My therapist has given up on me

[autumnal]

It has been mentioned on several occasions not just by me, but other members either directly or indirectly, that your words or implied memes are hurtful, negative, or belittling.
And your constant reply is what "you think" it meant, "how you intended it", even implying at times that you knew the tone in which the OP posted in. (How can anyone know this?) And insist that the OP can't possibly be hurt by your words.

But they are.
I am starting to believe that you do not possess the capacity to understand what is being pointed out to you OR to know when to use better judgment. Or to know when to just let some very small trivial things go unnoticed bcuz they harm no one. If William said something hurtful, derogatory, negative or completely factually false, then call it out.... but ffs, the nit picky technical dissection of words (when not causing harm) is so unnecessary. And actually destructive


You even knew it was overkill.... so again I ask, why make someone feel like shit to make a point?
(A point that everyone on this board already understands, but you had to explain in great detail like those reading are inept at knowing the difference between a friend and a therapist) and from the sentiments shared here, it sounds like a friend might be the better option.



"not a negative assessment of William"
He obviously felt negated enough to delete his post ... he deleted a post offering support to a member because you made him feel small for his choice of words = belittling.
It feels like you don't care at all how your words make people feel as long as you have posted an "intellectual, factual, scientific, explanation.

I'm sorry you still apparently fail to see the relevance of clearly and unambiguously distinguishing between a friendship and a therapeutic relationship. The possible scenario of someone attempting to replace the role of a therapist, even with the best of intentions (and I'm not suggesting William had otherwise), when untrained to do so is not trivial, nor does it harm no one. I'm not saying this was necessarily William's intent, but it was the simple possibility of that scenario that prompted my initial response.

There was no intention to 'belittle' William or make him 'feel like shit'. Nor was there a belief that members are 'inept at knowing the difference between a friend and a therapist'. The only member of concern was William, and the possibility he may have failed to understand the importance of clear delineation between these two roles, and that he might have believed that he as a layperson could provide the same qualities for the OP as their former therapist had.

William himself acknowledges that it was his 'feeling a little sensitive at the moment' which led him to delete his post after reading my response to it. I would suggest it was his state of heightened sensitivity which caused him to react the way he did, rather than because of any particularly hurtful attributes of my post. Note that there was no indication of William being in such a state at any stage before he revealed as such. Not unless you wish to consider membership of a suicide forum as being a constant and de-facto indicator of increased sensitivity or an indemnity from valid critique or questioning. Those familiar with my posts will know that I certainly do not subscribe to that notion, and believe that to do so would actually be the most belittling action of all.

A member in a more normal state of sensitivity would most likely have responded to my post with 'Oh no, obviously I just meant friendly support', which would have both put my mind at rest and prevented this entire overdrawn saga, or alternatively might even have responded with 'Just because I'm not a professional, doesn't mean I can't replace their therapist!', in which case I would have responded further and explained why this was not the case.

And of course it is all well and good in hindsight for William to say he was merely trying to be supportive, or for you to speculate as to his intended meaning based on further information provided later. But that doesn't negate the fact that, at the time and on face value, his post had the potential for ambiguity and warranted clarification.

While it was motivated by caution, I am not suggesting my initial post was overkill, I was suggesting that all the subsequent analysis and discussion (including this) was overkill, and indeed remains so. Endless speculation as to the hypothetical motives of William are hardly likely to make him feel less anxious, and for my part in feeling obligated to defend my end of this argument, I do apologize to him.

Hopefully this will now conclude this discussion, with the final realisation that you and I have clearly differing views on what the well-intentioned offer in the original post could have been interpreted (or indeed misinterpreted) as meaning. My view was formulated based upon academic and professional experience which rightfully emphasises the practical and ethical importance of avoiding any crossover between therapeutic roles and personal ones. Your view appears to have been formulated based upon your belief (correct or otherwise) that I belittled others in previous threads and so was most likely doing so in this one.

I firmly believe I have done all I possibly can to demonstrate this was not the case.