Beware

THEY RELEASED THE COYOTE VS ACME TRAILER !!!!!

WE WON !!!

“Dick Schwartz [founder of IFS] started calling them ‘critters’ a long time ago,” Falconer tells me. “They had a staff meeting at one point, and changed the name to Unattached Burdens, because it makes it sound a little more academically acceptable. This idea is like the third rail, and Dick’s terrified it’s going to destroy the reputation of IFS. But I thought it was so important that I wouldn’t shut up about it. It led to me being exiled from the IFS community for a while. Finally [Schwartz] came around and wrote the foreword to my book, and now they’re talking about it in Level 1 training.” [...] A core IFS dogma is “there are no bad parts.” But it turns out this is not entirely true. There are some parts that are not part of your Self. On the positive side, there are the “guides,” or angelic beings. And there are Unattached Burdens, UBs, or what are traditionally known as “djinns” or “demons.” As Falconer said, UBs have been a bit of an IFS secret, only taught in Level 3 training until recently. But a year ago, he published his book about UBs, with a foreword by Dick Schwartz and praise from other leading IFS therapists. This book has been pretty influential in IFS, underground psychedelic culture (where Falconer is active), and the wider New Age / spiritual culture. (He was interviewed on the Emerge podcast and the Stoa has launched a talk series dedicated to the topic.) Demonic entities are having a moment. 

article

reportedly, many IFS therapists are now routinely informing patients that they are possessed by demons lol

Here’s another client who emailed me: “I’ve been seeing my psychologist who specializes in trauma therapy for about 10 months now. I made it clear that I was not interested in anything spiritual because I had a lot of that pressed on me, and I wanted to set my boundaries…After our meeting on Tuesday, when I discussed a very frightening embodiment of what I would call the abyss, or death, which I felt had its sights set on me….she told me she thought I had an unattached burden. At first, I was interested, thinking it was some kind of trauma thing, and then my heart sank. And then I got really pissed off. I have suffered from delusions in the past, she knows that. I have experienced psychosis in the past. I have been expressing very suicidal thoughts, and I’m in one of the most vulnerable times of my life, certainly of my adult life. I feel disrespected, but more than anything, I feel, honestly, it’s kind of disgusted with the fact that she could say something so irresponsible to somebody in my situation.” IFS therapists can dismiss all these examples as “bad IFS,” but it seems there is clearly a risk of IFS therapists and coaches suggesting or imposing the idea of a UB, and clients finding it harmful — even more so if they’re working with clients taking psychedelics, which amplify suggestibility. In his book, one observer even tells Falconer it looks like he’s making hypnotic suggestions: “Participant 1: [Falconer], it seems like you implanted a lot of little suggestions, almost like a hypnotist. Falconer: Well, there is a general principle here. These things are often full of pride, and you can use their pride to manipulate them. “ In other words, Falconer thinks he is hypnotically manipulating the UB rather than the client… I emailed the IFS Institute to ask if they wanted to comment on these issues, but didn’t hear back.

I had already put IFS on my mental list of "therapies I do not recommend people look into anymore" (I'm an editor specializing in psychology and mental health books, and I have worked in mental health in the past), specifically because I think the idea that you should view the different "parts" of yourself as a "family system" that helps you live in the world and navigate it effectively and as a person is.............

A blatantly terrible idea for a modality of trauma therapy, mostly.

Such a huge portion of people with trauma - especially severe, complex, and/or developmental trauma - have family as a major source of trauma. So the idea of "ah our revolutionary trauma modality helps people by making them compare all the different parts of themselves as family members!" sounds massively, massively counterproductive and retraumatizing for a lot of people.

But this is unethical and counterproductive and harmful on a whole new entire order of magnitude.

This is especially alarming in the context of how IFS says people's brains work:

From the description of IFS founder Dick Schwartz's book No Bad Parts:

Is there just one “you”? We’ve been taught to believe we have a single identity, and to feel fear or shame when we can’t control the inner voices that don’t match the ideal of who we think we should be. Yet Dr. Richard Schwartz’s research now challenges this “mono-mind” theory. “All of us are born with many sub-minds―or parts,” says Dr. Schwartz. “These parts are not imaginary or symbolic. They are individuals who exist as an internal family within us...”

Sooo that sure sounds like an efficient way to make your trauma clients dissociate from themselves MORE and view themselves as a functional and independent person LESS, imho. And I really, really don't like how it looks in combination with the articles and info in prev.

Aslso, peaking of "this is basically Scientology," gotta say, the part where historically they didn't mention an Entire Category of their system (UBs), which actually breaks their beginner definition of IFS by its actual text, sure sounds like "Insider vs. Outsider Doctrine" aka an informational practice literally considered a cult tactic.

the flightless cormorant, sometimes known as the galápagos cormorant, is a unique cormorant species endemic to the galapágos - they are found along the rocky coastlines of the isabela and fernandina islands. they are the only example of a cormorant that has lost the ability to fly through evolution. this evolution initially occurred due to the birds being found on an island free of predators - however, human introduction of cats, dogs, and pigs has made survival more challenging without flight. they are classified in genus nannopterum, alongside the neotropic cormorant & double crested cormorant. they are the largest living member of their family at 2.5–5.0 kg (5.5–11.0 lb), though their wings are approximately one-third of the size that would be necessary for a bird of this weight to take off. the sexes are similar in appearance, with blackish upperparts and a brown underside; however, males are larger and heavier than females. the flightless cormorant’s keel (an extension of the breastbone, where muscles needed for flight attach) is also significantly reduced compared to other cormorants. however, flightless cormorants are still adept hunters whose webbed feet and powerful legs help propel them underwater in pursuit of their prey. these birds feed near the sea floor, with their diet consisting of fish, octopi, and other small marine mammals. surprisingly, despite being birds who feed by diving underwater, the flightless cormorant shares a trait found across cormorants - their feathers are not waterproof. they spend time after each dive drying off in the sunlight in preparation for their next hunt. their hair-like, dense body feathers trap air, which prevents the birds from becoming waterlogged. the flightless cormorant is currently listed as ‘vulnerable’ by the IUCN due to their limited range and population size.