Problem excess weight appeared suddenly. I have always been a rather large girl, "wide bone" is about me, I never pulled on Thumbelina, but I was slender. But it so happened that, against the background of stress, I got to my wide bones ten extra pounds. In the world of almost any girl, this is a disaster.
I began to weigh 76-78 kg with a height of 178 cm.
I must say that I myself did not really notice this, I thought that yes, I recovered a little, but I can also easily lose weight. Those around me opened my eyes to the terrible truth. I'm afraid to even count how many times during that period I heard the questions "are you pregnant?", "Are you sick?", "Do you have problems with hormones?" When people heard the honest answer "no, I just got better," they immediately burst into a stream of various recommendations on the topic of weight loss. At first I shyly listened to all these streams of universal wisdom, then I began to politely send well-wishers to the garden, then I got angry and realized that my body is my business. And nobody else's.
I understood perfectly well that I was uncomfortable in the weight I had, but I also understood that I did not intend to lose weight with the help of diets. If you're wondering where this confidence comes from, I can say that for a long time I had a loved one before my eyes who suffered from two eating disorders, so I know very well what the downside of diet is.
In search of information on losing weight without harm to health, I came across Svetlana's blog (I think most of my friends are familiar with it, but just in case I give a link - svetlyachok
). It seems like it was in 2014, I can't say more precisely. In her magazine there was a lot of information that you can eat whatever you want and not get better at the same time. But there is one caveat - you need to listen to yourself and learn to understand what you are really want.
I began to read all the posts on the tag "overeating psychology", I used something on myself. I did not focus on the practical part, I worked mainly on the attitude towards my own body, because it was very difficult to accept myself as "fat".
Actually, this is where my relationship with intuitive eating probably would have ended if I had not found out that Svetlana had written a book. At the time of the publication of the book, it seemed to me that I had invented a good nutritional system for myself - I began to eat 5 times a day in small portions of 200 g. What can I say - my weight went down, but in the very first chapters of the book I found a refutation of this techniques. The fact is that when we are guided by the numbers on the scales, we do not listen to signals. own body... As a result, you can easily overeat.
- Ha! - I thought - To overeat from 200 grams! Of course!
And I was surprised to find that it is possible. I deliberately weighed the food that was left on my plate several times after I felt like I was full. It often turned out that a third of those 200 grams was clearly superfluous for me. When I ate according to my "system" I crammed all the food into myself to the crumb, because I was afraid that I would soon be hungry and have to eat again. But if you often eat, then you can become fat back - brr, scary.
Thanks to Svetlana's book, I learned that there are different categories of overeating people, and there are categories for which it is generally useless to limit themselves in any way in food, because they eat simply because the food looks beautiful or smells good.
The book debunks most of the myths about weight loss and proper nutrition- refutes the bundle "fat means sick", talks about the absurdity and uselessness of BMI, about artificially low indicators that determine obesity and about other unusual things.
I want to note why at one time I did not study much on Svetlana's LJ - it seemed to me that the methods were not completely clear, there were many questions, so I did not even want to start - suddenly I would confuse something, do it wrong. In the book, everything is presented systematically, the first part is completely devoted to theory, the second - to practice. The practical part also has specially designated places where you can enter the results of assignments. I am in awe of books, I cannot write in them, so I started a separate diary for performing experimentariums :-)
For me personally, the most valuable information is located at the very end of the book:
firstly, this is the chapter about intuitive movement (by the way, I also came to this thanks to the Firefly blog. Now for me this is stretching, which I have been doing for almost 6 months and yoga, which I have just started to practice).
secondly, this is a chapter about relationships with your own body, about self-acceptance, about problems that can be hidden behind overweight.
I think the most troubling for many readers (and for me too) will be the chapter, which describes the legalization of prohibited products. This word implies that you can eat any food in any quantity, even those that people who are not on a diet do not allow themselves. I legalized chips and gas water - they were the basis of my diet during the period when I recovered. And it was they who were forbidden for me for a long time, I tried with varying success to give up their consumption, but they always prevailed over me. So, by the third day of legalization, I realized that I don't like chips. And I don't like sweet soda.
This is an unexpected result that refutes the myth that "if I am allowed to eat whatever I want, then I will only eat fast food."
In conclusion, I want to say who should read this book. Definitely worth reading for those who are disappointed in various diets and no longer want to sit either on Dukan, or on the Paleozoic diet, or try all sorts of newfangled systems like on a laboratory rat. For those who want to learn to accept themselves and understand that being overweight is not just nasty numbers on the scales that do not want to leave, it is often the result of some psychological problems and internal conflict. Those who are tired of scolding themselves for every cake they eat and considering their body an enemy and a stupid, weak-willed beast.
Clinical Psychologist, PhD in Psychology, BIG-Registered Medical Psychologist (Netherlands), Fellow of the Netherlands Institute of Psychology (NIP), Certified Intuitive Nutritionist, author of the Firefly Method, a modular program for weight and eating behavior regulation.
Graduated from the Faculty of Psychology of Moscow State University named after M.V. Lomonosov, there she also defended her Ph.D. thesis on the psychology of female prostitution. In parallel, she received the qualification of a gestalt therapist at the Moscow Gestalt Institute and underwent retraining in psychotherapy and sexology at the Russian Medical Academy of Postgraduate Education at the I.M. Sechenov.
For five years, she taught clinical psychology and psychotherapy according to the author's curricula at the University of the Russian Academy of Education, while working in a psychiatric clinic. More than a dozen theses and a dissertation for the academic title of Candidate of Medical Sciences have been defended under her scientific supervision.
Since 2002, she led a project of medical, social and psychological assistance to Russian-speaking drug users in Antwerp (Belgium). From 2008 to 2010 she worked at the Dutch Ministry of Justice, in a men's prison, in the unit for drug-using repeat offenders.
Since 2011, she has been actively studying the issues of obesity, overeating and eating disorders. Promotes the restoration of a healthy relationship with food through the use of the Intuitive Nutrition method, complete rejection from diets and a positive attitude to one's own body (model “Health in any size).
From 2011 to 2013, she led educational projects and worked as a psychologist and psychotherapist at an eating disorder and obesity treatment center in the Netherlands. In 2014, she created the first Intuitive Nutrition Center in Russia.
She hosted a psychological podcast for Podcast Records. She has acted as an expert psychologist in magazines, on radio and television.
We have discovered the Intuitive Nutrition method for Russia -
the first effective approach to weight management
and eating disorders.
Specialization
CBT and DBT therapy for anorexia nervosa, bulimia nervosa, binge eating disorder, obesity. Teaching Intuitive and Conscious Eating. Psychotherapy for adults, children and adolescents, parents of children and adolescents with RPD and obesity.
When we are asked to talk about what Intuitive nutrition is and what it is eaten with, we say that it is very simple and you probably already know a lot. The transition to Intuitive eating always begins with the realization: diets don't work... If you have an idea deep down in your soul that there will be that very "your" diet or nutritional system, do not waste money and time. Intuitive eating is not yours yet. Wait one, two or three more dietary cycles, and this realization will certainly come.
When you are convinced that diets do not work, you must follow certain rules. There are only those moments when you are a little hungry. Finish eating when you feel a little satiated. Choose for yourself the food you want at the moment, moreover, relying on the peculiarities of the taste that you want to feel, and not on the finished dish. Don't use food to solve emotional problems. And here it is - Intuitive Nutrition!
Nothing is easier and nothing is wiser!
We all know that food can be emotional, when you have an overeating attack or your hand reaches for a bun, as soon as you smell vanilla and cinnamon "like in childhood."
Food can be rational, then a diet or a newfangled nutrition system happens to you. Many of us are familiar with this. Attentive counting of calories, studying the composition of foods, tracking weight and time. All of this is a very rational relationship with food.
Wisdom arises when our emotions connect with our rational approach and, most importantly, with our willingness and ability to hear the needs of our body.
It is at this point, along with wisdom, that Intuitive nutrition is born, acceptance of oneself, one's body. This does not happen overnight. This is the way. If you want to walk on it, we can show you the way, help you take the first steps, teach you ways to eat wisely and mindfully.
Leading groups: Svetlana Bronnikova and Anastasia Repko.
Meetings weekly on Tuesdays at 19:00 Moscow time, the day can be changed.
Start of a recruitment group (7-9 people)
To participate, you need to undergo diagnostics. Leave a request - and we will write you all the details.
Tags:Name
Cycle of webinars "How to feed a baby" in recordings
How to feed a child so that he is healthy today and in 20-30 years from now? Svetlana Bronnikova conducts a series of webinars “Babies and Sweets: How to Feed a Child”.
Any loving parent takes nutrition very seriously. So serious that wars sometimes arise in the family on this basis. The child refuses to eat, prefers to eat foods that are harmful from the point of view of adults, or does not agree to eat "healthy" foods. It is even more difficult with children with allergies: you need to keep peace in the family and not provoke an attack.
How to feed a child so that he is healthy now and in the future, does not have problems with being overweight or underweight? How to end a family food war?
You will learn:
- what is normal in a child's relationship with food, and when should you start worrying?
- what to do if the child is gaining weight?
- what to do if the child refuses to eat?
- why do children want to eat sweets and how to react to it?
- how many sweets can a child eat without harm to health?
- how to prevent food from becoming a means of manipulation?
- how can you help your child build relationships with food and the outside world?
All editions are available for purchase in recording!
Registration and payment for access
When I found Svetlana Bronnikova's blog ( svetlyachok.livejournal.com) I had an informational binge. I read texts on the psychology of overeating and could not tear myself away: so important information and such a unique presentation!
You know, this is the perfect recipe: humor, Scientific research, real cases from personal practice, unique theoretical knowledge. And the main ingredient is love.
Science without love is dry statistics. Maybe that's why they still don't teach at school how to treat your body correctly, how to properly cultivate a food culture in a family? To have the courage to look for an approach to everyone - you need not only to be a super-specialist, you need to be as interested as possible in the personal victory of everyone. Everyone who still suffers.
I know this feeling. In fact #sekta appeared to sort out the chaos at least a little, at least help someone find their own " perfect body“Right here, in the mirror. Here and now. And most of all I was afraid that Sveta would say that we were doing everything wrong. I was scared because she turned out to be the first person in the field of weight loss who, even before meeting, became an authority for me. And I'm so happy it didn't happen.
In early February, I went to Holland to meet with Sveta and talk about everything that worries me, the curators #sekta and our students. As well as many who are concerned about their weight and relationship with food. This interview is a must-read! I hasten to warn you that there are about 40 pages of text, so take some time and a cup of hot tea.
The first question to get to know you as a specialist is about your education and work experience. What do you need to study, where do you need to work in order to have all the necessary information?
I graduated from the Faculty of Psychology at Moscow State University in 1996. Immediately after graduation, I entered graduate school and began writing a dissertation on a topic that was very exotic for that time. I was doing psychological research on women in prostitution. And the topic that I studied was related to a group that was relatively new for that time. mental disorders, which are called "borderline personality disorders." This is a specific form of mental pathology, located between mild, almost imperceptible disorders and deep ones, in which the help of a psychiatrist and an inpatient drug treatment, some of its signs are in most modern people.
Such disorders are characterized by non-self-integration, extreme impulsiveness, inconsistency, inability to establish stable emotional connections with other people and a tendency to all sorts of addictions, both chemical and non-chemical - from food, computer games.
In parallel, I studied psychotherapy. At first it was Gestalt therapy, since at that time, along with psychodrama, it was the most accessible direction in Russia, however, having entered the practice in a psychiatric hospital, I very quickly discovered that Gestalt therapy is rather helpless and does not cover the needs of either the psychotherapist or client. In Gestalt therapy today, an adequate theoretical basis has not been developed that would explain what actually happens to a person.
I began to look further and very quickly realized that the psychoanalytic trend, despised by psychology students at that time (and in those days in Russia it was fashionable to despise “outdated” psychoanalysis, since the “third wave” psychotheoapia flourished - Geshtalt, psychodrama, existential psychotherapy) gives still clear answers to the questions that practical work posed to me. I began to engage in psychoanalytic and psychodynamic psychotherapy, and here in Europe I studied cognitive psychotherapy - more applied, perhaps more mechanistic, but giving quick relief of symptoms in some cases and concrete answers to practical questions.
After completing my dissertation in 2000, I started working with chemical addictions. I came to Médecins Sans Frontières-Holland and worked there for several years as a trainer in a harm reduction program, traveled to Russian cities and villages. And in 2002, I was invited to a very similar project, but already to Europe, to Belgium, in order to organize there the work of a center of medical and social assistance for Russian-speaking migrants from the post-Soviet space who come to Belgium as refugees and begin to use drugs because of a long-term state of uncertainty in which they find themselves (in those days, the case on refugee status was considered by the Belgian authorities for 3-4 years or more, and the decision on the status meant either permission to stay in the country or deportation to their homeland).
Since it is much more effective to treat and help such people than to catch and punish, such a project was organized with funds provided by the European Parliament and the Ministry of Health of Flanders.
So, for several years I was engaged in chemical addictions, mainly drug addiction. I found out, as it seemed to me at that moment, everything that I could learn about it, did everything that I could do, and at some point began to look wider. I wondered what else exists in the world of addictions, besides drug addiction and alcoholism. And it is very logical, and most importantly, very quickly, I switched to non-chemical addictions, and in the first place among them I have always been, is and will be addiction to food. Thus, from drug addicts, from delinquents, from people who commit illegal acts, I moved on to people who are completely socially adapted at first glance and absolutely normal, from the point of view of generally accepted logic.
I currently work in a clinic that treats obesity and eating disorders, and I have a fairly extensive private practice with both Dutch and Russian-speaking populations. I lead the reception, lead the groups and plan to never stop, because the flow of people, including from other countries, who want to get help and do not know where to get it, does not stop.
Is it correct to say that you are fighting overweight with psychotherapeutic methods?
No, this is a wrong statement, because the key word in this statement is struggle. And I think this is the most wrong word to use when we talk about obesity, overweight, eating disorders, body image disorders. You don't have to fight with the body and food, you need to be friends with them. You need to negotiate with them, you need to establish contact with them, you need to love them, understand them and let them be themselves - then everything will be in order both with the body and with the weight.
Then the correct statement would be: Do you help people with obesity and eating disorders with psychotherapeutic methods?
Yes. Perhaps so.
Do people come to lose weight and receive more extensive help that ultimately helps them solve their original problems?
Yes. Initially, most people come to lose weight, it is. Very few more “enlightened” ones, who have read something, heard something, come and say that they would like to establish a relationship with food and with their body. Such a minority. Mostly people come to lose weight.
They come with certain numbers in their heads, they need to lose weight by 30, 20, 5, 2 kilograms. And that's a very long way to go, because we start with the question:« Why do you need this? Why do you need to lose 30 kilograms? What are you going to do about it? " And “Why don't you need to lose weight? Why haven't you done it yet, if you necessary?" ... Quite quickly, people come to the realization that it is not a matter of numbers on the scales or weight, but that there are deep problems that determine the relationship with the body and the attitude to how to choose what to eat.
Are you saying that there are no fat people who are mentally stable?
This is not an entirely accurate statement. It would be more correct to say - very rare fat people who are mentally stable at the same time. It happens, it happens, it is just rare.
Most often, excessive fullness, unusual for a person, inorganic for him and in no way genetically programmed is a consequence of internal conflicts.
That is, in any case, if a person is full, is there such a possibility that his fullness is provoked by some unresolved internal problems? And if he solves them, can the situation change?
Yes exactly. Moreover, these are now already quite well-known experimental works in Europe, innovative forms of psychotherapy, when all intervention, all treatment is limited only to psychotherapeutic interventions, and overweight clients do not change their diet in any way and do not take part in any programs. physical exercise... They are only concerned with resolving internal conflicts, and the weight goes away.
This should be the big light at the end of the tunnel for those who have tried every possible diet and every possible system and still hate their bodies. The method of psychotherapy always seems very complicated, very expensive, inaccessible, with vague prospects for people who are not familiar with it.
If all this is indeed supported by both research and human experience, can we say that if you have not tried it yet, then start with psychotherapy?
I would say that overweight people mostly come to psychotherapy desperate. I work in parallel with two large, virtually unrelated groups of patients - the Dutch-speaking and Russian-speaking populations, my remote clients in Russia. Both there and here the situation is very similar: in order to reach such a life, in order to come to psychotherapy as a method of treating excess weight, you need to try everything else and make sure that it does not work. You have to go through ten thousand different diets, twenty different weight loss schools, in which there will be different “revolutionary” programs, in order to eventually realize that the reflection in the mirror still says the same thing.
At the same time, people from time to time lose weight, gain weight again, then they come to us and always say about the same thing: I have tried everything. I've tried cocktails and shakes that replace food, I've tried Ducan, Atkinson, protein diets, low calorie, low carb, I tried sports schools... I am losing weight, but gaining again or not losing weight at all. What should I do?
I think one of the problems is that psychotherapy is very scary. Expensive, difficult, unclear in terms of prospects - these are rather excuses, in my opinion. First of all, this is scary, because there is always an unconscious feeling, a suspicion that something is wrong with me, and if now this terrible uncle or aunt-psychotherapist turns me to face my demons, suddenly they will come out of there and devour me and the therapist will be devoured at the same time. I'm afraid! I'm afraid to let them out. Moreover, I am afraid to look at them, I am afraid to look them in the face.
It seems to me that the problem is that a person does not identify himself with his body: “Here I am normal, but my body is not. Why am I normal, but I cannot make my body as normal as I am? " The feeling that my internal problems cannot make the body abnormal.
This is a very subtle and accurate observation about the lack of contact and connections between me as a person and my body. This breakup, disidentification, and it happens very, very early. Throughout life modern man this is how the upbringing system, the childcare system is arranged, that there are a lot of small events that contribute to the interruption of contact with the body, contribute to the fact that I stop hearing the signals of my own body, stop recognizing and understanding them. This begins from infancy, when a newborn is fed not at his will, but by the hour, because it is more convenient for parents, or because breastfeeding has not been possible, and the baby is an artist. The baby does not receive food in response to the signal of hunger from the body, he is forced to do something with this signal of hunger, slow it down, or eat at a time when he is not yet hungry. And he copes with it sooner or later, but he pays for it by not feeling when he is really hungry and when he is not.
This continues further: not only babies are fed by the hour, but also older children. At about 1.5-2 years old, a colossal epic begins for any modern family growing within the framework of European civilization - this is an epic with the development of a pot. The child must start going to the potty, and if here, in Europe, this bacchanalia has stopped a little, and people are calm about the fact that children at 2-2.5 years old do not go to the potty yet, then in Russia grandmothers are still in a panic , if at 2 years old the child does not know how to ask to go to the toilet in time and walks in diapers.
However, too early stimulation, too early an attempt to force the child to control the body impulses that he cannot yet control - the urge to empty the bowels and bladder- again leads to a rupture of sensation with reality: I have a need to go to the toilet, but I have to learn how to slow it down. Again it happens at the wrong time, again it happens too early, again I have learned to ignore the messages of my body.
Further, the amount of such experience only grows, because in the life of modern children there are too many imperceptible restrictions that are focused on not hearing the body. And then it turns out that he is not even an adult yet, but a schoolboy who is just “hatching” as a person and in search of himself is looking for answers to the questions “What am I? Who am i? I look like? Am I interesting? I'm cool? Am I smart? ”, Goes out into the world and does not know it. He begins to look for standards, criteria on which he can rely. And he comes across media, glamorous standards: you need to be thin, you need to eat little, right like this, everything else is not right. And if a teenager is even slightly different from this standard, or it seems to him that he is different, a tragedy begins. And diets in adolescence are almost guaranteed, according to all studies, lead to eating disorders in more mature age... So yes, this is really a complete lack of contact, and most people have no desire to establish this contact. They are scared and incomprehensible: how is it to listen to your body? What for? It needs to be tamed, it needs to be controlled, it needs to be made to function properly, like a pet or a machine. Hence such a thirst, such a search for control systems. Any diet is a system of control over your body.
The question is a continuation of this topic. In order for me to change my body, do I need to change myself internally? To become a different person or to become yourself, but more complete?
The second is more true: why does one become a different person? I already have it. I'm just not familiar with myself.
That is, to patch up some holes in the boat, glue what flows, some weak spots? There is still a person who has many different qualities, many skills and positive sides... But there are some areas that need help, work.
Does psychotherapy treat some "affected areas" or not?
I don't really like the metaphor of “minor repairs” that has just been voiced. One gets the impression that we need to darn here, then fix a patch, and such a golem, made from patches and pieces, went, and it seems to function well. It seems to me that this metaphor does not accurately reflect what is happening. To the greatest extent, psychotherapy is an attempt to find a way to oneself. Find out who I am. This is an endless, long-term, intense self-study that leads to an understanding of who I am, why I am here and what I want, to these basic questions that I am often afraid, lazy, or don’t want to answer myself. Overweight psychotherapy leads to the same questions. Because when we consider the situation with disturbed eating behavior, we see that it serves certain protective functions, it relieves me of some feelings, protects me from unpleasant experiences. The question arises: do I need these experiences? Why am I so afraid to experience these feelings that I eat? What's so terrible? This is how I come to understand that in my life there is one or more global internal conflicts, resolving which, I can live more fully, more happily, in contact with myself and with other people.
It seems to me that the moment when a person begins to ask himself “Why am I eating?” Is not the first step, because the first step is to understand what exactly I am eating. People often come to us and say: “I just eat. I eat and I don't know why. I eat and I can't stop! "
Why I used this metaphor: many people who begin to work with their personality, with their inner content, are afraid of losing themselves. A person believes that he will lose a set of qualities: for example, some kind of cynicism, some kind of purposefulness, bordering on the ability to walk over their heads. He will lose what he thinks helped him achieve success. He is afraid that along with them, he will lose himself.
It seems that the psychotherapist will "tear" my defense away from me. Therefore, I wanted to hear that a person remains himself, all of him strong qualities stay with him, but they no longer require any effort of will.
This is true. Psychotherapy cannot take anything from you that you do not want to part with. This comes from very ancient human fears, from the fact that we often unconsciously associate the therapist with the “knowledgeable” - shaman, sorcerer, witch, with ancient archetypal images, and it seems to us, consciously or unconsciously, that the therapist can do something magical, that he can to manage us at the expense of these skills, but this is not true. Not because he doesn't know how, but because he won't. There is no such task. Therefore, you cannot lose yourself if this is adequate, competent, professional psychotherapy. Just find it. I cannot say that this is a simple, painless process, that it is quick and easy. But everything that you possess, everything that makes you you, is not only not lost, but also strengthened, revealed. Otherwise, psychotherapy would not have solved its problems.
I read that many people change their beliefs. For example, that story from your blog: when a woman who was “ childfree”, Decided that she needed a child. You need to be prepared for such changes.
This can happen. The fact is that many of the things that we experience, for example, our personal beliefs, the decisions we make, are in fact nothing more than neurotic defensive complexes. Something that protects us from the awareness of our inner conflicts. And very often such decisions taken or beliefs are not needed when the inner conflict that is behind it turns out to be deeply, thoroughly worked out. And you don't have to be anymore childfree because i was childfree to feel invulnerable in the company of “children” and even large peers. And when I work through this conflict, I no longer need to keep this shield with me, I can admit that I am vulnerable, I can admit that I want to have a child and I it's damn scary that I might not have this child. Because, I think, among the people who have chosen the path childfree , there are many who are either afraid of being a bad parent, or are afraid that they will not be able to give birth to a child at all. It is from this fear that belief grows. And admitting the truth is a much healthier thing than a neurotic complex. And I can admit and mourn my inability to have a child, real or imagined, and will live happier and more fulfillingly than if I defend myself from these experiences and say that I am convinced childfree and I hate children.
You can just touch on such a moment as neurotic complexes.
It is easy to figure out such people - they constantly cling to people of other convictions. For example, those who are losing weight constantly cling to those who are not. Bodybuilders constantly cling to those who are not in bodybuilding and say that all this is not great.
Along with this, in every area there is healthy people who sit and are silent or say: "I have my own beliefs, but I accept the fact that the other person may have them different."
Where is this line? Why do some people behave normally while others behave aggressively?
Whatever the human beliefs, even the strangest and most extreme, if I do not feel any inner doubts about this, then I have no need to cling to others. For example, I can profess some very exotic branch of Buddhism, being in the circle of total Christians. But if this belief of mine is based on a deep inner conviction, then I do not have the slightest doubt that this is correct, I am comfortable.
In psychology, there is such a concept - ego-syntonic. Ego-syntonic is the experience that is felt by the personality as harmonious. I find something, a certain system, and I understand that this is mine, this is correct, it seems to me so intuitively. If so, if I have no inner doubts. Then I will not cling to others, I will not ask: “Why are you Orthodox Christian? Come on, go over to my Buddhism, I have much better and more correct here. "
There is another situation. When I find the system, but I continue to be tormented by internal doubts: maybe this is not true? Maybe there is a better system? Maybe this is not the ultimate truth? Maybe there is something more literate, more correct? If I myself doubt that diet, bodybuilding, or anything else is a healthy system, I will cling to others. I will try to win them over to my side and thus strengthen my beliefs and ease my doubts that this is wrong.
Of course. It is amazing how massively the basic ideas of Freud have spread among people, but, nevertheless, how much we continue to underestimate the influence of the unconscious on our behavior in Everyday life... Freud began by writing a book, The Psychopathology of Everyday Life, which is understandable even for high school students. His idea was to show that the action of an unconscious force is constantly present in our life. The way we forget something, lose things, see dreams, all this is a manifestation of the action of the unconscious, it is in all the people about whom we have just spoken. And this is really not realized, and since it is conflicting, one does not want to be aware of it. Therefore, if someone very enlightened comes and says: “Well, you doubt it! Well, you are really sausage. You are afraid that this is not true, everything that you believe in, ”then this will not cause any other reaction than aggression.
This is very cool and explains the behavior of many people.
On the Internet, it is difficult to open up and not get negative from others, each of whom adheres to his own way of life, and they did not like my way of life. If I swing the press without a pancake on my chest, without weighting - for them I am doing very wrong, it gives them pain, judging by their offended comments. And the fact that it has such a clear explanation in psychology makes life easier.
I hope that many will see and hear that you should not take personally everything that is said in your address. Perhaps people just talk to themselves and convince themselves.
It is very painful and uncomfortable to see that your neighbor is not only pumping the press without a pancake on his chest, but also happy at the same time. He is valuable in himself, he is doing well. Because the presence of such a neighbor confirms my doubts: “He’s happy, he’s doing well, but I’m not! Maybe I'm fucking pulling a pancake in vain? Maybe it's all in vain?» ... It is incredibly excruciating - the constant background doubts and fears that such people experience.
Raw-foodists now come up in my memory, who believe that I personally am against raw food.
Yes, I adhered to this system for a long time, but I left it because it does not suit me! Now it seems to them that I am generally against her. All their conclusions are similar to defense: “How so ?! Why a raw food diet? How did it offend you? " I say - do it, it doesn't suit me personally. Surely, if they see this, they will be very upset (laughs). You guys are great raw foodists!
In general, I am not against any nutritional system, not a single system of sports. If it brings a person real joy, if it makes his life easier at this stage, then I will never go to another person's plate and into his sports schedule to show what it is doing wrong. I think it's good approach- Keep out.
I think yes. If your own worldview is harmonious, and there is no internal conflict, then there is no need to climb into someone else's plate and someone else's sports schedule, and generally ask: “Do you play sports ?!» After all, this is none of my business.
I was thrown off a link to Firefly, which - literally - wrote the following about me: "The psychologist has one child preschool age and a fresh marriage after a long period of loneliness, and this, in my observation, often leads to a burning need to educate the masses about how to build long and lasting relationships and raise children from zero to adolescence. "
On this phrase, my brain collapsed and died, because this is, to put it mildly, an unexpected interpretation of my biography.
So, dear husband, you, it turns out, quite recently (4 years ago) saved me from an extremely long and joyless lonely existence (1 month long), and I immediately (8 years ago) began to write psychological articles and posts, conduct therapeutic groups (5 years ago) and work with clients (also 8 years ago). Tellingly, I have no idea if Firefly has a relationship, and if so, what kind.
Then she criticizes my post about insulin. In general, the criticism in places is quite sensible, because I wrote - and this is indicated in the post - as I understood this from the doctor's explanations, without pretending to be an endocrinologist and not saying that the way I live needs to be repeated by someone - on the contrary, saying in every possible way that you first need to go to the doctor. I really made a mistake in this post, and many found other ways - yes, Mrs. Firefly, none of these people told me anything about my, forgiven, my new husband, can you imagine? - write about it.
And - if you limited yourself to this, even in the context of "this is done in a school chemistry course", as one of the participants in the discussion - I would understand that. And if you personally wrote to me about what is wrong in my post, I would also thank, but - alas - this is about the subjunctive mood. It turned out the way it turned out. And it so happened that at an ordinary post of a person about his diagnosis, about which he writes - let's just say - it's still not quite what Mrs. I wrote my professional position in a blog (which is media outlets according to Russian laws, but she probably doesn’t know) -
a) Lies;
b) In an offensive manner;
c) About a colleague
And I believe it
a) Unethical;
b) Piggy
falling under the libel article. I, of course, consider this article rather strange and go to court - rather pointless, but I consider it necessary to write that it has nothing to do with reality.
When I tried to ask what it was, I was told that I had obvious problems, because I chose a pretentious pseudonym for myself (here Eric Erickson and Jacob Moreno said hello and went to their therapists - and these are only psychologists. Freddie Mercury, Marilyn Monroe, Maxim Gorky and Kir Bulychev, as well as a list of ten pages of seriously ill people I will not give. And what a beautiful young lady would say to my colleagues Karine Serebryakova and Zhanna Lurie - I'm even afraid to imagine). It was also added to me that she considers me the worst example of pop psychology. Apparently, this gives her reason to invent fables about me and publicly talk nasty things about me behind my back (no, there was no personal conversation before). Perhaps this is due to the fact that once I wrote that I respect what she does, but I don’t like her presentation style, so I don’t read it.
Such is the "symmetrical" answer.
Personally: Firefly, you used to make insulting and derogatory responses to your Russian-speaking colleagues, but I saw them only in a general sense - like "working with a paralyzed grandfather behind the wall." I did not follow your work, and therefore I do not know if I was the first to get on your list of targeted insults, but, nevertheless, from myself I can assure you that I am impressed by how far you have come.
I suggest that my readers - and the readers of Firefly - think seriously: if a person allows himself absolutely calmly and without the slightest doubt, without then abandoning his words - moreover, continuing to develop them, write something like that addressed to a stranger (even distracting from the fact that this is a violation of professional ethics), using your own fantasies as material, then ...
and then at your discretion.
Personally - to the user Firefly - you made me an evening. Well, I can congratulate you - before that in my life, only my ex-fiancé reached such a level of generalization after I left him two weeks before the appointed wedding, and I was sure that his fantasies and an extremely alternative view of no one surpasses my life.
For you, I - it seems - was not going to marry. So it's not even clear where you got such pictures from.