i literally cannot fathom!! it's like every time i start to speak about it (for example, an association to a repeated dream element that i know touches on a fantasy that is desperately trying to be spoken) -- i come to a dead stop and can't deal with the possibility of the words themselves hanging in the air in an analytic space. it's literally like the main thing stopping the flow of speech for me at this point and i feel so stuck and annoyed!! fwiw i can talk with lovers and to some extent friends about fantasies and proclivities, but for whatever reason the analytic space feels impossible.

those of you who have freed yourself from this bind, or were never in it, how??

i'm also low key afraid that my fantasies will stop working for me if i speak them in this space, and also confused in an unpleasant way about the transference -- i am afraid the content or even just the transgressive-feeling act of breaking the seal on speaking about it will be arousing (to me -- edited to add, i think i'm also afraid it will NOT be arousing to my analyst and i'll feel shame or guilt), or will carry too much affect that will ruin the space itself for me.

edited to add, for those saying i should start by talking about this problem, i have been complaining about it for literally a year lol and have shared everything in this post except the bit about fear/confusion about arousing myself.

So I deal with diagnoses like FND, fibromyalgia, and some other things that likely exacerbate the symptoms of those.

I’m a wholehearted believer of psychoanalysis as a clinical modality. While it took years in PA to get to the point I’m at, with a little bit of other therapeutic methods thrown in, my pain has significantly diminished and my FND symptoms haven’t come around in a while now (I’ll regret say this later today, I’m sure).

Anyway, someone in the r/FND sub asked if CBT was worth checking out and I wrote an entire op-ed about my positive experience with (mostly) PA. While my comment itself didn’t get much traction, I got two people who private messaged me essentially telling me that psychoanalysis is an archaic way of thinking and that it seeks to blame the patient for all their problems. Both of them happened to make the same/similar points as each other, as well as with what I’ve just explained.

Is there any simple and calm way to counter-argue these kinds of points? I thought my very long comment was explanatory enough in itself to counter these misconceptions, but perhaps they never even got past the first sentence of reading it.

Thoughts?

I had a dream that a patient of mine told me he loved me in session. It made me wonder: what would you do if a patient told you they loved you? It’s never happened to me in real life but I do wonder.

I like men who make me laugh. And I enjoy healthy banter. But I’ve never been physically attracted to these men. Am I broken?

And the men I am physically attracted to I don’t find funny whatsoever. I find all their attempts to make jokes to be awkward and almost silly.

Someone please psycho analyze me.

Does anyone else feel as if many of Freud's associations (latent dream thoughts) are incredibly arbitrary?

Hi! I'm looking for Vanheule's 2004 "Neurotic Depressive Trouble: Between the Signifier and the Real," but I can't seem to find it through my university, PEP, or anywhere else. Does anybody here happen to be in possession of a digital copy of this paper—or of any issues in the Journal for Lacanian Studies edited by Nobus—and are willing to slide it under the table?

For patients who operate along a borderline character structure due to early childhood traumas and implement splitting as their primary defense, how does one go about interventions that might help someone integrate and move towards a more depressive (depressive as optimal developmental stage according to Klein, not depressed) position in their view of the world and their object relations?

Dear readers,

I wanted to gauge wheter this idea has any traction with you. Reading the sub can be immensly helpful, but sometimes I come across posts or comments that make me scratch my head, and I wonder whether I'm reading someone with a stroke of genius or a regular one. I really belive it matters from what background people write here. And I'd like to know if what I'm reading is written by an IPA candidate or a student without clinical experience.

I assume moderators sir squidz, spook's apprentice have their hands full, but I was wondering whether there could be a flexible flair system, where those who wanted could write their credentials in.

The title kinda says it all. I've been looking for literature that has an in-depth analysis of lacanian theory as it might relate to judaism/Jewish religious/mystical thought. I've only found articles and literature in which what I'm looking for is peripheral. It's really weird considering how central language and desire is to both topics.

I'm a therapist in my 2nd year of private practice, in my 5th year of practice. It's been a learning curve to figure out what my ideal schedule is. I'm hoping to shift my work hours 2 days of the week, which would require moving 5 clients pretty significantly. I'm hoping to offer about or exactly the same times, just on a different day or taking into account what days clients need and want to see me. But, is this harmful/changing the frame too much? Should I just not make any changes and wait until things naturally shift around?

And if I want to make these changes, do I offer it as an option and work it out with the client or just say "I need to make a shift to our session time," offer the options, and then explore how they feel about this change? Some of my folks are more flexible (both mentally and schedule-wise) than others. Some are "people pleasers" and some may have a hard time with it.

I made this post in r/askfeminism asking about the aversion boys show towards girls in childhood (things like the phrase "boys rule, girls drool" and the idea that girls have "cooties"). I feel like they missed something (which partially was due to how I framed the question), so I would like to ask here.

What do you think about the idea of cooties? What function does it serve and where does it come from?

It seems to me pretty similar to Freud's ideas around childhood theories of sex and birth. In particular, it reminds me of Freud's paper on Fetishism. The child is confronted with difference (the opposite sex) and negates it (cooties) to ward off anxiety. One could also invoke Klein and talk about the distinction between a good and a bad object, but I'm more partial to a Freudian reading here.

From the perspective of fetishism, it's also interesting because children have a simultaneous fascination and disgust with the opposite sex; for example children "play doctor" and hold to the idea of "cooties" at the same time.

The answers held that this was social conditioning from parents. I don't think this is sufficient; for one thing, I've never heard of any parents espousing the idea of cooties. I suppose one could say that they were conditioned through other children but that leaves the question where did the idea come from in the first place?

It seems there's something psychoanalytic going on here.

What do you think? What is happening when children say they have cooties?

And if you have any cases where this came up, please share

Which books/texts would you consider to be the holy grail on the topic of the self or provokes thinking into self reflection without going too much into the self help style of books?

Dear all,

Could you please share your thoughts on breastfeeding. For example share any thoughts on someone that was not breastfed at all- to someone that was breastfed until 3 years old.

Any papers or thoughts in general on the effect of breastfeeding psychoanalytically would be great. One part I thoughts was looking, being looked at and eye contact in general.

Free association still remains an awfully elusive concept.

What are the arguments for it being:

a) actively examining and describing what one is experiencing -- emotions, thoughts, memories, etc. (arguably what Freud meant when he said look out the train window, and describe what you see)

b) simply saying whatever words come to mind, without attempting to do anything at all... except say the words

I understand the psychoanalytic stance of listening more than talking. But quite often patients walk in with this expectation that the therapist will talk, or say things that'll help. How do one frame or justify this stance to them in a way that supports the analytic process? Do you at the beginning of the work explain that I as a therapist will not speak much?
Is there any literature around this sort of therapeutic restraint?

These are clients that want to focus on ridding themselves of their badness. They want to get down and 'do the hard work'.

They often see themselves as bad or abusive to others but on closer look it seems like regular assertive anger or displeasure from others' controlling behaviour. They take on all blame for relational failures but be angry and resentful towards the other. Same in the transference.

They seem to feel ashamed of themselves and speak to themselves like an old fashioned school teacher like "I just have to get my head down and get my act together".

They seem very willing to do this self punishing type work, but self compassion or self empathy seems miles away with plenty of primitive defences like denial (they will cry or voice will crack but say they got something in their eye or have a dry throat).

There is something masochistic about it, and there's definitely a hostile superego. How else would you see it?

This is a client type that I notice but I don't know how I would characterise it...

Wondering if anyone has recs for texts that bridge psychoanalysis with visual/image analysis.

Hello. I apologise beforehand if my writing isn't the best, it's been a while since i've done anything academically but I'm hoping to ease myself back into it.

I've been toying w the concept of the mother viewing the child as an appendage or extension of her self. The notion of her believing the child will know her wants and needs, that it will understand what she understands, that it doesn't necessarily have any free will outside of her world. I was wondering if this concept or anything similar is something that has been discussed, or if it even has a name. Thank you

Does anyone have or can indicate some works by the psychoanalyst Joe Weiss ? He was the one who coined "pathogenic beliefs". Do you know any links to his articles ? Couldn't find any book on libgen.

Those in psychoanalytic training programs, I am collecting syllabi from coursework (yes I'm sure it's a lot). If you would like to share, please upload to https://www.file.io/ and share the link! Thank you

NB: I have mined the reddit and other forums and my own supervisors/colleagues for recommended readings. I am, however, specifically interested to see the papers and chapters assigned in sequence and the various classes that people are taking, to help with designing an independent study.

So, I’m looking into applying to the IOPA for the full analytic training. Obv need to be in 5x weekly analysis with an IOPA training analyst for a year before applying. But I can’t find a list of training analysts anywhere. Have been going around in circles. Does the institute publish a list online somewhere?

Hi Everyone,
I have about 2 1/2 years left until I’ll be licensed, and desperately need a job.
I have an MA in psychoanalysis. And, despite seeing patients for 4 years, I can’t get a job in my field! And, if I want to see more patients I can - but every 4 patients I have (which are typically paying me between $30-$75/hour) , I need to pay a supervisor about $100/hour. Suggestions would be appreciated.

Hi there, is anyone in this Sub planning on attending the Congress? Im an IPA newbie and have never been to any Congress in my life! I'd like to hear some experiences from former IPA congresses maybe. Also the price for a Ticket I end up with in my shopping cart doesn't add up with any price on the price list for some reason....
This is the link: https://web.cvent.com/event/b308433a-1cc7-4f34-9177-f5574e3149df/summary

Thanks in Advance :) (I hope this doens't violate any rules, I've read the sticky)

I’m wondering if training as a psychoanalyst or psychoanalytic psychotherapist is meant to make a clinician “better” at working within an analytic framework than training as a psychodynamic psychotherapist.. As far as I can tell the former trainings are more intensive/more time consuming (and more expensive!) working 3-5x per week with patients, so I assume should enable the practitioner to work at greater depth and manage more intense transferences etc? However, surely the vast majority of patients now are only going to be able to come 1x or max 2x a week, so what are the benefits of going further than just psychodynamic if it’s all working within the same analytic framework- is it worth the extra cost and time, or is it actually better to train psychodynamically if you’re only going to be working with people 1x per week? Not sure what I’m missing.

Hello everyone. I am taking a class this semester on psychoanalysis and I am struggling with a particular issue. I have known of Lacan for a while and heard about his difficulties. But what has actually been most challenging is the way other writers (especially film theorists) use his terms.

Additionally, I do not yet see a connection between Lacan’s system (RSI etc.) and anything Freud talks about. I have been told over and over that they are both psychoanalysts but I often feel like they are talking about two completely different subjects!

Does anyone 1) have any advice on how to better grasp the Lacanian language and 2) any resources on how Lacan’s work is a continuation of Freud’s. Thanks in advance 🙏

It seems that when I put a pencil and paper in my hand, they are all gone, the fluid line of reasoning that exists in my mind seems to be diluted to pure emptiness, I try to write, but it seems so artificial that I sometimes end up with just a few sentences without much meaning. and value to me.

Are there any good books on sexual fetishes / abnormality from a psychoanaytic perspective? I need some recommendations for in-depth reading.

I browse this sub daily, and I see many people discuss theoretical explanations of things.
"This happens because of an issue in the x stage causing Y" OR "That's not exactly our place to discuss it's something the patients tell us"

When this happens I'm seeking clarity on how to parse it. Am I better off understanding allocations of theory to explain commonly experienced phenomena or would I be better served to stop trying to explain things and only let the patients explain. And In that, if patients describe something commonly with s through line like I notice, that's where theory is derived right?

I understand this might be considered as advice solicitation, but I don't plan on disclosing personal information, so I would expect responses to be more generalized, facilitating discussion/debate.

Anyways, I'm looking for some conventional wisdom on choosing an analyst. Specifically, I mean on the basis of identity, and based purley off first impression. I.e., should x type person seek out x type analyst. I would expect a good analyst to overcome whatever transference, etc., that might be facilitated by a particular relationship, but I also imagine there may be prescriptions on the matter. To be even more general, but on the same point, I could ask: should a soliciter "lean in" to potential conflict, or should they seek to minimize it?

If I'm asking the "wrong" question(s), I'd also be interested in hearing opinions. I'm not expecting any "right" answers, as the question is quite broad.

You can register on meetup or let me know on reddit

https://www.meetup.com/new-york-psychoanalysis/events/305798800/

See details of previous meetings here

https://www.reddit.com/r/psychoanalysis/comments/1h4atsp/another_junior_analytic_trainees_potential/

Hope to see you there!