Learn Hardcore Spanish (Latin America): La psicóloga me dice que no tengo que ser perfecto, solo constante. - The psychologist tells me that I don’t have to be perfect, only consistent.

In Spanish, using the definite article la with professions or roles often means “the [person] I go to / the one we’re talking about”, and it’s clear from context that she is my psychologist.

La psicóloga = the psychologist (understood as my psychologist or the one treating me).
You could also say mi psicóloga (my psychologist), and that’s completely correct—it's just a bit more explicitly possessive.
Saying just psicóloga me dice… would sound incomplete; Spanish almost always needs an article (la) or a possessive (mi) here.

Why is it psicóloga (feminine) and not psicólogo?

Spanish professions usually change ending for grammatical gender:

psicólogo = male psychologist
psicóloga = female psychologist

The sentence uses psicóloga because it’s referring to a woman. If the psychologist were a man, it would be:

El psicólogo me dice que no tengo que ser perfecto, solo constante.

How do you pronounce psicóloga? Is the p silent?

Yes, in psicóloga, the p is silent.

Rough pronunciation (Latin American):

psicóloga → see-KÓ-lo-ga
- si like see
- có stressed, like koh
- lo like lo in lotion (without the “sh”)
- ga like ga in gallon

So you do not pronounce it like p-see-kóloga; it starts with an s sound.

What does me do in me dice? Why not just dice que…?

Me is an indirect object pronoun: it tells you to whom she says this.

La psicóloga dice que… = The psychologist says that… (in general)
La psicóloga me dice que… = The psychologist tells *me that…*

Without me, the sentence doesn’t specify who is being told. In this context, me is important because she’s giving advice to me.

Could I say La psicóloga dice que no tengo que ser perfecto… without me? What changes?

Yes, grammatically you can, but the meaning shifts a bit:

La psicóloga dice que… sounds like you’re reporting what she says generally, like a rule or her opinion.
La psicóloga me dice que… emphasizes her advice directed at me personally.

In your original sentence, the personal advice aspect is important, so me dice is the most natural choice.

Why is it dice (present) and not dijo (said) or está diciendo (is saying)?

Spanish often uses the simple present to talk about:

Habitual actions: what someone regularly tells you.
Stable facts or typical behavior.

So:

La psicóloga me dice… can mean My psychologist tells me (regularly / as a rule)….
La psicóloga me dijo… would be My psychologist told me… (referring to a specific past moment).
La psicóloga me está diciendo… = My psychologist is telling me… (right now).

The present dice is the best match for “This is something she (always) tells me.”

What exactly does tengo que mean in no tengo que ser perfecto? How is it different from necesito or debo?

Tener que + infinitive expresses obligation/necessity (have to / must).

tengo que ser perfecto = I have to be perfect / I must be perfect
no tengo que ser perfecto = I don’t have to be perfect (the obligation is absent)

Compared with others:

necesito ser perfecto = I need to be perfect (focus on need, more internal/subjective).
debo ser perfecto = I should / ought to be perfect (moral duty or recommendation).
no debo ser perfecto would mean I must not / should not be perfect (a prohibition or strong advice against it), which is not what the Spanish sentence says.

So no tengo que ser perfecto clearly means it’s not necessary, not it is forbidden.

Does no tengo que ser perfecto mean “I must not be perfect” or “I don’t have to be perfect”?

It means “I don’t have to be perfect” (lack of obligation).

no tengo que… = I don’t have to… / I’m not required to…
For “I must not be perfect” (prohibition), you’d normally use no debo ser perfecto or no puedo ser perfecto depending on the idea.

So the psychologist is removing pressure, not forbidding perfection.

Why is it no tengo que ser (indicative tengo) and not no tenga que ser (subjunctive)?

After decir que, Spanish can use either the indicative or the subjunctive, but the choice changes the meaning:

La psicóloga me dice que no tengo que ser perfecto…
→ indicative (tengo): she is stating a fact / giving information or advice.
La psicóloga me dice que no tenga que ser perfecto…
→ this sounds quite odd here; decir que + subjunctive is used when someone is ordering / telling someone else to do something, and even then the structure would be different (e.g. me dice que no sea tan perfeccionista).

In your sentence, she is explaining how things are (no obligation), so the indicative tengo is correct.

Why is perfecto masculine? What if the speaker is a woman?

Adjectives must agree with the noun (or the person) they describe in gender and number.

If the speaker is male: no tengo que ser perfecto
If the speaker is female: no tengo que ser perfecta

So for a woman, the sentence would usually be:

La psicóloga me dice que no tengo que ser perfecta, solo constante.

Why doesn’t constante change for gender like perfecto/perfecta?

Some adjectives in Spanish have the same form for masculine and feminine. Constante is one of them:

Él es constante. (He is consistent.)
Ella es constante. (She is consistent.)

It only changes for number:

Ellos son constantes.
Ellas son constantes.

So for both a male and a female speaker in your sentence, it stays constante.

What’s the difference between solo and sólo? Is the accent needed here?

Historically:

sólo (with accent) = only
solo (no accent) = alone

Modern recommendation (RAE): always write it without the accent (solo) unless there’s a real risk of confusion—and even then, many writers still leave it without an accent.

In your sentence, solo constante clearly means “only consistent”, not “consistent alone”, so there is no real ambiguity. The standard modern spelling is:

…no tengo que ser perfecto, solo constante.

Why is there a comma before solo constante? Is it necessary?

The comma helps to mark a contrast:

no tengo que ser perfecto, solo constante → I don’t have to be perfect, just consistent.

It separates two contrasted ideas:

being perfect (not required)
being constant (required)

You’ll often see this structure with a comma in Spanish. Without the comma it’s still understandable, but less clear visually. The comma is stylistically natural and recommended here.

Could I say solo tengo que ser constante instead? How would that change the meaning?

Yes, you could say:

La psicóloga me dice que solo tengo que ser constante.

This changes the emphasis:

no tengo que ser perfecto, solo constante
→ explicitly contrasts perfection vs consistency.
solo tengo que ser constante
→ emphasizes that the only requirement is to be consistent, without mentioning perfection.

Both are correct, but your original sentence highlights the contrast with perfection more strongly.

Why is it que and not qué in me dice que no tengo…?

In Spanish:

que (no accent) = “that” / “which” / “who” (conjunction or relative pronoun).
qué (with accent) = “what?” / “which?” in questions and exclamations.

In your sentence, que introduces a subordinate clause:

me dice que no tengo que ser perfecto…
= she tells me *that I don’t have to be perfect…*

It’s not a question or exclamation, so it must be que without an accent.