Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Chastised by Therapist for Restoration

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Chastised by Therapist for Restoration

    I recently went in for a regularly scheduled therapy session, with nothing in particular in mind to talk about. I had mentioned circumcision and restoration to her in the past, and she seemed to be mostly against circumcision, and didn't have much to say about my restoration. In this session I tried to bring up my most recent restoration status with her. At first she proceeded to call circumcision a human rights violation. But as I talked about my restoration status more, she proceeded to ask if I had talked with a doctor about it, which I hadn't. I tried to tell her that most doctors were ignorant of restoration, and the natural penile anatomy in general, and that I probably knew far more about restoration than the average doctor, but she continued to argue with me (A trait she has shown considerably in past sessions). Then she brought up a point that was poorly constructed, but which I think may be of interest to the members of this forum. She tried to tell me that I was fine as I was, and did not need to restore. She even brought up the idea that if I were to marry a Jewish woman, she might not have me unless I was circumcised. This strikes me as insulting, as if one's partner should be the arbiter of what your genitals look like. I would venture a guess that she would not have the same logic about men getting to decide a woman's worth based on the presence of her clitoral hood. Then again, her opinions on male circumcision are wildly inconsistent, as you can tell, so who knows.

    What struck me as a good example of self-acceptance done wrong was when she attempted to convince me that there was nothing wrong with me being circumcised. I virulently defended myself, and insisted that circumcision was harmful, and that I was taking steps to go through a healing process to repair some of the damage. On one hand, she's right in the sense that circumcised men have nothing to be ashamed of. For most of us, it was done without our consent as infants. But the way she went about it was entirely wrong. Rather than showing compassion for victims of circumcision, she decided to sweep the pain under the rug by appealing to cultural tradition, and the fact that there are people who are in favor of it, while simultaneously trying to mask it under the guise of self-acceptance.

    The thing is, I do "accept" my body the way it is. I had no choice in the matter. And though I know I will never feel pleasure in the same way I would be able to had I been left intact, I have long since accepted that this will not be the case, in the same way a person who has had part of their finger amputated in an accident will hopefully, with time, learn to live with it and accept their bodies the way they are. But I'm willing to bet such people would still give anything to have their amputated organ back; even a facsimile, such is the case with restoration. You can accept who you are while also acknowledging that a terrible thing happened to you. That nuance was something that seemed to escape her.

    Ultimately, that was my last session. This and many other incidents of an unsupportive, disrespectful, and unempathic attitude in our sessions drove this patient to other sources. I should also note that my previous therapist before this one was very supportive of my restoration. How I wish she was still practicing.

    Anyway, I thought this might be of some interest to many on this forum. I for one, will not let anyone else make decisions about what my body will be like ever again.

  • #2
    Wow sounds like a recent argument I had with a female. They don’t understand. That’s really it. In these days parents circumcise because it’s trending. The girl argued me down that it’s easy to get an infection and just throwing stuff she read online at me as if she’s the one with a penis. It was very laughable. I honestly think the two of these women had personal issues with foreskin.

    Also she denied having a “hood” which tickled me even more.

    I’ve noticed there are quite a bit of people around who dislike foreskin. As of now only my partner and this forum know of my restoration.

    People are ignorant. Very ignorant. Anyway keep on tugging !!!! Forget them ! It’s your body, your choice.

    Comment


    • #3
      Good for you ditching that therapist. She's not doing her job right. The whole point of therapy is to relieve anxiety, and here she is trying to make you anxious about potential judgment over your foreskin. Fuck that!

      Comment


      • #4
        Thanks for sharing. I think it can help others navigate what sounds a like a tricky situation. It sounds like you are clear headed and thoughtful, good characteristics in a situation like that.

        Regards

        Comment


        • #5
          I agree with greg. Therapy, including pharmacological therapy, is never a one size fits all situation. If the two parties don't "fit" then it's time to move on, find another therapist. You have to demonstrate to yourself that this is true over time, ie multiple sessions, before you move on, and it sounds like you did exactly that.

          Comment


          • #6
            Yeah, ditch the bitch! Sounds like she was giving you lip service all along. You should file a formal complaint with the proper board. Find her web page and give her a bad review at the minimum. Quite a while ago I talked with a "therapist" and got the usual cognitive dissonance shit. He tried to spin it around on me as though there was something wrong with me for being dissatisfied with being circumcised. I asked him if he was cut. Answer was..........yes. Go figure. I immediately told him to fuck off.

            Comment


            • #7
              The brainwashing runs deep with these kind of people. I , for the life of me, cannot even wrap my head around the idea of even thinking that forcing circumcision on an infant or young boy is OK. Even if you know NOTHING about the foreskin, something in your head should go off and say "he was born with that, maybe he's going to need that". Sheeple.

              Comment


              • #8
                This is why I still blame my parents even though they "meant well for me." Like... how could they have been so fucking stupid?
                Started CI-0 with no movable skin and 0% FEC

                Currently at CI-4 with 64% FEC

                See my progress gallery

                Comment


                • #9
                  Societal brainwashing.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Either societal brainwashing or your therapist has other motives.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      In chapter 1 of his book, "Why This Book?" Dr. James Bigelow has a heading titled, "To Prepare the Therapeutic Community for Things To Come."

                      From Pages 5-6 of The Joy of Uncircumcising:"

                      "The first therapists to see various stress disorders a few years ago had no other labels to apply to them than to call them some sort of borderline personality disorder. Then, as the numbers grew and job stress, burnout, and chronic fatigue became better known, we changed our views, our diagnoses, and our labels . . .

                      "I was told by a urologist, as late as the winter of 1991, that men who seek the restoration of their foreskin are 'at least borderline schizophrenics.' "

                      1991 was a "late" year when Dr. Bigelow's book was first published in the early 1990s, but now it is long in the past, and I am wondering if Dr. Bigelow did, as a therapist himself, actually accomplish his goal of preparing the therapeutic community to have any compassion for men who want foreskin restoration?

                      The "therapeutic community" is related to the Medical profession, of which the urologist Dr. Bigelow mentioned, is a part.

                      And, while there may have been some slight change, in all the years since the early 1990s, the Medical Profession as a whole still seems to adhere to the established teaching that the male foreskin serves no function, and with men who want a foreskin their real problem is something else, and the desire to have a foreskin is some kind of mental disorder.

                      Dr. Bigelow continues:

                      " . . . as the numbers increase and the message spreads that it is okay to care that your body was mutilated, I expect many more circumcised males to admit to themselves and to their wife, family, counselor, minister, rabbi, therapist, psychiatrist, etc. , that they feel violated, cheated, and disfigured.

                      "As that happens, the community at large, and the therapeutic community in particular, must be ready to deal with their pain without labels which will do further damage.

                      "This book, then, is written in the hope that it will in some way alert the therapeutic community to be prepared to help wounded men whose pain and anger are only now beginning to be articulated."

                      My guess would be that the therapeutic community is just as rigid with its doctrines and dogmas and doctrines, as the medical profession, and also just as slow to change.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Joseph_H
                        healthcare in USA becomes this bureaucratic system that is based on educational institutions (degree mills). It's less about how much you can fix, and more about how well you can memorize this antiquated textbook that hasn't been updated in a long time. Expecting any sort of groundbreaking care or care that keeps up with the times seems to be a pipe dream. add financial benefit from surgeries and you have what we see.
                        "doctor, my arm is bleeding"
                        -well it says here in my textbook from 1950 that we need to amputate it to prevent bad spirits. that will be 100k.
                        Finding a doctor or a professional that can think critically is so extremely rare it seems. It's such a shame
                        The problem is regulations and policies forbid them from thinking critically and using their own common sense, because if they do and something goes wrong it's lawsuit city. The higher ups force them to play by the book to avoid liability.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I belong to the group True Nudist as I have been a nudist since I was a teenager!! I asked the ladies if they preferred natural or circumcised? The response I got was 100% circumcised!! I got the same response from the men also!! This is where I was expecting at least 50/50!! But to be chastised by a person who is supposed to be helping you goes against everything they swore an oath too!!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by abhchelms View Post
                            I belong to the group True Nudist as I have been a nudist since I was a teenager!! I asked the ladies if they preferred natural or circumcised? The response I got was 100% circumcised!! I got the same response from the men also!! This is where I was expecting at least 50/50!! But to be chastised by a person who is supposed to be helping you goes against everything they swore an oath too!!
                            That's weird... SInce nudists like natural unclothed bodies I thought sure they would like natural uncut penises as well.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by KragDragon View Post

                              That's weird... SInce nudists like natural unclothed bodies I thought sure they would like natural uncut penises as well.
                              Less than weird, it's BS. Don't listen to one guy, check for yourself. Those of us who've joined and/or lurked on restoration forums over the last several decades have seen posts from circ'd nudists who know about restoration, and who've begun that process because of the majority of nudists they see are in intact. Any member here who's been around for that time will confirm this. And, photos from nudist websites (not porn sites) will reveal that a significant number of male nudists are intact (yes, some of those are European sites). In fact, this a a way of confirming that Nature designs a spectrum of natural foreskins, from short to long.

                              Consider this: The nudist philosophy promotes living a "natural" life. So does one guy's implication, NOT DIRECT STATEMENT, that "women" and "men" both have a preference for surgery done as infants, or as adults, ARE IN FACT THEMSELVES CIRCUMCISED (which he only implies), sound true to you? Lets get this guy to link to his group's philosophy first.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X