"Strangers on the Internet" Podcast Episode 36: Therapy Speak as Relationship Abuse

Why the Sarah Brady and Jonah Hill controversy carries broader meaning

The 36th episode (Apple Podcasts link here and Spotify link here) of Strangers on the Internet with co-host and psychologist Michelle Lange explores how therapy language has at times been weaponized in romantic relationships.

The Internet is abuzz with discussion about allegations by Sarah Brady, a University of Hawai'i law student, that her ex-boyfriend and celebrity Jonah Hill emotionally abused her and dressed up the abuse in therapy language. According to screenshots of text messages she posted publicly, he designated it "boundaries" that she should not post swimsuit pictures of herself on social media, model, surf with men, or interact with female friends of whom he didn't approve, among other things.

We discuss the difference between boundaries and coercive control, the ways in which boundary speak doesn't absolve the speaker of problematic values injected into requests (or demands), and the general current trends in distorting psychological language to serve one's purposes. We also delve into what happens when a partner's mental health or other life circumstances make it difficult for them to give what the other person might actually deserve under optimal conditions. Tune in and join the discourse!

Comments

[ReaderY]

I don’t know anything about this case. But from the description given, what makes this “abuse” in anything approaching a legal sense? He’s given the rules he wants his family to abide by. I can’t say I’d like those rules either. Sure, it reflects something of a control streak. But so what? Why can’t she just say sorry, no way and leave without a whole lot of fuss? Why does anybody else have to intervene or make a big stink about it? If nobody wants to date him or continue after the first couple of dates, perhaps he’ll change, perhaps he’ll just be lonely. But so what? It’s his problem. He’s not beating anybody up or anything. This is nothing like the cases you began with where people were being swindled out of their life savings. Plenty of conservative religions have some of these rules (e.g. Muslims with swimsuits). And in general, there is a limit to what the law can do to prevent people from behaving like assholes.

[TwelveInchPianist]

"Sure, it reflects something of a control streak. But so what? Why can’t she just say sorry, no way and leave without a whole lot of fuss?"

Normal people understand that she can. But many feminists have an irrational belief that women are weak-minded and in thrall to men, such that an ask by a man becomes coercive because, well, he's a man and she's a woman.

This manifests itself in other bizarre superstitious beliefs by misinformation purveyors like the federal government, who claims that a man asking for sex on his birthday can "make [a woman] participate in sexual activity that [she does] not agree to."

Truely sick stuff.

[Dr. Ed 2]

That was what I was trying to say in that the murdered call girls on Long Island had a role in their demise. It's "the world revolves around me" version of feminism.

[Social Justice is neither]

She wanted him to continue sending her money while she sleeps with other men and he wanted her out of that environment for a serious relationship. As a feminist she of course sees any boundaries or inaccessible male assets as coercive control.

[lucia_l]

Social Justice is neither...

She wanted him to continue sending her money while she sleeps with other men

Was he sending her money? How much? Was she sleeping with other men? Who?

[lucia_l]

I think using therapy words started a while back. I remember hearing people say they needed "closure" which was used an an excuse by the person who was left to insist that someone be forced to discuss the "reasons" for leaving until "closure" was reached-- which could be effectively endlessly.

Also, some insistence of discussing our "feelings" about things. Of course, knowing how something makes someone feel matters. But anything can ultimately be framed as being "about feelings". Taken to an extreme it can sound like "When you eat chocolate, it makes me feel anxious that you will die before me." Now on party eating chocolate amounts to disregarding the others feelings. That characterizations makes eating the chocolate sound bad. But really, it's just chocolate.

And, of course, sometimes it's the feelings that are inappropriate rather than the behavior that triggered them. Perhaps the person having the negative feelings should learn to deal with their feelings.
(And honestly, who hasn't seem humorous characterizations of overly protective or interfering parents trying to manimulate with "feelings". E.g. "I worry!" )

[Ed Grinberg]

screenshots of [his private] text messages she posted publicly

Not a word about whether her doing so is "problematic"!