Jonah Hill's alleged text messages show that 'therapy-speak' is officially out of control


Over the weekend, Jonah Hill's ex-girlfriend Sarah Brady took to Instagram to post some alleged text messages from the 21 Jump Street actor. The screenshots were eye-opening: Hill allegedly told the professional surfer that surfing with men, posting photos he deemed sexual, and even some of her friendships with certain women went against his boundaries.

"I've made my boundaries clear," said Hill, who directed a documentary with his therapist last year. "It's not my place to teach you," he apparently texted.

This type of "therapy-speak" — when people throw around terms like "boundaries," "self-care," and "toxic" — has become increasingly popular. The phrases can be useful in helping people stick up for themselves in unhealthy relationships, but some therapists warn that therapy-speak has, ironically enough, been used to justify some self-centered, boundaryless behavior.

People might flake on friends in the name of giving themselves space, and relationship psychologist Esther Perel recently commented that therapy-speak is making us lonelier as we prioritize ourselves over our relationships.

Isabelle Morley, a licensed clinical psychologist who specializes in couples therapy, told Insider that while we should take stories from anyone in the public eye with a grain of salt (as we only know one side of the relationship), she found Hill's texts concerning.

"If we take it at face value, it seems like concerning behavior because it's controlling somebody's actions," she said.

While therapy-speak might sound healthy and mature, it can also be a tool for emotional abuse and manipulation.

Boundaries should never be about controlling someone

In the simplest terms, boundaries indicate what we will and won't allow in our relationships. But people's understanding of them can get murky, according to Morley.

"Setting a healthy boundary means indicating what you're comfortable with — what your limits are all to protect your well-being and mental health," she said.

Examples of boundaries include when you're ready to have sex with someone or not tolerating name-calling from a partner.

Simply put: Boundaries are rules that you impose on yourself, not another person.

But in Hill's situation, his idea of setting boundaries was dictating what Brady wore, what kinds of pictures she took, and who she spent time with.

Morley said that if a person is uncomfortable with their partner's lifestyle or choices, it's their responsibility to decide if they want to date them, rather than try to alter their behavior.

It's also natural for boundaries to be violated

The texts that Brady posted also highlighted another dynamic: Brady's apparent fear of always doing something wrong. She allegedly paddled away from men when surfing and deleted posts that Hill disapproved of.

Morley said that even with healthy boundaries, it's important to know that everyone violates boundaries occasionally because we can't always know every boundary a person has.

"It's not abusive to violate people's boundaries if you weren't aware," Morley said. "There has to be room for boundary violations and then healthy conversations after the fact."

If you feel preoccupied with identifying what is and isn't a boundary violation around a person, that could be a sign that something's amiss in the relationship.

Healthy dialogue involves opening up about your feelings

What was missing from Hill's texts was how he actually feels, Morley said. He's clear about what he finds unacceptable in Brady — but he's never vulnerable or explains why he feels the way he does.

"That is where the real work of a relationship is," Morley said. "It's not 'respect this boundary or get out.'"

For example, Morley said that he could have opened up a conversation by stating his insecurities. Maybe he was hurt in the past and felt incredibly jealous when other men spoke to Brady. The onus wouldn't be on Brady to change, but on both of them to find a solution together as a couple.

"All feelings are okay — jealousy is okay, insecurity is okay," Morley said. "How you react and respond to them is what matters."
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I read the texts and he outright says, “If you need to do these (whorish) things, do them, but I am not the partner for you.” How is that controlling? This “controversy” is absurd and I feel like no one is talking about the insane violation of privacy of having an ex release those personal texts for all to see on a huge social media platform.
 
I've been wondering why we're being urged to form a mob against this random shmuck and I think I've settled on a hypothesis- they're setting up the narrative and planting the seeds for a campaign to demonize not only monogamy and the default expectation thereof ("if you wanna be with me, don't prance around in your undies with other guys") but the whole idea of sexual boundaries. The whole thing. Think about it. We have heard being gay or straight demonized as "genital fetishism" and we have these constant "nudge" pieces urging guys to look at gay porn and get pegged in order to somehow become more broad-minded. (Women already got successfully brainwashed with the "lesbian chic" fad of the 90s and are now default identifying as bisexual.)

Making it a backwards or "abusive" thing to have sexual boundaries, to say no to whatever globohomo wants to shove in your orifices, is a necessary step if their end game really is going to be to come for the kids openly.
 
I've been wondering why we're being urged to form a mob against this random shmuck and I think I've settled on a hypothesis- they're setting up the narrative and planting the seeds for a campaign to demonize not only monogamy and the default expectation thereof ("if you wanna be with me, don't prance around in your undies with other guys") but the whole idea of sexual boundaries. The whole thing. Think about it. We have heard being gay or straight demonized as "genital fetishism" and we have these constant "nudge" pieces urging guys to look at gay porn and get pegged in order to somehow become more broad-minded. (Women already got successfully brainwashed with the "lesbian chic" fad of the 90s and are now default identifying as bisexual.)

Making it a backwards or "abusive" thing to have sexual boundaries, to say no to whatever globohomo wants to shove in your orifices, is a necessary step if their end game really is going to be to come for the kids openly.
Romans 1 said:
For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with omen and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.

And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. Though they know God's righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.

Modern mass media makes it hard to believe that Paul's letter is almost 2,000 years old.
 
"Look, therapy speak was for us women to control men and make them feel like shit for not doing what we want, not otherwise, ok? That's not how it works!"

Ah, fuck these people.

All couples make compromises in their relationships. In a very realistic scenario, it's almost a given that both parts have to sacrifice something for the good of the couple. That's not necessarily a bad thing. Women have become too spoiled, thinking men should sacrifice everything for them, but not otherwise, and that's not fair. I've met women who get mad when their boyfriends/husbands go out with their friends, but then demand themselves to have "free time" with their own friends because they deserve free time.

Honestly, it's for the best that he put all his demands on the table since the beginning of the relationship. I once dated an asshole who did so after a fight we had after about a year of dating. Turned out I was doing everything wrong because I wasn't up to his own standards, which he never specified to me. Hill's approach is in fact healthy: "I expect this about our relationship and if you can't do it, then you're free to go".
 
We have heard being gay or straight demonized as "genital fetishism" and we have these constant "nudge" pieces urging guys to look at gay porn and get pegged in order to somehow become more broad-minded. (Women already got successfully brainwashed with the "lesbian chic" fad of the 90s and are now default identifying as bisexual.)

This makes me think of how women have been socialized to refer to their boyfriends as their "partner."

On twitter somebody posted "Women in their 20s will be saying 'my partner' when it's really her boyfriend named Matt." And some socialist e-girl walked into the rake and replied, "ACTUALLY, I do this because it helps normalize queer relationships."
 
I read the texts and he outright says, “If you need to do these (whorish) things, do them, but I am not the partner for you.” How is that controlling? This “controversy” is absurd and I feel like no one is talking about the insane violation of privacy of having an ex release those personal texts for all to see on a huge social media platform.
No one has the right to reject a woman, for any reason. It's mean. Having boundaries is mean.
 
Yeah, I'm not going to feel bad for yet another mediocre Hollywood nepotism project being eaten alive by fellow woke-oids.

jonah hill.png
 

Healthy dialogue involves opening up about your feelings

What was missing from Hill's texts was how he actually feels, Morley said. He's clear about what he finds unacceptable in Brady — but he's never vulnerable or explains why he feels the way he does.
Anisa telling the world Ian is incontinent is the perfect example of why not to. You can't be vulnerable with a malicious or narcissistic person, because they'll use it to mock you publicly. Guess how trustworthy a self-centered golddigging whore is.
"That is where the real work of a relationship is," Morley said. "It's not 'respect this boundary or get out.'"
She's a licensed psychologist specializing in couples therapy, and she doesn't know what an ultimatum is?
For example, Morley said that he could have opened up a conversation by stating his insecurities. Maybe he was hurt in the past and felt incredibly jealous when other men spoke to Brady. The onus wouldn't be on Brady to change, but on both of them to find a solution together as a couple.
The presumption is on his having insecurities, rather than her behavior being unacceptable. "Find a solution together as a couple" sometimes means an ultimatum. An alcoholic would have the sole onus to change. So would a whore.
 
Ever since he became thin and pushed back at being a fat punching bag or a punchline after getting fit, he's been real incompatible with people in general. The only time I see him on youtube clips is clashing with other people who expect him to be the fat, funny chill guy he was in movies like Accepted, and he's not. He's an uptight C-lister who justifiably got thin and now demands respect. But nobody wants to give you respect when you just make everyone uncomfortable, they want to get laughs out around you.

I don't know how I feel about another #MeToo accusation, gaslighting women is not a crime, but it's easy to accuse anyone of it and get tons of pity points. If you don't like where you're at, move on bitch. But on the other hand Jonah Hill seems annoying in the Current Year and is probably easily seen as a stepping stone to cooler boyfriends in Hollywood. Two terrible people who deserve the grief they're giving each other.
 
Ever since he became thin and pushed back at being a fat punching bag or a punchline after getting fit, he's been real incompatible with people in general. The only time I see him on youtube clips is clashing with other people who expect him to be the fat, funny chill guy he was in movies like Accepted, and he's not. He's an uptight C-lister who justifiably got thin and now demands respect. But nobody wants to give you respect when you just make everyone uncomfortable, they want to get laughs out around you.

I don't know how I feel about another #MeToo accusation, gaslighting women is not a crime, but it's easy to accuse anyone of it and get tons of pity points. If you don't like where you're at, move on bitch. But on the other hand Jonah Hill seems annoying in the Current Year and is probably easily seen as a stepping stone to cooler boyfriends in Hollywood. Two terrible people who deserve the grief they're giving each other.
He's not a comedian. That requires doing stand-up. He's just some nobodoy that cut in-line into show business because he's a connected trust-fund baby.
 
Back