retrain yourself in midlife -- since you don't need a degree to do this actually -- and set up a twelve step program. So for Foucault this is not some great new humanistic advance in medicine that has liberalised the treatment of madness, it is a new form of control that's based on a new language about the mad. For example we no longer call them morons and idiots; we call them the differently abled and so on. But for Foucault this new discourse is even more totalitarian because behind it hides the same mechanisms of power... not the same... but behind it hides mechanisms of power which keep these people in their sway. I think that one of the greatest examples of this -- for me -- is the discourse concerning body weight in women; bulimia, anorexia and so on. It's as though a male dominant society was able in the Middle Ages to, you know, put a chastity belt on a woman, to put, you know, to keep food away from her and starve her if she misbehaved. But today we accomplish the same feat through images that are constantly bombarded into the conscious and into the unconscious of women, and they perform the wonderfully humanistic task of starving themselves to death while male therapists teach them how to get onto twelve step programs to eat. See, for Foucault, this is why its not humanism. This kind of malady is a cultural malady that strikes at the very