Would you want to eavesdrop on an anonymous couple’s therapy session? Hear a woman talk to her husband about the revelation that he secretly fathered twins with a lesbian couple she had doubts about, just after he’d cheated on her with someone else? Millions of people do: this is exactly what the celebrity therapist Esther Perel lets you listen in on, with the latest episode of her wildly successful podcast, Where Should We Begin?
There is something dystopian about people competing for the attention of a famous podcast host to solve their most intimate problems. Hundreds of couples apply for a handful of opportunities to share their stories with Perel, along with her legion of listeners. Her 2006 bestselling guide to marital relations, Mating in Captivity, established her as TED-talking international authority on relationships. By the time Where Should We Begin? launched in 2017, Perel was listed in Oprah Winfrey’s SuperSoul 100 list of “spiritual luminaries”. Her podcast has been downloaded 50 million times since its launch.
It’s not hard to see why. As radical new ways of ordering relationships have proliferated, we no longer hold a set of principles for living in common. Liberalism’s marketplace of ideas has given rise to a marketplace of moralities: as free unbounded agents, we get to decide what is right for us. But when our bespoke moral stories clash with those adopted by other people in our lives, things get tricky: how do you resolve a conflict when you cannot agree on the rules that mediate it? Who do you turn to, to help you decide?
Enter Perel. She is fair, philosophical in encouraging a big-picture view of how to live well, and gently tough at making sure that the dynamic never falls into that of victim and aggressor. Nothing is sensationalised, and no one is demonised. She is something of a radical in the Anglosphere, where our one-strike-and-you’re-out attitude to cheating has remained intransigent even as non-traditional, non-monogamous relationships have become increasingly common. With divorce rates estimated at 42% in the UK and 45% in the US, and 27% of US adults estranged from a close family member, Perel’s more charitable approach to conflict might have merit.
She is also part of a trend. Therapists are increasingly becoming a kind of free-market priesthood, jockeying for the territory that actual priests once oversaw. With the decline of religion, we have lost any sense of a unifying story about how to live, without which we’re more likely to be miserable — as the mental health gains from being religious can attest. The claim of therapy is that it helps you shape the overarching narrative with which you make sense of the world, and how to live well in it. At best, going to one’s therapist is a substitute for confession, a time for honest reckoning; too often, though, clients see it as an indulgence, a means to divest one’s conscience of interpersonal responsibility. Once, we could have taken solace in doing the right thing by others; now, the feeling of solace comes first.
Perel is too tough, and too professional, to let her clients avoid hard truths. But other therapy-as-content offers people that easy way out, dwelling purely on the solace. If Instagram laid the groundwork for the therapy influencer phenomenon, all pastel-coloured quotes and exhortations to set boundaries, TikTok took it to the next level. Therapists on the video-sharing site seem to see everything as a sign of trauma: transient negative emotions, feeling under-motivated, feeling over-motivated, feeling uncertain. Things that cause trauma include having to do homework, dead celebrities, and understocked supermarkets. If anyone suggests that these things might not actually cause trauma, TikTokers argue that they are “invalidating” that trauma — which, they insist, causes further trauma. The therapists who say things like this make their followers feel understood, offering sweet relief from the harsher offline world — and building their influence as they do.
An obvious concern of the influencer model of therapy is that anyone can set themselves up as a mental health expert, without any training or expertise. But most successful influencers on TikTok and Instagram are verifiably qualified therapists or psychologists. They’re careful with disclaimers too, reminding their audience that their content isn’t therapy.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeThat’s clear and insightful writing.
That’s clear and insightful writing.
This is excruciating. I couldn’t get through the article. Some years ago in the US, there was a well-known rabbi who worked with troubled families – on TV, as “infotainment”. One such family lived down the hill from us. We passed by the TV crews for a week as we took our kids to school. I didn’t watch when it aired but the few I knew who did said it was agonizingly painful. I can’t imagine why they did it – exposing their hurt for all the country to see. Why wouldn’t the couples cited in the article seek private counseling?
Did they perchance arrive in the Americas from England perhaps around the year of our Lord 1634?
If that’s a subtle reference to my family, Charles, no (and you know better). My people even frowned at dinner table chat; conversation was for the after-dinner drinks in the living room. A raised eyebrow was about as “emotionally open” as it usually got (but the funeral after-parties were always very lively; there was always a well-stocked bar).
Excellent! I’m very glad to hear it.
(My apologies, it was a rather lame effort I must admit.)
Excellent! I’m very glad to hear it.
(My apologies, it was a rather lame effort I must admit.)
Ah, dear Charles, the king of the non sequitur !
Just a bit of harmless (English) banter, no harm done.
Indeed, and If it wasn’t always so obtuse we all might be able to enjoy the joke.
*abstruse
*abstruse
Indeed, and If it wasn’t always so obtuse we all might be able to enjoy the joke.
Just a bit of harmless (English) banter, no harm done.
If that’s a subtle reference to my family, Charles, no (and you know better). My people even frowned at dinner table chat; conversation was for the after-dinner drinks in the living room. A raised eyebrow was about as “emotionally open” as it usually got (but the funeral after-parties were always very lively; there was always a well-stocked bar).
Ah, dear Charles, the king of the non sequitur !
Did they perchance arrive in the Americas from England perhaps around the year of our Lord 1634?
This is excruciating. I couldn’t get through the article. Some years ago in the US, there was a well-known rabbi who worked with troubled families – on TV, as “infotainment”. One such family lived down the hill from us. We passed by the TV crews for a week as we took our kids to school. I didn’t watch when it aired but the few I knew who did said it was agonizingly painful. I can’t imagine why they did it – exposing their hurt for all the country to see. Why wouldn’t the couples cited in the article seek private counseling?
Much prefer Gottman’s work on love, parenting, romance and friendship, and it seems intuitive to me that all strong relationships would have certain characteristics in common. My perhaps unkind conclusion is that she excuses nonmonogamy as a necessity for broken people in a broken world. Maybe it works for some but think there are better things to aim for
Much prefer Gottman’s work on love, parenting, romance and friendship, and it seems intuitive to me that all strong relationships would have certain characteristics in common. My perhaps unkind conclusion is that she excuses nonmonogamy as a necessity for broken people in a broken world. Maybe it works for some but think there are better things to aim for
I see the author is getting piled on, but as much as “reality” media turns my stomach, I think it’s important that the multiple complications related to cultural therapization are teased out w/ nuance, and I think she’s doing that.
I see way too much “throwing the baby out with the bathwater” these days, and it’s a hair trigger reaction around which we all need to be vigilant. That kind of response has been prevalent on the Left for a range of reasons I’ll save for my own article, but can happen in our own understandable outrage at the forced disasters we see happening all around us.
Some therapists ARE sincere, and some are even competent, operating from a more spiritual, humble place that nurtures personal growth and interpersonal responsibility, accountability, and genuine love of God, self, and others. This medium, right now, may be the most effective way this therapist can crowbar open just a millimeter of light and air into the vacuum sealed, daily condensing cesspool of collective human ego that our culture seems to have become.
We all understand that metaphor–the cracks are how God lets the light in, or our own self-imploding dark nights of the soul where we forget that there is something larger, but via grace, meditation to which we drag ourselves, mentally, kicking and screaming, or even an Ativan, get a little perspective. The best teachers, counselors, parents, friends–just people–are able to open up this space on a more regular basis. They might carry the same “name” as others w/ initials and followings, but they’re vitally different, and you know it when you see it.
On one plane, no pigs are more equal than others, nor a human being better than another, but on another, certain human behaviors, characters, and contributions are vastly better than others. Just because we’re sitting in stunned horror at the consequences of the appalling early human development unfolding on social media, doesn’t mean those media can’t be used for human good.
Thanks to the author for wading into this morass. Keep up the good work.
I see the author is getting piled on, but as much as “reality” media turns my stomach, I think it’s important that the multiple complications related to cultural therapization are teased out w/ nuance, and I think she’s doing that.
I see way too much “throwing the baby out with the bathwater” these days, and it’s a hair trigger reaction around which we all need to be vigilant. That kind of response has been prevalent on the Left for a range of reasons I’ll save for my own article, but can happen in our own understandable outrage at the forced disasters we see happening all around us.
Some therapists ARE sincere, and some are even competent, operating from a more spiritual, humble place that nurtures personal growth and interpersonal responsibility, accountability, and genuine love of God, self, and others. This medium, right now, may be the most effective way this therapist can crowbar open just a millimeter of light and air into the vacuum sealed, daily condensing cesspool of collective human ego that our culture seems to have become.
We all understand that metaphor–the cracks are how God lets the light in, or our own self-imploding dark nights of the soul where we forget that there is something larger, but via grace, meditation to which we drag ourselves, mentally, kicking and screaming, or even an Ativan, get a little perspective. The best teachers, counselors, parents, friends–just people–are able to open up this space on a more regular basis. They might carry the same “name” as others w/ initials and followings, but they’re vitally different, and you know it when you see it.
On one plane, no pigs are more equal than others, nor a human being better than another, but on another, certain human behaviors, characters, and contributions are vastly better than others. Just because we’re sitting in stunned horror at the consequences of the appalling early human development unfolding on social media, doesn’t mean those media can’t be used for human good.
Thanks to the author for wading into this morass. Keep up the good work.
Sounds like Perel is more prophet than priest, to invoke the Biblical distinction. The priest is a functionary, loyal to what’s trademarked, like a manualised therapy or formulaically invoking trauma. Prophets speak freely, diagnosing particularities, appealing to the soul via challenge more than comfort.
Sounds like Perel is more prophet than priest, to invoke the Biblical distinction. The priest is a functionary, loyal to what’s trademarked, like a manualised therapy or formulaically invoking trauma. Prophets speak freely, diagnosing particularities, appealing to the soul via challenge more than comfort.
Umm, Perel has a Masters in Art Therapy. She says affairs are “Acts of exuberant defiance?!” Oh hell no, people cheat because of poor character and narcissism., No one forces anyone into monogamy, it’s not “a cruel twist of fate” — it’s a choice. Esther Perel can bite me (Thanks Chump Lady)
Umm, Perel has a Masters in Art Therapy. She says affairs are “Acts of exuberant defiance?!” Oh hell no, people cheat because of poor character and narcissism., No one forces anyone into monogamy, it’s not “a cruel twist of fate” — it’s a choice. Esther Perel can bite me (Thanks Chump Lady)