I find this to be a very important topic and thank you for bringing out and sharing your perspectives on it.
While I understand that accreditations and formal qualifications are still very much revered in our society, I advocate for it in the complementary wellness industry (which I'm considering Circles to be a part of in the "professional" sense since you mentioned IICT) for 2 reasons that does not relate to external validation or to appease patriarchal views.
One is to ensure the quality of the training being provided and two to ensure that the graduates of the training have been trained well and are capable of providing the service they've been trained it. While Circle work may be deemed low risk by governing bodies, I do believe it can make an impact to attendees (in both positive and negative ends) that is usually not spoken about or reported. I have heard cases when women are afraid to attend another circle because of an unpleasant experience in a previous one (and this may well have tainted their view of being with a group of women whether in circle or not).
What I'm getting to is that the 2 reasons I stated are I hope in service to making sure we provide a "high quality of service", for lack of a better phrase, that helps ensure that whoever runs circle and whoever attends circle continues to bring about and receive the benefits and purpose that Circle provides. While the complementary therapies have gained popularity in the recent years and more and more people have experienced it and are swearing by its effectiveness to create/support change/healing/wellness, the accreditation and qualifications can also continue to assist and shiw that. Because I know that it changes lives since I've personally experienced it over the years and I would hope more people would as well.
I find this to be a very important topic and thank you for bringing out and sharing your perspectives on it.
While I understand that accreditations and formal qualifications are still very much revered in our society, I advocate for it in the complementary wellness industry (which I'm considering Circles to be a part of in the "professional" sense since you mentioned IICT) for 2 reasons that does not relate to external validation or to appease patriarchal views.
One is to ensure the quality of the training being provided and two to ensure that the graduates of the training have been trained well and are capable of providing the service they've been trained it. While Circle work may be deemed low risk by governing bodies, I do believe it can make an impact to attendees (in both positive and negative ends) that is usually not spoken about or reported. I have heard cases when women are afraid to attend another circle because of an unpleasant experience in a previous one (and this may well have tainted their view of being with a group of women whether in circle or not).
What I'm getting to is that the 2 reasons I stated are I hope in service to making sure we provide a "high quality of service", for lack of a better phrase, that helps ensure that whoever runs circle and whoever attends circle continues to bring about and receive the benefits and purpose that Circle provides. While the complementary therapies have gained popularity in the recent years and more and more people have experienced it and are swearing by its effectiveness to create/support change/healing/wellness, the accreditation and qualifications can also continue to assist and shiw that. Because I know that it changes lives since I've personally experienced it over the years and I would hope more people would as well.