I told you my T was acting differently

amen to that!!!

Hmm I have kind of a different take on anger. I think anger is risky, even if not loud and powerful - and almost always a secondary emotion. I try to figure out what the primary emotion is (hurt, frustration, fear) and share that. My epxerience is that if I think about it, I can almost always think of an emotion behind the anger, and that primary emotion is not so threatening to share with another as anger is.

Another way I've heard of to look at it that "Anger is a tragic expression of unmet need" (Marshall Rosenberg) So figuring out what I need is helpful and then addressing that sometimes helps me.

And another friend says she realizes she gets angry when she doesn't have control and has an unmet need. so she tries to figure out her need, and see what kind of control she can have.

Anger is generally not seen as vulnerable, and therefore more likely to result in defensiveness.

I'm not saying I never get angry. when I recognize I'm angry (and sometimes I don't recognize it until I, and the othr person, hears it) I try to as quickly as possible figure out my feelings and needs and share that.

My therapist isn't the same every week. But he acts in a trustworthy way every week, and when he doesn't (which is rare) we discuss it - and to be honest, I'm much more concerned about how he responds when we discuss it than I am the original trigger. And I really want some consistency in being trustworthy with discussing triggers and problems between us.

I'll concede this.

I don't have an issue with anger, per se. Here's the thing...anytime I've gotten angry in session...she's immediately told me to simmer down. So it's okay for her to be angry, but not okay for me? That's a double standard and I don't abide by that. I tried to ask her what made her angry and she insisted she was not despite all the evidence to the contrary.

My T has never told me that. In fact, none of my Ts ever said that.

Fair enough.

Ironically, T preaches this...anger is a secondary emotion 99% of the time. Then again, I could have the luck to be the 1%.

Ok, as the details come out, I'm getting a different impression. You're probably not going to be happy with what I'm going to say, but know there's no intention of blame here--only neutral observation.

I tried to ask her what made her angry and she insisted she was not despite all the evidence to the contrary.

This may be part of the problem. All you can know is that her affect appeared to you to be anger. You can't know her inner feeling. If you can't accept her characterization of her feeling at face value as legitimate, then you are either transferring something from you to her, and/or dismissing her.

When, like your T, I've been on the receiving end of such an interaction (from students), I've found it to be very frustrating and annoying. It's a power trip whenever someone provokes feelings and then will not respond. It leaves the other person powerless to engage.

I don't know if she was in control of her demonstrated reaction to you; she was either in control and trying to teach you a real world lesson, or she had a regrettable, though understandable lapse.

Perhaps her comment about "life sucks" was a way of confronting you that your words have real consequences. When you send an e-mail that obviously annoyed her in some way, and that she invested time and feelings in, and then go into session and say you don't care because you're "past it," you leave the other person holding the bag. That's not an interaction, that's a dump. And it's dismissive and disrespectful of the relationship.

I have sometimes read anger in people who denied they were angry. I could, of course, have made a mistake. (Aspergics often do.) But it is very difficult to persuade me that I didn't see what I know I saw.

I find it very frustrating. I can read children and animals but not adult humans. Frankly, I blame the adult humans.

I understand what you are saying, and once again, I can utilize this "different way of thinking" to discover what is happening within me and within my relationship with T. I want to save the analysis of this until I write about my entire session and receive all feedback. I also want to bounce this back to a couple of RL friends who know me and my past well and can give me feedback given that past.

I am not saying that T's anger or other feelings aren't legitimate. I am saying her emotional state is not congruent with her normal (based on 20 months with her) demeanor. I did indeed respond to her when I told her I was "past it". I then went further into the why.

Regarding how she felt about the email, she actually read things into it that were not there. I feel she did not see it at face value.

What you may be having trouble with, being Aspergic, is reading secondary emotions. Children and animals are very genuine. They don't try to hide their feelings (older children do, especially if they have been implicitly taught that their feelings are not okay).

That's the key. Many times a primary emotion is fleeting, then a secondary emotion takes over. For instance, someone can feel sadness and fear as their primary emotion, but show anger because it is less vulnerable and gives the person a feeling of power over the situation.

But can people show anger and not be feeling it? (I assume they are not acting.)

People were always telling me I was "obviously" angry because my face got red or whatever. Is thinking the other person is stupid or wrong, necessarily angry? I may be frustrated that they don't get a database design that looks so simple and obvious to me. I just gave up. I couldn't deal with them taking it personal all the time.