My AmazonReview of "The Reasonable Woman," allegedly by Wendy McElroy

[Brant Gaede]

George's post #212 addresses Wendy's training, which sounds quite suspect.

Psychotherapy is a complex thing and effective work I suspect rare. I had a year with Nathaniel Branden during what I consider his classic period (mid-70s). It was very effective for me but I suspect not for many others. Individual therapy in a group context has its pluses and minuses and many didn't seem to work and if you didn't work he didn't know you. If you pretended to work he didn't force the issue too much. It was always the client's responsibility to get something going. This is not the work you do with someone with severe problems nor did he accept those clients.

--Brant

[George H. Smith]

George's post #212 addresses Wendy's training, which sounds quite suspect.

Psychotherapy is a complex thing and effective work I suspect rare. I had a year with Nathaniel Branden during what I consider his classic period (mid-70s). It was very effective for me but I suspect not for many others. Individual therapy in a group context has its pluses and minuses and many didn't seem to work and if you didn't work he didn't know you. If you pretended to work he didn't force the issue too much. It was always the client's responsibility to get something going. This is not the work you do with someone with severe problems nor did he accept those clients.

--Brant

Yesterday I revealed that, since 2004, Wendy has been claiming that I am a violent predator towards women, indeed, that I punched her so hard in the face one time that she permanently lost sight in one eye. This vicious lie was concocted to cover Wendy's plagiarism tracks.

Sorry, people, but all this seems a tad more significant than whether Wendy was a qualified Reichian therapist. Who gives a fuck?

Ghs

[George H. Smith]

I posted this earlier on Atlantis II:

Have you seen the latest on OL? Since 2004, Wendy has been

claiming that I physically abused her, Annie, and my wife

Laura. Wendy claimed that I punched her so hard one time

that she permanently lost vision in one eye. It has taken

her years to get over the trauma, especially since I have

stalked her through all those years. All this ties in,

apparently, to why I initiated my vicious campaign against

her.

When are libertarians going to stand up and express outrage

over this psychopath" -The woman has become a lunatic. What

kind of person makes up this kind of shit?

Wendy never presents evidence for anything. She just pulls

shit out of thin air. And some people take her seriously.

Wendy could claim that I belong to a Satanic cult that

roasts babies, that I cut the nipples off of 13 year old

girls -- she could claim anything she wants about me with no

evidence whatsoever, and many libertarians would conclude,

"Well, maybe George did do those things. Why would Wendy

make up a lie like that?.

Ghs

[George H. Smith]

Hey, Stephen kinsella!

I thought this might be a good time to comment on your criticism of my 1996 Liberty article on capital punishment. When some people asked if I was considering writing a reply, I replied that your article was so poorly done that it would be a waste of my time. For example:

Another problem with Smith’s assertion that rights are inalienable

is just that: it is merely an assertion. Simply labeling

rights over and over again with the modifier “inalienable” does

not make it so.12 Libertarians do not typically view rights as “inalienable”

in Smith’s sense, or put much weight on this concept.

In fact, viewing rights as alienable is perfectly consistent with—

indeed, implied by—the libertarian non-aggression principle.13

Under this principle, only the initiation of force is prohibited;

defensive, restitutive, or retaliatory force is not. One does alienate

or forfeit certain rights by committing acts of aggression. This

is exactly why it is permissible to use force to defend against or

punish aggression, or to obtain restitution. One has a natural, not

inalienable, right to be free from aggression.

http://mises.org/journals/jls/14_1/14_1_4.pdf

It was immediately obvious to me that you have no comprehension of what it means to accept a premise as given in order to explore its implications. You also have no comprehension of what "inalienable" means or the crucial function that inalienable rights have played in social contract theory. In short, on this topic you have the knowledge of an eggplant and the understanding of a pear.

I look foward to reading your reply.

Ghs

[Robert Campbell]

3. Between 1999 and 2011, I sent Wendy exactly one email around six years go. I asked if she would be interested in resolving our dispute and that if I didn't hear back from her, I wouldn't send any more emails. No more emails were sent.

George,

Did you send this email before or after September 9, 2004?

That's the date of the first entry in Wendy McElroy's Domestic Violence blog.

Robert Campbell

[Brant Gaede]

George's post #212 addresses Wendy's training, which sounds quite suspect.

Psychotherapy is a complex thing and effective work I suspect rare. I had a year with Nathaniel Branden during what I consider his classic period (mid-70s). It was very effective for me but I suspect not for many others. Individual therapy in a group context has its pluses and minuses and many didn't seem to work and if you didn't work he didn't know you. If you pretended to work he didn't force the issue too much. It was always the client's responsibility to get something going. This is not the work you do with someone with severe problems nor did he accept those clients.

--Brant

Yesterday I revealed that, since 2004, Wendy has been claiming that I am a violent predator towards women, indeed, that I punched her so hard in the face one time that she permanently lost sight in one eye. This vicious lie was concocted to cover Wendy's plagiarism tracks.

Sorry, people, but all this seems a tad more significant than whether Wendy was a qualified Reichian therapist. Who gives a fuck?

Ghs

I'm pretty sure it's going to get far worse, George. She's laying smoke trying to avoid your documentable charges. This is standard tactic from the totalitarian left.

--Brant

[George H. Smith]

A few details:

The first (or nearly first) time I met Wendy was in 1975. I attended a lecture she gave on Reichian techniques for the UCLA psychology department. Wendy's lecture was well attended, well done, and well received. She held a workshop afterwards for faculty and grad students only.

I don't know what people think Reichian Therapy means, but Wendy never did conventional psychotherapy. All she did was a type of very specific technique in which pressure is applied to certain parts of the body in which "armoring" is present, e.g., knotted muscles.

Although I cannot recall the exact number, I believe Wendy had around 300 hours of supervised training before setting out on her own. The conflict with her former lover, licensed trainer and, I believe, certified psychotherapist, was that many of his clients followed her after she went her own way. In fact, he sued Wendy for damages. I accompanied Wendy to court when that revenge-inspired case was dismissed within ten minutes.

Wendy had a loyal clientèle who spoke highly of her and remained with her for years. I was impressed by how much money Wendy made per hour. She made a decent living just by working on weekends.

Wendy and I talked a lot about the ideas of Freud and Reich. I was very critical and apparently argued a little too well. When Wendy came to agree with my criticisms, she quit doing Reichian therapy, explaining that she couldn't continue to charge people for something she no longer believed in. Although this decision cut deeply into our income, I admired Wendy for making it.

It may seem strange to see me defending Wendy's ability and integrity, but Wendy was not always the Darth Vader character she later became. These were her Anakin Years.

Ghs

[George H. Smith]

I'm pretty sure it's going to get far worse, George. She's laying smoke trying to avoid your documentable charges. This is standard tactic from the totalitarian left.

--Brant

No offense, Brant, but your prediction falls into the category of No Shit, Sherlock!

[George H. Smith]

3. Between 1999 and 2011, I sent Wendy exactly one email around six years go. I asked if she would be interested in resolving our dispute and that if I didn't hear back from her, I wouldn't send any more emails. No more emails were sent.

George,

Did you send this email before or after September 9, 2004?

That's the date of the first entry in Wendy McElroy's Domestic Violence blog.

Robert Campbell

I don't recall. But, yes, this a very interesting correlation. It seems that every time, however infrequently, I have sent Wendy an email, she has gone ballistic.

One thing that I noticed about Wendy, years before any of this plagiarism crap occurred, was how easily she was able to convince herself that something that never happened actually did happen. I am not saying she did this consciously and deliberately. This was an odd feature of Wendy's incredibly complex mind that I could never figure out.

I had many discussions and arguments with Wendy about this. For example, one night, as we were driving home from a libertarian supper club in Orange County, Wendy became very agitated as she recounted how badly some woman had treated her. I had been standing next to Wendy during the entire conversation, and she knew I had, so there was no question that Wendy was attempting to deceive me. She was very sincere.

Now, the woman had in fact said those rude things to Wendy; Wendy recounted those remarks verbatim. But this had not been a one-way steet; Wendy had said equally rude things to her. Nevertheless, Wendy told me a story, in all sincerity, that left out half the real story. Wendy didn't change any facts; she simply omitted half of them, and she didn't have any awareness of having done so.

This was early in our relationship, so I didn't know how to handle it. I listened for ten minutes as I drove on the freeway to our Hollywood home, and I became increasingly annoyed. The following conversation ensued:

"Wendy, I understand what you're saying, but there is more to the story."

"You were there. You heard what she said."

"Yes, she said those things, but you said a lot of things as well."

"What did I say?"

It was clear that I had ventured into territory where no man should dare to go, and things rapidly degenerated from there.

This was not the typical "Do you think this outfit makes me look fat?" or "How old do you think I look?" death trap that can throw even the most rational man into an an irrational panic. A lot more was going on.

Ghs

[Brant Gaede]

A few details:

The first (or nearly first) time I met Wendy was in 1975. I attended a lecture she gave on Reichian techniques for the UCLA psychology department. Wendy's lecture was well attended, well done, and well received. She held a workshop afterwards for faculty and grad students only.

I don't know what people think Reichian Therapy means, but Wendy never did conventional psychotherapy. All she did was a type of very specific technique in which pressure is applied to certain parts of the body in which "armoring" is present, e.g., knotted muscles.

Although I cannot recall the exact number, I believe Wendy had around 300 hours of supervised training before setting out on her own. The conflict with her former lover, licensed trainer and, I believe, certified psychotherapist, was that many of his clients followed her after she went her own way. In fact, he sued Wendy for damages. I accompanied Wendy to court when that revenge-inspired case was dismissed within ten minutes.

Wendy had a loyal clientèle who spoke highly of her and remained with her for years. I was impressed by how much money Wendy made per hour. She made a decent living just by working on weekends.

Wendy and I talked a lot about the ideas of Freud and Reich. I was very critical and apparently argued a little too well. When Wendy came to agree with my criticisms, she quit doing Reichian therapy, explaining that she couldn't continue to charge people for something she no longer believed in. Although this decision cut deeply into our income, I admired Wendy for making it.

It may seem strange to see me defending Wendy's ability and integrity, but Wendy was not always the Darth Vader character she later became. These were her Anakin Years.

Ghs

This sounds like a first cousin to rolfing.

--Brant

[George H. Smith]

A few details:

The first (or nearly first) time I met Wendy was in 1975. I attended a lecture she gave on Reichian techniques for the UCLA psychology department. Wendy's lecture was well attended, well done, and well received. She held a workshop afterwards for faculty and grad students only.

I don't know what people think Reichian Therapy means, but Wendy never did conventional psychotherapy. All she did was a type of very specific technique in which pressure is applied to certain parts of the body in which "armoring" is present, e.g., knotted muscles.

Although I cannot recall the exact number, I believe Wendy had around 300 hours of supervised training before setting out on her own. The conflict with her former lover, licensed trainer and, I believe, certified psychotherapist, was that many of his clients followed her after she went her own way. In fact, he sued Wendy for damages. I accompanied Wendy to court when that revenge-inspired case was dismissed within ten minutes.

Wendy had a loyal clientèle who spoke highly of her and remained with her for years. I was impressed by how much money Wendy made per hour. She made a decent living just by working on weekends.

Wendy and I talked a lot about the ideas of Freud and Reich. I was very critical and apparently argued a little too well. When Wendy came to agree with my criticisms, she quit doing Reichian therapy, explaining that she couldn't continue to charge people for something she no longer believed in. Although this decision cut deeply into our income, I admired Wendy for making it.

It may seem strange to see me defending Wendy's ability and integrity, but Wendy was not always the Darth Vader character she later became. These were her Anakin Years.

Ghs

This sounds like a first cousin to rolfing.

--Brant

Yes, but I think Reichian Therapy was the mother of everything else.

Ghs

[Martin Radwin]

d. When I opened the suite of offices, McElroy used one room, which I had soundproofed, for her "Reichian therapy." The business sign on our door read: "George H. Smith, Forum for Philosophical Studies. Wendy McElroy, Personal Consultant." I was paid for teaching philosophy, including FOR. McElroy was paid for pinching and punching nude bodies. We used the offices at different times, owing to the screams that would frequently emanate from her room and disrupt my classes.

George,

Wendy was practicing "Reichian therapy"? Did she have any training in this area? I know of one branch of therapy that was largely based on some of Reich's work on emotions and their relationship to the body. It is called Radix. As I recall, Nathaniel Branden was himself an advocate of Radix therapy and had at least a casual friendship with Charles Kelley. Many years ago, I actually took a couple of Radix workshops and was very impressed with what I saw and experienced. The Radix Institute offers training programs for Radix teachers. I think these are two year training programs. After watching the work of an experienced Radix therapist, I do not think that this kind of work could be competently performed by someone who had not had at least a year or two of training. On the other hand, your description of "pinching and punching nude bodies" does not sound very much like what an experienced Radix therapist would do. Where did Wendy get the idea that she was qualified to perform this kind of work?

Martin

I'm sure George can provide a more thorough answer than I can. However I am not aware that Wendy had or has any formal training in psychology or psychotherapy of any kind. Since I actually am a psychologist (with a Ph.D. and many years of college teaching), I understandably look askance at such behavior. As for how she got the idea that she was qualified, George will have to answer that. I can only tell you what people I knew were saying about her in the early 80s--that when she was dating a psychologist, she fancied herself a psychologist; when she was dating a poet, she imagined herself to be a poet; when she was dating a historian (George), she decided she was a historian. She has, to my knowledge, no formal training in any of these areas.

Sharon,

As a professional psychologist, have you studied Reichian types of therapy involving body work? If so, what is your opinion of this type of therapy? Do you think that it is a valid type of therapy that has at least the potential to produce good results? Or do you think that it is basically worthless?

Martin

[Brant Gaede]

Yes, but I think Reichian Therapy was the mother of everything else.

Ghs

Yeah, the guy who invented it was slammed by the Feds in the 1950s and died in prison.

--Brant

[George H. Smith]

Hey, Brad!

I just read your defense of Wendy the Pure on Amazon:

B. Rodriguez says:

Smith has been making these allegations, to no avail, for over twelve years. McElroy's 1998 reply establishing her authorship can still be read at her web site, http://www.wendymcelroy.com/reason/libel.htm

I don't think Wendy's 1998 defense will do the trick. True, you are Clueless Brad, but I hope you haven't become Clueless and Brain Dead Brad.

Nevertheless, it's good to know that you are still alive. I was afraid that you might have died from the loss of precious bodily fluids. Should you ever decide to go down fighting for Wendy the Pure, you can always leave your sandbox and defend her on OL, where the big boys play.

Cluck, cluck, cluck, cluck....

Ghs

[George H. Smith]

Yes, but I think Reichian Therapy was the mother of everything else.

Ghs

Yeah, the guy who invented it was slammed by the Feds in the 1950s and died in prison.

--Brant

Yes, but there is a long story here. I don't think the Feds gave a shit about the efficacy of Reichian Therapy. Moreover, Reich may have been something of a loon, but I don't think he was a fraud.

Ghs

[George H. Smith]

Sharon,

As a professional psychologist, have you studied Reichian types of therapy involving body work? If so, what is your opinion of this type of therapy? Do you think that it is a valid type of therapy that has at least the potential to produce good results? Or do you think that it is basically worthless?

Martin

According to some Reichians, once you eliminate armoring so that energy can flow freely throughout the body, you will experience full-body orgasms.

I can't say that I have ever experienced a full-body orgasm; none of my orgasms has wandered far from Ground Zero. But I sure have had a lot of fun trying.

Ghs

[George H. Smith]

From Amazon:

Starbuckle says:

Contra B. Rodriguez, George H. Smith has abundantly documented Wendy McElroy's plagiarism of his work, indeed to some avail. Sharon Presley (with much first-hand knowledge of both parties and the manuscript from which McElroy lifted), Robert Campbell, and other distinguished persons find Smith's evidence credible. Those who wish to learn more about Smith's evidence and how he has responded to McElroy's evolving counter-arguments, including those hosted at wendymcelroy.com, should review Smith's documentation at ObjectivistLiving.com. See "My Amazon Review of 'The Reasonable Woman,' allegedly by Wendy McElroy," located at objectivistliving.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=9928&st=0 [

"...McElroy's evolving counter-arguments."

Classic, absolutely classic.

Many thanks for your support.

Ghs

[slpresley]

I posted this earlier on Atlantis II:

Have you seen the latest on OL? Since 2004, Wendy has been

claiming that I physically abused her, Annie, and my wife

Laura. Wendy claimed that I punched her so hard one time

that she permanently lost vision in one eye. It has taken

her years to get over the trauma, especially since I have

stalked her through all those years. All this ties in,

apparently, to why I initiated my vicious campaign against

her.

When are libertarians going to stand up and express outrage

over this psychopath" -The woman has become a lunatic. What

kind of person makes up this kind of shit?

Wendy never presents evidence for anything. She just pulls

shit out of thin air. And some people take her seriously.

Wendy could claim that I belong to a Satanic cult that

roasts babies, that I cut the nipples off of 13 year old

girls -- she could claim anything she wants about me with no

evidence whatsoever, and many libertarians would conclude,

"Well, maybe George did do those things. Why would Wendy

make up a lie like that?.

Ghs

Why indeed would Wendy make up such a lie? Actually, many potential reasons. She plagiarized his book, he rejected her, he is not willing to play her games. Psychologically IMO that is more than adequate motivation for a person who clearly has personal demons. In the first instance, a red herring to distract from the plagiarism claim; in the second two, petty revenge.

I have known George since the early 80s. As I stated before, I knew him when he was with Wendy, I knew him when he was with Laura. I was at George and Laura's place many times. Not only did I NEVER see any indications or signs of domestic violence, the idea is absurd on the face of it. Speaking not only as a friend of George's but as a psychologist and feminist who is very concerned with issues of domestic violence and who takes that issue quite seriously, I categorically state that IMO these claims of Wendy's are simply vicious lies. Like all human beings, George has faults. Bing violent toward anyone, let alone women, is not one of them. I will stake my (considerable) reputation on it. If I were not completely certain of George's innocence in all these matters, I would not go public and risk the possibility of a law suit nor damage to my reputation.

[George H. Smith]

Like all human beings, George has faults.

Faults? Moi?

Thanks again, Sharon.

Ghs

[slpresley]

d. When I opened the suite of offices, McElroy used one room, which I had soundproofed, for her "Reichian therapy." The business sign on our door read: "George H. Smith, Forum for Philosophical Studies. Wendy McElroy, Personal Consultant." I was paid for teaching philosophy, including FOR. McElroy was paid for pinching and punching nude bodies. We used the offices at different times, owing to the screams that would frequently emanate from her room and disrupt my classes.

George,

Wendy was practicing "Reichian therapy"? Did she have any training in this area? I know of one branch of therapy that was largely based on some of Reich's work on emotions and their relationship to the body. It is called Radix. As I recall, Nathaniel Branden was himself an advocate of Radix therapy and had at least a casual friendship with Charles Kelley. Many years ago, I actually took a couple of Radix workshops and was very impressed with what I saw and experienced. The Radix Institute offers training programs for Radix teachers. I think these are two year training programs. After watching the work of an experienced Radix therapist, I do not think that this kind of work could be competently performed by someone who had not had at least a year or two of training. On the other hand, your description of "pinching and punching nude bodies" does not sound very much like what an experienced Radix therapist would do. Where did Wendy get the idea that she was qualified to perform this kind of work?

Martin

I'm sure George can provide a more thorough answer than I can. However I am not aware that Wendy had or has any formal training in psychology or psychotherapy of any kind. Since I actually am a psychologist (with a Ph.D. and many years of college teaching), I understandably look askance at such behavior. As for how she got the idea that she was qualified, George will have to answer that. I can only tell you what people I knew were saying about her in the early 80s--that when she was dating a psychologist, she fancied herself a psychologist; when she was dating a poet, she imagined herself to be a poet; when she was dating a historian (George), she decided she was a historian. She has, to my knowledge, no formal training in any of these areas.

Sharon,

As a professional psychologist, have you studied Reichian types of therapy involving body work? If so, what is your opinion of this type of therapy? Do you think that it is a valid type of therapy that has at least the potential to produce good results? Or do you think that it is basically worthless?

Martin

Martin:

I am not a clinical psychologist, my field is social psychology. So my response, while informed, is not expert. I have not studied Reichian therapy, but here's my general take on therapy. There is no magic cure-all panacea one-size-fits-all therapy. Some types work for some people and not others. The idea that many people in some sense store up their problems in a physical way is not especially controversial. Stress and other psychological issues may manifest themselves in tight muscles, ulcers, IBS, headaches and many other ways, even conversion reactions (unconsciously converting a hidden psychological problem into a physical symptom). Thus a physical therapy may be beneficial to some people, along with more conventional talk therapy. I can't speak for Reichian therapy per se but the idea is not worthless on the face of it. However, I will also state that many profs of clinical psychology would take the stand that any therapy should only be done by people well-trained. Hypnosis, for example, can have value, but untrained people can do considerable damage if issues they are not expecting or trained to deal with surface. Whether this is a potential problem with Reichian therapy I can't say for certain, but I am highly skeptical of amateur psychologists, to say the least. Just because someone has a psyche doesn't make them a psychologist. We didn't go to years of graduate school to learn what everybody else already knows. I'm not saying that one must have a Ph.D. or even an MA to do good therapy but one has to have some kind of rigorous training. IMO that requires systematic training though credible institutions, not merely reading a book on it!

[slpresley]

Like all human beings, George has faults.

Faults? Moi?

Thanks again, Sharon.

Ghs

Anyone who claims they have no faults is either a liar, psychopath, or narcissistic personality (that's an official diagnosis in the DSM). You are none of these. I know people who are and avoid them at all costs.

[slpresley]

George's post #212 addresses Wendy's training, which sounds quite suspect.

Psychotherapy is a complex thing and effective work I suspect rare. I had a year with Nathaniel Branden during what I consider his classic period (mid-70s). It was very effective for me but I suspect not for many others. Individual therapy in a group context has its pluses and minuses and many didn't seem to work and if you didn't work he didn't know you. If you pretended to work he didn't force the issue too much. It was always the client's responsibility to get something going. This is not the work you do with someone with severe problems nor did he accept those clients.

--Brant

Yesterday I revealed that, since 2004, Wendy has been claiming that I am a violent predator towards women, indeed, that I punched her so hard in the face one time that she permanently lost sight in one eye. This vicious lie was concocted to cover Wendy's plagiarism tracks.

Sorry, people, but all this seems a tad more significant than whether Wendy was a qualified Reichian therapist. Who gives a fuck?

Ghs

A good point! The claims about violence are the ones that needs to be aired and dealt with. I have commented elsewhere in this thread on the absurdity of her claims.

[Brant Gaede]

Sharon,

As a professional psychologist, have you studied Reichian types of therapy involving body work? If so, what is your opinion of this type of therapy? Do you think that it is a valid type of therapy that has at least the potential to produce good results? Or do you think that it is basically worthless?

Martin

According to some Reichians, once you eliminate armoring so that energy can flow freely throughout the body, you will experience full-body orgasms.

I can't say that I have ever experienced a full-body orgasm; none of my orgasms has wandered far from Ground Zero. But I sure have had a lot of fun trying.

Ghs

Uh, George, "Ground Zero"--isn't that your head--the big one?

--Brant

[George H. Smith]

Like all human beings, George has faults.

Faults? Moi?

Thanks again, Sharon.

Ghs

Anyone who claims they have no faults is either a liar, psychopath, or narcissistic personality (that's an official diagnosis in the DSM). You are none of these. I know people who are and avoid them at all costs.

I'm not familiar with the essential characteristics of a narcissistic personality, as that term is used in clinical psychology. If you or Robert would care to fill me in, I would be very interested.

Of course, I have no reason for asking this question. It is just a passing thought with no possible relevance to my life.

Ghs

[George H. Smith]

Sharon,

As a professional psychologist, have you studied Reichian types of therapy involving body work? If so, what is your opinion of this type of therapy? Do you think that it is a valid type of therapy that has at least the potential to produce good results? Or do you think that it is basically worthless?

Martin

According to some Reichians, once you eliminate armoring so that energy can flow freely throughout the body, you will experience full-body orgasms.

I can't say that I have ever experienced a full-body orgasm; none of my orgasms has wandered far from Ground Zero. But I sure have had a lot of fun trying.

Ghs

Uh, George, "Ground Zero"--isn't that your head--the big one?

--Brant

For me, the Little Head -- using the term "little" in a nervously metaphorical sense -- has always been Ground Zero. It points the way, and the Big Head maps out a route to the destination.

In other words, I am like every other guy.

Ghs