Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy: It Works for Me - It Can Work for You Book

This is not an introduction to REBT. When Ellis describes how it worked for him, it's along the lines of: 'I just used the stage F of the ABC protocol (stage F: fuck those guys) to overcome this problem. The clearest summary of the general principles is in the appendix.
As a biography though, it's a very interesting read. Ellis describes his work creating REBT, the early life circumstances that helped to inspire his philosophy, the various personal events that he overcame with the power of REBT and his work as a radical, both politically and theraputically.
If this were a work of fiction, I would not hesitate to describe Ellis as an unreliable narrator. He is shameless in his own praise:
At first, I won few friends and influenced few people with my honesty and directness. But I courageously continued.
Phrases like this are hilarous in their arrogance, but Ellis is firm in his belief that we should not depend on the opinions of others - and I suppose, if the only opinion that gratifies you is your own, then why be modest? And history has largely proven Ellis right. In the 1950s psychotherapy was in its heydey in the USA, and when Ellis called it all out as bunk and moved towards the creation of REBT, this was an unthinkable move. Now, it is much more acceptable to say that not everybody wants to fuck their mother, and endlessly talking about your childhood may not necessarily help your agoraphobia.
Likewise, Ellis was an early and vigorous agitator before the sexual revolution for women's sexual rights, clitoral orgasms, gay rights and free love. It's hard now to really comprehend how dangerous and radical it was to be outspoken on these matters, when some of them have become common place. He practised what he preached, having open relationships with numerous women. Towards the end of the book, he says:
When therapists and clients briefly hear about my love and marital 'record' they sometimes conclude that I have 'trouble relating to women and am not to be trusted to counsel maritally inclined people. 'False' I say on several counts because I have probably helped more relating people than almost any other therapist and writer.
And I was twinged with guilt, because I had thought exactly this on reading of his sexual past. Ellis is apparently honest in his writing, describing his lovers in unflattering terms such as 'hopelessly screwy'. His relationship with his first wife sounds like a clusterfuck of passive-aggressive, needy, co-dependent bullshit. Their relationship includes a secret marriage, which takes place after lying to her parents, followed by an imemdiate breakup and an annulment facilitated by lying to a judge. Of course, after they break up they remain 'friendly (including sexually friendly)'. And although she is 'too crazy and sometimes suicidal' for Ellis, he helps her to sleep with other men out of the goodness of his heart. Although he often describes himself as 'glad to be rid of her' and pleased to no longer be responsible for her, they keep getting back together. At no point does Ellis even imagine that staying in this drama-ridden nightmare of a relationship indicates something rather immature, or not entirely sane, in him - no, the madness is all on her part! When he describes helping her to lose her virginity to another man he is wildly triumphant about conquering his own sexual jealousy. This glorious victory so overshadows any concerns for her experience that he seems quite narcissistic.
He describes at length the joys of frotteurism on public transport which is 'the cheapest and easiest sex I ever had [...] in some ways it was great: no fuss, no obligations, no time wasted, no having to put up with the inane conversation of most women, no pregnancy, no disease, no boredom'. The underlying misogyny of this statement, and the hostility toward actually relating with other people rather than just jacking off on them, really did make me feel that perhaps Ellis could not be a particularly great expert on relationships. He seemed certain that 'if done tactfully and politely, it was harmless, seldom an intrusion' and after 'one negative glance or push away from me and I immediately withdrew'.
I am grateful to the sexual revolution, and the brave people who won it, for many things - but I am heartily thankful that frotteurism did not make it into the category of acceptable sexual behaviours! Even a man attempting to start something on a bus or train is deeply unpleasant (usually because they begin by sticking their penis into the small of your back and seeing what you do next - I wonder if Ellis had a less offensive method of gauging a woman's interest). Perhaps things were utterly different in the 1930s? Ellis says 'I was grateful to my anonymous partners - and was happy that I obviously pleased so many of them'. But how on earth does a man sexually please a woman by rubbing his dick against her through two layers of clothes on a crowded train? And can there really be so many people who enjoy this? Was the world - prior to the sexual revolution - so utterly unsatisfied that crowds of people could only find release in the awkward rubbing of strangers?
Altogether, it was a very interesting glimpse into a very strange world - made even more uncanny by those moments where it seemed familiar.