THE QUEEN OF CAVEATS

"Disclaimers" I want to acknowledge

I believe psychology is not always like the hard sciences or maths where there are concrete right and wrong answers. Sometimes there are, but more often, psychology is much more subjective.

I write from my clinical perspective after studying psychology, being trained as a therapist, seeing clients AND I want to make it very transparent that I write from my personal biases because I am still me - with my life story and all of the experiences that have shaped who I am up to this point.

I don't believe it is possible for any therapist, or anyone for that matter, to ever be totally objective so I don't want to pretend that just because I am a therapist, I have this magical ability to come to any of these topics I write about objectively. It's like when a jury hears something in court, only to be told to "disregard that last statement". I never understand this because we can't unhear something we've already heard --- just like I can't truly ever be unbiased or totally objective nor do I think that is being a good therapist.

When my clients directly ask me for advice, I do give it but I make sure I also tell them that if they lined up 10 psychotherapists, they would likely hear 10 different perspectives because most of the time, when it comes to the nuances of our lives and human emotions, there is not one correct answer.

In other words, I am the Queen of Caveats -- or what I call the "bare in minds" -- because I could put caveats practically in every other sentence. Andy Roddick- a former tennis player I love- turned podcaster- who I refer to in one of my F1 articles (and whom I will probably refer to in other articles) says he has "strong opinions loosely held". I think it was a quote he borrowed from somoene else maybe?

Well, I would say I have incredibly strong opinions loosely held --- but I am not set in my ways. I'm always asking questions, trying to learn, reading, and I always try to defer to people who are smarter and more informed than I am which is usually most people so I rarely think I'm right - thus, my need for caveats.

When I say caveats, I should give an example of what I mean: in my article about the negative drill sargeant versus the positive cheerleader, I wanted to include the "caveat" that I recognize that the the symbols of the drill sargeant and cheerleader fit the gender stereotypes and I apologize for that BUT I'm just going to go with it anyways. I know we live in a very charged world right now with gender sterotyping and people are very sensitive to this right now but I'm not going to bother changing their genders, making them "they/thems" or gender neutral etc etc. because I felt that would distract from the point of my article so I just left them as they were with the stereotypical man as the drill sargeant and the cheerleader as a woman.

Another caveat I thought of putting in that article is that I felt bad even writing the article in ithe first place because Hamilton and Norris don't need any more voices piling on giving their opinions about how to race or mentally prepare for a race blah blah blah... They have entire teams and strategists and I am guilty of the very thing Andy Roddick says not to do so I am a hyppocrite.

But again, if I keep adding caveats, pretty soon, I will talk myself out of writing anything ever!!

And I do want to help people and reach a broader audience by using real world accessible examples and applying them in relatable ways.

I do hold strong opinions about my core values which will probably come through in my articles. But always know you can challenge me on anything and everything -- just send me an email or text and I welcome any and all input! Truly :) Just not mean stuff :)

Here is another caveat: when I write about the psychology in F1 (or any sport or event in the media), I assume that from what I watch on the broadcasts and read in articles, I might be getting 1% out of the total 100% of what goes on in that world of whatever it is I am writing about. I see what Netflix shows me and what different news sources report and I understand that those sources often have their own biases.

So, please know that:

1.) I humbly acknowledge this and

2.) I don't presume to completely understand the psychology of any individual I write about

I write about F1 racing because I think it is a fascinating sport from a psychological perspective. There is so much intensity and emotional engagement between the teams and the drivers that it is dripping with psychology in a palpable way unlike any other sport I have ever seen. I never thought I would be interested in cars or in the sport but it is psychologically captivating.

And I have to confess, I do love sports. I have since I was little. If I could retire now, I think I would alternate my time between being out in nature --- in the wilderness and ocean, on beaches, and then check back into the world to see sporting events and, because of my love of Art and Architectural History as well, I would go to art museums and theatre.

I also write about movies, tv shows, events, and people in the public eye because all of this is so influential in American culture and in broader world culture. I sort of view this, on the one hand, as a negative but on the other hand, regardless of whether or not I like it, it is how the world is spreading information and connecting. So, I decided I might as well use the material we see in the news and throughout social media and analyze and learn from it because in that way, we are socially engaged and asking questions instead of just thoughtlessly ingesting what we are fed by the media.

I will add that I didn't often write about politics in America but since Trump was elected again, it is very hard for me because I no longer feel clear about what is the current political situation in America anymore. It is my feeling and strong belief that since Trump has been front and center in the political arena, the discussion in any and all news media should have ONLY been -- and should ONLY BE--- about FRAMING the discussion in terms of WHAT DOES THE UNITED STATES DO when someone with a severe mental illness wants to run for president or is now president?

Because we have a frightening narcissist - this is a severe mental health condition and it is a dangerous health condition for the world and he is in no mental health condition to run a country so it is just maddening and disillusioning to me.

So I encourage you to email me anytime if you read something I post that confuses you or that you disagree with or if you have any questions because I am happy to discuss any issues that arise from my posts. Ultimately, I went into the field of psychology to support people so hopefully, there will be things on here that can help!