by BETTINA ARNDT – HOW refreshing to discover an anti-feminist psychiatrist. Very few people in the “helping professions” have the courage to openly oppose the prevailing orthodoxy.
Hannah Spier is well placed to do so because the Norwegian psychiatrist is currently taking time out from her career to raise her three children.
- Under the guise of protecting girls, researchers exploit what has always been considered harmless banter.
- They attribute innocent male misbehaviour as an underlying hatred towards women.
- Even when the truth emerges, this psychobabble goes on its own sweet way.
She’s now living in Switzerland and producing YouTube videos as well as writing a Substack blog – both named “Psychobabble”.
She is exposing how feminist and postmodernist ideas have infiltrated psychology and are screwing up our society.
IDEOLOGICAL CORRUPTION
She wrote a recent blog about the ideological corruption of psychology which featured research from an Australian university, Monash, which last year made headlines with pernicious claptrap about the influence of Andrew Tate and the manosphere in encouraging schoolboy misogyny.
This was based on a study which claimed to provide evidence of “misogynist radicalisation” – a concept that characterises a recent shift in boys’ behaviour, their treatment of girls and women, and the views on gender relations as demonstrated in interactions with their teachers.
But, as Hannah Spier points out, the so-called research was based simply on chats, “qualitative interviews”, with a mere 30 female teachers.
She sums up the research: “No proper evidence. No historical comparison, no opposing perspective, and no objective measures whatsoever – just hearsay and emotional appeal passed off as research.
“Yet, it sailed through peer review solely because it aligned with ideological bias.”
Elsewhere Spier has written at length about what is wrong with the Monash University research, pointing out that under the guise of protecting girls, the researchers exploit what has always been considered harmless banter, and normal male interaction, to incriminate boys.
They attribute any misbehaviour to an underlying hatred toward women.
She suggests the authors fail to consider that boys’ enthusiasm for Tate stems from a desire to reclaim a sense of agency and respect in a society that devalues traditional masculinity.
Spier summises: “If they took the time to have a proper conversation with a teenage Andrew Tate fan – and really listened – they’d quickly realise that much of the appeal is the desire for easily earned money, cool cars and impressing girls – as teenage boys have always wanted.”
The interesting twist was the researchers weren’t even psychologists.
The Monash study was actually conducted by sociologists, a profession which can’t claim to be a science.
Sociology differs from psychology which, as Spier points out, was once committed to scientific methods, seeking objective truths through quantifiable, empirical research.
“This approach assumed that human behaviour could be systematically measured and analysed.
“However, over the past few decades, the field has shifted toward relativism, identity-based theories, and subjectivity,” she wrote.
Today’s psychology culture has no interest in objectivity, particularly when boy shaming is on the agenda.
Australia’s Labor Government is currently throwing money at school programs attacking boys for toxic masculinity and this type of research is just what they need to justify this dangerous social engineering.
The Monash University sociologists got the ball rolling but sure enough, our psychologists then jumped on board this nasty anti-male propaganda.
SHAMELESSLY
Our professional psychology body, The Australian Psychology Society, is now shamelessly promoting a new professional development on “Mainstreaming the manosphere’s misogyny: Exploring how teen boys navigate the Andrew Tate effect”.
This course is based on yet another “study” promoting paranoia about Tate, this time from media experts at the University College London who chatted with a bunch of 13 to 14-year-old schoolboys getting their views on Tate’s videos.
The resulting ideological hogwash is being promoted as “evidence-based” professional education by The Australian Psychology Society and sold to their members.
Spier points to the role of the American Psychological Association (APA) which is the leading voice in mental health and the gatekeeper for psychology licenses.
As Spier explains, the APA has always been a political actor, weighing in on issues far beyond psychology, from feminist ideology to criminal justice and immigration.
In Australia, The Australian Psychology Society (APS) has a similar role, endlessly promoting ideologically biased theories and concepts.
I have had numerous battles with the APS over a range of issues, including the work of psychologist Jennifer McIntosh whose research on overnight care of infants and toddlers has been used to deny fathers’ overnight care of infants and toddlers in family courts across the world.
Even after the McIntosh research was thoroughly debunked by a group of 110 child development experts, the APS has continued to promote her work for many years.
Even when the truth emerges, this type of psychobabble goes on its own sweet way.
Nearly 25 years ago, I wrote about “trauma vultures” – the teams of psychologists and counsellors making a living helping people deal with the impact of witnessing disasters, like school shootings, train disasters, earthquakes and motor accidents.
Their much promoted “trauma debriefing” was supposed to prevent lasting effects on their psychological health but it turned out that wasn’t working.
New 2007 guidelines concluded psychological debriefing should no longer be offered on a routine basis.
Solid research had shown that venting inner turmoil immediately after a trauma is not only often unhelpful but can sometimes make things worse, increasing the likelihood of post-traumatic stress disorder.
The new guidelines suggested survivors of potentially traumatic events should be supported and monitored over time to see who runs into problems. Most people who experience a traumatic event recover on their own with the help of family and friends.
That’s what is supposed to happen.
But the reality is the trauma vultures have simply rebadged themselves as offering “psychological first aid” and whenever there’s a disaster the politicians invite them in to ply their wares.
Having carved their way into disaster relief territory there’s no way psychologists are going to give that up.
There are many areas where psychology is contributing greatly to human knowledge with valuable empirical work.
But it is alarming that this important discipline’s professional bodies and university courses have fallen capture to ideology because they are indoctrinating the professionals of the future, including school counsellors, child experts in our courts and policy makers who play such a vital role in shaping our society.PC
