- Registered Member
- Posts: 1143
- Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 8:17 am
- Location: Chicago, IL
I'm a male therapist. When I see a client, I see a person in need of massage therapy be it therapeutic or relaxation or a combination. Even when I'm not in a clinic setting, I'm often running possible treatment scenarious for people I see on the street, riding the bus, etc. (I did this intially while in school and have toned it down somewhat. But it's kinda always there.)
When I intially read the article, I was on the bus. I was so upset at what I was reading. (In fact, as I snapping the pages and breathing heavily and maybe turning red in the face, I may have been given a few scared looks from fellow busriders.) I couldn't believe the words that were falling off the page. I couldn't read it through in one sitting. While there were points worth exploring, I believed (and still believe) that the author used quotes that supported her opinion; excluding others that might have leveled the 'article' out. Then I got even more upset; realizing that people outside the profession would take the talking points as gospel and never look at the alternatives. It's like "if it's in print, it must be true!"
As a side note:
While I enjoy the challenges working on a specific problem, I also enjoy the 'fluff and buff' type of work. However, I also inform clients that, everything else being equal, once a body is worked on for roughly 20 minutes or so, the body automatically enters into the PNS and will naturally enter into a relaxed state. And for people who regularly receive work, the time is often shortened.
Sorry for the long post. I'm glad I was able to finally get this off my chest. I'd mentioned this to a few therapists at work and even shared the article with those who hadn't read it. I wanted to see if it was just me. It wasn't. My fellow therapists were upset as well, maybe not as much as I.