Wasted time.
Oct. 30th, 2009 10:16 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
lolabobsI went to a training event today - "dealing with women offenders."
They started out with some sweeping statements along the lines of "had we noticed that women offenders had much more complex problems than men?" When one or two of us pointed out that this was an unhelpful approach, and how, as a rule, we liked to address people as individuals and consider their problems accordingly they backtracked a little, to point out that "some women had complex problems as did some men". So far so educational.
The in depth traning then looked at some case studies, asking us to identify the problems of these fictional characters - we do the reality of this every single day in our jobs; working with and reviewing a persons obstacles and problems. The cases presented were much teh same and the sole 'woman'specific aspect presented was that one of teh cases was a female sex worker. Ever other problem identified was non gender specific. We, as a group suggested gender elements and played along, but it was an insultingly simplified waste of time. Theyhadn't even considered issues of domestic violence. It ended by them issuing a 'resource list' for those working with women offenders - with the caveat that they don't know the area, so perhaps *we* could tell *them* some of the local resources to put on their list!
The afternoon session was marginally more interesting, as it focussed on women in teh sex industry. But it wasn't particularly helpful as we don't have a lot of contact with this client group because they don't tend to receive sentences where we would be working with them. It seemed to be an afternoon about education and removing stereotypes but mistargeted because pretty much, people in my job? Have an awareness of needs and circumstances and choices and the like. It's pretty much hammered home from day one - plus,it's kinda part of teh job.
One of teh trainers works on an outreach project, going onto teh streets and provided condomes, food, support etc for sex workers. Her anecdotes were interesting (although again, not particularly educational). She spent a good while telling us about a fantastic drop in/support facility - before adding that this was in Bristol and there was nothing like it in our area... which was helpful.
The one fact that everyone was suprised by was her assertion that the 'going rate' for sex was between £30 and £5. When people expressed an element of dismay at someone being in a situation where they value themselves/are valued so lowly she seemed to think we were judging the women for prostitution and went off on an allegory of the married woman who no longer loves her husband but stays for teh security...
All in all it was a waste of a day. I (and my colleagues) had kind of assumed it would have been more about 'this, this and this have been identified as gender specific issues, this is what resources we have to deal with them' - not 'women have deeper problems than men. well, except when you disagree with us, in which case no they don't but they have some and I don't know what resources you've got to help, but lets have some biscuits'
The annoying thing was, they were reasonably good trainers - the materials were well presented, they had good pacing and motivation - it was just rubbish/mistargetted subject matter.
They started out with some sweeping statements along the lines of "had we noticed that women offenders had much more complex problems than men?" When one or two of us pointed out that this was an unhelpful approach, and how, as a rule, we liked to address people as individuals and consider their problems accordingly they backtracked a little, to point out that "some women had complex problems as did some men". So far so educational.
The in depth traning then looked at some case studies, asking us to identify the problems of these fictional characters - we do the reality of this every single day in our jobs; working with and reviewing a persons obstacles and problems. The cases presented were much teh same and the sole 'woman'specific aspect presented was that one of teh cases was a female sex worker. Ever other problem identified was non gender specific. We, as a group suggested gender elements and played along, but it was an insultingly simplified waste of time. Theyhadn't even considered issues of domestic violence. It ended by them issuing a 'resource list' for those working with women offenders - with the caveat that they don't know the area, so perhaps *we* could tell *them* some of the local resources to put on their list!
The afternoon session was marginally more interesting, as it focussed on women in teh sex industry. But it wasn't particularly helpful as we don't have a lot of contact with this client group because they don't tend to receive sentences where we would be working with them. It seemed to be an afternoon about education and removing stereotypes but mistargeted because pretty much, people in my job? Have an awareness of needs and circumstances and choices and the like. It's pretty much hammered home from day one - plus,it's kinda part of teh job.
One of teh trainers works on an outreach project, going onto teh streets and provided condomes, food, support etc for sex workers. Her anecdotes were interesting (although again, not particularly educational). She spent a good while telling us about a fantastic drop in/support facility - before adding that this was in Bristol and there was nothing like it in our area... which was helpful.
The one fact that everyone was suprised by was her assertion that the 'going rate' for sex was between £30 and £5. When people expressed an element of dismay at someone being in a situation where they value themselves/are valued so lowly she seemed to think we were judging the women for prostitution and went off on an allegory of the married woman who no longer loves her husband but stays for teh security...
All in all it was a waste of a day. I (and my colleagues) had kind of assumed it would have been more about 'this, this and this have been identified as gender specific issues, this is what resources we have to deal with them' - not 'women have deeper problems than men. well, except when you disagree with us, in which case no they don't but they have some and I don't know what resources you've got to help, but lets have some biscuits'
The annoying thing was, they were reasonably good trainers - the materials were well presented, they had good pacing and motivation - it was just rubbish/mistargetted subject matter.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-10-30 11:29 pm (UTC)Ever since the 1980s, when I first became exposed to the status of "women's issues" in England, I've been appalled by the cluelessness of the powers that be -- and thus how these issues bubble down to the masses.
Back then, I was involved with a man whose English cousin was one of the editors of a feminist magazine called Women's Review -- at least, that's what I think it was called. Their gimmick was to publish reviews of cultural events, including plays, films and books, from a feminist perspective, with enlightening sidebars to help readers new to the idea to grasp what was going on under their noses. My conversations with this fabulous woman were fascinating to me on the one hand, while on the other, depressing beyond belief. She was fighting battles that we'd fought (and mostly won) 15 or 20 years earlier. I'm sorry to see that, in some quarters at least, nothing much has changed.
What would happen if you could sell your expertise and insights to a company such as the one that cooked up this presentation? With these added to their money and apparent marketing savvy, they'd really have something. And you'd have more money in the till.
Thanks for hearing me out. Here honey. Have a nice cuppa.
no subject
Date: 2009-10-30 11:50 pm (UTC)It was quite frustrating really - the tutors identified some distressing stats as to the type of sentences women receive (which, of course, I can't quote now - but were linked to the fact that whilst the number of women in the CJS is significantly less than men, the sentences they receive are proportionately worse), but they didn't consider why (except to wonder if we wrote bad reports!) and then suggested that we do things that aren't within our remit/capabilities/resources. (such as: why don't we link/refer women to various support agenies before sentence? How about because we don't have any powers to do so before sentence? Basic info they shoudl have researched before coming to us.)
They training company was a private affair run by these two women, both of whom were 'experts in their field', so I don't think they would be open to any alternative information(!) - It's a very logical and lovely suggestion though - talk to and invest in someone who actually does the job and works with the subject group. Maybe one day...
no subject
Date: 2009-10-30 11:40 pm (UTC)I enjoyed them as it give me a confidence boost!
I never figured out what I thought about the trainers though. On the one hand they were starting from a conclusion they wanted to reach and then worked back to the theory. Bad. On the other they were good trainers earning a living. Understandable.
So, understandabley bad.
no subject
Date: 2009-10-30 11:52 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-30 11:56 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-31 05:15 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-11-01 07:21 pm (UTC)