(Part 2) Reddit mentions: The best books about psychotherapy

That is the biggest bullshit I have read in quite some time...

This is so full of assumptions and wrong statements that even though some train of thoughts may be correct as a whole it is just ridiculous.

> you see human psychology just works that way

This is a sentence that could come right from a speech of Donald Trump.

> you will play bad when your car is plain and ugly because your brain is constantly thinking about getting better items

This for example is based on the assumptions that a plain car or a car without skins from crates or so must be ugly.

And "your brain is constantly thinking about getting better items". I guess you went to school or are still going to school. Question: Can you focus on what is happening at all or when someone wears a nice piece of clothing is your brain constantly thinking about getting better clothing too?

See how ridiculous that is? Most times people don't even give a fuck when someone wears a nice shirt. You think "Nice shirt" and thats it. But to say you are constantly thinking about this is just so over the top I can't even.

> it just ruins your confidence seeing other people have endo's and white Zombas while you don't even have a very rare wheel,

Next assumption here. Apparently, as soon as someone has something better looking (if you think that. As said in the beginning a skin must not be better looking than a standard skin but well), you turn into a brain dead. Just appreciating that someone has something nice is no possibility right?

> but when you do have those items, your brain isn't processing things like "I wish I had those wheels", it instead uses that energy to concentration on the game

I could just aswell say: If your car is flashy with moving skins you can't focus on the game because your concentration will be on your own car.

But without any source to back that up that is just...

> also when your car looks cool, it boosts your self confidence and makes you feel cooler, which helps us do better because we believe in our self.

Next assumption. If a car looking different in a video game boost your self confidence, you should look into other psychological issues. Again by the way, skins from crates is not the same as better looking.

Also feeling more self confident doesn't mean you perform better. It can also have the opposite effect, being over confident and making impulsive decisions for example.

> That's how human psychology works.

No. I doubt you have ever read any book on psychology. For a start I recommend Atkinson & Hilgard's Introduction to Psychology, costs over 50€ but has over 1000 pages and is easy to read and interesting.

https://www.amazon.de/Atkinson-Hilgards-Introduction-Psychology-Edward/dp/0155050699

Your logic is way too oversimplified.

I could also say: If someone has depression he needs to play Rocket League and get a BMD, because that will boost his self confidence and cure his depression.

That is roughly on the same level as your "theory".

Especially because you state opinions or thoughts as facts. You don't say "they may boost your confidence" or "it could be that" and so on. If you just state

> Okay so skins don't actually speed up your car [...] but they do improve your skill

That is an objective statement. It's not an opinion. And you have nothing to back that up.

I found the following book to be really useful on integration; almost the entirety of the last third of the book is dedicated to integration.

Another reddit user on this forum, 'liquidrome' has made some interesting points about integration; namely the idea that in his view one of the most potent methods of integration is to 'go for a long walk in a forest, around a lake, and to listen to the same music playlist I used for the session. This evokes the material from the session again, and integrates it into normal waking consciousness. Often this walk will also bring up more feelings and continue the healing process — sometimes more powerfully than the session itself.' Here's a [link] (https://www.reddit.com/r/mdmatherapy/comments/d1d861/getting_worse_after_taking_mdma/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share) to one of his comments on a post where he explains this in a little more detail (it's his second comment on the post) . I've read a few of his posts and comments and whilst I may disagree with some of his views on maps, he has undergone 100s of psychedelic therapy sessions so I personally value his opinion highly in this area even though it doesn't come from a book. I personally haven't tried this method yet and as I haven't had a session since I came across it but I intend to try it following my next session.

Here are a couple of other books I've found super useful in general for psychedelic therapy.
 They also talk about integration, although integration isn't a main focus:

[Psychedelic psychotherapy] (https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/0963009656/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_awdb_t1_1jUDDbX3B0XE3) - I made a post about it here. Honestly one of the most useful books I've read in my life. It's very much a practical guide to me on to how use psychedelics to heal from trauma, rather than many other books in the arena that appear to focus on why psydhclics can heal from trauma.

Internal family systems - I'm reading this book at the moment, and being someone who doesn't have a background in psychology its been super useful so far for understanding my mental landscapes, in a way that a layman like me can understand. This in turn I feel will help me to navigate my defences and other elements and psychological concepts that come up in my experience, and thus help me to heal efficiently and integrate effectively.

Hope something in this post is of help. Good luck on your healing journey :)

You're right, one class will certainly not be enough 🙂 I'm glad you're asking this question, tho. So many psychologists assume that because they are decent clinicians, they are decent supervisors...

False. Supervision is a specialized skill. It needs to be intentionally studied, learned, and practiced. I'd highly recommend buying the book Supervision Essentials for the Integrative Developmental Model (https://www.amazon.com/Supervision-Essentials-Integrative-Developmental-Clinical/dp/1433821419). It's fairly brief, easily readable, and evidence-based. It will give you a strong foundation to build on.

Aside from that, I'd recommend making sure you pay attention both to content and process in supervision. Many supervisors seem to focus only on content. But in my experience, supervisees have found at least a partial focus on process to be extremely helpful. I'd also recommend doing what you can to build a strong supervisory relationship from the very beginning. Part of that for me is letting my supervisees know that I really care about the progress they make, and that I'm eager to see them grow over the course of the year. As a result, I tell them they can expect lots of feedback, both on things they're doing well, as well as in areas they want to grow in or where I see a need for them to grow. Superficial, uniformly positive feedback is a waste of your supervisee's time, and they won't learn much.

Once again, it's wonderful that you care enough about this to ask for advice. Your future supervisees are very fortunate!

No problem and thank you for the compliment. Overall, I love experiential and psychodynamic theories but I try to approach any theory as a means to an end. Any clinician that becomes too dogmatic risks missing the point (that is, helping the client and not serving your own ends). I like playing between affect and behavior with clients and attachment theory is behind it all for me.

In any case, why don't you ask an easier question? Haha. There is so much material out there for each modality that I could recommend plenty.

Strengths-focused

• 1001 Solution-Focused Questions by Fredrike Bannink
  
  
• Positive CBT by Fredrike Bannink
  
  
• Learned Optimism by Martin Seligman
  
  Experiential
  
  
• Learning Emotion-Focused Therapy by Robert Elliott
  
  
• Emotion-Focused Therapy, 2nd ed. by Les Greenberg
  
  
• Focusing in Clinical Practice by Ann Cornell
  
  Attachment
  
  
• Attachment in Psychotherapy by David Wallin
  
  
• Affect Regulation Theory by Daniel Hill
  
  
• The Healing Power of Emotion by Diana Fosha, Daniel Siegel, & Martin Solomon, ed.
  
  Psychodynamic
  
  
• The Transforming Power of Affect by Diana Fosha
  
  
• Treating Affect Phobia by Leigh McCullough
  
  
• Psychodynamic Therapy: A Guide to Evidence-Based Practice by Richard Summers and Jacques Barber
  
  
• Time-Limited Dynamic Psychotherapy by Hanna Levenson
  
  
• Negotiating the Therapeutic Alliance by Jeremy Safran
  
  Hope that helps! Feel free to PM me too. I wonder if /u/evilqueenoftherealm would have any suggestions too.

There has been an increase of research on this topic. Of course clinical experience and personal reflection is important, but I think you should check as well the scientific state of the art.

As mentioned before, check material on Feedback-Informed Treatment (FIT). It's more a philosophy to deliver interventions highly responsive to the client's needs. This also entails adopting a more flexible and integrative practice beyond a particular model of psycotherapy (which most of the time prevents therapists from fully engaging in the work their clients need).

Check also stuff on deliberate practice (DP). Practice should follow certain criteria so therapists can progress towards high levels of excellence. This goes way beyond traditional supervision and training in specific models of psychotherapy. Which have been plaguing the field and creating obstacles for therapists to assess pragmatically their competence.

Some links:

FIT
https://www.scottdmiller.com/implementing-feedback-informed-treatment/

DP
https://www.dpfortherapists.com/




Books:

FIT
https://www.amazon.com/Feedback-Informed-Treatment-Clinical-Practice-Excellence/dp/1433827743


DP
https://www.amazon.com/Cycle-Excellence-Deliberate-Practice-Supervision/dp/1119165563/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1497988529&sr=8-1&keywords=cycle+of+excellence

You are asking all the right questions:

"When will enough be enough? Will he tell me I'm "healed" when time time comes? Is he taking advantage of me? Is our relationship even real, or do my attempts at being "real" with him, and my expressions of appreciation for his help, get looked at through some psychodynamic lens?"

The answers depend entirely on the therapist. And also reflect the way you related to your caregiver as a child.

In theory, it would be possible for a therapist to benignly support a person in their healing. But, as Alice Miller observed — and I share her perspective, the set-up itself invites re-enactment. The most probable outcome is repetition. Despite the best intentions of both 'therapist' and 'patient'.

There is, for example, no escaping the core dynamic (unless the therapy is free). The patient is paying for 'love'. It is easy to see how this recreates many people's childhoods': Where love was conditional.

The 'wounded healer' is a common role-play. It is one I have fallen into myself in the past as a 'therapist'. I have also, as a 'patient' been in experiences where my 'therapist' was in-fact satisfying their own need to 'save' people, casting me in re-enactments of their own childhood.

The whole therapeutic scene is a mess, in my opinion. JM Masson went even further, calling psychotherapy The Dark Science. He wrote a very interesting book exploring the problems with therapy.

My personal view is that a therapist may have an occasional role to play in listening to a person after MDMA sessions, and hearing their experiences. However, I don't feel the 'therapist' plays any useful role within an MDMA session itself other than to reassure an anxious person to keep going. This role could be equally well-played by a kind, respectful friend.

Obviously this perspective is hugely challenging to the enormous industry that has built up around 'healing' people. It puts 'therapists' out of a 'job'.

My experience has been that MDMA — used properly — makes therapists mostly redundant.

The MAPS protocol attempts to shoehorn therapists back in. It's as if a horse-and-cart salesman, realising his time is up in the age of the automobile, has a plan to keep himself in business: What if he tells you all automobiles require a horse-and-cart to run alongside them or the passengers won't be safe?

Now he can keep selling you the horse-and-cart.

For me, this describes the MAPS model regarding MDMA.

Until more recently, it wasn't common to find books/articles on "how to do" psychoanalytic psychotherapy. The knowledge of how to perform the therapy came from the therapist's training analysis, which, going back to Freud, used to be the only requirement for becoming a psychoanalyst (cf. The question of Lay Analysis by Freud). However, there are now some "psychodynamic" therapies that provide a "how to" look at therapy using psychoanalytic principles. Two that I am familiar with are Intensive Short Term Dynamic Psychotherapy or ISTDP and Brief Dynamic Therapywhich is a little better in my opinion. Glen Gabbard, who I like a lot, has also written a text that lays out some of the basics of psychotherapy from an analytic perspective.

Speaking of Gabbard, I highly recommend his text Psychodynamic Psychiatry in Clinical Practice. It provides an overview of some of the major psychoanalytic theories (drive, ego, object, self). Unfortunately he doesn't cover Lacan, and briefly touches on intersubjectivity. Another book in this vein (without the diagnostic applications) is Freud and Beyond by Stephen Mitchell and Margaret Black. Not to diminish Dr. Black, but Stephen Mitchell is really great. I recommend anything by him, especially Hope and Dread in Psychoanalysis and Relationality.

Finally, any recommendation on contemporary American psychoanalytic writing would be incomplete without mentioning Thomas Ogden, especially The Matrix of the Mind and The Primitive Edge of Experience. His more recent works are great as well, but a little more nebulous and might be less applicable to beginning psychoanalytic work.

Oh, and I can't help but recommend this little book by Owen Renik Practical Psychoanalysis. Renik is great, and I really enjoy is work, especially his thinking on "getting real in psychoanalysis." Though he is far from the traditional views of analytic neutrality and abstinence.

While I applaud your principled stance, it doesn't seem particularly relevant here. ACT, by its very nature, lends itself to technical eclecticism and ACBS encourages therapists, not only to explore techniques from other approaches, but to go as far as make up their own metaphors, experiential exercises, or other contributions to the therapy, so long as they are consistent with the functional contextual philosophy. I remember Joe Ciarrochi (the author of the above-mentioned book on ACT for CBT practitioners) posting often on the old ACT listserv openly exploring the common ground between these two worlds. Many of the metaphors in this book were collected from therapists on that listserv who just made them up on the spot in a session. Every therapy is a work in progress. The ACT community is just more transparent about it.

With an experiential approach like ACT, informed consent is best understood as an ongoing process. It's meant to be a flexible model and responsive to what the client brings in (or what shows up for them) moment-to-moment, week-to-week. Unless one is following a manual to the letter, there is going to be a huge element of clinical discretion and spontaneity in a given session. Keeping communication open between therapist and client is really the only means of doing this kind of work in a responsible and responsive way.

Furthermore, the current dearth of existing research on integrating specific modalities creates a situation in which therapists would be unreasonably limited should they only adhere to combinations with thorough research backing. Every client has individual needs and no one approach is ever wholly adequate for everyone, or even adequate to the needs of a single person all the time.

I'd suggest getting an intro textbook to (first, L1) language acquisition. This is the one we use at our university--pricey, yes, but I've heard it's excellent.

I always recommend Steven Pinker as an approachable start to learning about linguistics. Reading his books before I started university really got me into thinking like a linguist and about the wonder of language. The Language Instinct will help you begin to understand what it is we do when we acquire this amazingly complex tool. It's not all about acquisition, but a large part of it is.

I tried to find some open courseware on the subject, with no luck. MIT's language acquisition course isn't available online, and I couldn't find another university with such a course that offers open courseware. Try searching on iTunes U. That being said, however, you might need to take at least an intro to linguistics course, if you haven't already, to understand the terms and the approach needed to study language acquisition.

Since you're at university, you have access to academic publications free of charge, as well as your library. Use these resources. As far as articles go, try and find overviews of developments in language acquisition research over the past 20 years or so. The field has exploded with the advent of more and more advanced neuroimaging techniques, so I'd recommend staying in a recent timeframe so as not to get overwhelmed with possibly outdated theories.

Okay, returning now..

I'm just echoing what I'm reading of others who are deep in psychotherapeutic work and/or research; Jung's model and theoretical positions are finding correspondence to other more contemporary positioning and propositions constructed via the route of cognitive science, neuroscience, developmental psychology, dream research and so on. Apparently.

Here's a link regarding psychiatrist Erik Goodwyn's text The Neurobiology of the Gods. In this he outlines how Jung's dream theories and modeling are cohering to current dream research perspectives, among other congruities of a Jungian perspective (of note, he has published more since the publication of this material so presumably he has developed further the Jungian links?).

John Haule, a Jungian analyst, has published a couple of volumes of what is said to be an ongoing series of books called Jung in the 21st Century. He asserts he has researched 300 or so neuroscience papers, and similarly finds convergences of Jungian perspectives and thought in current empirical research and theoretical positioning.

Preface to John Ryan Haule's Jung in the 21st Century

Jean Knox, another Jungian analyst and psychiatrist, also finds connections between Jungian concepts and perspectives and more recent findings. A couple of the books she has published here and here.

I haven't read Knox very deeply yet, only cursorily (in a paper where she draws connections with a cognitive science concept image-schemas and archetypes), but her pov is thought provoking and promising.

I started to compile links to some papers that sit in the regions of empiricism and Jungian territory here but I haven't got much further with that particular angle on things yet, distracted by other concerns.

Edit: another link
to a paper not in that list, Recent Neurological Studies Supportive of Jung’s Theories on Dreaming, Robert J Hoss, M.S.

(Note: if you can't access the papers linked to there pm me, there's options).

So..I'm not sure what to make of it presently, other than it tentatively looks like there is some validation of Jung's ideas taking place or able to be mapped in regards to some regions of the sciences.

On framing and approaching science, Jung says in CW 7:

>A genuinely scientific attitude must be unprejudiced. The sole criterion for the validity of an hypothesis is whether or not it possesses an heuristic—i.e., explanatory—value.

para.216

Additionally, in the same volume he states:

>.. Everything about this psychology is, in the deepest sense, experience; the entire theory, even where it puts on the most abstract airs, is the direct outcome of something experienced.

Ibid., para.199

>For me, scientific research work was never a milch-cow or a means of prestige, but a struggle, often a bitter one, forced upon me by daily psychological experience of the sick. Hence not everything I bring forth is written out of my head, but much of it comes from the heart also, a fact I would beg the gracious reader not to overlook if, following up the intellectual line of thought, he comes upon certain lacunae that have not been properly filled in. A harmonious flow of exposition can be expected only when one is writing about things which one already knows. But when, urged on by the need to help and to heal, one acts as a path-finder, one must speak also of realities as yet unknown.

Ibid., para.200

>..So every man whose fate it is to go his individual way must proceed with hopefulness and watchfulness, ever conscious of his loneliness and its dangers. The peculiarity of the way here described is largely due to the fact that in psychology, which springs from and acts upon real life, we can no longer appeal to the narrowly intellectual, scientific standpoint, but are driven to take account of the standpoint of feeling, and consequently of everything that the psyche actually contains. In practical psychology we are dealing not with any generalized human psyche, but with individual human beings and the multitudinous problems that oppress them. A psychology that satisfies the intellect alone can never be practical, for the totality of the psyche can never be grasped by intellect alone. Whether we will or no, philosophy keeps breaking through, because the psyche seeks an expression that will embrace its total nature.

Ibid., para.201

Still reads as relevant to me (but I'm priorly biased and predisposed to consider the feeling dimension, phenomenological and parapsychological regions of psyche).

Hope that gives you something to go on after your own interests, if you weren't already familiar with the material.

Why thank you!

The issue is there are loads of super in depth clinical books (which deal with stuff you will never need to know in this line of work) or the utter rubbish stuff that says it can make your boobs turn into alpacas or whatever. However, once you filter that there are lots of good books out there. Here are a few I suggest:

• Hypnosis for Beginners: Reach New Levels of Awareness & Achievement (Llewellyn's Beginners Series)
  
• A Guide to Trance Land: A Practical Handbook of Ericksonian and Solution-Oriented Hypnosis
  
• Handbook of Hypnotic Suggestions and Metaphors
  -The Art of Hypnosis: Mastering Basic Techniques
  
• My Voice Will Go with You: The Teaching Tales of Milton H. Erickson
  -Essentials Of Hypnosis (Basic Principles Into Practice)
  
  Also the ASCH Bibliogrpahy has some good article links for you to check out.
  
  And I should plug our very own /r/erotichypnosis while a load of it is pretty advanced it often has some great tips.
  
  Also if there is a group near you go check them out, the people tend to be nice it lets you get personalized advice.
  
  For the follow on, I don't self-hypnotize intentionally. However, I did recently realize how often I trance when doing stuff. When I study or present in front of people I tend to trance out and I recently spotted I do it when I am stressed. I guess its because I have been under so much my brain is just used to it and knows that a trance state is useful for my work and stress levels so just drops me into one as needed.
  
  It is very real and I know a lot of people who use it to great effects, I have just never got into myself, however, that is just personal preference.

I don't know where you are in the world, but that is not typically how things work in the United States.

In the US, commonly licensable Master's degrees are Counseling, MFT, and Social Work. For all of these, you are trained as a generalist. That means you will work with a variety of populations and you will probably take some sort of "theories of counseling" class. Some programs will emphasize certain theories more than others-- e.g. some programs are VERY CBT heavy or VERY interpersonal psychotherapy heavy. Some may operate from slightly different perspectives (e.g. family systems theory for MFT). But any good program will teach you more than one thing and will have opportunities for you to explore theories that seem like a particularly good fit for you (hopefully-- sometimes it's hard if there is no one trained in a method as a professor or supervisor).

Some people do specialize. E.g. I know a clinician who only does EMDR. That's what she does and she doesn't take clients where either she or the client do not believe that this a fit. Most people, though, consider themselves either "eclectic" or "integrative", which means that they are utilizing multiple theories in their interventions. It is pretty uncommon for folks to operate from only one theoretical orientation.

With all of that said, my theories textbook was Theories of Counseling and Psychotherapy by Seligman and Reichenberg. -- https://www.amazon.com/Theories-Counseling-Psychotherapy-Strategies-Hardcover/dp/0132851709/ref=sr_1_3?keywords=theories+of+counseling&qid=1572576919&sr=8-3

I do not know how good these books are, but Dr. Barkley an ADHD specialist in 2009 recommend three professionals and their CBT programs. Note I said programs and not books. They three specialists also have books on this subject. The books may be good or may not be (sometimes the content of something may be awesome but the presentation sucks and is boring.)

These books may be better for your therapist and not you specifically, or they may be good for you, I do not know I have not read them.

The three people and the books they published.

• Dr. J. Russell Ramsay Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy for Adult ADHD: An Integrative Psychosocial and Medical Approach
  
   
  
  
• Dr. Steven A. Safren Mastering Your Adult ADHD: A Cognitive-Behavioral Treatment Program Client Workbook and Mastering Your Adult ADHD: A Cognitive-Behavioral Treatment Program: Therapist Guide
  
   
  
  
• Dr. Mary V. Solanto Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy for Adult ADHD: Targeting Executive Dysfunction
  
  
   
  
  
  ----
  
  On formating I am not complaining but just trying to help if you want to learn some reddit techniques
  
  

• Bullet points are caused by a * followed by 1 space at the very beginning of the line.
  
  & nbsp; with no space between the & and the N followed by a hard return will create a paragraph space.
  
  -- -- With no spaces between them will create a hard line like this.
  
  

Agree re: polyvagal! It was revelatory for me. And as someone who tries REEEEEEALLY hard at everything, learning about neural platforms kinda let me off the hook for things I was expecting to just will myself out of.

I've brought the topic up here before, but never garnered much interest. Hence the low effort, low commitment podcast :)

Therapist Uncensored podcast has a few good episodes on it, as does Dr Drew of all people (Allan Schore episode is better than Porges ones).

For anyone interested, recc reading:

Easy read: The Polyvagal Theory in Therapy: Engaging the Rhythm of Regulation

More in depth:

[The Polyvagal Theory: Neurophysiological Foundations of Emotions, Attachment, Communication, and Self-regulation] https://www.amazon.com/Polyvagal-Theory-Neurophysiological-Communication-Self-regulation/dp/039370700

The Pocket Guide to the Polyvagal Theory: The Transformative Power of Feeling Safe

No vocals here (quick skip if you were looking for them).

I make electronic/cinematic synthwave music as PatternShift. I have an eclectic set of influences and bleed across a genres a bit. Best matches by genre preference would probably be:

(main links are YouTube)

• Soundtrack/theme: PatternShift - "Walking the Manifold" or SoundCloud
  
• Chill: PatternShift - "Departure" or SoundCloud
  
• Straightforward Synthwave: PatternShift - "The Physical Option" or SoundCloud
  
• Ambient: PatternShift - "Orbital Resonance" or SoundCloud
  
• Cyberpunk: PatternShift - "Exsurgent" or SoundCloud
  
  I just released my EP May 1 (technically an album on several services due to ambient outro and bonus track). It's my first release after getting back into independent music production, this time with synths/electronic music. I'm a long time musician (play a few instruments) and wanted to be a soundtrack composer as a kid, spent some time as a music comp major in college, etc. The songs take thematic inspiration from both science fiction and science, reflecting my background and interest/involvement in both.
  
  A bit of the story on "Walking the Manifold" -- the title is a reference to "Walking the Pattern" in the Amber books by Roger Zelazny. But it's mapped onto a real scientific concept - in machine learning, the Manifold Hypothesis is a way of explaining how deep neural nets work. For an over-simplified explanation, one type of manifold, in topology, can be thought of as a mapping from a high dimensional space to a lower space, where some properties hold that make those spaces equivalent in certain ways. An OK analogy for this is a street address -- it's a 1D mapping (go N far on this street) by which you can find a house in a 3D world.
  
  The thing is, that's a way that music works as well. Music is wired into the part of our brains that processes things emotionally. The machinery from our evolutionary past, hooked up to animal cries and calls, etc. We feel this raw emotional stuff in our brains (and bodies as well), and we can encode and decode all of that in music - notes and chords and beats and timbres -- and then other people can decode it!
  
  The way that works has gotten personal for me. I have a son with autism who is really into particular sounds, spinning, etc. (common topics of autistic perseveration). Before diving back into music and writing this album, I found and read a book on Language, Music, and Autism and was blown away by a small fact tucked away in there: for autistic people, a lot of the deficits in encoding emotion into and out of natural language are just not there with music. That is, there are often no emotional deficits in processing music in autism. It's that effective as a medium for communicating things emotionally (possibly due to the degree of redundancy in its signal, versus normal language).
  
  Anyways, I've mostly played my cards close to my chest re: the meaning in the music as I want people to find their own things in it, as what they discover is IMO just as valid as what I tried to put there intentionally. But I think a little bit of story is justified in this case. If you're into it, it's on the majority of streaming platforms, etc. and it's all linked on my landing page.

Great question!

While I appreciate the person you respect's opinion, I completely disagree. You wrote:

"I recently was emphatically encouraged by someone I really respect to never ever to praise clients or make anything resembling a positive evaluation because it will take away from client's autonomy and put us in a position of power (to decide how good they and their actions are)."

We are already in a position of power. Clients are -- consciously or unconsiously -- coming to us to feedback on "how good they and their actions are". See:

https://www.amazon.com/Disabling-Professions-Ideas-Progress-Illich/dp/0714525103/ref=sr_1_13?crid=2OPIBTS3V0NUF&keywords=ivan+illich&qid=1554578467&s=books&sprefix=illich%2Cstripbooks%2C149&sr=1-13

... and ...

https://www.amazon.com/Witchdoctors-Psychiatrists-Common-Psychotherapy-Revised/dp/0060970243/ref=sr_1_fkmrnull_1?keywords=torrey+psychotherapy&qid=1554578567&s=gateway&sr=8-1-fkmrnull

Let's not pretend we are not in a position of power as therapists, for this way lies dragons. Let's recognize that power and use to for good.

See also:

https://www.amazon.com/Power-Helping-Professions-Adolf-Guggenbuhl-Craig/dp/0882143042

I was trained in psychodynamic perspectives, and I got the whole, "don't express praise for clients" thing in my training. While I value much of my psychodynamic training, for me personally this (praising clients) is an area I have come around 180 degrees quite strongly.

Life can be crushing for so many people we see. And (I began to ask myself) we're withholding praise?!? Further, I was taught to adopt a "neutral" stance. For many of us, we've been raised to recognize that "neutral" means "bad", so I would argue that it is impossible to for anyone to truly be neutral in therapy.

So yes, I praise. Always with sensitivity to client needs and dynamics, but I praise.

It seems to work ... both for me and my clients.

Then again, I might be wrong.

​

First: take a deep breath.

When I read your post the first thing that came to mind and the thing that most strongly reverberates within your post is clear, crystalline anxiety. So, first calm down: from my perspective you are overreacting quite a bit and I think it helps to look at all of this with a bit more level-headedness.

Let's start with the most obvious:

> I hate that I'm so feminine and I resent this all day long.

Nobody gives a fuck and nobody should give a fuck whether or not you are a "feminine" guy. The whole gender-role stereotype-riffraff should really die in a fire because it is fucking stupid most of the time. So you like music, well that's nice! So, why the fuck should you feel bad about it? Shyness? Being considerate? Tell you what: maybe not being an asshole isn't such a bad thing either! Being weird? Holy shit all nerds are weird and those guys end up as bosses of IT giants!

In my opinion the fact that things like this, or some behaviours or whatever are conflated with being female or gay is in many many cases a logical fallacy informed by stereotypes. Being female or being gay does not equate to acting girly nor vice versa and is in no cases a bad thing as well.

So, take a deep breath, you are not broken but you simply like stuff. There is no shame in that.

> I many times get off when masturbating to the thought fantasy of being a woman and having a woman's body during sex.

Now this was actually something curious! Tell you what: that sounds like a fetish called autogynephilia, which I know because I happen to have this myself (along with becoming a furry which is double the fun!).

That said, I can see how this may lead to confusion on your part, because being taken as a woman obviously involves male parts. However, according to Lawrence, autogynephilia can be understood as an erotic targeting location error, meaning you like women but project this onto yourself. It should be emphasized that this is not a value judgement but a theoretical description.

Now I know that this explanation is pretty damn barebones and completely neglects the fact that sexuality is a continuum and not just a binary decision; So if you like males (and specifically the male body shape - not just the dick!) as well you may be bisexual.

I may, of course, be totally wrong with all of this.

Either way: don't obsess too much about the sexual aspect. You are fine no matter what you like (as long as it doesn't involve the usual exceptions). If somebody asks me I personally answer with a large question mark and that's it; And I still exist. You aren't just your sexuality but a person with likes, dislikes and a history. Don't forget this.

> I was always daydreaming or absent minded, never fully paying attention - basically an airhead.

Now this was also something I found interesting. Have you considered being checked for ADHD? It may be something worth looking into, if your "airheadedness" is something that persisted over the years. It may help, but don't obsess over this.

> I just feel shitty about myself, and wanna improve.

Now this is something far more concrete than the other stuff. I think the first thing you should do is (again!) calm down and look at things from a rational perspective.

First, things rarely just fly over to just such you can pick them up and be happy. Most of what you want includes work and risk-taking. I usually compare life and its decisions with a game of poker: if you always fold, not only will you lose but the game itself isn't much fun either. So, be ready to take a risk once in a while. Not only is it rewarding but you can look back on it later and say: "damn, I did this and I'm so fucking proud I did in retrospect instead of sitting at home and being miserable".

The first thing you want to do is order what you need to do and then fucking do it. Get out, get a job or a degree. Whatever you need to do.

You have to fight your own lazyness and you have to expend real, consistent effort but you will be better off afterwards. For instance, what I think helped a lot with my social anxiety was simply to constantly get out and be with other people; And if you really want to challenge yourself you can try volunteering - standing at a stand and trying to sell something to passerbys I think does a lot in not only training yourself to be less afraid to approach others but also makes you proud of yourself for something you believe in.

Lastly, I want to echo one of the other replies in saying that it may be useful to get yourself a therapist. Again, you are anxious, that much I can see. Another therapist may help where your previous one failed. Money is a factor which you need to weigh in on, of course.

Sure! Right now I like these Yoga With Adriene videos: Gentle Yoga, and Yoga for Loneliness (I like that this one is low to the ground and pretty much all done on your back). I also like these Somatic Exercises for neck and shoulders.

The book I like best for explaining dissociation is Sensorimotor Psychotherapy by Pat Ogden/ Janina Fisher. The book is huge and a little pricey, but that's because the format is supposed to be like a workbook for client and therapist. You don't have to go through the exercises (I don't) but my therapist utilizes a lot of sensorimotor psychotherapy ideas and techniques in our work and I bought the book because there's just so much great information in there about dissociation and how trauma gets stored in the body. There's also a workbook that I recently bought that's pretty good so far: Coping With Trauma Related Dissociation.

ok

Firstly, if you are not seeing a trauma specialized therapist I highly suggest you consider seeing one. Just from your description it sounds like your issues are above the pay-grade of your current clinicians, or they are not putting in the proper amount of effort. The fact that you have so many complicating issues and your clinicians are not understanding why you having these shutdowns is a big red flag that something is amiss with them. I presume that you are being open and honest with them about all of your current issues, and that they know about your history of abuse/trauma.

You should also definitely do some reading about borderline personality disorder.

Please don't take this the wrong way, but absolutely, positively stay away from any drugs, even legal ones like alcohol. You are a perfect candidate for death by addiction, unfortunately.

Here are a few books that you might find useful:

https://www.amazon.com/Feel-Fear-Do-Anyway/dp/0345487427

https://www.amazon.com/Dialectical-Behavior-Therapy-Skills-Workbook/dp/1572245131

https://www.amazon.com/Complex-PTSD-Workbook-Mind-Body-Regaining/dp/1623158249

https://www.amazon.com/Unspoken-Voice-Releases-Restores-Goodness/dp/1556439431

https://www.amazon.com/Pocket-Guide-Polyvagal-Theory-Transformative/dp/0393707873

I strongly suggest you try to get some serious headway on your issues BEFORE you try going to college. It might be worth taking a year or two off and just working and going to therapy/working on issues before you attempt to go to college full time.


Do you happen to live in a very religious area? Do you have a very religious family?

CBT is not mired in ego psychology, it was developed as a reaction to ego psychology. "The first discrete, intentionally therapeutic approach to CBT to be developed was Rational Emotive Therapy (RET), which was originated by Albert Ellis, Ph.D. in the mid-1950's. Ellis developed his approach in reaction to his disliking of the in-efficient and in-directive nature of Psychoanalysis. The philosophic origins of RET go back to the Stoic philosophers, including Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius. Epictetus wrote in The Enchiridion, "Men are disturbed not by things, but by the view which they take of them." The modern psychotherapist most influential to the development of RET was Alfred Adler (who developed Individual Psychology). Adler, a neo-Freudian, stated, "I am convinced that a person's behavior springs from his ideas."

I would suggest you read this fantastic book that describes how the role of psychiatrists and witch doctors are related. I found it absolutely fascinating. Almost none of it is rooted in Freud.

Kraepelin was the first Western doctor to research several psychopharmacologic substances, but that doesn't mean he developed Prozac.

I'm not sure what your problem with the EEG is. It's tremendously valuable in diagnosing various mental health conditions, and is great at finding the damage left behind by TBI.

What you're describing is very similar to what I've grown up with. Try reading this book, it describes our situation very well with hundreds of examples. It made me feel a lot better knowing other people dealt with the same issues I did.

I just bought it for myself lol. Another book I wanna buy is Sensorimotor Psychotherapy: Interventions for Trauma and Attachment (Norton Series on Interpersonal Neurobiology) https://www.amazon.com/dp/0393706133/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_MTYRzb97NH9GV

https://www.amazon.com/Consciousness-Medicine-Indigenous-Entheogens-Expanded/dp/1623173493

I picked up this book, about half way through. It’s a roadmap on holding space for people during journeys.

Have you read anything by Anne Lawrence? You may find Men Trapped In Men's Bodies of interest.