One of the best shows on TV that I’ve recently discovered is “In Treatment”, an HBO show about a therapist dealing with his patients and with the turmoils of his own personal life. What makes this show so unique is that the show runs for a half an hour consecutively five days a week and shows the actual therapy sessions. There’s a lot of talk and little action, but the writing is very sharp, the characters are complex and interesting, and the dynamic between Paul, the therapist played by Gabriel Byrne, and his patients is intense and intriguing. So far I’ve caught up with the entire season 1 and have not yet started on season 2.

Despite the many outstanding qualities of the show, I do have some gripes with the way that Paul is conducting his therapy. Now this may be a fault of Paul’s psychoanalytic background or just his own personal lack of insight, but I can point my finger on several instances, and one in particular where Paul does more harm than good.

In this particular example, a couple- Amy and Jake- come to Paul initially because they are unsure whether or not to keep Amy’s pregnancy. Amy has fears about having the baby because she has horrible postpartum depression when her first son was born, while Jake wants her to keep the baby. As time goes on, it becomes clear that their conflict over the baby is a microcosm of their difficulties in the relationship in general.  It turns out that Amy was previously married to another man when she first met Jake, who was a poor struggling musician. However, what turned her on about Jake was that he was everything her ex-husband was not- dominant, masculine and aggressive. She even confided to Paul that she had a fantasy about the first time that she and Jake had sex, that they went horse back riding and then he commanded her to get off and take off all her clothes. Her ex husband had been some boring, stuffy executive and she suddenly felt more alive with Jake, who was living a more rugged, masculine lifestyle. She ended up leaving her husband and marrying Jake, but the fairy tale does not end there with a happy ending. Apparently, as it turns out, Jake wasn’t the masculine, confident man she had envisioned that she was marrying. In fact, as time went on, he became more and more of an insecure, whiny, needy, doormat. Of course readers of this site know how women react to such traits in men, but what’s worse here is that she feels that he somehow tricked her by appearing initially as the confident man she craved, but revealing himself later to be as weak as her previous husband.

This is all well and dandy, and is very similar to the predicaments of countless other couples out there in the world today. But where the problem comes in is how Paul handles the situation. Once again, I’m not sure if this failing is more due to his training or his poor judgment, but at one point Paul actually instructs Jake to tell Amy how he feels by airing out all his emotions on the couch. What happens is almost embarrassing to describe as Jake weeps his eyes out, pleading with Amy with such atrocities as “please take me back” and “I don’t want you to leave me” and “I need you.” Paul sits back with a content look on his face, feeling proud that his patient had the strength and courage to show his vulnerability to his wife. Meanwhile, instead of warming up, Amy grows increasingly contemptuous and insulting with Jake, as if his vulnerability disgusted her even further. The end result of this pathetic piece of weepiness? Amy goes and cheats on Jake with her boss the very next week. Job well done, shrink.

Lesson to be learned: Doesn’t matter how much training or theory someone has, don’t let them pursuade you that showing weakness is actually strength. There is a time and place to SELECTIVELY show weakness to your woman, but it isn’t by breaking down on a couch, begging for her to stay. Remember guys, if you want to keep your woman’s attraction, act with all the masculine traits that women crave.