Veteran Therapy, Military Culture, and Relational Toxicity: A Veteran Clinician’s Perspective

I write this as both a veteran and a mental health clinician working with individuals impacted by military culture and trauma. Military service shapes identity, emotional regulation, and interpersonal functioning in profound ways. It fosters discipline, resilience, loyalty, and purpose. At the same time, the structure of military life—rigid hierarchy, chronic stress exposure, power imbalance, and emotional suppression—can unintentionally reinforce relational toxicity, including narcissistic traits, when left unexamined.

It is important to state clearly: the military does not create narcissism, and most service members and veterans are not narcissistic. However, certain cultural conditions within military systems may reward, normalize, or conceal narcissistic traits, particularly when authority, emotional invulnerability, and image management are emphasized (Stark, 2007). These dynamics often become most visible in interpersonal functioning and during the transition to civilian life.

Narcissistic Traits in a Military Context

Narcissistic traits exist on a spectrum and are distinct from Narcissistic Personality Disorder. Traits such as emotional detachment, defensiveness, entitlement, grandiosity, and difficulty tolerating vulnerability can be adaptive in combat and leadership contexts where decisiveness and control are necessary (Herman, 2015).

Relational difficulty emerges when these traits become rigid and persist beyond service. Military culture often reinforces stoicism, dominance, and emotional containment while discouraging vulnerability or relational accountability. Over time, service members may internalize beliefs that emotional expression is weakness or that accountability threatens identity. When carried into civilian life, these beliefs can interfere with healthy connection, flexibility, and self-reflection.

Trauma, Emotional Suppression, and Veteran Mental Health

Military training frequently requires emotional suppression to function under threat. While suppression may be adaptive during service, it differs from emotional regulation. When emotional suppression becomes habitual, it may present as withdrawal, irritability, emotional numbing, contempt, or difficulty tolerating others’ emotional needs (Herman, 2015).

Unresolved trauma can intensify these patterns. Trauma-related defenses such as hypervigilance, projection, denial, or emotional shutdown may resemble narcissistic behaviors. These defenses often function to protect against overwhelming internal experiences but can contribute to relational strain and emotional isolation if left unaddressed (American Psychological Association [APA], 2020).

Toxicity Among Women Veterans and Women in Leadership

An often overlooked aspect of military relational harm is toxicity within the ranks of women, particularly among women in leadership roles. Research and military climate data indicate that women service members frequently report higher levels of perceived hostility, discrimination, and interpersonal stress within units compared to their male counterparts (Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Services [DACOWITS], as summarized in Department of Defense surveys).

In male-dominated, hierarchical institutions such as the military, women often face scarcity dynamics, limited access to leadership roles, and heightened scrutiny. Research on women in such environments suggests that internalized misogyny, institutional sexism, and competition for limited positions can contribute to lateral aggression, relational hostility, and punitive leadership behaviors among women (Bearman et al., 2009).

Qualitative research further suggests that some women in military contexts may adopt rigid, authoritarian, or emotionally dismissive leadership styles as a survival strategy, aligning with dominant norms to maintain credibility and safety (HaCohen & colleagues, 2024). These behaviors are not inherent to women leaders but reflect adaptation to systems that reward dominance and punish vulnerability.

This toxicity may manifest as emotional invalidation, excessive rigidity framed as professionalism, public shaming disguised as discipline, or lack of empathy justified as strength. The relational impact can be significant—particularly for junior women service members who may already experience marginalization and limited psychological safety.

Interpersonal Impact and Civilian Transition

As service members transition into civilian life, unexamined survival strategies may continue to shape interpersonal functioning. Veterans may struggle with emotional closeness, accountability, or flexibility in relationships and professional settings. Without trauma-informed support, these patterns can persist, reinforcing isolation and misunderstanding (APA, 2020).

Veteran-focused mental health care provides space to explore how military-shaped behaviors once supported survival—and how they may now limit well-being and connection.

A Trauma-Informed Path Forward

Healing does not require rejecting military identity. It requires integrating it.

Trauma-informed veteran therapy emphasizes emotional awareness, nervous system regulation, and reflective accountability without shame. This work allows veterans to examine power, control, and vulnerability in ways that support growth rather than defensiveness. For women veterans and leaders, it also includes unpacking internalized norms that equate authority with emotional suppression.

At Athena’s Healing Haven, this perspective is grounded in respect for service and honesty about its emotional and relational costs. Growth becomes possible when military experiences are honored and examined with curiosity and compassion.

For Veterans Seeking Support

If you are a veteran experiencing anger, emotional disconnection, or interpersonal difficulties, this does not mean you are broken. It may mean that skills once essential for survival now require adjustment. Seeking support is not a failure of strength—it is an act of self-awareness.

Military service shapes us, but it does not have to define the limits of our healing.

References

American Psychological Association. (2020). Violence and abuse in relationships. https://www.apa.org

Bearman, S., Korobov, N., & Thorne, A. (2009). The fabric of internalized sexism. Journal of Integrated Social Sciences, 1(1), 10–47.

Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Services. (n.d.). Reports and findings on military women’s experiences and unit climate. U.S. Department of Defense.

HaCohen, N., et al. (2024). Gendered adaptation and survival strategies in male-dominated military contexts. Frontiers in Psychology.

Herman, J. L. (2015). Trauma and recovery: The aftermath of violence—from domestic abuse to political terror. Basic Books.

Stark, E. (2007). Coercive control: How men entrap women in personal life. Oxford University Press.