|
It makes no sense to me. Or, to the extent it does, the sense it makes is only negative.
Here I delve into the heavy intellectual side of therapy and theory, so be forewarned.
In great part, most--or almost all--of the major figures in psychology and psychiatry think that the essence of psychotherapy is transference. Perhaps some are less familiar with that notion, but I bet most are.
My current T explains it in terms of object relations: There is a primary object--parent, spouse, etc.--that patients have issues with to work on, and the T becomes a secondary object who represents the primary object to the patient--in the patient's mind. The patient projects onto the T the characterizes of the primary object and forms feelings and thoughts about the T as if they were--in part--that other person, e.g. parent. But it's easier to work through the issues with T because...somehow he explained that I can’t do justice to...the T isn't really the primary object and the related thoughts and feelings the patient has about the T can be demonstrated to be untrue, hence being easier to deal with. Also that in therapy working issues out is the whole point whereas in "real world" relationships working things out isn't the main point, often times can't be done due to other issues, e.g. the other person might be incapable or unwilling to delve deeply into the nature of things. What can be done in therapy is less polarized than in the real world precisely because the T isn't the abuser, etc. and that difference opens up possibilities for exploration and change not present in the "real world." Transference is the “meat” of therapy according to leading intellectuals in the field.
Separating out non-romantic/non-erotic feelings for a T from romantic/erotic ones is a false dichotomy and almost certainly they interact. The only way that I can see a potentially meaningful distinction is when the attraction to the therapist is purely physical. I had a very beautiful female T and my attraction to her was a very major issue for me, but it wasn’t separate from the other feelings—of all kinds. Purely physical doesn’t exist, IMO, in therapy.
If transference--in general or just specifically the romantic/sexual kind--is taken out of the psychotherapy forum, what's left in it? "I can't afford therapy" "T didn't call me back" "I missed an appointment" "How do I find a T" Many of those are logistics, not the meat of therapy.
It all belongs together. A meaningful and practical distinction is impossible in the real world between the two kinds of transference.
__________________
out of my mind, left behind
|