Aha. I know very well what a therapist's "love" is and how it ends. Not good. Of course, "love" could mean different things. We use the word way too loosely in
American culture and thus it got completely devalued. One can define compassion as a kind of love that is impersonal and that consists of a empathy felt for someone's experience and a feeling of good will toward them. In that sense, I "loved" my clients as well. But, I suspect, that's not what Mackler meant. Otherwise, he would just say "compassion". I can't imagine any adult person who has been in close relationships with other people like family, friends, romantic partners who'd use the word "love" describing their relationships outside of their close circle, whether it's relationships with colleagues, bosses, clients. When a therapist says they "love" their clients I don't believe they know what love is and it makes me think that they've never been in truly intimate, mature relationships. And if yes, there is nothing they can offer me. To me they have no real life experience to put themselves in the position to help people navigate through their lives.

Yes, he seems to be very reactive. I don't see him as intense though. More like emotionally disturbed, frankly..That's why I am glad he stopped practicing for his own sake and for the same of his clients. I also don't see him perceiving trauma in everything but rather being overwhelmed by traumatic experiences of other people, which, I believe, is largely due to the fact that he hasn't heal a lot of his own traumas.

And, no, high reactivity is not helpful in a T. My last T was very reactive and also "loved" me very much and all that hurt me more than helped even though it felt good in the moment. He'd feel with me and for me. He'd cry for me at times. He'd be outraged at anyone or everyone who was abusive to me, hurt me and was unfair to me in any way. It felt awesome to see such support of me but the awesomeness started fading away the more I realized that I am still stuck in my life, that i still have emotional blocks that don't allow me to take constructive actions, that I was still lost as far as where I wanted and needed to go. His supportive emotional reactions did nothing for me in the long run. In fact, they kept me stuck in the unhealthy place of inaction, self-doubt, constantly searching for someone to blame etc.

Actually, I believe, Mackler behaved similarly with his clients. In one of his videos he said that he'd often tell a client how overwhelmingly horrific their experience was and how he was surprised that they were able to cope or something of that sort. Very unhelpful strategy if you ask me. It can make you feel good in the moment because you'd feel seen and heard for the first time may be, but, in fact, this just the food for your ego. When a therapist has such strong emotional reactions to your story and it makes you feel special, that's just ego need being fulfilled.

As far as being highly sensitive, I believe sensitivity is actually a must for a therapist to have. Sensitivity is a basis for empathy. Without sensitivity true empathy is impossible IMO. I can't just intellectualize about a client's experiences and I would hate if a therapist intellectualized about my experiences and wasn't able to feel them. That would make me feel that they don't really "get it". But sensitivity doesn't have to turn into reactivity. It's a professional skill to make sure that you don't act out your empathy through your exaggerated emotional reactions.

When therapists react to clients stories in such emotionally exaggerated ways they come across as drama queens, frankly. This is the visceral impression I get of Mackler and my lat T. It helps to see a friend reacting that way when you need their support, but a therapist? No, thank you.

No ****. If I'd allowed myself to react to the clients stories the way he does, I would've killed myself in the couple of weeks.

I wouldn't want to socialize with the guy. I don't dislike him but I also don't like him as a person enough for socializing. Yes, he is definitely more conscious than the average Joe, yes, he definitely has some refreshing radical ideas on different topics ( I listened to some of his videos where he philosophizes outside of the therapy subject), but I actually came up with many of those ideas on my own a long time ago, so to me they are not original at all . Also, being a spiritual/philosophical/psychological junkie, I've come across so many interesting and enlightening people and social media sources that it's hard to impress me . By comparison to what I've read, heard, watched and come up on my own Mackler's "radical" ideas aren't radical enough for me, sorry To me, he doesn't go deep enough and far enough.

Besides, personality-wise, I see him as idealistic and someone who doesn't know, doesn't appreciate and doesn't embrace the dark side of life. Idealists are not interesting people to me, not the ones I want to connect with. I "click" with people, who, like me, are comfortable with their own ****, with other people's **** and with life's **** in general. Not that they like it but they don't judge it. They just accept it as is, as the reality of life. And not in the intellectual way when they disconnect from their emotions and pretend to be "above" them. That's not real acceptance, not real wisdom, not real objectivity. That's just the defense against one's emotions. I am talking about people who are fully in touch with their feelings, including the darkest ones, with all their impulses and instincts, including the lowest ones, and who accept all of them with no judgment while also understanding their nature and the necessity to manage them.