Interview with a detransitioner

Much like GC thinking, gender is an internal concept

But, but, but ... In "gender critical" feminism - actually just simple radical feminism ... "gender" is regarded as a social construct, and a political system.

Sure, individuals may internalise aspects of gender roles & gender stereotypes, so that they appear to be one's "nature" eg "natural" but this is what we radical feminists would call "conditioning" or "socialisation."

Even John Stuart Mill recognised this 150 years ago.

Jungian thought has been severely compromised by "woo-ism" imo.

I was a practising therapist and I am very much influenced by Jung. There is no gender stereotyping, and if there is, then that's a misinterpretation of the approach. Much like GC thinking, gender is an internal concept, and much of the work of both sexes is to find a balanced expression of both genders. There is no such thing as a "girl brain" or a "boy brain" and to identify too much with one would lead to psychological disruption (much like 'gender dysphoria', for example).

I'm not a psychotherapist, let alone a Jungian, but I also found Dr Marchiano's conversation with Julian Vigo in the Savage Minds podcast very interesting. Dr Vigos podcasts are all very thought-provoking, although I wish sometimes she'd talk less & allow her guests to talk more.

Good. Jungian circles need really shaking up. She must be very strong and determined to take all those beardy men (in my day they were mainly beardy men) on. I wish her luck.

One of the analysts, Lisa Marchiano, is quoted in Abigail Shrier's Irreversible Damage and I believe is very concerned about how the affirmation only approach may fail clients who actually need to explore and question, rather than solely be affirmed, through the process of therapy. I have her new book about the psychological aspects of motherhood on my to-read list ...

I’ve heard Dr Marciano speak live ( in a Zoom conference) and she came across as one of the most compassionate wise and thoughtful therapists and theorists I’ve heard.

She made Jungian psychology seem considerably less “woo” than I’d ever thought. She made it seem a really fruitful way of thinking about some of the deep issues of being human.

OP, what do you think a Jungian view of the world and the human psyche brings to the debate that GC 'right-think' apparently doesn't?

GC.

GS?

And thanks, I'll listen to what I want to. It doesn't mean I'm swallowing it whole because I like to listen to something a bit different when I'm doing the washing up

Good for you OP and thank you for the link :)

Ignore the GS version of right think and listen to what you want :).

It's many years since I went through my Jungian phase and there will be others along who will know more and doubtless put me right — but I came away from that period of my life feeling very strongly that Jungian sexual stereotypes were a huge problem for women and that it was all thinly-veiled patriarchy. I can remember shutting that particular door fairly firmly.

I started listening to your podcast and practically the first thing I heard was an older man describing a woman in his family in terms of Jungian archetypes. He says she's Aphrodite. He overrides a woman (also presumably a Jungian) who points out that internet porn and the torrent of sexual abuse and coercion aimed young women is a new and never-before-experience phenomenon that is affecting the adolescents experience their bodies. He says no, in his ultra he-man voice, his young relative is Aphrodite. And then the moment the detransitioning woman starts to talk the first thing she mentions is being totally overwhelmed by porn and male sexual expectations.

Jung and his goddesses and the his transcendent feminine are all part of the woo. Put the Jungian podcast down and step away.