“Hello, Badger, I’m thinking of trying out the Naked Therapist. Have you heard of her? Do you think she’s a good idea? You did sex work before and said it was therapeutic, so what do you think of her work?”
The Naked Therapist, aka Sarah White, is neither a sex worker nor a healthy therapist. Her premise is to train men. She sees men as an illness, something wrong that must be corrected, and views herself as “the way.” She uses her body to train men. People could confuse this with BDSM; it is not. A Dom does not look down on a sub as less than or needing help. No. A Dom honors submission and is a guide/teacher and has love for her sub. A Dom does not look down on sexuality; a Dom loves and embraces sexuality and her submissive’s expression of sexuality.
Sarah White does none of these things. What she is doing is brainwashing men to be what she thinks men should be by using her nudity to open up men’s receptivity to the messages she’s giving them. From here forward, I will call her the Naked Brainwasher, or NB for short.
What’s perfect is I can use her as an outline of what to watch out for when you meet a female therapist and/or life coach and what to watch out for in the spiritual/Tantric communities if/when you are around a sexual healer. Also, if you see these traits in a sex worker you’re interviewing, including a Dom, you will know that they are dysfunctional; do not work with them.
I will take you through a rundown of her site. We’ll start under the “Naked Therapy” tab, where she describes the brainwashing … er … “therapy”:
In each Naked Therapy session, I seek to provide my clients with a comfortable, accepting, even fun environment wherein they can develop a sense of self that is empowering, an awareness of their feelings that is freeing, and an understanding of the conflicts that are holding them back from realizing their full potential.
There’s an issue right there: looking at men as if they are holding themselves back from their “full potential” is already looking at men with a broken lens. Men are beautiful right now, how men are. They do not need “fixing”; they may need support when they ask for it, but they do not need to be fixed. Also, what the hell does “full potential” mean? That is subjective, and in the eyes of a woman who clearly thinks men are lacking in general, it’s not possible. Men are perfect right now.
Same page, next section:
Accepting Male Desire
As of 2012, all of my clients are men, and that’s something I’m very proud of, because men want to be in therapy but traditional therapeutic practices have proven increasingly unattractive to them. As these statistics make painfully clear, men represent the vast majority of those in crisis.”
And here you have it, folks: men are the reason for bad things happening in society. I clicked her link, it took me to a missing page. Here, she is blaming men for crisis in society, and you want to trust her to guide you as a therapist? But wait, there’s more:
Here’s a list, far from all-inclusive, of some of the things my clients and I work on together in our Naked Therapy sessions:
– Resolving conflicted feelings
– Choosing between contradictory objectives
– Setting achievable goals
– Becoming more motivated
– Feeling more confident
– Identifying and overcoming sources of unhappiness, stress, shame and impotence
– Achieving a more satisfying sex life
– Improving intimate relationships
– Understanding and resolving feelings about porn use
– Seeing positively and harnessing the power of masturbation
These issues are symptomatic of what I call the new male hysteric, which I expound on here.
The fact alone that she uses the term male hysteric tells you enough, but—surprise—this link is now missing too. I went to her site a week ago and should have taken screenshots because now what I have to say is only hearsay. I will still say it, though, and you can make your own decision. She stated in her “About” section—or whatever it was called at the time—about how she at times tells her clients “No” regarding taking off her clothes. All fine and dandy, everyone has the right to say no, but what are the men paying you for again? To be trained to your specifications using your nudity? She also went off on a tangent about how awful pornography is and that it is—I can’t remember her exact words but it was to the tune of—harmful to women. She then continued to say how violent men are and why she thinks this is, etc. All of this is missing in her revised website! Someone is doing some major PR work on her site right now to cover up her blatant male-shaming from last week. Again, I do not have evidence and I wish I did, damn it; I had no idea she would be changing her site. Must learn to screenshot these people; seriously, my mistake. Unbelievable. So when she states in the above list “understanding and resolving feelings about porn use,” she means, Stop looking at porn … except if it’s her … and then it’s okay. Holy shit, this woman is manipulative!!
Most recently, I have begun investigating how Naked Therapy is inevitably conducted under the rubric of the broader concept of performance art therapy, a therapeutic experience in which the client joins the therapist in a performative event that is mutually constructed, dialogic, and directed toward the release of the client from whatever he feels is hindering him from genuine happiness.
Translation: Don’t arrest me! She’s saying all this to cover her tracks. This is one great big pile of nonsense. She refuses to call herself a sex worker, looks down on porn, and now calls herself performance art therapy? Performance art therapy? Wow, why didn’t I think of that line when I was a stripper having to worry about getting fined by the police for not having one foot on the floor. How wonderful of her to be able to story her way out of legalities and not stand for sex workers while she’s at it. Also, porn is bad; hence, sex work is bad … again, except her. Class act, this. And then:
What’s So Important About Arousal?
In our current therapeutic culture, arousal (not to mention nakedness) is largely forbidden between therapist and client. This is because arousal is associated with sex, and sex between therapist and client is not allowed by the Codes of Ethics of the American Counseling Association and the American Psychology Association. But Naked Therapy does not involve sex between therapist and client. Instead, it supports and encourages the client’s arousal through the therapist’s nakedness and attitude in order to explore how the client being aroused might help him achieve his therapeutic goals.
Hmm, could there be a reason that the Code of Ethics of the American Counseling Association and the American Psychology Association are against what you are doing? Because what you are doing is UNETHICAL?! How about that? Convincing your clients that they must do as you say by underhandedly telling them you have their best interest in mind? Here’s the thing, I have NO problem with sexuality and therapy being mixed together if it is clearly stated as such. Sexual therapy is beautiful, but this is not sexual therapy. Here is a woman who is still disconnected from healthy sexuality and refuses to even consider herself a sex worker. She works only with men, as she sees them as the reason there is so much violence and so they must be taught how to be healthy … by her … and by her vagina. Furthermore:
By linking arousal and sex, and therefore forbidding arousal because sex is forbidden, we have failed to understand and fully utilize therapeutically what happens to us psychologically when we are aroused. Perhaps the closest we’ve come to explaining that is the tantric philosophy, typified by such books as “From Sex to Super Consciousness” by Osho. And while it respects and gains some impetus from this spiritual approach, Naked Therapy is a more “Western” analytic approach that is both informed by 21st century realities (such as the Internet) that encourages and utilizes in a therapeutic context the mental causes and effects of physical arousal.
This is not Tantra, nor Spiritual. She is sticking her fingers in every crevice she can find to validate her manipulation. There is NOTHING Tantric about what this woman does. Nothing. Just being naked does not equate Tantra. Not even Neo-Tantra. And regarding the diluted state of Neo-Tantra, that’s saying something. And:
And indeed, Freudian Psychoanalysis and Naked Therapy have, in a certain sense, similar beginnings. Freud devised a therapeutic method meant to treat what was ailing turn-of-the-century women, while I have devised a therapeutic method to treat what’s ailing turn-of-the-century (albeit a different century) men. Freudianism was born out of the practices of hypnosis and mesmerization when Freud posited the existence of an unconscious given what he saw hypnotized patients doing. So too is Naked Therapy sourced in a new form of mesmerization – men in states of arousal (for my thoughts on arousal and women, click here). Who can watch a man become aroused by a naked woman and not sense that he is in some way “mesmerized”? From this observation, Naked Therapy posits that there is an “arousal state” in the brain. But the brain does not seek this for purely physical reasons. The brain seeks this arousal to heal, to discover, to learn, to become aware of things it cannot otherwise become aware of, for this state is as unique in the human mind as is the unconscious state of dreaming.
ACK!! SHE’S SAYING IT RIGHT HERE! She is hypnotizing men with her nudity and implanting what she wants. Using this extremely vulnerable position men are in to embed what she wants men to be! Dear God! She’s saying it right here! Blatant as day. She is manipulating the very pure and trusting state of arousal in men to tell them how to be. Not ONCE does she speak on accepting men as they are. NOT ONCE. Can hypnotherapy be supportive, yes; this is NOT hypnotherapy, she is just manipulating with her intent to “fix.”
To give a crass example, everyone knows how much porn there is on the Internet. History will look back and agree with the puppets of Avenue Q: “The Internet is for porn.” But why? It is scientifically lazy to just say “because men are biologically hard-wired to crave sex.” Any time we use the phrase “hard-wired” we should feel the obligation to investigate more. I would assert that so many billions of men spend so many billions of hours every day seeking access to women through porn, prostitutes, strippers, and sexual partners because it IS the mechanism through which they know themselves. As any man can tell you, the experience of being aroused and satisfying yourself through that arousal contains within it a variety of unique mental states, discoveries and transformations. In other words, it contains unique information that must be, just like dreams, utterly and uniquely relevant to the life-arch of the individual. That information simply needs to be allowed, encouraged and explored in order to discover its relevance.
Here we go, bashing the sex industry and blaming men for the sex industry. And you can see how she looks at porn as “crass.” She clearly has a chip on her shoulder about sex work. God, the hypocrisy. She states “seeking access to women … because it IS the mechanism through which they know themselves”; what, what is this elusive mechanism she speaks of? She is discussing men enjoying the sex industry in a very ignorant way. Men did not just come into the sex industry for sexual arousal but for companionship, a safe place to speak without being bashed for being men, a sense of sanctuary from women SUCH AS THIS, who consistently see them as not enough. Bottom line—acceptance. Men come to the sex industry for acceptance. Acceptance of men is lacking in our society and this Naked Brainwasher does NOT see this AT ALL.
Instead of seeing the acceptance that is lacking and how society contributes to this, she looks at men as wrong for engaging in the sex industry. That is what these words mean. Then she says “that information [arousal] simply needs to be allowed, encouraged and explored in order to discover its relevance.” Discover its relevance?? You mean the relevance of male sexuality? Or the relevance of male sexuality regarding sex workers and women? What a sneaky, sneaky snake! What she is doing is analyzing men and male sexuality from a place of “fixing” because she sees it as wrong. She sees male sexuality as something to be fixed. With all of her wordplay, I can see right through her nonsense, and I’m telling you, men: Do not buy it. This is an area in which I am savvy. I can tell this game from a mile away. She’s using her attractiveness to manipulate men and in this her narcissism is fed. Old story.
Let us finish this nonsense:
But Naked Therapy is changing all that. Just like Psychotherapy said that dreams mean something personally relevant, Naked Therapy says that arousal means something personally relevant. Arousal is as unique a mental state from non-arousal as consciousness is from unconsciousness. When you are aroused you are being given information about yourself (just like when you dream) that you cannot access in any other way. Just like Freudianism is entirely based on helping the patient access his unconscious thoughts, Naked Therapy is entirely based on helping the patient access his arousal thoughts. That’s why Naked Therapy studies and attempts to utilize in the therapeutic context what kind of mental information emerges in states of arousal in order to see how it might be used to help patients live freer, happier, healthier lives.
Arousal is relevant? No shit, who would have thought, except almost every human in existence. Ever. She then eludes that you men are incapable of understanding what your own arousal means to you … right. How could anyone ever know your body more than you? Can we be supported in opening up and in our growth? Sure! I study with life coaches and go to workshops and none of them look at me as needing “help.” It all comes down to self-acceptance and new knowledge. This woman offers neither. Just her nudity with a background of “you’re not good enough.” All of her clients are men, so she is addressing men here. Now, she says she wants her “patients” to “live freer, happier, healthier lives,” but what she means is that she wants men to be what she wants men to be so that in her mind she will see them as “healthier.” There is no freedom for men in a person who knows they are abusing the vulnerability of a man’s arousal. This state of arousal is very sacred and can only be entered with consent of the person and in support of the person’s intentions, NOT to be used to hypnotize the person to be the hypnotizers ideal. This is sick, what she is doing. And she knows it. She is also taking a stand against sex workers … except herself, of course, even though she won’t identify as one. You see, all women who want to get naked and share their sexuality with men and enjoy male sexuality are just unhealthy and men who want to participate need to discover the “relevance” of their arousal in such a situation. Unless … of course … it’s with her. Then it’s “therapy.”
My advice: Steer clear of her and all those who see men as needing to be “fixed.” Don’t feed the dysfunction. Men do not need “fixing.” Men are wonderful right now. If you are seeking support, seek support from those who see you and accept you in your state of being. Those who want to support YOUR intentions, not the intentions they have lined up for you. I wish you the best on your journey of finding this support.
The Naked “Therapist” [God, I can’t help it. I can’t call her a therapist, she’s not, so quotes are necessary!]
- Why I’m not ‘anti-racism’ - February 20, 2017
- The death of the ‘Women couldn’t vote’ manipulative narrative - February 1, 2017
- The Feminist Haunted House … no joke - November 6, 2014