This is... not exactly a shock.

theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2…

I had a life coach. I recommend her: @FelicityMorse is awesome!

But a big reason she's awesome is she's fully aware of the many issues set out in this article. She's not at all dogmatic and is highly empathetic.
Life coaching will work for some people and not work at all for others. Like CBT or psychodynamic or Gestalt or any other kind of therapy, in other words (even though it's not actually therapy - or not supposed to be).

But by heck, it as an industry needs to be regulated.
And it as an industry is so focused on upper middle class white people, it's frightening.

Any world like this in which many of its practicioners (but not Felicity in ANY way) ignore trauma and tell you it's all in your head is dangerous, ableist and extremely racist.
Good life coaches have an open mind, treat everyone as individuals and with the utmost respect and compassion.

Bad coaches, like bad anythings really, are dogmatists, demagogues and think THEY have some kind of special power.

They don't. They're just narcissists.
As with most private sector industries in this mad, bad world, capitalism is at the very root of where the problems lie.

Anything marketing itself as a get rich quick scheme and some magic cure ALWAYS warrants massive scrutiny.
Good coaches would welcome that scrutiny and regulation. Because they're in it to genuinely help others not make a fortune while blaming others for their problems.

See also: mindfulness. A good thing. Except when taken to extremes.
Except when used by exploitative bosses, ie. "you're exhausted and depressed because of your poorly paid 60-hour working week with us? You should be doing mindfulness!" 🙄🙄🙄

Then said boss ticks the box which says 'we care about our employees' mental health'. 🙄🙄🙄
Wellbeing, physical and mental, is absolutely fundamental to a happy, productive society and economy.

Yet in practice, amazingly few bosses even think about it. When the Tories go on about 'productivity', I roll my eyes. Because they're so so full of shit.
If we cared about productivity, we'd invest in mental health astronomically more than we do.

Instead, it's a skeleton service with scandalous waiting lists - and social services are horrifically underfunded and scapegoated when anything goes badly wrong.
If we cared about productivity, we wouldn't laugh at the idea of a 4-day working week. We'd implement it, because it's bloody obvious it'd make the workforce happier, more rested and more productive.

If we cared about productivity, we'd invest for the long term.
In the best technology, tools and practices. Instead, the entire ethos of neoliberalism is about short term profit by spending as little as possible and making your staff work as hard as possible.

Neoliberalism isn't only unethical and immoral. IT DOESN'T WORK.
If we cared about productivity, we'd have much longer maternity and paternity leave.

If we cared about productivity, the government would pay for people to retrain. Instead, only the privileged are able to afford to change careers - despite a rapidly changing economy.
And if we cared about productivity, no woman manager or executive would feel the need to emulate the worst kind of man in order to prove how 'tough' and 'ruthless' they are.

ALL managers would treat their staff well. Because happy staff are productive staff.
In football, managers with empathy and love for their players - no matter how highly paid the latter are - get MUCH MUCH better results nowadays than old-style dictators.

Life doesn't have to be like this. It doesn't have to be cruel or harsh or full of bullies and egotists.
In short: Image

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Shaun Lawson

Shaun Lawson Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @shaunjlawson

9 Oct
OK - plenty of people have pulled me up on that comment. So I'm going to explain what I meant.

Of course I'm fully aware of Bury, Macclesfield, Oldham, Swindon, AFC Wimbledon, Coventry (where Mark Robins is doing an astonishing job) and many many others.
But go find me another club anywhere in the world which gets 50K through its gates and has won NOTHING, not a sausage, in getting on towards 70 years.

You can't. Because it doesn't exist. Even snakebitten Schalke, now in Germany's second division, won the UEFA Cup in 1997.
For a huge club to have failed for almost 70 years has required the most epic levels of constant mismanagement. Appalling neglect in the 70s and 80s. Ludicrous overspending in the mid to late 90s (John Hall's investment wasn't grants; it was loans); the appalling Freddy Shepherd.
Read 40 tweets
8 Oct
THREAD: Newcastle United.

Let me start with this. No fanbase in England has been through more misery nor been more extraordinarily loyal to their club than Newcastle's. A huge amount of my respect for them comes from that.

Across Europe, probably only Schalke even compare.
Newcastle haven't won a single thing domestically since 1955, nor internationally since 1969. Yet even when they got relegated, they were still one of the 20 richest clubs in the world - they are a HUGE club.

And it's because of their potential that the Saudis have bought them.
Just as it was because of Man City's potential that their owners bought them. So many laughed at City fans and have kept laughing at Newcastle fans - but both were and are sleeping giants.

Now it's the Toon who'll stir... and I've no doubt, will mean business.
Read 23 tweets
7 Oct
And now a short note for British business - much of which is beside itself with fury at Johnson's remarks.

It's pretty simple, folks. How did you vote in 2015? How did you vote in 2017? How did you vote in 2019?

More than that: how did you vote throughout the 80s, 90s and 00s?
Thatcherism, neoliberalism, massive inequality and disgraceful levels of poverty didn't just fall out of the sky. They were voted for.

Not by a majority, sure - but by the huge bulk of the business world? Oh yes.
Said business world responded to the economically illiterate disaster of austerity BY VOTING FOR MORE OF IT in 2015. Even when austerity took enormous amounts of money out of people's pockets and gutted the economy.

As long as fat cats got even richer, it couldn't give a damn.
Read 10 tweets
6 Oct
Picture the scene. I was teaching a group of 15-17 year olds who were taking PET (Preliminary English Test: if you pass it, you're intermediate).

One girl in the class was way, way ahead of everyone else and really should've been doing FCE. She also had a part time job.
And other exams to prepare for, and plenty of responsibilities beyond that. Her job meant she missed several classes - including the listening mock.

She found me right after class one week and said she was worried about having missed it.
The ridiculous language institute this was at told her she had to come the following day, Friday, at 2pm. This was the only time she could take the mock, apparently.
🙄Yet her job clashed with that time... and the institute - which charged absurd fees - didn't care.
Read 7 tweets
6 Oct
Johnson, of course, mentioned Churchill towards the end of his speech. This was a typically cynical way of shoring up the Tories 'war on woke'. But again, it'll have connected.

I see Churchill as pretty much the absolute encapsulation of humanity. He did such good AND such bad.
Was he a great man? Absolutely yes. Was he an evil man? Very often, absolutely yes.

How can those two viewpoints co-exist? They can, and they do. Because human beings are extremely complicated. We're ALL hypocrites to some extent or another.
He changed parties practically as often as he changed his socks.

He worked very effectively with Labour, then denounced it as a 'Gestapo'.

He opposed Nazi tyranny with all his might but wanted to continue British imperial tyranny and never forgave those who ended it.
Read 16 tweets
6 Oct
There are, of course, many different narratives and perspectives about Britain in 2021.

Boris Johnson delivered the ebullient, positive, happy perspective. It was full of nonsense - but as a piece of political theatre, it worked.

Starmer cannot lay a glove on him.
Labour have to find someone who can.

But it's a mark of how incredibly divided Britain is - some winners, many more losers - that he could've made that speech ON THE SAME DAY as his Chancellor, the wealthiest MP in history, plunges so many into abject poverty and destitution.
And it's a further mark of how broken Britain is that the media will focus on the speech, not the utterly horrendous, indefensible reality.
Read 7 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(