What has feminism got to do with mental health?
/ Depressed women of the world, unite!
/ Women talking themselves out of depression. And sometimes shouting.
/ The hidden consequences of hidden anger

Women have historically been viewed as having less mental stability than men. Hysterical. Depressed. Dependent.

According to research done the 1970s, being a woman precluded mental health in significant ways (Broverman,et al: 1970, “Sex-role stereotypes and clinical judgments of mental health.”). In the study, a group of mental health workers were asked to describe the attributes of a healthy adult. They were then asked to describe the attributes of a healthy woman. The results showed that the attributes for a healthy woman did not match those of a healthy adult. Instead, traits that characterized healthy adults were attributes used to describe a man. In short, only men were perceived as being capable of mental health.

It’s no wonder then that feminist psychologists of the 70s criticized psychology and prevalent forms of psychoanalytic thinking in particular. Freud and his phallocentric concept of ‘penis envy’ dominated the field, which was, not surprisingly, difficult for feminists to accept.

Irmeli Laitinen is a Finnish psychotherapist and feminist who has been working in the UK for the past ten years. She is a groups analyst at Manchester Mental Health and Social Care Trust. She points out that in today’s post modern society, traditional boundaries of gender have become much less defined in some contexts yet are heavily reinforced in others. This may be unconscious, but it has political implications, such as women receiving less pay than men for equal work.

Mental healthcare cannot afford to be blind to gendered issues. For example, it is more common for women to seek help for depression than it is for men. According to Laitinen, this so called “female depression” is often an expression of hidden anger. It is still more acceptable for women to be depressed than to be angry or frustrated.

Laitinen also emphasises that this is a socially constructed phenomenon rather than a biological one. This is clear from Laitinen’s personal experiences of working as a therapist in Finland and in Britain. For example, men in Britain are better at discussing their feelings, whereas in Finland a kind of Viking culture still prevails in the sense that men are expected to stifle emotions which may indicate vulnerability. In both Finland and Britain, anger is constructed as a “masculine” emotion, and thus a woman who is angry is perceived as “difficult”, troubled and essentially not feminine.

And this is where feminist therapy groups come in: helping women deal constructions of gender that have contributed to their ability to address issues of mental health. Groups vary from radical self-help groups to clinical therapist-led ones. The essential point is that these groups create a space for women to discuss their problems with each other – a space where it is acceptable to be angry. In the groups women can raise their concerns as well as their voices.

A young woman, who will be referred to as Laura, has participated in a feminist radical self-help group in Finland and says the group has helped her break patterns of thought that may otherwise have blown certain issues out of proportion. As a new mother, Laura has been particularly sensitive to criticism related to the upbringing of her child, an issue she felt comfortable enough to discuss with other women in the group.

The group meets once a month for a day or two in the weekend. It is a self-help group in the sense that there are no therapists present. Anyone can raise issues they feel they need to discuss with the knowledge that their peers will listen without analyzing or judging. No interruptions are allowed when someone is speaking, and all issues raised are given validity. In many instances, the discussions have little to do with mental health and instead revolve around broader issues of being a woman.

Irmeli Laitinen developed the concept of female only clinical therapy groups in Finland, and she recently finished her research on their effect on depression (Depression in / by / for women – agency, feminism and self-help in groups). These groups had two therapists present but they could continue the groups by themselves later. Both qualitative and quantitative results from Laitinen’s research show that even groups that met only 10 times helped women to maintain a healthier attitude towards their depression.

The aim is not to get rid of depressive feelings altogether since, according to Laitinen, depression isn’t necessarily a bad thing. The basic task of life is to learn how to lose. Depression can be a protective mechanism, it can tell you to slow down if you are working too hard. It can be a way to turn the page and move on.

Of course, one needs to make a distinction between reactive depression caused by external factors – such as losing a friend – and clinical depression that comes not from a specific event but originates internally and that may be balanced with regular therapy and/or appropriate medication. Laitinen’s research has focused on reactive depression.

Unfortunately depression in general has become clinicalized with too much emphasis on medication and getting rid of the symptoms, with not enough attention paid to solving the underlying problems. A 2000 study by Canadian psychologist, Janet Stoppard showed that women are often prescribed heavier medication even if they have the same symptoms as a male patient. (Stoppard, 2000: Understanding Depression: Feminist Social Constructionist Approaches.) Group therapy can be empowering, giving women the strength to make the changes they might need if they are not happy with their lives.

Fair enough, but what about men who suffer from depression – shouldn’t they be allowed to participate in these groups?

According to Laitinen, men typically have different issues to deal with than women. It is more common for men to rely on violence and alcohol or drugs, which hide their depression. A man who stops drinking often goes into deep depression. These issues can be dealt with in male-only groups. More recently, mixed therapy groups for both men and women have been developed in Finland, using the same methods as the feminist groups that Laitinen started.

The need for feminist groups will exist as long as the experiences of men and women are different. Laitinen points to so-called survivor groups for sexually abused women in the 70s, or women with eating disorders in the 80s. These groups were created by feminists who realised women needed a space where they felt comfortable and could talk openly about their feelings and experiences, without the fear of being misunderstood. Professionals at that time were not conscious of this dynamic and thus were not able to provide effective help.

Today, mental health workers are educated on the issues. The worries of women who have been sexually abused are taken more seriously, by female and male therapists alike. The female only survivor groups are thus not as necessary as in the past. Similarly with depression, there needs to be more understanding of the underlying societal structures that make women’s experiences different from those of men. The goal is for these groups to become superfluous.

For more information on feminist therapy groups in London, see Women’s Therapy Centre: http://www.womenstherapycentre.co.uk/