People debate over the "intimacy in therapy" topic quite often.In part, because intimacy can mean different things to different people. I personally don't like to describe what goes on in therapy as intimacy, mostly because my experiences when I felt that way were always balanced, mutually and equally involved relationships without stable, designated roles -more than merely sharing secrets and one person helping the other. But the dictionary definition of the word can fit what happens in therapy, I think. In any case, if someone wishes sharing very personal details intimate in the sense I described above about mutuality, of course that will run into issues with the structure of therapy. Maybe in that case it can help not to try to view it as something intimate but more what it literally is: a service where the the client seeks answers or just support and understanding to their most personal feelings, problems, behavioral tendencies etc. View it more clinically, like sharing uncomfortable, painful and disruptive issues about the body with a doctor and the doctor's role is to provide feedback and possible solutions that the client can explore. Of course, those that want to work on relational issues using the therapy relationship as a model are unlikely to benefit much from that very clinical approach, but I guess then exploring both the desire and blocks around sharing might be interesting.

For me, I can do one-sided sharing of even my hardest secrets if I want to but it only feels beneficial if I get feedback in the form of observations, possible explanations, solutions etc. If I more just want a place to unload and a person to wander together, not knowing anything about them will quickly get in the way. I got to know a lot about both of my Ts. The first one did not share much in session but puts an incredible amount of info on himself on the public web.The second made lots of disclosures in session - that was pretty much his way to empathize and sometimes, I think, to actually get lazy and not think about my stuff. The second was a much better fit with me in many ways, including the sense of companionship generated by our very interactive exchanges. It's not that he shared very vulnerable information on himself, just lots of information, typically as it related to mine. But it was more like how I interact with a friend (so it did generate some air of intimacy) than what I would want from a clinician. I did not find it super helpful as I can get similar from friends or colleagues anytime - there weren't any possible solutions provided. If I ever wanted to try therapy again, I would think harder about how I want to use therapy, what my expectations are, select a therapist that has the potential to fit with that and tailor the sharing accordingly. I also would not do the wandering all over the map but would stay more focused. This is something I only know now, from experience - it was not clear when I started therapy and even with the second T.