Dr Jessica Taylor New Book

[Seiheiki]

Hi,

Is anyone else going to the Birmingham book launch of Sexy But Psycho on Sunday night?

Well, I went last night and Dr Jessica Taylor's talk was brilliant. I was a bit worried what it would be like after this thread but I found she was much more nuanced than you might expect from what's been said here, and she obviously knows her stuff.

She didn't say she was anti meds. She said what she wanted when doctors prescribed meds is for them to be honest e.g. if they don't really know how they work to say that, say that they may help, they may not, that you might be fine on them or you might have significant side affects, that you might find coming off them really hard and that you will need support with tapering etc.

She also talked about changing things, looking for ways to move forward, it wasn't just about criticising the status quo.

She talked about lots more things but I'm at work right now and shouldn't really be on my phone.

Our of interest, did she credit the long line of user/survivors, researchers, doctors, psychiatrists, psychologists, charities etc who have been making these points for decades?

She's a proponent of the widespread existence of satanic ritual abuse, basically a lefty QAnon. Also the idea that she's doing something novel in criticising psychiatry is hilarious. Heard of RD Laing? Jesus, I'm ancient and studied him at uni. Anti psychiatry is big business. There is a lot wrong with psychiatry, but there's even more wrong with psychology imo. Absolute nutball

In the 25+ years that I've worked in mental health, I can honestly say that I've never come across anyone who, or read anything that, purs forward the view that doctors should be handing out drugs like Smarties and not telling people anything about the possible benefits/side effects/dangers of coming off suddenly etc.

These discussions don't always happen as fully as they should, largely because of pressures on GPs time, and equally I haven't come across anyone who thinks that doesn't need improving either.

Setting up a dichotomy between vulnerable, traumatised patients and uncaring, uninformed doctors is highly offensive to the thousands who do their utter best working in the field and just not true. Many doctors take psychotropic drugs of some sort and have experienced trauma.

It's a complete straw person argument.

But I'm glad that you enjoyed her talk and I honestly would like to like her work, but she makes it impossible for me.

.

@Twitterwhooooo

Our of interest, did she credit the long line of user/survivors, researchers, doctors, psychiatrists, psychologists, charities etc who have been making these points for decades?

Yes, she made it clear the ideas she was talking about were part of a wider school of thought. She didn't spend a lot of time talking about this, as she was more focused on talking about her own personal journey of realisation, relevant experiences from her professional life and the book content. But I didn't get any sense that she was trying to claim criticising psychiatry was a new thing or something she's invented!

She invited those who want to read around the subject to ask her for a reading list.

@beattieedny

She's a proponent of the widespread existence of satanic ritual abuse, basically a lefty QAnon. Also the idea that she's doing something novel in criticising psychiatry is hilarious. Heard of RD Laing? Jesus, I'm ancient and studied him at uni. Anti psychiatry is big business. There is a lot wrong with psychiatry, but there's even more wrong with psychology imo. Absolute nutball

Is she, really? What evidence do you have for that?

Because I remember a twitter thread about this and that's not how it went at all.

Jessica mentioned satanic abuse. I can't remember the context but she wasn't talking about widespread satanic abuse, instead she was saying she'd seen cases where it had happened. And there was some bloke who saw himself as an expert who was saying no, that couldn't possibly happen, satanic abuse doesn't exist.

I must say I found Jessica more convincing. It seemed that the bloke couldn't entertain the idea that single cases that could be described as satanic abuse could exist, given the claims of widespread satanic abuse are - quite plainly - bollocks. He didn't seem to be able to distinguish between individual cases and this supposed mass movement.

He - and others - demanded Jessica prove her claims - but if she's only talking about one or two cases, in her old job, she can't very well go back and drag up those individual case files to prove her point, can she? (Client confidentiality!).

I found it bizarre that the bloke couldn't entertain the idea that satanic abuse could exist at all. There are plenty of people in the world who describe themselves a satanists, then there are loads of twisted fuckers, satanic abuse is a trope - from films and now from this modern urban myth. It doesn't seem at all beyond reason that someone would act out that trope in real life abuse.

Perhaps I've got it wrong - in which case please show me where exactly Jessica said she thought QAnon style Satanic abuse exists as - AFAIK - she didn't?

Also, she's not saying she's novel in criticising psychiatry, where have you got that from? If we were doing it when you went to uni, and we still need to do it now, perhaps we need more people like Jessica to shout about it?

There was a real feeling last night that the book was about trying to create change (rather than claim novel ideas).

Lol, search twitter with her handle and satanic abuse. She's very convinced of herself and does not like other women disagreeing with her.
The anti psych being new was in reference to another poster in this thread..
She's also a massive Professional Working Class Lass. Really lays it on thick. She ain't poor anymore!

@beattieedny

Lol, search twitter with her handle and satanic abuse. She's very convinced of herself and does not like other women disagreeing with her. The anti psych being new was in reference to another poster in this thread.. She's also a massive Professional Working Class Lass. Really lays it on thick. She ain't poor anymore!

OK, I've just done that. The QAnon theories are about massive, organised rings involving celebrities, the rich and powerful etc etc.

I can't see Jessica supporting that at all. Please show me where she has done?

What she's saying, as I understand it, is that she has come across cases of ritualised abuse. One tweet says

I have personally supported victims of Christian cults in the midlands and wales who were sexually abusing children in groups using satanic rape rituals.

That's not the same thing as supporting QAnon, is it?

As to this She's also a massive Professional Working Class Lass. Really lays it on thick. She ain't poor anymore!

Well that comment's just snide as fuck, really, isn't it?

Re the satanic abuse, I think JT and the expert bloke were talking at cross purposes - in the sense that no, there is no such thing as "satanic abuse", as in linked to an actual practising dark religion. However JT is saying that she has seen instances of abuse where the perpetrators led the victim to believe it was a satanic ritual, purely as a fabrication to excuse their abusive behaviour.

longlines I think that's the problem for me. That Dr Jessica doesn't spent much time crediting others, and is overly involved in self-promotion. Really different to eg Karen Ingala-Smith who I admire tremendously.

BUT I say that as someone who knows more mental health than her, and I can imagine it's a powerful pov if you haven't heard it much before.

I agree that it's good that she's reaching different audiences and am glad that you enjoyed her book launch.

@BeyondPurpleTulips

Re the satanic abuse, I think JT and the expert bloke were talking at cross purposes - in the sense that no, there is no such thing as "satanic abuse", as in linked to an actual practising dark religion. However JT is saying that she has seen instances of abuse where the perpetrators led the victim to believe it was a satanic ritual, purely as a fabrication to excuse their abusive behaviour.

Yes, many women who work at Rape Crisis and similar services regularly hear women articulate their abuse in this type of way.

I remember at work trying to refer a young lady on to the safeguarding front door at the council due to being exorcised by her own dad who believed she was possessed. This resulted in severe self harm and traumatic behaviours in this young lady and certainly opened my eyes to the extent of things that go on within our communities.

Nevertheless she was refused help as she still didn’t meet the threshold, and this wasn’t in a rape centre. A fairly average inner city school in the midlands.

Have to admit I’ve cringed reading this thread at all these people who “know” more than others. The real experts are the ones with lived experience.

@longlines

As to this She's also a massive Professional Working Class Lass. Really lays it on thick. She ain't poor anymore!

Well that comment's just snide as fuck, really, isn't it?

Yes, yes it is snide. She's utterly horrible to women who disagree with her, so if she wants to dish it out then I'm happy to reciprocate. Her reliance on herself as an authentic, wc woman branding says it all to me.

A few points:

1. There are plenty of people in the public eye who are criticised and questioned and that's how it should be. As soon as we can't do that, we're living under very different circumstances. And as someone with "lived experience" of such circumstances, I wish that everybody could feel the relief that comes with that freedom - admittedly alongside the sting of the criticism itself.

1. There seems to be an idea that academics publish work and everybody claps. From what I've seen a few people do, but it's a dog-eat-dog world and anything you publish is ripe for the picking. Academic take downs can be HARD!

1. There's a very popular psychiatrist who used to work at an elite American university who penned a book about the body's response to trauma. He's almost a superstar in some therapy settings - I've seen rooms of women fawn over him. I believe his work to be excellent. He's an absolute arse in my experience though - and it seems from someone I know who was in high school with him that it's a bit of a trend. "Questions" at seminars/workshops are basically opportunities for him to be praised. I've seen him speak rudely about someone in front of an extended audience..the woman in question was on the podium behind him and organising the event. Actual questions about his work or furthering it in some way were shut down - and very rudely when not on mic. He has been questioned on Mumsnet (probably in "feminism" but I can't remember), with details about his wife shared in an attempt to discredit him. I see similarities in the arrogance of him and JT, I see similarities in their treatment online and similarities in the reverence with which some people refer to them. I see similarities in how they are shaking things up in relation to understanding trauma symptoms. I do not think JT is being treated differently in this thread.

1. I notice that with social media personalities, SM is both part of their job and identity. This exacerbates the "sting" of criticism about their work, because their whole identity is very publicly tied up with their income stream. I wonder if this is something that also applies to JT.

I find her self promotion and somewhat aggressive style annoying. But that doesn't change the fact that she is doing good work. As someone else said, she's very unlikely to be right all of the time, but she's articulating and discussing things that a lot of people weren't, or that people were, but not in a way that was accessible.

For example, some of her older work around emotional abuse etc and the way women are treated different to men in all kinds of situations, including medically, have been very well explained and I've found them useful to send to people like DH to articulate something I wasn't able to do so very well.

The real experts are the ones with lived experience.

Indeed, as many of us have. With bells on, unfortunately.

So you’ve came on this thread to enlighten us all you know more than JT, have 25 years plus worth of experience in the field AND you have lived experience (with bells on).

So I take it you’ve published then?

No, I've been too busy working in frontline services, mainly for charities.

Also, have no desire to be published.

You?

And I 'came on this thread' somewhere around page 5 to discuss my concerns about her work in mental health and wish her the best.

That's okay, isn't it?

No one has said lived experience doesn’t matter.

I have lived experience. I’ve also worked in mental health. That’s not uncommon. I’m not sure why posters are being attacked for that?

People are allowed to disagree with or critique Dr Taylor’s publicly expressed opinions. It’s a very bad sign if any psychologist or their followers think that differing opinions on her professional work are a personal attack on her or on women generally.

A differing opinion is one thing. Claiming superior knowledge over others is another.

I don’t claim to “know” more than anyone else regarding mental health irrespective of publishing or not. That attitude is more dangerous.

Length of time in service within the MH field coupled with lived experience does indeed make you knowledgeable, but you cannot possibly know that you know more than JT. Perhaps you do, perhaps you don’t. Bold statement, if a little arrogant which does seem to be an issue with people working within MH services.

I wouldn’t make that statement about anybody to be honest. I’ve worked in the field, have lived experience and have family members who are MH nurses and also the other side of the coin (been sectioned etc).

I am still open to learning and do not claim to be an expert.

But you were the one who said, "the real experts are the ones with lived experience". That's claiming superior knowledge of one group over another right there.