Originally Posted by LonesomeTonight

I guess it's just his unclear policy is difficult for me. If he had a strict "Nope, no phone calls unless scheduled" (that's more for clients who go off to college) policy, then it would be like, "OK, fine." But his is more like, "Well, maybe, depending on the circumstances." I guess I sort of want him to just say, "If you're feeling that bad, it's fine to request a call, just know it will be charged, can't be longer than 5 minutes, and I can't guarantee I will be available." That's the sort of thing I'd want. Ideally, I'd never even use it. It just helps to know the option is there if I need it. That in itself is comforting to me. Hm, maybe that's what I need to tell him. That the vast, vast majority of the time, just knowing the option is there if I need it is enough. (Like with ex-MC, I called him in the middle of the night exactly once in 4 years.)

You can set that policy for yourself. If it helps you to know that phone calls are not an option, you can decide that phone calls to him are not on your list of options. You do not have to rely on him to set your boundaries, nor do you have to meet him at his boundary.

[unaluna]

It seems like calling him has become the elephant in the living room.

Of course, if you were actively SI, he would not want your last words to be, "if only i could have called..." And everybody understands that. So no problem there.

At the other end of the spectrum in terms of frequency, he doesnt want to become an OCD tic, where you call him every time you feel a certain way. And thats where it feels like you are getting stuck in a loop, in rationalizing the OCDness?

Because i dont think its really about HOW BAD do you feel, on a scale of 1 to 10, for you to be "allowed" to call.

How do we separate the "how bad", or celebrate the how bad, from the ocd habit? Just trying to look at things in a different way. Its not a question of how close is how bad to SI. Or at least how do you separate the two.

[LonesomeTonight]

T Monday. Went back and sat down. He was wearing his R2D2 socks. I said I felt like I should apologize for the email I'd sent him the night before but knew I didn't have to. That I'd tried to have a talk with H about something, but it went pretty badly, and I just ended up feeling really awful. That I'd tried talking to a couple friends, and it helped some, and I even tried an online crisis line thing, but I was in the queue for a long time, then got put into a chat area, and it still said someone was ahead of me, and after 10 minutes in there, I gave up. T was rather horrified at how long I'd waited in the chat room. Me: "Yeah..." I said someone had given me. the number of someplace to text the next time, where they're more available.

Possible trigger:

I said how I'd felt really awful that night, like strong SUI urges. That I hated how I'd spiraled so quickly. Though I'd managed not to SH.

I told T I knew he likely wouldn't have seen the email that night (sent around 9 or 9:30 on a Sunday--I did mention how bad I felt). What I didn't say was that I'd contemplated texting him for a call because I was in such a bad place, but since we'd just talked about that the previous session, I was a little afraid it would seem like I was testing him or something. In retrospect, I should have told him that. Incidentally, he did send a brief, caring response to the email that morning (I'd sent a follow-up saying I'd be safe and that we could just talk in session).

I started crying and said I was frustrated with myself for feeling so bad Sunday night when I'd been doing so well the week before. T: "You mean with self-care?" Me: "Yes. I even went to yoga again Friday, despite being sore from Wednesday. And I'd been doing well with the drinking...till Sunday." I said I guessed I should tell him what happened Sunday night, adding that H and I did actually talk about some of the stuff that morning and resolved a few things. T: "OK."

I said how Sunday night had started out fairly well, that I'd dropped D off at my parents' for an overnight (it's spring break this week, so she's off) and H and I went out to dinner. That dinner was good, had a drink after. Then opted to go someplace else for a bit because I wanted to bring something up and was enjoying being out (I noted that it was only like 8:30 pm at this point, not late!)

Me: "I was trying to be careful with the drinking, only drinking lower-alcohol stuff and drinking slowly. And I mentioned that to H--oh right, I guess he made a comment that really bothered me pretty early on, when I mentioned that." T: "What was that?" Me: "Well, I said I was watching how much I was drinking. And H said he could let me know if I seemed to be getting drunk. I said OK."

Possible trigger:

Me: "And then H said, 'Drink however much you want to, just don't get to the point where you get all knife-y.' Like referring to SH. I didn't say it bothered me at the time, but it really did."

T: "It seemed like he was trying to make light of it." Me: "Yeah, and it seemed like something inappropriate to make light of. I did mention it this morning and he apologized." T: "What did he say this morning?" Me: "He said, 'Yeah, I was trying to make a joke. I apologize." T: "I think I've mentioned this once before." Me: "Yes?" T: "Have you considered that your H might have Asperger's?" Me: "Yes, you did mention that before."

We had a very brief conversation about how I know that the DSM V no longer consider's Asperger's a formal diagnosis, that it's different functioning levels of autism, but that T thinks it's a specific set of symptoms and feels it should be different. I said I know at least one person with Asperger's who agrees with that and have read that people want to keep it a separate diagnosis.

Back to my H. T: "Most people would realize that there are certain things you don't joke about." Me: "Yeah, I would know not to joke about that." T: "Yes, you're on the particularly emotionally sensitive end of things. It could be said you're maybe even too sensitive about things." Me: "Yeah." T: "I'm not saying that as a criticism, just an observation." Me: "Yeah, I know. I am very sensitive." T: "But most people...OK, I think I've talked before about behavioral learning." Me: "Yes." He explained how people learn by doing things and seeing how others react, or by watching other people interact. How most people might be able to recognize how tens of thousands of different behaviors can affect people (or something like that), how I'm especially emotionally attuned, so it might be more like hundreds of thousands for me. But for H, if he does have Asperger's, could be just thousands for him.

T said how people typically are aware of how another person is reacting when they're talking, reading their facial expressions and body language to pick up on whether they're bored, interested, upset, etc., then reacting accordingly. T: "But from what you've said about H--remember, I've never met him, this is only going by what you've shared with me--but it seems like he doesn't tend to pick up on those cues." Me: "Like he wouldn't have noticed I was upset by that comment?" T: "Yes." Me: "Yeah, he doesn't seem to notice if I'm glazing over when he gives me endless details about a work project. Or he often doesn't pick up on if I'm in the middle of something when he comes down to talk to me in the middle of a workday." T: "Yes, things like that. Or just lacking sensitivity about how someone might be feeling." I said I'd noticed that in his interactions with his mom at times. T said how it could particularly affect things with D. Me: "Yeah, her, too."

T: "I'm going to make an observation here, and I'm sure it's really going to shock you." Me: "OK." T: "Not really, it's rather obvious, but: You and H are extremely different." Me: "Yeah..." T: "It makes me wonder how you ended up together." I described how he was when we first met at work, like 15 years ago. How he'd seemed kinda goofy and happy-go-lucky. He'd walk around the office barefoot, his desk was decorated with paperclip garlands. He'd go to coffeeshops and sit and observe people, writing down what he saw in a journal. And he'd write poetry sometimes. T: "That sounds appealing." Me: "Yeah. He just seems different now."

Talked more about the main conversation with H Sunday night, where I'd said I really missed being goofy and playful with H, how we would joke around together quite a bit. And that it felt like we didn't do that anymore. How H seemed to agree. That he's more serious now. I said I wasn't sure if it was partly related to having D, to his close friend's passing 6 years ago, something else. H said it may partly have been getting older. And we'd agreed about trying to have more fun. T said sounded like good conversation. Me: "Yeah...except then it somehow shifted to talking about ex-MC. I guess because we'd brought up the having fun stuff in there? And then H was talking about when things seemed to take a negative turn with ex-MC. And H said it was around the time of 'the incident,'
referring to my cheating a bit over 3 years ago. And it really upset me that he brought that up. When I thought we were having a positive conversation."

I said how I brought it up to him that morning, how it upset me that he'd mentioned it, and he said he was just thinking it was around when things changed with ex-MC, that there hadn't been any other meaning behind his mentioning it, and he was puzzled when he came back from the bathroom and I was crying. And that I was clearly angry with him, but he didn't know why. And I said how it felt like we were having a conversation about something else, then he brought it up, and it just made me think about it.

T: "It seems that you tend to go in a spiral the couple times he's mentioned it." Me: "yeah, I think much of it is guilt." T: "But it suggests that you don't think he's allowed to bring it up at all." Me: "What do you mean?" T: "Like you don't permit him to bring up the topic. You're trying to set rules around it." Me: "..." T: "When he should be able to mention it. Because it's something that happened." My first impulse was to feel upset by what T was saying. It felt a bit like he was taking H's side, instead of mine. But I thought for a second and realized he was just trying to help me. Me: "OK. I mean, I don't bring it up at all either. It just seems like a verboten topic in general. I guess part of me just feels it's in the past, and he says he's moved past it...but if he brings it up it suggests it's still on his mind." T: "Well, it is a thing that happened in your relationship." Me: "yeah, I know. But I don't know if it still bothers him and he seems unwilling to talk about it."

I mentioned that I wondered if we needed to go back to marriage counseling (obviously with someone other than ex-MC!) T didn't seem to give much of an opinion on that. Talked a bit about how he didn't marriage counseling, saying, "I'm not sure what training ex-MC had in it." Me: "I'm not sure either. You and ex-T talked about different theories or techniques you used in marriage counseling, like how you'd set goals, but ex-MC never did. It seemed more free-form." T: "Hm, Ok."

Me: "I think I worry if we go to marriage counseling again, how the marriage counselor would basically see me as the problem in the relationship, like ex-MC seemed to. Where he'd act like whatever H did/said was OK, it was my overreaction." T: "I'd hope that wouldn't happen. What I try to do with marriage counseling is getting the couple to have conversations they need to have. And then before they terminate, I talk about how they'll be able to have those kinds of conversations on their own. Like what are their plans for that?" Me: "Yeah, ex-MC never did that sort of thing with us. I mean, he'd say we handled a conversation well on our own or something, but..."

T: "Because the thing with a set marriage counseling appointment is you have a scheduled time to discuss things. And there's a set end to that time. That can be more difficult outside of that setting. Both setting aside time and having a set ending." I said how D is generally around, making it more difficult to talk. And if H and I are on a date night, it's like I often don't want to mess things up with a relationship talk. How I felt I did that Sunday night. And then we were still out together and came home together. That I missed D being there. T: "Because she can act as a sort of buffer?" Me: "Yeah." T said it can be hard to have a conversation at home because there's no set end to it. Like, do you keep talking about it later that day? The next morning?" He said one good way to handle it is to go for a walk together, because then you don't have to talk the whole time--Me: "Or face each other"--T, "Yes, and that. But then you can have a set time for the walk, when you get home. And if you feel you want to talk more, you could add a few minutes to the walk." Me: "That's a good idea, maybe I'll try that."

We did end up talking a bit more in there about how different H and I are and how he might have Asperger's, but I forget the specifics. We were at the end of time. Confirmed Thursday, scheduled for the next week. I went over and paid, talking about...something. Shaking my hand, T said, "Have a good weekend!" Me: "Uh...it's Monday...right?" T: "Oh, yes, it is! Have a good week then!" Me: "Thanks, you too." I opened the door and glanced back at him, hoping for a "take care," but there wasn't one (I think he's forgotten about my appreciation of that phrase--not sure it's worth bringing up again).

[LonesomeTonight]

Originally Posted by unaluna

It seems like calling him has become the elephant in the living room.

Of course, if you were actively SI, he would not want your last words to be, "if only i could have called..." And everybody understands that. So no problem there.

At the other end of the spectrum in terms of frequency, he doesnt want to become an OCD tic, where you call him every time you feel a certain way. And thats where it feels like you are getting stuck in a loop, in rationalizing the OCDness?

Because i dont think its really about HOW BAD do you feel, on a scale of 1 to 10, for you to be "allowed" to call.

How do we separate the "how bad", or celebrate the how bad, from the ocd habit? Just trying to look at things in a different way. Its not a question of how close is how bad to SI. Or at least how do you separate the two.

The thing is, I've yet to call or text when I was feeling that bad (I did leave him a voicemail once when I was upset with him about something, but that was months ago and was the sole time I've called his phone). So I don't see how that's an OCD thing. It could be said that emailing is...but lately I've tried lots of things before that. I don't jump right to email. Or I might compose something and throw it in my draft folder and let it sit overnight, sometimes just let it stay there without sending.

(ETA that I've texted to request an extra session, but that doesn't "count" as a text to him as long as I don't explain why.)

I think much of it comes down to unclear boundaries. And I think there's some element of how much does he really care. I accept that he wouldn't talk to me at 2 a.m. But, in terms of my feeling bad enough to warrant a phone call....oh...I think I just realized something. With my mom, it's like I had to be at a certain level of, say, illness to not go to school (like, maybe I had a really bad cold, but no fever, so, off to school you go!) or having a migraine didn't seem an acceptable reason to come home early from work. Or, I mean, mental illness was no excuse for anything...So...maybe this is sort of that replaying itself? Well, I may have a possible topic for today (session later than usual).

ETA: And I think it's also how he doesn't seem to think my

Possible trigger:

SH is particularly serious, so it's like, "eh, whatever" compared to other clients. When to *me* it's serious if I get to that point, I mean, I'm not going to die of my injuries (unless infection, I guess), but I think that taking a knife and hurting myself with it is a fairly big deal to me and maybe I want him to treat it that way.

And maybe this is partly also about comparison with other clients, like maybe he'd be there for them more because they're sicker, while I'm not.

[snowangel17]

T: "Yes, you're on the particularly emotionally sensitive end of things. It could be said you're maybe even too sensitive about things."

I have to disagree with this. I don't think you can be "too sensitive" about things. The world needs people who are more sensitive IMO. And him saying it's not a criticism but an observation....hmmm not sure that's entirely correct. It's based on an opinion, his opinion ....where is the line between being just sensitive and "too" sensitive?

Edited to add: Yup I have a bee in my bonnet about people calling people 'too sensitive"

[LonesomeTonight]

Originally Posted by snowangel17

I have to disagree with this. I don't think you can be "too sensitive" about things. The world needs people who are more sensitive IMO. And him saying it's not a criticism but an observation....hmmm not sure that's entirely correct. It's based on an opinion, his opinion ....where is the line between being just sensitive and "too" sensitive?

Thanks, Snowangel. It does feel at times that T is being a bit critical of me. Like in his saying I think about therapy and the therapeutic relationship more than any of his other clients. He seems alternately somewhat critical of me and almost fascinated by me. He and I are very different, too, if you couldn't tell! But I think he also helps me in that way, in giving me a different perspective. He says he tries to help me see how other people might react to me (though they might not tell me).

[unaluna]

I havent read your session post yet, but when you say its his boundary, where is his boundary, it reminds me of catholic school and us kids asking the nuns, "how about THIS? Does THIS cross the line?" We werent being disrespectful, we just got fascinated with the idea of there being a line.

Some years ago, when i found out i could get an annulment thru the catholic church, i wasnt motivated to do so. I was like, "i really dont think the only thing keeping me out of heaven is gonna be the paperwork...".

Maybe its not OCD, but you seem to hung up on the "paperwork". What IS that? Whats the golden ticket you seek?

[LonesomeTonight]

Originally Posted by unaluna

I havent read your session post yet, but when you say its his boundary, where is his boundary, it reminds me of catholic school and us kids asking the nuns, "how about THIS? Does THIS cross the line?" We werent being disrespectful, we just got fascinated with the idea of there being a line.

Some years ago, when i found out i could get an annulment thru the catholic church, i wasnt motivated to do so. I was like, "i really dont think the only thing keeping me out of heaven is gonna be the paperwork...".

Maybe its not OCD, but you seem to hung up on the "paperwork". What IS that? Whats the golden ticket you seek?

I would say the golden tickets for full acceptance (for me, as who I am, not trying to be someone else) and/or for not being abandoned.

[snowangel17]

From reading online it doesn't seem that you think about therapy and the therapeutic relationship more than others. It seems quite common especially with certain types of clients. So either he is not getting many of these types of clients (which is unusual) or the clients he has and feel this way don't feel comfortable enough sharing the same levels of thoughts about him that you have. You are very open and honest in your work with him. Not everyone is or for some, it can take a long time to reach that point. I understand that him giving you a different perspective is helpful. You seem to have a good sense of self-awareness. Perhaps you are also helping him to realise that not all people react to him the way he thinks they will. There are others out there not all like his 'other' clients and it is good for him to see other perspectives too

[DP_2017]

I agree with snow angel, it is very common. Probably the most common topic they deal with overall. However, he sounds like my regular T in the sense of him saying more than others. He said something similar to me about how he knew other people felt similar but I was the only one honest about it.

I couldn't imagine not saying anything, I mean, yes I feel like I wasted too much time on it now looking back, but not saying anything ever? That would have made me explode.

[LonesomeTonight]

Originally Posted by snowangel17

From reading online it doesn't seem that you think about therapy and the therapeutic relationship more than others. It seems quite common especially with certain types of clients. So either he is not getting many of these types of clients (which is unusual) or the clients he has and feel this way don't feel comfortable enough sharing the same levels of thoughts about him that you have. You are very open and honest in your work with him. Not everyone is or for some, it can take a long time to reach that point. I understand that him giving you a different perspective is helpful. You seem to have a good sense of self-awareness. Perhaps you are also helping him to realise that not all people react to him the way he thinks they will. There are others out there not all like his 'other' clients and it is good for him to see other perspectives too

Thanks. I do think, if you're reading on here, people on PC think about their T's more than say the average therapy client. (And I've read that the typical client is only in therapy for 6 sessions, or something crazy like that.) I've also said to him that maybe other clients do feel this way, but just aren't telling him about it--either they don't feel comfortable or maybe don't fully understand what they're feeling. It took me a long time before actually sharing even with ex-T what I was feeling about ex-MC. And that was after coming on here and reading other stuff online about it. If I hadn't realized other therapy clients were experiencing it (transference, attachment), too, I'd likely have been too afraid to bring it up.

[susannahsays]

So the thing with H that had happened where the next morning he acted like nothing had happened was what you described here? The conflict was over him alluding to the cheating incident? It seems pretty clear why he wouldn't have brought the subject up the following morning. From what you've said, it sounds like you told him he wasn't fun anymore, then became upset when he offered insight into why your relationship has changed. Then it kind of sounds like you decided to talk about it the following morning, that consisted of guilting him for sharing his thoughts on the subject because they were upsetting to you. I'm not sure it's fair to say he's unwilling to talk about his feelings on this when your reaction might be coming across as punitive to him.

I realize that all probably comes across pretty harsh. I couldn't figure out how else to phrase it. I don't think you're "the problem" in the relationship. It sounds like you're both just trying to manage things the only way you know how, and those ways aren't always the most productive or conducive to open communication. If you feel like I'm giving your husband a free pass, know that I also think his SH comment is an example of communicating something (I'm not exactly sure what) in an unhelpful way. So there are definitely issues on both sides. I think your concern about being seen as "the problem" is about insecurity and it doesn't help that ex-MC was incompetent to provide MC.

One other thing I'm wondering about is if it's the best idea to talk about relationship stuff when you're drinking. I'm especially wondering this given your husband's comment about SHing after you've been drinking. That just made me wonder if you ever become more impulsive or dysregulated when alcohol is in the picture.

[LonesomeTonight]

Originally Posted by susannahsays

So the thing with H that had happened where the next morning he acted like nothing had happened was what you described here? The conflict was over him alluding to the cheating incident? It seems pretty clear why he wouldn't have brought the subject up the following morning. From what you've said, it sounds like you told him he wasn't fun anymore, then became upset when he offered insight into why your relationship has changed. Then it kind of sounds like you decided to talk about it the following morning, that consisted of guilting him for sharing his thoughts on the subject because they were upsetting to you. I'm not sure it's fair to say he's unwilling to talk about his feelings on this when your reaction might be coming across as punitive to him.

I realize that all probably comes across pretty harsh. I couldn't figure out how else to phrase it. I don't think you're "the problem" in the relationship. It sounds like you're both just trying to manage things the only way you know how, and those ways aren't always the most productive or conducive to open communication. If you feel like I'm giving your husband a free pass, know that I also think his SH comment is an example of communicating something (I'm not exactly sure what) in an unhelpful way. So there are definitely issues on both sides. I think your concern about being seen as "the problem" is about insecurity and it doesn't help that ex-MC was incompetent to provide MC.

One other thing I'm wondering about is if it's the best idea to talk about relationship stuff when you're drinking. I'm especially wondering this given your husband's comment about SHing after you've been drinking. That just made me wonder if you ever become more impulsive or dysregulated when alcohol is in the picture.

Just to clarify the first part, I didn't say that *H* wasn't fun anymore. I said I missed when we would be playful and silly together. I was putting myself in there, too. Like, it was something that both of us weren't doing. Not just him. I think I made that fairly clear to him, both at night and in the morning. And I was trying to say I felt like that change happened way before the cheating, wondering if it had to do with us being parents, etc. He was saying that the ex-MC relationship changed after the cheating, not so much our relationship.

I agree that we shouldn't have the talks when we're drinking, at least not more than a beer or two. It's a bad pattern we fall into. Like alcohol helps give me courage to bring stuff up, but can also make him more blunt than usual. And is also part of why, in the morning, when he asked if I was OK, I said I was upset about some stuff from the night before. And we continued the conversation (both totally sober). I figured that was preferable to continuing to stew about it, while he would have invariably already let it go, which tends to be our pattern, mainly because it's how our minds work. It's also why I talked it out with T.

[unaluna]

Good point, susannah. When would be a good time to talk. And when would be a good time to talk about The Incident? Maybe going to a different (or even the same?) MC for a short number of times, focusing on just a few specific things?

[Echos Myron redux]

Originally Posted by unaluna

Good point, susannah. When would be a good time to talk. And when would be a good time to talk about The Incident? Maybe going to a different (or even the same?) MC for a short number of times, focusing on just a few specific things?

Different! Definitely different. But I agree that you both seem to need a neutral forum for constructive conversation LT.

[stopdog]

Originally Posted by snowangel17

I have to disagree with this. I don't think you can be "too sensitive" about things. The world needs people who are more sensitive IMO. And him saying it's not a criticism but an observation....hmmm not sure that's entirely correct. It's based on an opinion, his opinion ....where is the line between being just sensitive and "too" sensitive?

Edited to add: Yup I have a bee in my bonnet about people calling people 'too sensitive"

I am just the opposite. I think there is an ability to be overly sensitive and that it hinders a lot of things and is used at times to control others. I think the world needs more people who are not wallowing around in their feelings or using how sensitive they are to control others.

[hopealwayz]

Happy birthday, LT!

I experience some personal discomfort when I read your posts. I feel disconcerted that the therapeutic intensity appears to be all on your shoulders. You seem to consistently raise difficult and painful relational issues (including some ideas about their intrapsychic origin or the relevance of psychodynamic interpretations) whilst your therapist shrugs or fudges or encourages a surface interpretation. It's interesting that you describe two imagined feelings which he has about you - he is critical or he is fascinated. These are polar responses and relatively extreme reactions for a therapist to have. What if he isn't either of those things? I have a sense that he isn't engaged in the same kind of therapeutic conservations as you are.

[susannahsays]

Originally Posted by snowangel17

I have to disagree with this. I don't think you can be "too sensitive" about things. The world needs people who are more sensitive IMO. And him saying it's not a criticism but an observation....hmmm not sure that's entirely correct. It's based on an opinion, his opinion ....where is the line between being just sensitive and "too" sensitive?

Edited to add: Yup I have a bee in my bonnet about people calling people 'too sensitive"

It is a fallacy of logic to argue that the lack of a clear delineation between sensitivity and too much sensitivity is evidence that there is no such thing as too much sensitivity.

I think there is definitely such a thing as being too sensitive, and it seems to me that denying this is shifting the responsibility for managing the too sensitive person's emotions onto other people - which is something people who are too sensitive sometimes do, directly or indirectly, intentionally or unintentionally. That is not helpful for anybody.

[susannahsays]

Originally Posted by LonesomeTonight

Just to clarify the first part, I didn't say that *H* wasn't fun anymore. I said I missed when we would be playful and silly together. I was putting myself in there, too. Like, it was something that both of us weren't doing. Not just him. I think I made that fairly clear to him, both at night and in the morning. And I was trying to say I felt like that change happened way before the cheating, wondering if it had to do with us being parents, etc. He was saying that the ex-MC relationship changed after the cheating, not so much our relationship.

Gotcha. Still, maybe it would be helpful to view what he said more in the lens of he was trying to contribute to the conversation and talk about your relationship. I think that's something you've expressed wanting more of, so maybe instead of dwelling on the fact that you felt blindsided and hurt by what he brought up, you could take it as a positive that he was reflecting and sharing his perspective. Or, if not "instead of," maybe "in addition to?"

[unaluna]

Agree with susannah. It is notable that you report you catch yourself doing this with t: you write, "previously i would have bitten his head off, but this time i listened and understood." So only a matter of time before you do this with h too?

Huge step, doing that with t, btw.

[Anastasia~]

Being sensitive is not a choice, at least not for me. I don't "wallow in my own emotions," because I am too busy trying to tolerate them, taking meds..to modulate them or doing whatever to just become numb. Emotional dysregulation /sensitivity is a curse, at least for me. I agree that it hinders me, as in my social anxiety, and I would do anything to not be this way.

This post is meant to be factual in regard to my own experience, it is not a result of my sensitivity about being sensitive.

[susannahsays]

I think everybody wallows in their own emotions sometimes. I do, at least. I'm also the world record holder for longest sulk. I'm really fun at parties, promise.

If only Adele had written a song called wallowing in the deep, it would have been much more fun... just a completely random thought from my mind to yours. You're welcome.

ETA: Just realized my profile pic looks like she's having a good wallow or sulk... that's probably why I picked it, she looks nice and disgruntled like me. Hmm...

[Amyjay]

Just from reading through your posts here about your conversations with T re: "appropriate" reasons for calling I would think the safest or most appropriate thing to do would be just to have a no-phone call policy. Why? Because angsting about whether or not you are in "enough" crisis to warrant calling him or not is going to add SO much more to whatever crisis you could ever be experiencing that it is likely going to be far more dangerous to allow calls in "crisis" situations. If you had a blanket-rule about no phone calls to T you would have far more internal resources available to devote to actually implementing self-care strategies. Having all this extra contact with T is your go-to. You don't have to figure out things for yourself. You don't have to find a way to tolerate unpleasant emotions yourself. Your need for contact may even actually generate crises in order to warrant it. So much of your time and emotional energy goes into internally debating about whether or not to contact, whether or not to email. I don't think that escalating this to calling on the phone will help you at all.

[unaluna]