Saturday, July 25, 2015

Vocational Rehabilitation and Men’s Rights (the WMH as target for “reform”)

Following is an excerpt, the only portion, so far, that deals with Men’s Rights, from a new blog [“VR Services Reform: Study Notes ,” Robert St. Estephe] on Vocational Rehabilitation Services. It is highly specialized, so it is not easy reading, and will be of little use to non-professionals, yet it is worth knowing about for social workers who deal with Vocational Rehabilitation.

Here is the link to the page from which this section was excerpted:

2. Vocational Counselors: Ethics and Competence
C) Political bias against a targeted class of clients

“It doesn’t have to be capitalism” was the complaint leveled by a State Vocational Counselor against the employment goal of that counselor’s client. There is more to this inappropriate statement (and seriously unethical gesture) than meets the ear.

It is important to consider how a social worker who has been indoctrinated into the political theories of “social justice” – an ideological position that is noted for its extreme bias towards “social constructionist” explanations of differences between individuals and equally intense predilection for ignoring hard science explanations of major factors governing difference (biology, genetics, chemistry) – might attempt, whether consciously or not to promote his or her notion of “social justice” through discouraging the client from seeking achievement, excellence, individual achievement, economic success (under “capitalism”), or any other of many aspects of the employment goal that would be suitable for the client’s achievement that is consistent with that person’s “unique strengths, resources, priorities, concerns, abilities, and capabilities,” as is required by law.

Here is an example of the prevalent politicization of social work pedagogy that seeks to single out a targeted class (“white heterosexual male” clients) for different treatment (pressuring the client to “change” to conform to the social worker’s political ideology)

“For example, it would be important for a White heterosexual male therapist to be aware of how his positionality might influence his work with a White heterosexual couple in ways that might blind him to how societal structures are privileging the needs of the male partner, over the needs of the female partner, and lead him to align with the male partner’s view of the relationship.”

[Thomas Stone Carlson & Christi R. McGeorge, North Dakota State University, “Social Justice Mentoring: Preparing Family Therapists for Social Justice Advocacy Work,” Michigan Family Review, Volume 14, Issue 1, 2010]

The authors’ specious ideology-based claim that “societal structures are privileging the needs of the male partner, over the needs of the female partner” is presented by the professor as fact, rather than as an example of “critical gender theory” polemics, designed to promote a political notion of a path towards utopia rather than as a description of reality (bias against fathers, widespread family court fraud, work-place deaths, male genital mutilation, military conscription, etc.).

In the subjective, non-scientific political ideology – or more properly, the cluster of ideological positions (“social justice,” “social change”) – that are now being promoted in many of the training programs that prepare social workers for service employment, the profile of  the “white heterosexual male” is singled out for triple-scrutiny as a class of person who is to be treated with suspicion, as a member of a class to be targeted for political “reform” – along lines that are consistent with the political preferences of the social worker who has adopted “social justice” activism (“Cultural Marxism,” “critical theory,” etc.) as an integral part of practice.

It is not unreasonable to suppose that bias – both institutional and exercised by individual politicized social workers – against VR clients who are, in essence, members of a “pariah class,” and who need to be politically or ideologically “changed” or reformed, is widespread and has infected many agencies.


For more on how the influence of political ideology such as “critical gender theory” (feminist sub-ideology of Cultural Marxism or "social justice"), creates anti-male bias among social work practitioners, see:

[Peter Wright, “A male-centered approach to disability – Part 1: Supercrip,” An Ear for Men, July 16, 2015]
[Peter Wright, “A male-centered approach to disability – Part 2: Institutional Gynocentrism,” An Ear for Men, July 16, 2015]



No comments:

Post a Comment