How does therapy actually help with...

Another thing about the movie - everything started to go bad for Riley when Joy prevented Sadness from doing what came natural for sadness. Instead, sadness was sent away and contained, told to stay in a circle and not to "act out". Therapist often like to talk about where's our anger about something because anger is also an emotion that we are told not to act on, told to keep it to ourselves and so on. Fear is also one that many are mocked or shamed about.

I think a part of talk therapy is to help break through that early training of containing these parts, to get us to learn to trust them, and to learn how to now express them as we are no longer children so child like tantrums are not appreciated. We have to learn how to use them in an appropriate (adult) way in order to get our needs met.

Thanks everyone

I have seen Inside out, many times, fantastic movie! I never thought of it in terms relating to therapy though so that was interesting

As for the stuff about attachment to T, I've been going since April and still nothing. This time, I think his more closed off attitude and strict boundaries keep me from feeling like he cares, which also keeps me from caring about him, therefore, no attachment or mess like before and I think I am doing pretty well with him. Still working on trust but sadly he has to follow the T I trusted most in life and then regretted deeply so it will take time... the best thing he can do for me and he knows it, is to remain detached. Don't show me care or anything. So far, so good.

I am not sure the pattern will ever change sadly but hopefully I can at least learn to deal with it better than my usually SH or self loathing

I usually think that people with good, solid boundaries care more than those who do inappropriate, unprofessional, excessive things under the disguise of caring. They also care enough to monitor their attitudes and to do best what their true role is instead of some sort of very superficial "care" that primarily serves their impulses. There is a difference between this and detachment/non-involvement. Also, nothing has to be very rigid and black-and-white.

Maybe if you revised your definition of care and changed your perception to something that is beyond momentary impulses and fantasies, you could allow yourself to feel closer and keep your own boundaries at the same time. Perhaps instead of going with the flow try to think about it as here and now, a new challenge to try out consciously, like working on a phobia or something. Using a banality, the difference between what you wish to feel good and what you need to improve your life. It's not always easy to recognize on the go when someone truly cares IMO, often it becomes much clearer in retrospect, once we see tangible improvement and are aware of the differences between then and now.

I am personally not a fan of separating feeling and thinking, emotions and cognition. It is very artificial and unrealistic - our brain, body, decisions and behavior do not work that way, it is never compartmentalized, isolated, one approach at a time... they are integrated processes in every moment and influence each-other even if an individual does not feel that way and feels it's fragmented somehow (due to psychological defenses originating from traumas, fears etc). So, IMO, it is not necessary at all to decide whether one wants a cognitive approach or emotional approach because it will inevitable be a mix of both, whatever modality. It's only the method being used that likes to emphasize either or but, in reality, they are never separated unless someone has a serious and specific form of brain damage, which is rare.

Do you think your current T is helpful with some of the things you want to address? If yes, great, keep going. You can always decide to work on other things later, no need to target everything all at once. Perhaps if you become more comfortable with certain things (e.g. self-esteem), the other insecurities will be much easier to focus on as well and you will be more open and willing to work on those, perhaps things will even unfold naturally in that direction. Perhaps too dry an analogy, but it can be a bit like one needs to reach basic self-preservation and security first to a certain level before wishing to be successful with "higher forms" of self-actualization... otherwise it will have not resolved the underlying anxiety/avoidance and will likely mostly lead to efforts that won't last. I think we need to solidify certain resources first in order to build something else upon them.

Thanks for this, I have said to my T that I do not find insight particularly helpful, and I have sometimes thought that not many people the same way as me, it’s great to read that someone else feels the same as me.

I did not intend to say that insight is unhelpful, just that it doesn't generally result in healing because healing is a more comprehensive goal than insight.

Well said. This was the benefit of a therapist who approached therapy from varying modalities based on what was needed at the time. Personally, I don't think healing was all intellect nor was it all emotional. In fact, I can see a real danger in a therapy that is ALL either of these. There was a real interplay between the two. The healing came in connecting the two in the process.

Exactly^. That's where the balance is. For some people, the insight may come first, for others, the emotional response comes first. I think a therapy that can't help a client to connect the two is unbalanced. But that spans modalities, which is why I like generalist Ts who have a firm grounding in psychological theories.