use of possessive language when referring to a therapist

What does the bit I have put in bold mean? The 'keeping them back' bit? What would happen if you don't? I am very curious to see what your thinking is on this.

i think when i've used the possessive form to refer to others there can be a range of meanings. if i say i'm going to "my doctor" rather than i'm going to "the doctor" then yes i probably feel more of a sense of closeness or familiarity with that doctor but it may or may not be all that much.

it would be totally awkward to me to say "the T" as opposed to "my T". i think there is usually a sense of a relationship in therapy.

as for pastors it can be quite common to refer to one's pastor as "my pastor" if you feel a special affinity for them, have sat under their teaching for awhile or have a close relationship with them. i think of the head pastor at my old church as a spiritual father because he had such a positive influence on my life so he'll always be "my" former pastor. the spiritual father part is quite rare though as i don't imagine i will think of more than a couple in my life that way.

life is relational and i think there are degrees of relationship so using the possessive doesn't always mean that much closeness but sometimes it does. context matters.

How can someone that you see weekly and say things to that you don't say to others be considered a "stranger"? I don't understand that at all.

That they stay out of my real life, don't think they are real or in my life. They recognize they are just a tool - they do not have a stake in me. That they do not call to check on me or intrude upon me when I leave their office. That they do not pretend a knowledge of me they do not have. And of course physically no touching.

I don't know the woman and she does not know me. I could not tell her things if she was not a stranger.

That sounds like what's known as compartmentalization.

Therapists do this too.

I don't think it fits my understanding of compartmentalization.

And I would hope therapists know they are not real, but they often don't act like they know. That they are strangers is because they set it up that way. I may find it not unbeneficial, but it is the therapists who set the game up so they are.

In writing I use the word "my" a lot more than when speaking. If I'm leaving work I'll explain my absence with "going to the doctor/dentist/school etc." or I will reference an appointment or an errand.

In writing, especially on this forum, use of the word "my" is more necessary. The three people in my immediate family all have therapists. In person we refer to them by name to differentiate, but if I wrote "Zoe said x y z" you would not know who I was talking about. My T, DD1's T, or DD2's T. All cumbersome.

I have often wondered if I was missing something, I feel no particular closeness with T, no urge to see her, don't find myself yearning for her or missing her. I don't feel particularly comfortable baring my soul to her or flaunting my imperfections either. She does her job, amazingly well considering my attitude towards sharing. She makes me think, and question the status quo, and helps me realize that I'm not always wrong and that good things happen when I change my patterns.

So I guess I feel a little closer to her than other professionals I have a relationship with, but not close enough to feel possessive.

There, that was clear as mud, wasn't it?

Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk

sorry...this made me laugh....I would definitely be worried if you your door.

I agree with a lot of the other posts...it doesn't hold any real meaning for me...the word "my"....just a term...although I do also just say T, with no leading description....

I think I kind of understand where you're coming from. I'm curious, do you then see a kind of a hypocrisy there, a lack of honesty? And are therapists part of it or is it a true blind spot for them?

I think it is set up that way on purpose like SD says. I don't see where the hypocrisy would be. T is a stranger in the sense that I don't know t. T knows much about me. It is not a balanced relationship. On purpose.

I find this thread a bit bizarre. "My" expresses a grammatical relationship, and needn't express anything more than that. The linguistic dimension is interesting to me, but the extension of it into whether or not people are "real" strikes me as forced. I never found my T to be any more or less real than myself. The relationship was created for a purpose that could be seen as separate from RL, I suppose, but that didn't make the participants in that relationship any the less real for that. But this does presume a relationship. It always comes back to that. And while our relationship has changed post therapy, neither of us is more or less real for that. I think extending the characteristics defining the relationship to the individuals is a bit wrong-headed.

Oh I see. I haven't been reading all the posts...so I wonder, what is the problem then? It's set up this way, it works, and people and therapists are aware of what the relationship is about, and "my" does not mean possession, any more than saying "my teacher" means I possess my teacher.

I don't think everyone would characterize it that way. Because the relationship is set-up in a certain way doesn't necessarily have to imply that the participants are, therefore, less real.

In my case, I do think that the T's use of "your" in relation to me as a client helped me to see that she sees the relationship as real and as part of her responsibility.

She also used the terms "our relationship" and "our therapeutic relationship." This phrase took me aback and made me feel slightly uncomfortable. But as I said, I was also pleased deep down.

I don't think the therapist knows me either. She has never exhibited to me that she knows me nor would she have reason to do so simply because I go in and tell her various things.

In terms of real, it simply means we do not count to each other in real life. Therapy is an artificial setting with the therapist playing a role designed to manipulate the client, in my opinion. The role played by the therapist has nothing to do with the therapist's real personality or beliefs or reaction. Theatre of the absurd sort of thing.

Definition from merriam webster online:
My- 1. Of or relating to me or myself especially as possessor, agent, object of an action, or familiar person <my car> <my injuries> <my man>

So most here on this thread seem to say they use it in the way of my injuries and my man.

I would agree with what you posted above; it is certainly how I see myself using the term, "My therapist". My therapist is a familiar person, someone who is not a stranger off the street. She is real and has an impact on my life. However, in your original post, you wondered if people were using the term and giving it "possessive weight". I'm only guessing here, but I wondered if you were asking people if there was an underlying feeling or emotion attached to the term, as in, this person, my therapist is mine, I love him/her and I claim his/her as a critical and all important person in my life.

For me personally, I don't think it goes that deep. I like my therapist. I think she's a good person, but I wouldn't die of loneliness or despair if I had to stop going. I see my relationship with her as a professional one. She's there to help me with some issue I have in life, she's taught me some great skills, but she sure doesn't fall into the same category as my son, my parents, my siblings and my beloved cats and dog! (*I used "I" through-out this post even though I know you are addressing all people reading because I think how people feel about the issue is very individual).

Yeah i agree with this pov. This is why i say i "love" my t in the room, but IRL we would not be a good match. I think his real personality is too abrupt. But in the room, he slows down to my pace. That is a manipulation that makes me feel cared for, and it stands in opposition to my mother's "hurry up".

Also i believe good theater moves us and can change us.

I really don't understand the semantics game people on this forum seem to get into so frequently. I get that language is important, but when we start reading into literally every word for deeper meaning, that sounds a little pathological to me.

But since we are playing this game, to be completely honest, I feel like tons of people on this site are desperately afraid of attachment to their T's. They call absolutely all feelings they have towards them transference and run away from anything that might make them feel dependent on their T's at all. I feel like this huge thread on a really very trivial topic of basic English grammar really demonstrates that quite clearly. Saying "my" denotes a connection to the person and some people are so afraid of that connection that they ditch the "my" altogether.

I know some people are arguing that using a possessive article on their therapist is in a way objectifying them or assuming that you "own" them. No one here is arguing that saying "my husband" is wrong despite that with the same logic, you would be saying you are in possession of your husband and thus objectifying him. The reason that no one is arguing against "my husband" is because people aren't as afraid of articulating an attachment to husband because they feel more secure in knowing that he won't leave. You can "own" knowing that relationship is constant so it is less scary.

If she comes up in conversation, I'll call her by name if the other person knows about her or I'll call her "my T" or "my aunt" or "my friend". That may make tons of people uncomfortable because she isn't any of those three things and she blatantly can never be any of those things but the simple reality is that my feelings for her and the nature of our relationship is exactly the same no matter what I call her. It feels the same if I call her the red headed lady as it does if I call her mom and the same if I call her the therapist or my therapist. The language game doesn't change the feelings.

Many people here do claim to love the one they see or past ones and many do claim to consider the therapist an important or critical person in their lives. I simply wondered if they were using the modifier to signify that or not. It came up for me in a non therapy context this weekend (with a clergy person and not directed at me) and I had somewhat the same response to hearing "I am YOUR clergy" as I would to using or hearing my or your in relation to a therapist.

Maybe I'm off or taking this down the wrong path, but it seems that the therapeutic relationship is more in question than the use of "my".

To me, the relationship I have with my T is real. I'm not talking to an inanimate object. There is a real, living, breathing person in front of me. I have feelings about my T just as I would about anyone. My feelings for her are positive...I love her. But each relationship in life is different. With my T, the relationship exists in basically a box: her office. But the same could be said about teachers: the relationship exists in the classroom. But it's still real. And whether you have positive, negative, or neutral feelings about a person, a relationship still exists if you're in each other's life even if in a minimal capacity.

Hey Stopdog - Do you say "my dogs"?

haha I almost said stopdoc

I am more interested in language here. I don't think of myself as having a relationship with every human I come into contact with.
I do not consider myself having a relationship with the therapist. Others may, but I do not. I consider the use of my to mean something perhaps others here do not. It is fine - I was just curious.

As I do have a relationship with my dogs - I say my.

My parents were so neglectful, caught up in their own crap, and struggling with their own demons that I think I developed an attachment to my dog....

I think a lot of people have attachments to animals. Even the one therapist I see has stated she is very attached to her dog (The very animal I do not want at appointments I attend) I am also attached to my cat. I do not see it, for me, as having anything to do with my parents.