[tw000001]

The first 12 years of your life are spent in the care of (ideally) parents who love you unconditionally and genuinely want you to succeed.

Under psychedelic therapy, you are at the mercy of your therapist. I'm not necessarily saying that these are bad people but a dangerous property of a soft science like psychology is that, in defining what falls within the range of normal the psychological establishment is effectively acting as an arbiter of culture. The particular personality changes that they may collectively recommend won't be necessarily be compatible with one's home culture.

Particularly when you consider that the establishment leans heavily left, meanwhile their views regarding aggression, emotional expression, gender roles, etc are fundamentally in conflict with many core tenants on the right. Learning to be less aggressive or more emotional can put you at a social disadvantage in other societies. Laypeople treat psychology as though its conclusions are as rigorous as physics but that's pure hubris - as evidenced by the thousands of successful cultures around the world with totally different approaches to many of the same issues.

[qntty]

Hmm I guess this a there's a lot to say about this. I'll just say two things. One, that most people (including maybe you) are more messed up than they think from childhood. Secondly, (and this is an even bigger issue) there's really no reason to worry about left-wing ideology putting you at a disadvantage socially. The left wouldn't be adopting these more "progressive" identities if they weren't socially advantageous within the social circles of the most powerful people in our society. It's true that being "soft" can be a disadvantage in a small rural area, but this will never be the case again among the American elite. You have to justify your dominance of the peasants somehow, and one way they do it is proving that they are more "evolved" than others.