Ulax

@Tyler Robinson Its a shorthand for saying regarding

@Vido Agreed!

@ThePoint Hey, it might be that the 'IFS clinical consultant' filtering you are doing might be cutting a lot of folks out. I don't actually know what an IFS clinical consultant is. Re selecting a therapist I would go with someone who you feel you can best relate to, feel safe with and importantly specialises in your area of need, i.e. if someone had dissociation they would be smart to go with someone who specialised in dissociation. Also, I'd recommend finding someone who says they work with trauma, if trauma is what you are looking to deal with. If none of the level 3s fit, then I'd recommend checking out level 2s. Finally, I'd ask for an 'initial consultation'. Its like a trial session.

@ThePoint Any ideas regarding what you want to do?

@ThePoint I'm certainly very interested in the idea. I'm also interested in combining it with psychedelics. Also, am curious about exploring the ramifications of the IFS model in an academic setting

I think lyrics make people less lonely

@Raptorsin7 lmao drop me a msg if you ever see a job posting like that

@Tyler Robinson Jheez that sounds intense af. Scary too. My ex best-friend was bipolar. Was really disturbing to see how he would change in his actions. He had this agitation during his manic periods when he was out with me which were really anxiety provoking. Felt like the dude just wasn't inhibited enough.

@Tyler Robinson Was he being serious at the time?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LEEblG0B5zw I used to do this one about 6/7 years ago when I boxed! I got about 1000 calories a day out of it, and found it seemless to make.

Probably tbf. I mean you could be a sex worker and see it as a means of connecting with and relating to folk from lonely demographics of society.

Oh I see. I thought you saying that two traumatised people could work together. I could imagine that being possible. Although I don't know why the non-traumatised person would choose to engage romantically with the traumatised person. I don't think their attachment styles would mirror so as to create a relationship. However, I don't know too much about this situation. Curious for sure.

My honest perspective is that your words read as a redemption narrative imo. The fixing of the other partner in the relationship seems to me to be parts re-enacting what they dreamed would happen with one of their caregivers/ attachment figures growing up. I think the advice is usually, when healthy, to ensure that when in poor mental health you do not choose to engage in a trauma-bonded relationship instead of seeking out therapeutic solutions. Also, trauma-bonded relationships, to my mind, are much more likely to lead to unhealthy events occurring. However, I have heard that where two partners both have coping mechanisms and communicate well with each other, they can have a pretty healthy relationship in spite of their mental health.

@Yali I think its important not to do pickup if you have poor mental health, or at least be very selective about how you do it

I see. How is your mental health generally?

Are you interested in learning pick up @Yali ?

Maybe explore some subreddits and see if you can find resources in their wiki sections. I don't know much about poly relationships personally That said, I imagine having/ developing a secure attachment style would be key

@Tyler Robinson Okay glad to hear that for now

Are you okay btw?

Sounds great dude. I really like it. How old are you btw?

https://youarerad.org/therapy

I believe they can be a source of joy, owing primarily to my belief in the IFS model

@Vibes I'm glad it provoked such a response for you

@Kksd74628 Okay, I think the disagreement was more in the implications I saw you to be making. On another point, I think the mindset has to change before the actions do.

Here is me replying to you. I'll park my point about neurodivergence for now, as I am assuming you are responding only to my point that trauma needs to be addressed and identified, if one is to be able to be disciplined. Am I understanding you correctly? I'll start by identifying what I see to be the distinct claims you make: 1. "I understand that doing things varies in difficulty between people and there are many variables that affect on it, but saying to yourself that I can't be disclipined because of my condition is just telling yourself lies that weaken you, because EVERYONE CAN DO ANYTHING THEY WANT" 2. "Of course inner work should be done as well simultaneosly, but start your work today and don't wait until your traumas are healed or you'll never do anything" 3. "While you become disclipine also your self-esteem and confidence grows and I'd say that this helps also in curing traumas" Responding to (1.): "I understand that doing things varies in difficulty between people and there are many variables that affect on it, but saying to yourself that I can't be disclipined because of my condition is just telling yourself lies that weaken you, because EVERYONE CAN DO ANYTHING THEY WANT" I actually agree with your explicit claim. However, I suspect that we understand the claim to mean different things. I agree because having trauma isn't necessarily a barrier to becoming disciplined. However, I think for a significant amount of people if people try to become disciplined without healing their trauma then they will necessarily fail. I agree because I believed everyone with trauma can become disciplined but this would only necessarily be true if they all healed their trauma. So, while all non-traumatised persons would need to do basic self-help to become disciplined, a significant amount of people with trauma would need to heal their trauma, and then do basic self-help to become disciplined. So you see that the process of becoming disciplined would require more from a traumatised person. A significant amount of those with trauma will fail to become disciplined because of self-sabotaging parts. I use parts in the 'internal family systems' sense. A significant amount of people with trauma will have parts that will prevent the person from performing actions that contribute to success. Such parts are what I identify to be self-sabotaging parts. For example, if someone was bullied they may have a part that associates attention with danger. Success often is accompanied by attention. Therefore, that part seeks to avoid success as it sees success as dangerous. A disciplined lifestyle is a lifestyle cultivated to achieve success in a domain. It would follow that such a part would associate discipline with danger as well, and therefore resist such a lifestyle. Therefore, a significant amount of those with trauma will fail to become disciplined because of self-sabotaging parts Responding to 2. "Of course inner work should be done as well simultaneosly, but start your work today and don't wait until your traumas are healed or you'll never do anything" I agree with this. For example, let's say someone aims to make £10,000 in a year. Let's call them Simon. Simon picked this goals as he wants to make as much money as he can and decides its a sensible target for himself. Simon understands that achieving this aim will require a certain number of acts, with each act he does contributing more to this aimed total and correspondingly require a certain amount of discipline. Simon then come to believe the following things. 1. He has trauma 2. With his current trauma, even if he give his best efforts to healing, he would have self-sabotaging parts that would prevent him from achieving the required discipline to achieve his £10,000 aim. 3. With his current trauma, even if unhealed, he could make a non-nominal amount of money this year. 4. The more Simon attempts to heal his trauma, the likely he'll be more disciplined Simon evaluates his beliefs and decides that he won't try anything. I think Simon would be foolish in that example. Given his aims, it would best for him to do as you say. Work as disciplined as he can, accepting he is handicapped by how disciplined he can be and attempt to heal the trauma simultaneously so as to increase the likelihood of his monetary return being maximised. Responding to 3. 3. "While you become disciplined also your self-esteem and confidence grows and I'd say that this helps also in curing traumas" I think this can help a bit. However, I think there is a cap on how much help becoming disciplined can improve your self-esteem and confidence. Also, becoming disciplined could even have detrimental consequences on the self-esteem of parts of traumatised people. I am defining confidence and self-esteem as being about how well you can meet the demands of your environment. I return again to an IFS understanding of the mind. I think some parts will, by becoming disciplined, increase in self-esteem and confidence. For example, say there is a part that wants to achieve material success, by becoming disciplined towards a particular aim the probability of success is increased. So, the likelihood that that parts sees itself as being able to meet the demands of its environment is increased because the demands of the environment for that part are about getting from A to B, despite whatever the circumstances may be. Consequently, the self-esteem and confidence is increased. However, no traumatised psyche is made up of parts that only want success. Returning to the example, let's say there is a part who when that person was put down by peers for winning a science competition, decided that they were a bad person if they were successful and that success meant being unsafe. They feel shame whenever they are successful. For this part, becoming disciplined will not increase the likelihood of that part feeling self-esteem or confidence. In fact it will increase the likelihood of the part feeling lower self-esteem and confidence. The reason being that the part feels better able to meet the demands of its environment when unsuccessful, as there is less fear of being unsafe.