to see that
now that they have new information they can make new choices. They have been
as trapped by society's ideas of maleness as the women have been by ideals
of femininity.
Still, I believe it is important to honour that which is especially
male/masculine and not to try to create a sameness between the sexes. I
think that society has begun to privilege the feminine approach to
relationship- verbal and analytical. (As a former teacher I saw that these
skills are privileges and boys are falling behind in school too.) There is
great worth in kicking the footy around too! Sometimes the cave is a great
place to be! It's about balance and respecting that there is a time and
place for each approach to be accessed by both sexes. It's about having both
approaches available and choosing the one that will be most helpful in a
given situation.
Yes, these issues are bigger than the therapy room, bigger than any thesis
we could write, and bigger than the family systems in which our clients
live. But our ongoing dialogue and our commitment to making therapy
accessible to men is a great place to start getting the message out there.
Hmm...I have perhaps posted too often? Sorry, but this is very interesting
to me and so, so relevant to my current client case work.
Cheers All
Jan Victory
wondering about the idea of your couple being very close to one another
and there is too much at stake for your male client to speak directly to
his partner. The cost and price of winning and losing is far too high
and pretty bloody scarey. Just a thought about taking you out of the
equation and refocusing on the couple you have and their relationship.
Somehow getting the idea that it strikes you this relationship is really
important to each of them and they are down to the wire so it must be a
bit scarey and what are they going to do. I am not certain that your
male client is doing anything other than telling you and his partner how
important this is to him and how worried he is about it. Is it possible
to let him off the hook just a little? Maybe put him back on later - but
not now.
Also I am not getting spam
Jan
-----Original Message-----
From: ANZ...@googlegroups.com [mailto:ANZ...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf
Of Yael Clark
Sent: Wednesday, 11 April 2007 2:14 AM
To: ANZ...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [ANZJFT: 169] Re: Working with Men
David Steare
uncomfortable about this kind of problematising male socialisation.
Violence is not the prerogative of men although the differential
consequences of men and women's violence may make it seem so.
Also, whilst Alan Jenkins has provided a useful perspective it also
seems to lack an analysis of economics (a la David Smail) that I
prefer to utilise and that can help men and women identify more
with each other.
I find the Miles sort of analysis hypocritical because when it comes
to pointing a finger at male aggression and violence, it seems to
ignore the aggression and violence used to gain economic wealth and
power, something that women and children may also benefit from when
the economic aggression and violence are (mainly) used by men.
Tragic as family based violence can be, it seems small compared to
the tragedy of world wide starvation and the accumulation of wealth
in the hundreds of thousands, millions and billions of individuals.
A lack of validation of men's experience, and a lack of patience for
men to re-discover or discover for themselves alternatives to
aggression and violence, coupled with a preference for challenge may
be therapeutic mistakes. My work with men (and women and children)
is based on a respect and acceptance of them as they are, and a
belief that they are doing the best they can. I also embrace a
willingness to play, especially playing with possibilities of change.
David
PS I'm also not getting spam.
Jan Victory
than the couple in the room. It might make me more insightful than I
actually was. I also was not attributing what was being said to men and
violence - just men in relationship with women and specifically this man
and this woman with the therapist thrown into the mix. My ideas came
from the simple notion that this couple cared about one another or they
would not each enter the room of the therapist and somehow their
relationship had gone down a trajectory that they did not like and did
not know how to make different - so what would they do either of them
that would enable a different trajectory.
Jan
-----Original Message-----
From: ANZ...@googlegroups.com [mailto:ANZ...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf
Of Yael Clark
Sent: Wednesday, 11 April 2007 1:49 PM
To: ANZ...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [ANZJFT: 179] Re: Working with Men
Jan Victory
attitude. I asked them when they thought it would be that they could
take hold of their attitude, own it makes it special them and make
choices that show their attitude belongs to them. They gave varying
responses identifying their old age is when they might achieve this. I
reckon that something about ownership of self rather than the other
comes into this.
Yael Clark
still care for each other. Holding onto the relationship may say more about
each client's view of themselves ("I am not a person who quits"; "I am not a
person who divorces"; "What will my family think of me if my marriage breaks
down?" etc.) Then there are those who are there under court mandate or
lawyer's advice. I do agree that very often their coming can be used as
leverage for the reasons you named- but I am always on the lookout for other
motivations like the ones I listed. Do people think that violence can change
the rules of the game when working with a couple? Or is the work the same
and the problems just more extreme? I personally think that violence changes
the work. If the man continues to use physical violence then I advise a
separation while therapeutic work continues and then reunification once he
can refrain from using violence. Of course the other forms of violence
persist but I prioritise the woman's physical safety, the rest can be worked
with. Any thoughts? Disagreements?
Yael.
Yael Clark, Psychologist
www.supportingparents.com.au
ph: 0438 559 601
Nick Drury
Nick Drury (NZ)
(I get so much spam I have no idea where it comes from - the delete button works overtime)
-----Original Message-----
From: ANZ...@googlegroups.com [mailto:ANZ...@googlegroups.com]On Behalf
-----Original Message-----
From: ANZ...@googlegroups.com [mailto:ANZ...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of
Yael Clark
Sent: 11 April 2007 05:19
David Grace
I'm having the same problem as you David.
I get the feeling in some of the posts here that if the man comes to
counselling and it doesn't help him, and he does the sensible thing and
doesn't come back, it is because of his "resistance". That may be so, but
it may also be that he is not being offered appropriate counselling.
What I was trying to point out in my last post is that we need to look at
what whether we do need to approach counselling with men in a different way
to how we counsel women or children. Perhaps counselling that works well
with men would be a major turn off for women, and in that situation I would
hope no-one would say that the women are resistant to counselling.
>From: "David Steare" <david....@ntlworld.com>
>Reply-To: ANZ...@googlegroups.com
>To: <ANZ...@googlegroups.com>
>Subject: [ANZJFT: 181] Re: Working with Men
>Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2007 13:00:14 +0100
>
>
>This is also meaty for me, but perhaps in the wrong way. I feel very
>uncomfortable about this kind of problematising male socialisation.
>Violence is not the prerogative of men although the differential
>consequences of men and women's violence may make it seem so.
>Also, whilst Alan Jenkins has provided a useful perspective it also
>seems to lack an analysis of economics (a la David Smail) that I
>prefer to utilise and that can help men and women identify more
>with each other.
>0I find the Miles sort of analysis hypocritical because when it comes
>to pointing a finger at male aggression and violence, it seems to
>ignore the aggression and violence used to gain economic wealth and
>power, something that women and children may also benefit from when
>the economic aggression and violence are (mainly) used by men.
>Tragic as family based violence can be, it seems small compared to
>the tragedy of world wide starvation and the accumulation of wealth
>in the hundreds of thousands, millions and billions of individuals.
>A lack of validation of men's experience, and a lack of patience for
>men to 0re-discover or discover for themselves alternatives to
_________________________________________________________________
Interest Rates Fall Again! $430,000 Mortgage for $1,399/mo - Calculate new
payment
http://www.lowermybills.com/lre/index.jsp?sourceid=lmb-9632-18679&moid=7581
Yael Clark
need a different counselling approach. That is in line with what I wrote
earlier- that we need to value the male approach and not privilege female's
preference for verbal analysis. I wonder if the follow-on from your idea is
that men would work best with male therapists?
In regards to playfulness and humour. Amen! I also find that humour comes
naturally when the therapeutic alliance is good. Sometimes I find it hard to
challenge when needed when the atmosphere has been jokey. I find that both
men and women enjoy using the St Luke's cards (strength cards, magic happens
cards etc.). These give a concrete medium through which to work rather than
airy fairy blah blah blah.
And now I have to go to work. I look forward to reading your posts tonight.
Yael.
Yael Clark, Psychologist
www.supportingparents.com.au
ph: 0438 559 601
-----Original Message-----
From: ANZ...@googlegroups.com [mailto:ANZ...@googlegroups.com]On Behalf
Of David Grace
Sent: Tuesday, 10 April 2007 6:22 PM
To: ANZ...@googlegroups.com
David Steare
I'm not sure that useful approaches for men would be useless for women,
and I can only go by the feedback that I get from both men and women
(using the SRS etc.) My own sense of what works with men, women and
children, is a sense of validation of their experience and a sense of
playfulness around change. In Yael's description of her session
I read this approach as being very useful to anyone, including men.
I agree with you about 'resistance' and I hope that no systemically
oriented person entertains this, Steve de Shazer having killed it off.
I do believe that we have to be flexible with people, not just in how
we use taught/learned approaches/methods/techniques, but how we select
these in terms of how they may fit the person consulting to us.
Maybe working with men does require a more significant emphasis on
validating, using humour respectfully, and being playful in our approach.
But perhaps women and children may also respond positively to these as well
cf. Rebecca Abrams The Playful Self http://www.newstatesman.com/200011130022
Best wishes
David Steare
-----Original Message-----
From: ANZ...@googlegroups.com [mailto:ANZ...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of
David Grace
Sent: 11 April 2007 02:22
To: ANZ...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [ANZJFT: 186] Re: Working with Men
David Grace
I was using extremes to make a point, and most approaches would work with
both men and women. I'm advocating having a toolbox of techniques. I
remember a flurry of interest in humour in therapy in the early eighties,
and also the use of paradox in therapy, which can help people to gain
insight- (perhaps a bit of a borrowing from Zen?)
David G
>From: "David Steare" <david....@ntlworld.com>
>Reply-To: ANZ...@googlegroups.com
>To: <ANZ...@googlegroups.com>
_________________________________________________________________
Advertisement: Your Future Starts Here. Dream it? Then be it! Find it at
www.ninemsn.seek.com.au
http://a.ninemsn.com.au/b.aspx?URL=http%3A%2F%2Fninemsn%2Eseek%2Ecom%2Eau%2F%3Ftracking%3Dsk%3Ahet%3Ask%3Anine%3A0%3Ahot%3Atext&_t=762942039&_r=seek_apr07_yourfuturestartshere&_m=EXT
Yael Clark
Tom, I know a former federal police agent with 5 kids who is now a
hairdresser! No, I am not adding to the intellectual discussion here but
just had to pipe in with my agreement that we can't really generalise.
Still, it is good to have a tool kit that helps us work with those men who
really are from Mars. (No, not advocating that silly book in the least
here - just using its lingo.) There are also women who don't want a
navel-gazing, active-listening experience and prefer action, solutions and
advice. As David G. said, we need an array of "tools" for the array of
people.
Have any of you worked with men from the military? I have seen quite a few.
Some of the men I have worked with seem to have stepped straight out of 1950
even though they are in their early 30s. These men are so used to rank and
file and having their authority unquestioned, They are used to ordering
people around, insulting people and consider the army's attempts at
"political correctness" a joke. Or, they are the butt of the orders and
insults at work and take it out on their family at home. Their women and
their children are in such pain and once the men open up I see that they are
too. They want things to be different but are too scared they will lose
their wife's respect and their status. I have seen these men cry from the
until-now unrecognised hurts of their childhood (when dad did to them just
what they are doing now) and sob over the pain they have caused their
family. I try, as David G. said, to unpack "the wonderful gifts that a man
has as his birthright in the most positive way." I encourage (safe)
rough-housing play, teaching the children (both girls and boys) how to fix
and build things, and sharing their other "masculine" skills. I'm not sure
that I have extended this thought much further though and that bears
thinking about.......
In regards to non-clinic based work: I have worked with couples in their own
homes. This way I have seen the parents interact with the children and I see
the dynamics at home. This was agency-based work and I don't think I would
do it as a private practitioner. There are safety concerns, perhaps
especially for me as a woman. But for the assertive outreach work I was
doing, home-based counselling was convenient for the family- I would turn up
after Dad had had a drink and a wind-down after work. It was interesting to
note that the commitment to the work really showed when the kids had been
fed, toys been put out to busy the kids, the room tidied etc and it was
obvious that the living room session was an important time and space in the
week. It was important for me to establish the space as mine as well though
so I asked them before hand to set the chairs up in a certain way, to take
the phone off the hook and to turn the TV off. Interruptions from the kids
were par for the course but this afforded fertile ground for observation and
reflection.
Cheers
Yael
Yael Clark, Psychologist
www.supportingparents.com.au
ph: 0438 559 601
-----Original Message-----
From: ANZ...@googlegroups.com [mailto:ANZ...@googlegroups.com]On Behalf
Of David Grace
Sent: Wednesday, 11 April 2007 4:57 PM
To: ANZ...@googlegroups.com