Your anecdotal experience says that a congnitive approach works. My anecdotal experience says that an approach that includes touch (not necessarily from a licensed therapist and not exclusively touch) works. Your experience is supported by extensive research. My experience is backed up by much less research. In my judgment our anecdotal evidence is irrefutable and equal, what is required in my opinion is on-going research and documentation.

To that end, as a clinician and researcher, how much anecdotal evidence would you need in order to justify the formation of a hypothesis, and complete study of the issue?

Traditional psychotherapy has been thoroughly evaluated and found to be effective. Asking clients to put their feelings into words, and reflect on feelings instead of gratifying them is a tried and true means of addressing these issues.

Bioenergetics (and touch therapy specifically) takes a combination true but irrelevant observations (we live in a body, unhappy people have muscular tension) along with false assertions (traumatic memories reside in the body and need released through direct touch) and constructs an elaborate set of techniques that probably convey to the receiver some of the common factors that lead to a therapeutic relationship.

What we are addressing is the placebo effect. Just making an appointment brings some relief to about 65% of clients. Should we construct a therapy of simply having clients make appointments week after week with different therapists? Placebo is powerful and should be exploited for a client’s good but it is generally not enough, nor is it necessary to use invasive, potentially harmful techniques to achieve it.

Grantdale: Agreed. Boundaries in psychotherapy are crucial for it to be psychotherapy. Otherwise, it becomes one of number of other wish-fulfilling relationships we could have (friend, physical therapist, hair stylist, parent, bartender, etc.). Just because therapeutic (read: helpful) things happen in a relationship doesn’t make the relationship therapy. For therapy to have impact beyond what these other relationships can have, it needs to be something different from what these other relationships can be.

I hope to have another post on this soon.

My experience, both personal and observed, is that many of us want a deep connection with men but didn’t or don’t know how to achieve that without sex. Once we achieved intimate, non-sexual connection with men (physical and emotional) then the desire for sex with men decreased significantly.

I am not suggesting that this is the only factor that allows a man to achieve resolution to conflicted sexual desires, but it has been signficant for me and others.

I would agree with you that many “straight” men have a real issue around male/male non-sexual intimacy, and I believe that they would benefit from exploring and getting past their “hangups” on the subject.

As for men who self-identify as gay, I would imagine that there are many who separate sexual intimacy from non-sexual intimacy in a healthy way; I can’t imagine that there are many, if any gay men who want to have sex with every man they meet.

As to therapeutic boundaries, I am in agreement with you and with Dr. Throckmorton. I think a therapist must be careful, and follow ethical guidelines and boundaries. As I stated in an earlier post, if the methods are valid, then an ethical and safe way can be found to deliver them.

Thanks for the questions, they were thought provoking.