This Jungian Life - stopped listening due to transphobia

UPDATE: deleting my original post and would delete this thread if I could. Shortly after recommending it, it came to my attention that one of the hosts is basically a TERF (trans-exclusionary radical feminist) who pathologizes transgender people, which is a major red line for me. Because of this I would NOT recommend this post or advertise it in any way.



That looks really cool, will definitely be checking out the podcast, love that it is interactice.

Andrew mentions Jung as being very influential to him. It is my understanding that he dove far deeper than most people realize into the dream world, and also the spiritual world, but becuase of the fears of criticism and this tainting his scientific work, he was less vocal about these experiences.

Thank you for sharing that.

1 Like

I shared thses videos in a different thread. @_Barry brought up that one monk taught about the “pain body”. I did not know this was a term and a teaching in Buddhism. But I have been a huge fan of Ekhart Tolle for years, and he mentions this term in his work as well. I thouhgt he coined the term, looks like he borrowed it from a far older spiritual tradition. Part of me wonders if Jung may have done the same thing. The shadow and the pain body are in many ways very similar.

Most of his material is now on his youtube channel, and all for free. Would highly reccomend his videos. Watching him speak to a group of people I find more helpful than simple text or audio book, becuase like Andrew, he does the highly insightful side commentary, and gives personal anecdodes.

1 Like

Checked out their youtube channel, if you do a video seach of their most popular videos, this one comes up as #1. They are pretty insighful, looking forward to listening to more of their work:

1 Like

UPDATE: deleting my original post and would delete this thread if I could. Shortly after recommending it, it came to my attention that one of the hosts is basically a TERF (trans-exclusionary radical feminist) who pathologizes transgender people, which is a major red line for me. Because of this I would NOT recommend this post or advertise it in any way.


What did the host say or do that made them a TERF?

How did they pathologize transgender people?

I only listened to one episode, the one I shared above. My impression was the group seemed to be more left leaning/ liberal in their views and seemed to be pretty LGTBQ friendly.

1 Like

Google LISA MARCHIANO TRANSGENDER if you’re curious and/or look through her Twitter feed. I’m not going to explain, debate or unpack it any further here.

Dont have a twiter account, but I googled that and this was the first link that appeared:

Did not read the full article, but I did read the Abstract (copied and pasted beow). Nothing that I read there suggested she was transphoic. All she said was there were dangers of false positives in diagnosing teens who had no long term history as identifying as the opposite gender. This suggests that some children may be being manipulated or may be following a social trend, without realizing the serious long term consequences of medical treatmemts for a false positive.

I think she makes some valid points about these dangers. I did not read that she denys the existence of true transgender people, nor did I read that she thinks they should not go through medical treatments when age appropriate. If you could provide any evidence that contradicts either of those statements, then I would be more inclined to believe your claim that she is transphobic.

From what little I read it sounds like she is a caring therapist looking out for the health and safety of a very vulnerable population.

" Having lived through both World Wars, Jung was aware of the dangers of what he termed “psychic epidemics.” He discussed the spontaneous manifestation of an archetype within collective life as indicative of a critical time during which there is a serious risk of a destructive psychic epidemic.

Currently, we appear to be experiencing a significant psychic epidemic that is manifesting as children and young people coming to believe that they are the opposite sex, and in some cases taking drastic measures to change their bodies. Of particular concern to the author is the number of teens and tweens suddenly coming out as transgender without a prior history of discomfort with their sex.

“Rapid-onset gender dysphoria” is a new presentation of a condition that has not been well studied. Reports online indicate that a young person’s coming out as transgender is often preceded by increased social media use and/or having one or more peers also come out as transgender. These factors suggest that social contagion may be contributing to the significant rise in the number of young people seeking treatment for gender dysphoria.

Current psychotherapeutic practice involves immediate affirmation of a young person’s self-diagnosis, which often leads to support for social and even medical transition. Although this practice will likely help small numbers of children, there may also be many false positives.

Previous articleView issue table of contentsNext article

The earliest written record from the town of Hamelin in Lower Saxony is from 1384. It states simply, “It is 100 years since our children left.” Historical accounts indicate that sometime in the 13th century, a large number of the town’s children disappeared or perished, though the details of the event remain a mystery. “The Pied Piper of Hamelin” is, as far I as have been able to determine, the only Grimm’s fairy tale that is based substantially on a historical event. Both the actual event and the Grimm’s tale suggest an archetypal situation in which adults have allowed children to be seduced away into peril. This tale is a disconcertingly apt metaphor for various social contagions that have overtaken collective life throughout the centuries.

Having witnessed the destruction and horror of World War II, Jung had much to say about what he termed “psychic epidemics.” Several times throughout The Collected Works, he stressed that such “mass psychoses” are the main threat facing humanity today. “The gods have become disease,” Jung famously wrote. “Zeus no longer rules Olympus but rather the solar plexus, and produces curious specimens for the doctor’s consulting room, or disorders the brains of politicians and journalists who unwittingly let loose psychic epidemics on the world” (1967, p. 37). When we smugly imagine ourselves above the influence of contents from the collective unconscious, then we are most susceptible to possession by them.

Jung discussed the spontaneous manifestation of an archetype within collective life as indicative of a critical time during which there is a serious risk of a destructive psychic epidemic. “Catastrophe can be avoided only if the effect of the archetype can be intercepted and assimilated by a sufficiently large majority of individuals” (Jung, 1970, p. 229). Jung stated that archetypal contents such as anima and animus are liable to escape from conscious control due to their numinosity, and as a result can lead to psychic possession.

Currently, we appear to be experiencing a significant psychic epidemic that is manifesting as children and young people coming to believe that they are the opposite sex, and in some cases taking drastic measures to change their bodies. I am particularly concerned about the number of teens and tweens suddenly coming out as transgender without a prior history of discomfort with their sex. “Rapid-onset gender dysphoria” is a new presentation of this condition that has not been well studied. Current psychotherapeutic practice involves affirmation of a young person’s self-diagnosis ( Although this practice will undoubtedly help a small number of children, I am concerned that there may be many false positives.

This topic first came to my attention in my practice. A patient reported that her daughter was identifying as transgender. I admired the way this mother attempted to support her child, and I marveled at the creativity of youth culture in challenging traditional conceptualizations of gender. My view of this cultural trend as benign collapsed in an instant, however, when I learned that young women were having mastectomies as young as 14 (Rowe, 2016). Realizing that the identity exploration of teenagers was being treated in a concretized way that would have drastic, permanent consequences for the young people involved immediately filled me with concern. Further research online and through speaking with people only increased my alarm. It quickly became clear to me that teens were coming out as trans in peer clusters, as we have seen happen before with suicide and eating disorder contagion."

Dude, if you can’t recognize how what you quoted from Mastriano’s article is transphobic, then nothing I say is likely to convince you otherwise and – given that you evaluate Fox News as a good source of information and “LOVE Tucker Carlson” – it’s really not something I want to get into with you.

But since this thread that I so deeply regret starting and am tragically unable to delete is potentially being read by other people, I’ll suggest that anyone confused on this matter go on to google “rapid onset gender dysphoria” and look for articles that are (justifiably) critical of that perspective. The following abstract from “A critical commentary on ‘rapid-onset gender dysphoria’” does a pretty good job of summarizing the problem:

The term ‘rapid-onset gender dysphoria’ (ROGD) was coined in 2016 to describe an alleged epidemic of youth coming out as trans ‘out of the blue’ due to social contagion and mental illness. The term reflects a deliberate attempt to weaponise scientific-sounding language to dismiss mounting empirical evidence of the benefits of transition. This article offers an introduction to the theory of ROGD and its history, presents a detailed critique of the empirical and theoretical claims associated with the theory, and highlights structural concerns with the ROGD discourse. The article argues that claims associated with ROGD, including assertions of declining mental health and degrading familial relationships following coming out, are best explained by the leading ROGD study’s recruitment of parents from transantagonistic websites against a background of growing visibility and social acceptance of trans people. ROGD theory is best understood as an attempt to circumvent existing research demonstrating the importance of gender affirmation, relying on scientific-sounding language to achieve respectability. (LINK, full article paywalled)

See also: Why ‘rapid-onset gender dysphoria’ is bad science

“Rapid-onset gender dysphoria"…conveniently pulls on heartstrings by calling us to defend our children, much as Blanchard’s work appealed to our sexual puritanism. It distinguishes “good,” true transgender people from “bad,” fake trans people, allowing proponents to claim that they have nothing against trans people — well, at least the real ones.

Theories which rely on the idea of “contagion” in order to invalidate marginalised identities are not new. The same has happened with other marginalised groups, such as gay, lesbian and bisexual people. Young people were thought to be misled by the “gay agenda” into mistakenly and rashly claiming a queer identity.

The idea of rapid-onset gender dysphoria gives ammunition to those who are eager to oppose gender-affirmative policies. Best explained by transphobia and research study biases, it does not withstand scrutiny… [read full article here]


The lengthy Buzzfeed article Gender Dysphoria Isn’t A “Social Contagion,” According To A New Study covers it reasonably well. This pull quote notes some of the ways this perspective can harm transgender people:

The American College of Pediatricians, classified as an anti-LGBT hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center, cites Littman’s study to advocate against trans-affirming health care; its representatives recently met with lawmakers on Capitol Hill fight the passage of the Equality Act. And Transgender Trend, one of the sites Littman used to gather responses for her study, has published a lengthy school resource pack that warns a child’s gender dysphoria can be a result of “simple social contagion.”

Julia Serano, a writer, activist, and biologist who has extensively charted the rise of ROGD and trans social contagion theory, said that promoting trans identity as contagious has huge ramifications.

“If you’re a trans kid, will parents not let their kids interact with you?” Serano told BuzzFeed News. “People will say ‘Let’s just see what the science says’ … and will be given justification to say ‘I’m not going to allow my children to absorb any information or media that involves trans people.’”

What’s more, Serano worries that defining an entirely new “rapid onset” category of gender dysphoria might inspire different treatments than those currently recommended by the likes of the American Academy of Pediatrics. That could lead some parents to turn away from the “gender affirming” treatments — such as social or medical transition — for persistently trans-identifying youth, and instead try “reparative” gender treatments, which encourage children to feel better in their assigned sexes. For critics like Serano, the latter category is akin to gay conversion therapy. [read article in full here]

There is nothing in the article abstract that I read which would qualify as transphobia.And since you have had a difficult time to show any place in the article where there is transphobia, it makes me believe that you may be projecting your negative sentiments onto Lisa Marchiano.

Do you see how using Ad Hominem logic greatly hurts your credibility? I have yet to see you provide any concrete evidence to support your claim. All I have wintessed you do is call people names and use derogatory statements against those who see the world differently from you.

I look a the human consequences. Articles are just words that can be true or false. If you want to test your claim that Rapid Onset Gender Dyphoria is not real, or that false positives have never occured before, all you have to do is find ONE counter example. This will completely contradict your claim. If you can find multiple counter examples it would mean that yoir theory is completely false.

This video was made by a transgender woman who interviews a false positive case, and she makes some very good points about people being bullied by the ‘community’ for detransitioning:

This video shows a few examples of False Positives, and people who switched genders, only to switch back a few years later, or strongly regret their decisions. I dont agree with the guy in the video who says Gender Dysphoria is not real for some people, and I dont agree with his one size fits all solution, but he does provide serveral cases of false positive examples and the statistic on the chart he shares of a 17 fold increase in dianosis is very eye opening:

If you do a google sesrch, you will find may cases of false positives:

This woman provides a good summary of the issues:

To deny that false positives exist, and to deny that transitioing for false positives can really harmful for people, is to see the world with blinders on. Life is too complex for black and white thinking. If your real goal in life is to combat true transphobia, its important to not be ignorant of these case studies and perspecitives.

One of my favorite videos I have watched of This Jungian Life. I did not know that Jung was the guy who coined the term Synchronicity.

1 Like

These are passionate, personal and sensitive issues but I don’t understand what this theme has to do with meditation, or lucid dreaming ,:thinking:


The original post focused upon Jungian psychological perspectives of dreaming and lucid dreaming which drew interested responses, but was later amended due to the author’s disapproval of one of the three participants in the video. Other issues were then raised as can happen in online—and indeed any—discussion forum. Anyway, that’s my take.


Yes, Jung noticed amazing strange but meaningful coincidences in his practice. For instance, a patient told him a dream about an unusual brightly colored green beetle, and as he was telling the dream, Jung heard something hit his window. It was just such a beetle at his window! He opened the window and picked up the beetle and showed it to the patient, who was very surprised! He began to see this type of thing over and over again, where something in a dream would show up as an amazing coincidence in waking life, or things that people were talking about or thinking about would just show up. He termed this “synchronicity” and worked with his friend, the physicist Wolfgang Pauli, on delineating synchronicity. Pauli wrote an essay working out the quantum physics behind this (I tried to read this years ago but it was way above my physics and math level). I think that mainstream physics has just ignored Pauli’s theory on this, however. Jung was also very interested in the I Ching, and used synchronicity to explain how it worked.

1 Like

I think its one of his best contributions to to the world, and he definitely had many! I think it may have been in Charlie Morleys book or Waggoners book, I recently read it siad something like ‘therapists who work with patients dreams often start to see many interesting supyncronicities or even precognitive elements arising between doctor and patient.’ I think it was Robert Waggoner saying that. Interesting insight, it makes sense that in doing that kind of intimate ‘holy work’ a deeper connection to the spiritual world would begin to manifest between the two people. A good deed doesnt just help the reciever, I think there are karmic traces that help the giver as well.

The more I learn about Jung, the more I think that he was in part trying to bring Shamanistic practices, and ancient dream work from forgotten religions and cults into mainstream science. Things that had been time tested in cultures and religions around the world, but science would have a hard time proving them in a lab.

1 Like

Jung was amazing. When I first got interested in dreams in my early 20’s, Jung was who I turned to. He saw himself as doing empirical science in that the images from dreams, myths, fairy tales, alchemy, etc, he saw as ways of observing the data of the human psyche. However, other psychologists criticized him for being an unscientific mystic.


Studied Psychology in college in the ‘60s it was Freud vs Jung vs Skinner. Most professors were behaviorists, a few Freudians and an oddball or two were determined to be Jung. A lot has changed. I liked Jung from his introduction to the I-Ching.

1 Like

I used to think like the people who criticized him. Now I realize how small minded I was. I think youncan be both a scientist with a rational mind and a mystic. Imthink Andrew would qualify as such. I dont see that as a sign of weakness, its a sign of brilliance.

I think they all had significant contributions to modern thought. Frueds defense mechanisms are genius. Theres no doub that behavior plays a huge role in conditioning the mind. And Jungs work with dreams I think is second to none.

1 Like