FKM, I usually agree with your posts, but I was shocked to have read this. I've had experiences with people who have that trait, so I tend to notice it when I see it too....but there was no evidence here of her not seeing her T as a separate individual. Nothing.

Mian, perhaps instead of "separate," I should have said "autonomous individual."

The many personal characteristics of Ts that the OP has decided makes them unacceptable, coupled with the persistent and insistent ascribing of singular interpretations onto others' words strike me as objectifying. There's no expression of meaning as negotiable. No room for a T to act autonomously.

An objectified person isn't perceived as one who can have multiple motivations, intents, emotions--and also can't do anything to earn trust in a relationship because they're not seen realistically. If you've been in the position of being objectified, I'm sure you've sensed this. Ts can only be as effective as a client will allow them to be. Some believe that if they cannot get past the objectifying persona ( what the one T I think was referring to as a negative transference) that a client imprints upon them, whether it's positive or negative, then they won't engage in therapy. Some Ts, by nature of their training and interest, are more adept at working within such a context. In general, they are Ts who specialize in personality disorders.

If I'm extremely afraid of flying , most recommend a CBT trained T as the best able to help me. When it comes to issues of attachment and relating--issues the OP has referred to as problems for her--Ts who specialize in personality disorders are often best able to help. In either case, it's not about diagnosis or recommending treatment, it's about screening Ts--the central concern of all the OP's threads.