The Angry Woman Syndrome

Following is an excerpt from "the Angry Woman" by Psychiatrist Nathan Rickles (Note: that we are not only blamed for our anger, but we have also become a "syndrome")

Rickles writes: "Specific common denominators in the angry woman syndrome set it apart from any present-day classification. These symptoms are periodic outbursts of unprovoked anger, marital maladjustment, serious suicide attempts, proneness to abuse of alcohol and drugs, a morbidly oriented critical attitude to prople and a contrary obsessive need to excel in all endeavours, with an intense need for neatness and punctuality".

Helen Levine, a famous orator, mentions in one of her talks regarding this excerpt:

This diatribe against women, under the guide of diagnostic classification, is a chilling example of how women themselves are clinically blamed for the anger, desperation, and even excellence that are part of our lives. the political and personal context of our lives in marriage orbeyond is not considered. The catch 22 of women's lives comes clear: submission, dependency and conformity create hazards for us, as do our anger and desperation.

Be they concerned with incest, wife battering, rape or whatever, the helping professionals manage to zero in on female, rather than male, culpability. Under the guise of expert and sophisticated definitions of normalcy developed primarily by men, women have been kept firmly tied to the traditional institutions of marriage and motherhood. One woman, who had been on tranquilizers for 10 years, said. "I use these drugs one purpose, and one purpose onlu, to protect my family from my irritability." How is it that a woman's health is permitted to be sacrificed for others in this way? Why do we train women to drug themselves into a denial of their own needs and aspirations on the altar of family well-being? What happens when women try routes other than drugs or docility?

I want to share examples from the literature that may have particular meaning to those who are in the helping professions. Erik Erikson's work is considered basic to the curriculum of many schools of social work, psychology and psychiatry. Erikson says that young women often ask whether they can " have an identity" before they know whom they will marry and for whom they wil make a home. He thinks that much of a young woman's identity is already defined in her kind of attractiveness and in the selectivity of her search for the man (or men) by whom she wishes to be sought? In Childhood and society, Erikson devoted seventeen pages to the identity development of adolescent boy and one paragraph to the development of the adolescent girl.

The Angry Woman Syndrome

Following is an excerpt from "the Angry Woman" by Psychiatrist Nathan Rickles (Note: that we are not only blamed for our anger, but we have also become a "syndrome")

Rickles writes: "Specific common denominators in the angry woman syndrome set it apart from any present-day classification. These symptoms are periodic outbursts of unprovoked anger, marital maladjustment, serious suicide attempts, proneness to abuse of alcohol and drugs, a morbidly oriented critical attitude to prople and a contrary obsessive need to excel in all endeavours, with an intense need for neatness and punctuality".

Helen Levine, a famous orator, mentions in one of her talks regarding this excerpt:

This diatribe against women, under the guide of diagnostic classification, is a chilling example of how women themselves are clinically blamed for the anger, desperation, and even excellence that are part of our lives. the political and personal context of our lives in marriage orbeyond is not considered. The catch 22 of women's lives comes clear: submission, dependency and conformity create hazards for us, as do our anger and desperation.

Be they concerned with incest, wife battering, rape or whatever, the helping professionals manage to zero in on female, rather than male, culpability. Under the guise of expert and sophisticated definitions of normalcy developed primarily by men, women have been kept firmly tied to the traditional institutions of marriage and motherhood. One woman, who had been on tranquilizers for 10 years, said. "I use these drugs one purpose, and one purpose onlu, to protect my family from my irritability." How is it that a woman's health is permitted to be sacrificed for others in this way? Why do we train women to drug themselves into a denial of their own needs and aspirations on the altar of family well-being? What happens when women try routes other than drugs or docility?

I want to share examples from the literature that may have particular meaning to those who are in the helping professions. Erik Erikson's work is considered basic to the curriculum of many schools of social work, psychology and psychiatry. Erikson says that young women often ask whether they can " have an identity" before they know whom they will marry and for whom they wil make a home. He thinks that much of a young woman's identity is already defined in her kind of attractiveness and in the selectivity of her search for the man (or men) by whom she wishes to be sought? In Childhood and society, Erikson devoted seventeen pages to the identity development of adolescent boy and one paragraph to the development of the adolescent girl.

Group Process I: Jigsaw Puzzle

I did my first group therapy yesterday (i also did my first unsupervised counselling, but that's for another post!). One of the courses I have this semester is Group Process with Jo Petite. During this course we have to combine everything we've already learnt and facilitate group therapy sessions. Many of us have already been conducting group therapy sessions in shelters and workshops or drop-in centres. But for some of my classmates this was a new experience.

Usually in RECentres, when we facilitate group therapies, we focus on a single problem. Be it family, drugs, alcohol, abuse, violence, play etc. Because this was a new group, we weren't focussed on any single issue. So without a theme, we worked on a goal.

The goal of the group process we conducted was:
1. to become more aware of ourselves in a group (am I a leader, am I a follower, am I competitive, am I laid back, am I confrontational?)
2. be focussed/goal oriented
3. Understand what roles we play within relations (contextual and non contextual)
4. How do I interact with others around me?
5. How do I work with others around me? Do we work parallel with each other? (Do our individual work and combine efforts later) Do we combine our efforts and work together towards one goal? etc

For this exercise, we divided the group in pairs. So for a class of 17, we had 8 groups with one group of three. During this class, we handed out everyone a ziplock bag with jigsaw puzzles in it. From each ziplock bag, we took out one piece and placed in a randomly different bag. The group did not know abt this switch. Everyone was told to complete the jigsaw puzzle.

We observed. Once everyone completed their puzzle, we re-grouped into a larger group and asked everyone to discuss what they learnt. This challenged everyone.

Some observed that they were control freaks. Some observed that they shouted out 'I'm done, I'm done' as soon as they were done. (even though, no one was being timed). Some decided to help out others once they were done. (they were focussed on a larger group). Some sat back while their partner hunted for the missing piece, some groups spread out to find the missing piece. Some assumed leadership and delegated. Others let it go. Some mothers said that while at home they have to be incharge of everything, in class they were happy that someone else was running the show (that's so me!!).

Watch out for more unique group therapies we come up with!:P