![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 2 to 26 of 26. Go back in thread:
Posted by Tamar on December 6, 2005, at 10:35:20
In reply to Here I go, posted by Dinah on December 6, 2005, at 9:55:53
> Odds are, I'm going to chicken out.
>
> Oh well.What did I miss? What might you chicken out of?
Would it help if we lifted up our p*m-p*ms and did a little dance for you?
Posted by happyflower on December 6, 2005, at 10:46:54
In reply to Re: Here I go » Dinah, posted by Tamar on December 6, 2005, at 10:35:20
> > Odds are, I'm going to chicken out.
> >
> > Oh well.
>
>>
> Would it help if we lifted up our p*m-p*ms and did a little dance for you?
What am I missing? what is p*m-p*ms?
Posted by Tamar on December 6, 2005, at 12:26:44
In reply to Re: Here I go » Tamar, posted by happyflower on December 6, 2005, at 10:46:54
> What am I missing? what is p*m-p*ms?They're just what you'd think. Balls of fluff held by cheerleaders.
The automatic asterisking always catches that word, presumably on the assumption that it's offensive. I can only speculate that it's because of the term that might be used disparagingly in Australia and New Zealand to describe the British.
Another word the automatic asterisking catches is sw*shy, which amused me the first time I saw it. Apparently it is sometimes used homophobically, though I've never heard it used that way.
And there are some words that I think are much more offensive than p*m-p*ms but the automatic asterisking doesn't seem to recognise them as offensive... I'm pretty sure bastard is allowed. (If not, I'm sorry.)
Tamar
Posted by Dinah on December 6, 2005, at 12:40:31
In reply to Re: Here I go » Dinah, posted by Tamar on December 6, 2005, at 10:35:20
Although I waited for an appropriate opening.
It was about T3 and the fact that I found her too challenging.
She admitted that her style was more change oriented than I might be used to, but said she was willing to try to pace herself to my ability to tolerate it. But warned that she wasn't going to change it so much that I wouldn't still get angry and anxious from time to time.
And we changed the goal from growing up my "little girl" as she calls it. I let her know that I'd worked hard and long to accept and respect that part of me, and that that approach was better overall for my life.
So... We'll try another four sessions under the new understanding and then evaluate the results. We also clarified that we'd keep it strictly sex therapy, since I'm seeing T1 regularly for the moment.
She said she respected that I came in and talked about it. That usually if people had a problem with her style, they just quit coming. I told her that was my usual style as well. :)
Posted by Tamar on December 6, 2005, at 14:23:24
In reply to Didn't chicken out after all, in the end, posted by Dinah on December 6, 2005, at 12:40:31
Good for you! I bet that took guts. I usually prefer to walk away as well…
> She admitted that her style was more change oriented than I might be used to, but said she was willing to try to pace herself to my ability to tolerate it. But warned that she wasn't going to change it so much that I wouldn't still get angry and anxious from time to time.
I suppose a little anger and anxiety is almost inevitable in any kind of therapy.
> And we changed the goal from growing up my "little girl" as she calls it. I let her know that I'd worked hard and long to accept and respect that part of me, and that that approach was better overall for my life.
Yeah, I can imagine that. I suppose… I wonder how much that part of you is willing to share your body with the mother or wife part of you. But I’m probably talking rubbish. It’s just… sometimes I have to tell myself I’m allowed to be an adult. But it’s probably a different thing…
> So... We'll try another four sessions under the new understanding and then evaluate the results. We also clarified that we'd keep it strictly sex therapy, since I'm seeing T1 regularly for the moment.
I like that sort of plan. It makes sense.
> She said she respected that I came in and talked about it. That usually if people had a problem with her style, they just quit coming. I told her that was my usual style as well. :)Yeah, I think it was really good that you talked to her. I’m shaking my p*m-p*ms!
Tamar
Posted by Shortelise on December 6, 2005, at 15:22:45
In reply to Didn't chicken out after all, in the end, posted by Dinah on December 6, 2005, at 12:40:31
Dinah, that's so great. I can imagine how hard that was, and you did it in a mature, reasonable manner. I hope you are feeling satisfied with yourself.
((Dinah))
ShortE
Posted by Dinah on December 6, 2005, at 17:01:27
In reply to Re: Didn't chicken out after all, in the end » Dinah, posted by Tamar on December 6, 2005, at 14:23:24
> > And we changed the goal from growing up my "little girl" as she calls it. I let her know that I'd worked hard and long to accept and respect that part of me, and that that approach was better overall for my life.
>
> Yeah, I can imagine that. I suppose… I wonder how much that part of you is willing to share your body with the mother or wife part of you. But I’m probably talking rubbish. It’s just… sometimes I have to tell myself I’m allowed to be an adult. But it’s probably a different thing…:)
You're such a dear, Tamar.
I think... I think that there's a *fairly* good working relationship right now. It's just that sex causes so much intense fear and anger that it swamps any good intentions I might have about division of labor, so to speak. I think there's general agreement within myself, with T1, and now with T3, that the goal ought to be to leave adult things to my most adult part of myself. But the anxiety has to lower enough for my emotional self to take a temporary leave of absence during sex, so to speak. That's the current goal. I think *all* involved would approve of that goal. :)
Posted by Dinah on December 6, 2005, at 17:05:29
In reply to Re: Didn't chicken out after all, in the end » Dinah, posted by Shortelise on December 6, 2005, at 15:22:45
I really am rather pleased with myself. I had planned to be more confrontational about it, then had decided to chicken out. So the end result of a calm, polite and low key discussion was sort of a compromise between those two extremes, and one that worked out well. I was on my toes the entire time, ready to bail out at any sign of anger or "directness" about my ability to tolerate challenge. But my fears were for naught.
T1 will be proud of me, I think. He did his best to convince me that it wouldn't be as bad as I thought (and since he knows T3, I guess I gave that a bit of weight). And Babble did a lot to encourage me to be honest with her rather than flee. So I was very tentatively honest. :)
Posted by happyflower on December 6, 2005, at 18:57:14
In reply to p*m-p*ms (off topic), posted by Tamar on December 6, 2005, at 12:26:44
Thanks Tamar,
I was racking my brain trying to come up with the what the naughty word was. It felt like when I was so nieve in elementary school when I didn't even know what virgin meant! LOL :)
Posted by fallsfall on December 6, 2005, at 20:17:31
In reply to Didn't chicken out after all, in the end, posted by Dinah on December 6, 2005, at 12:40:31
WOW
Posted by Dinah on December 6, 2005, at 21:38:08
In reply to Re: Didn't chicken out after all, in the end » Dinah, posted by fallsfall on December 6, 2005, at 20:17:31
I have mixed feelings, but I have all the freedom in the world to do whatever I want.
Posted by 10derHeart on December 6, 2005, at 22:46:14
In reply to p*m-p*ms (off topic), posted by Tamar on December 6, 2005, at 12:26:44
>>I'm pretty sure bastard is allowed.
yup. And so are hell, crap and damn, which have been known to offend some people as well.
go figure.
{I enjoyed writing the above sentence a bit too much. I notice I am quite twisted that way lately. hmmm...}
oh, and I was surprised you hadn't heard the homophobic-type use of sw*shy. Because, perhaps sadly, I just realized I can't recall a single time I've ever heard it used any *other* way. :-(
Posted by Tabitha on December 6, 2005, at 23:30:59
In reply to Didn't chicken out after all, in the end, posted by Dinah on December 6, 2005, at 12:40:31
Posted by orchid on December 7, 2005, at 3:27:20
In reply to Didn't chicken out after all, in the end, posted by Dinah on December 6, 2005, at 12:40:31
I think this T might work out for you - atleast for sometime.
I hope you can work this out with her!!
Posted by Tamar on December 7, 2005, at 6:09:58
In reply to Re: Didn't chicken out after all, in the end » Tamar, posted by Dinah on December 6, 2005, at 17:01:27
> > > And we changed the goal from growing up my "little girl" as she calls it. I let her know that I'd worked hard and long to accept and respect that part of me, and that that approach was better overall for my life.
> >
> > Yeah, I can imagine that. I suppose… I wonder how much that part of you is willing to share your body with the mother or wife part of you. But I’m probably talking rubbish. It’s just… sometimes I have to tell myself I’m allowed to be an adult. But it’s probably a different thing…
>
> :)
>
> You're such a dear, Tamar.:) Thanks Dinah. You’re very sweet.
> I think... I think that there's a *fairly* good working relationship right now. It's just that sex causes so much intense fear and anger that it swamps any good intentions I might have about division of labor, so to speak. I think there's general agreement within myself, with T1, and now with T3, that the goal ought to be to leave adult things to my most adult part of myself. But the anxiety has to lower enough for my emotional self to take a temporary leave of absence during sex, so to speak. That's the current goal. I think *all* involved would approve of that goal. :)
Yes, that does sound like a sensible goal!
One thing that occurred to me: anger and anxiety and even fear can be quite sexually arousing if they’re experienced in a context that doesn’t involve feeling sexually threatened.
But the way I read what you wrote, it sounds as if the child part of you is the part who might feel sexually anxious. And who would blame her for that? She doesn’t want to be doing adult things with an adult man. She might be interested in a game of doctors and nurses with a boy her own age, but that’s about the extent of it.
Maybe it’s the age my own kids are at the moment, but sometimes my daughter comes into our bedroom when we’re getting intimate (so far we’ve always heard her coming so she hasn’t seen anything!). We stop and put her back to bed and then we carry on. I’m trying to do the same thing with the kid part of me. She doesn’t want to see it or do it, so I try to put her to sleep metaphorically. But she has to believe that I trust my husband not to hurt me.
I dunno… real kids understand that there are grown-up things that aren’t available to them. Whether the inside kids will be as accommodating is another matter!
I guess… asking your emotional self to take a temporary leave of absence during sex sounds like something that could work, but I wonder if it’s really your little girl who could be asked to go watch TV or take a nap for a couple of hours. Unless she and your emotional self are much the same…
Tamar
Posted by Tamar on December 7, 2005, at 6:12:55
In reply to Re: p*m-p*ms (off topic) » Tamar, posted by 10derHeart on December 6, 2005, at 22:46:14
> >>I'm pretty sure bastard is allowed.
>
> yup. And so are hell, crap and damn, which have been known to offend some people as well.Yeah, that *is* funny. I suppose there’s a question about where to draw the line. And of course, there’s no way of preventing people using religious names, which many people find much more offensive than profanity. But it would be odd to have a discussion of religion and find the name Jesus spelled with an asterisk…
> {I enjoyed writing the above sentence a bit too much. I notice I am quite twisted that way lately. hmmm...}
Nothing wrong with enjoying a few naughty words from time to time…
> oh, and I was surprised you hadn't heard the homophobic-type use of sw*shy. Because, perhaps sadly, I just realized I can't recall a single time I've ever heard it used any *other* way. :-(
Hmm, that’s interesting. I don’t hear very much homophobic language because I don’t happen to be in places where it’s used (but then I don’t get out much). My colleagues certainly wouldn’t use homophobic language… or at least they’d never use it in front of me because they know I’d start shouting at them! If I ever hear the word queer it’s in the phrase Queer Theory, where it isn’t being used in a pejorative sense. But sw*shy is a word that I use to describe a kind of long skirt.
Posted by caraher on December 7, 2005, at 9:31:54
In reply to Re: p*m-p*ms (off topic) » 10derHeart, posted by Tamar on December 7, 2005, at 6:12:55
I once posted on a BB that had a filter that ignored "white space" in its never-ending quest to scrub away filty language. This caused it to render "hot water" as "ho****er" and exploring its idiosyncrasies was great sport...
Posted by Dinah on December 7, 2005, at 12:52:53
In reply to Re: Didn't chicken out after all, in the end » Dinah, posted by Tamar on December 7, 2005, at 6:09:58
Yes, I think that what most people would call their inner children would be what I'd call my emotional side. That part of me just doesn't particularly like the inner child imagery, although it's as much a difference of terminology as anything, I think. I think my emotional self considers the role as more all encompassing than an inner child. And doesn't really think of the role as being age specific.
Posted by Anneke on December 7, 2005, at 14:34:29
In reply to Re: Didn't chicken out after all, in the end » Dinah, posted by Tamar on December 7, 2005, at 6:09:58
Hi!
I hope you don't mind me jumping in....
I'm new here, though I've lurked for a while and have found these boards incredibly reassuring. I finally decided to register to post and I had to respond to your post about putting your kid part "to bed" during intimate moments with your husband. I do that too....when my therapist first suggested it to me I was skeptical, but it actually has gone a long way toward helping the adult me enjoy that time again. Glad to hear I'm not the only one does it! Anneke
Posted by Anneke on December 7, 2005, at 14:38:14
In reply to Re: Didn't chicken out after all, in the end, posted by Anneke on December 7, 2005, at 14:34:29
Posted by Tamar on December 7, 2005, at 14:44:19
In reply to Re: Didn't chicken out after all, in the end, posted by Anneke on December 7, 2005, at 14:34:29
Hi Anneke, and welcome!
> I hope you don't mind me jumping in....
Not at all. It’s nice to meet you.
> I'm new here, though I've lurked for a while and have found these boards incredibly reassuring.
Yeah, I remember when I used to lurk. I got to feel like I knew people quite well before I started posting!
> I finally decided to register to post and I had to respond to your post about putting your kid part "to bed" during intimate moments with your husband. I do that too....when my therapist first suggested it to me I was skeptical, but it actually has gone a long way toward helping the adult me enjoy that time again. Glad to hear I'm not the only one does it!
I’m glad to hear it too! I haven’t heard of anyone else doing it until now. And I’m glad it’s working for you.
Thanks Anneke.Tamar
Posted by Tamar on December 7, 2005, at 14:49:27
In reply to Re: Didn't chicken out after all, in the end » Tamar, posted by Dinah on December 7, 2005, at 12:52:53
> Yes, I think that what most people would call their inner children would be what I'd call my emotional side. That part of me just doesn't particularly like the inner child imagery, although it's as much a difference of terminology as anything, I think. I think my emotional self considers the role as more all encompassing than an inner child. And doesn't really think of the role as being age specific.
I thought that might be the case. I wasn’t certain because you do sometimes talk about a little girl and I was fairly sure it wasn’t in the sense of having parts.
Posted by Dinah on December 7, 2005, at 15:08:16
In reply to Re: Didn't chicken out after all, in the end, posted by Anneke on December 7, 2005, at 14:34:29
I'm glad you decided to post. :)
Posted by Anneke on December 7, 2005, at 15:36:23
In reply to Welcome to Babble » Anneke, posted by Dinah on December 7, 2005, at 15:08:16
Dear Dinah,
Thanks for the welcome...as I said, I've lurked around for a while and recently my therapist and I were talking about ways I can validate my experiences more for myself....not minimizing, etc. And I thought, "Babble!" You all seem like validating people :) Anyway, she liked the idea too.....so here I am.
Posted by Dinah on December 7, 2005, at 19:37:24
In reply to Re: Welcome to Babble » Dinah, posted by Anneke on December 7, 2005, at 15:36:23
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Psychology | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.