If He's So Turned On, Why Aren't I?
March 15, 2017 10:19 PM Subscribe
[TW: sexual trauma] In 1970, Berkeley-based Freudian analyst Bernard Apfelbaum gave an interview with the Berkeley Barb in which he outlined Freud's late-career revision of his theory of defenses and the failure of the analytic community to catch notice. Says Apfelbaum following the interview,
That led to a call from a woman attempting to work as a surrogate, on her own, after reading Masters and Johnson’s description of that work. She was having trouble and needed a consultant. The Barb interview made me look like a possible resource.Together they formed the Berkeley Sex Therapy Group and the surrogate, known as Andrea, wrote about her work and the insights gained from it in a one-of-a-kind article: If He's So Turned On, Why Aren't I?
Wow, that sounds like one of the worst jobs in the modern world.
posted by AFABulous at 11:17 PM on March 15, 2017 [3 favorites]
posted by AFABulous at 11:17 PM on March 15, 2017 [3 favorites]
Jesus christ that sounds absolutely fucking awful and just confirms my low opinion of psychoanalysis.
posted by smoke at 1:07 AM on March 16, 2017
posted by smoke at 1:07 AM on March 16, 2017
The first-person story was poignant, and the 1970 interview was an interesting time capsule of various attitudes of the era (especially considering Berkeley), but the theoretical essay is an interesting perspective, because it draws on a particular reading of Freud to address problems in both classical psychoanalyses and non-psychoanalytic therapies (such as CBT, etc). It's not apparent, because the piece is very long and begins like an obscure re-history of Freud's work. The illustrations at the end are interesting to think about, without having to commit to the author's model or any other model. The author's bio page provides framing/context for the essays, e.g.:
It is always assumed that this work made me an expert on male sexuality, but much of the focus was on the body-work therapist’s reactions (as clues to the patient’s problem). When I mentioned in a meeting that we were doing an intensive relationship therapy, one therapist said she didn’t see how I could think of the patient and body-work therapist as having a relationship. Our patients typically had the same problem—in fact that was their problem: they didn’t think they were having a relationship with the body-work therapist. (Of course, that’s true of most patients in therapy. They don’t think they are having a relationship with the therapist. Recognizing it is called the analysis of the transference.)
The intended audience seems to be professional therapists, so it's an interesting window in terms of how one approach conceptualizes some of the ongoing problems/issues in contemporary psychotherapy. He died last year, but according to Google his work has been published in journals and contributions acknowledged in a textbook or two as well.
posted by polymodus at 2:52 AM on March 16, 2017
It is always assumed that this work made me an expert on male sexuality, but much of the focus was on the body-work therapist’s reactions (as clues to the patient’s problem). When I mentioned in a meeting that we were doing an intensive relationship therapy, one therapist said she didn’t see how I could think of the patient and body-work therapist as having a relationship. Our patients typically had the same problem—in fact that was their problem: they didn’t think they were having a relationship with the body-work therapist. (Of course, that’s true of most patients in therapy. They don’t think they are having a relationship with the therapist. Recognizing it is called the analysis of the transference.)
The intended audience seems to be professional therapists, so it's an interesting window in terms of how one approach conceptualizes some of the ongoing problems/issues in contemporary psychotherapy. He died last year, but according to Google his work has been published in journals and contributions acknowledged in a textbook or two as well.
posted by polymodus at 2:52 AM on March 16, 2017
As a psychoanalyst, I feel I should comment in this thread but it's hard to figure out what will fit in the size of a comment and still be understandable.
First, psychoanalysis as it is actually done today is very different from what Apfelbaum describes, not because he's totally wrong in what he says, but because it isn't theory driven in that way any more. Today, it's more about persons and less about abstractions. I sure hope sex therapy has changed as well.
It's now, or should be, about people in a particular kind of relationship in which attention is paid to things which in "ordinary life" would be missed or avoided. The therapist's feelings in this relationship are not distractions from doing the job, but primary data about what is happening in the room and by extension, in the patient's life.
Often, the key question is "What kind of relationships does this patient find himself (or herself) in and why?" with the answer implied, sometimes directly, sometimes indirectly, by the relationship s/he has with the therapist. Even putting it this way is too theoretical.
In the case of a sex therapist, what the unnamed woman tells us about how she feels in relationships with her clients probably says more about why her clients need treatment than anything else, and tells us a lot about her culture and her client's culture. What each is allowed to say, who feels in charge, etc., are all good places to focus. The medicalization (and the need to see it in that frame) is also significant. I could go on . . .
posted by Obscure Reference at 6:02 AM on March 16, 2017 [9 favorites]
First, psychoanalysis as it is actually done today is very different from what Apfelbaum describes, not because he's totally wrong in what he says, but because it isn't theory driven in that way any more. Today, it's more about persons and less about abstractions. I sure hope sex therapy has changed as well.
It's now, or should be, about people in a particular kind of relationship in which attention is paid to things which in "ordinary life" would be missed or avoided. The therapist's feelings in this relationship are not distractions from doing the job, but primary data about what is happening in the room and by extension, in the patient's life.
Often, the key question is "What kind of relationships does this patient find himself (or herself) in and why?" with the answer implied, sometimes directly, sometimes indirectly, by the relationship s/he has with the therapist. Even putting it this way is too theoretical.
In the case of a sex therapist, what the unnamed woman tells us about how she feels in relationships with her clients probably says more about why her clients need treatment than anything else, and tells us a lot about her culture and her client's culture. What each is allowed to say, who feels in charge, etc., are all good places to focus. The medicalization (and the need to see it in that frame) is also significant. I could go on . . .
posted by Obscure Reference at 6:02 AM on March 16, 2017 [9 favorites]
Please do!
posted by Obscure Injoke at 8:02 AM on March 16, 2017 [4 favorites]
posted by Obscure Injoke at 8:02 AM on March 16, 2017 [4 favorites]
I found the account fascinating if unnerving, thank you.
posted by sibboleth at 9:22 AM on March 16, 2017
posted by sibboleth at 9:22 AM on March 16, 2017
« Older Original Comic Book Guy | "now it's all about pushing myself" Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by Deoridhe at 11:10 PM on March 15, 2017 [1 favorite]