On the advice of my attorneys, NES and Hillary,
I am including these disclaimers:
Disclaimer – this is meant to be a fun story! I’ve highlighted in blue the different concepts that the reader may recognize as part of Freud’s screwing of women lives.
Disclaimer: I’ve used many generalities in order to make a point – (and after all, Freud used generalities, and he portrayed women in black and white – adopt a female role that makes men happy and it leads to happy and healthy second class woman. Don’t do so – for example, be your own woman, feel good about your womanhood, be an UPPITY WOMAN and it leads to unhealthy, unnatural, very unhappy women – and a very unhappy society of MEN!)
Disclaimer: Utah – it’s all to make a point, hopefully in a humorous way – I’m not suggesting that you or anyone else go gay! 🙂
Disclaimer: Freud did come up with some new, useful ideas. But for the most part, he was as mired in his own cultural assumptions as any of his contemporaries, especially in relation to women…..
Disclaimer: I personally believe in both competition AND cooperation. This is just a story to make a point….
So the first part is from wiki, a refresher on this part of Freud’s “little stories” about us. The second part below is where I write my own more favorable, more realistic “little stories” about us.
PART ONE – (ed.’s note) the boring, male-identified view of women, developed by a man who only studied a relative handful of people, and oh!, by the way, they were all in his psychoanalytic practice. He (non-scientifically) studied a (small) sample of mentally disturbed patients in order to develop a theory of…………. wait for it…………. wait for it…………… are you ready to guess, “a theory of abnormal psychology”?…. Because you would be WRONG!!!!! Our bright man didn’t have a moment’s hesitation when he chose to characterize his theories, based on abnormal subjects, as a theory of PERSONALITY! In other words, meaning they apply to EVERYONE! Anyone catch that major faux pas?
So here we go. Keep your eyes open for all the assumptions he makes, the conclusions he makes based, not on science or evidence, but on his own introspection (yes! let those misoygynistic juices ferment your thoughts – that won’t affect those thoughts coming out unbiased, will they?????) Ok, here’s a little Freud for your Wednesday morning! lol
In Freud’s psychosexual development theory, the phallic stage (approximately between the ages of 3.5 and 6) is the first period of development in which the libidinal focus is primarily on the genital area. Prior to this stage, the libido (broadly defined by Freud as the primary motivating energy force within the mind) focuses on other physiological areas. For instance, in the oral stage, in the first 12 to 18 months of life, libidinal needs to concentrate on the desire to eat, sleep, suck and bite. The theory suggests that the penis becomes the organ of principal interest to both sexes in the phallic stage. This becomes the catalyst for a series of pivotal events in psychosexual development. These events, known as the Oedipus complex for boys, and the Electra complex for girls, result in significantly different outcomes for each gender because of differences in anatomy.
- Soon after the libidinal shift to the penis, the child develops her first sexual impulses towards her mother.
- The girl realizes that she is not physically equipped to have a heterosexual relationship with her mother, since she does not have a penis.
- She desires a penis, and the power that it represents. This is described as penis envy. She sees the solution as obtaining her father’s penis.
- She develops a sexual desire for her father.
- The girl blames her mother for her apparent castration (what she sees as punishment by the mother for being attracted to the father) assisting a shift in the focus of her sexual impulses from her mother to her father.
- Sexual desire for her father leads to the desire to replace and eliminate her mother.
- The girl identifies with her mother so that she might learn to mimic her, and thus replace her.
- The child anticipates that both aforementioned desires will incur punishment (by the principle of lex talionis)
- The girl employs the defence mechanism of displacement to shift the object of her sexual desires from her father to men in general.
A similar process occurs in boys of the same age as they pass through the phallic stage of development; the key differences being that the focus of sexual impulses need not switch from mother to father, and that the fear of castration (castration anxiety) remains. The boy desires his mother, and identifies with his father, whom he sees as having the object of his sexual impulses. Furthermore, the boy’s father, being the powerful aggressor of the family unit, is sufficiently menacing that the boy employs the defense mechanism of displacement to shift the object of his sexual desires from his mother to women in general.
Freud thought this series of events occurred prior to the development of a wider sense of sexual identity, and was required for an individual to continue to enter into his or her gender role.
A page from a future textbook – Freud turned upside down….
Eve, Lorac. (2053). Sexual development theory in the cooperation-based world of 2053; Throwing out Freud’s baises and proscriptions led to the emergence of the true natural order. Somewhere City, New York: Uppity Woman Press.
A child, when first born, learns immediately through the mother’s breastfeeding and attention that the mother provides her with nourishment, love, safety, and comfort. As she gets older, the child’s view is reinforced by the mother’s continued caretaking and nurturance. The child, appreciating these efforts, identifies with the mother. She both wants to be like the mother and to have a mate similar to the mother.
The presence of other children propels the child into the “competition stage”. The child wishes to be the only recipient of the mother’s attention. Eventually the child develops the higher attributes (now called “world skills”) of cooperation, compassion, and harmonic coexistence as she moves into the more mature “cooperation stage”.
The father, being less involved in the process and in many families often non-existent, is seen as a distant and punitive figure, one not capable of relating on the more complex interpersonal and emotional levels. The child grows to realize just how fortunate she is to have been born a female and to be able to nurture relationships with other females, forming relationships based on the higher attributes of compassion, cooperation, similarities, and interpersonal abilities. The child at first finds it disheartening to find the father so incapable of emotional involvement (the “despair stage”), but later comes to understand that males have only one complete X chromosome, the other being broken (the “acceptance stage”).
The experience of the minority
Some children are born male. They do not have a “time of the month”, because they are affected by hormones EVERY DAY of the month, leading to a greater likelihood of physical and sexual aggression. In addition, these children learn that they do not have the greater interpersonal abilities of communication and cooperation, or the greater emotional development of the female. They compensate by developing their physical strength and stressing competition over cooperation and compassion.
Historically, these males dominated the more superior females by virtue of physical strength, and relegated women to the ranks of the dependent. Society, formed by these men, reinforced their notions so well that women learned to devalue their own superior strengths. The males limited the females’ contact with each other and trained them to be dependent on the male, thereby ensuring that for many centuries the males could overturn and control the natural order of the world. The males’ stress on competition led to many divisions in the world, between rich and poor, between countries, between the sexes. Many lives were lost to starvation, many to wars, many to subjugation.
The males’ control has long-ceased to exist, but males still compensate for their less developed abilities by overdeveloping their physical selves and by trying to stress the ancient, less productive ability of competition in the modern, progressively cooperative world.
Instead of accepting that they are lacking a second fully developed X chromosome and trying to learn appropriate world skills as best they can, these males fall victim to “X envy”. They realize that they are basically “incomplete women” and to overcome this feeling of being second-rate, they remain fixated at the competition stage, always trying to prove themselves. As if to make up for the lacking part of their second chromosome, these males at the competition stage, always place inordinate emphasis upon their penises and they remain fixated at the immature penile orgasm stage.***
A small number of men are able to overcome their biology and fit into the world. These men accept their genetic inferiority and are able to move past their “X envy” stage. They do the best they can to learn world skills such as cooperation and compassion, and they are able to experience mouth orgasms. Learning to appreciate the mouth orgasm is an important indicator that a man has reached sexual maturity*** and can finally, truly please those women who choose to have sex with a male. ***can anyone figure that one out? 🙂
Some children are very disturbed by the distance of the father figure and through a genetic disturbance, are more likely to take the father’s distance personally. They become fixated at this “despair stage”, and without therapy, will spend the rest of their lives trying to nurture relationships with men. These women are called “heterosexual”. They are consumed by a need to “tame” a man, to somehow help him grow and mature so that one day he might be more similar to how women are naturally, all in a misguided attempt to solve their childhood frustration at the alienation of the sperm donor.
Women who are fixated at this stage are unable to fulfill their potential as humans, for their misspent energies keep them from developing normal, healthy relationships with female mates. Instead of growing in a relationship which supports and celebrates femininity, in which both participants are capable of higher interpersonal skills and cooperation, these fixated women are doomed to relationships with the less developed male of the species, relationships in which the women are held back.
The males in these relationships are threatened by the two complete X chromosomes of the females and respond with the ancient tactic of trying to make the women believe that interpersonal and cooperation skills are inferior to the competition that the male favors. The women in these relationships, without help, will never move forward into the “acceptance stage” and will never fulfill their potential.
It is hypothesized that nature will always produce some women who are genetically predisposed to become fixated at this stage, so that babies will be produced for the continuation of the species. It was long ago shown to be a myth that females born to such women and raised in such households are more likely to turn out to have this “heterosexual deviation”; all research studies indicate that the number of such abnormalities is just high enough to maintain population levels.
Those males who do recognize the superiority of “world skills” seek out other similar males with whom to form families, thereby attempting to emulate the success of equality based female-female relationships. While they cannot fully complete their identification with the mother figure as they are not themselves female, they at least are not fixated at the competition stage as are other men, and they do not cause the societal fractures which lead to repressed women, wars between countries, or poverty.
So, what about you? Are you also tired of a history full of men defining the world based on themselves (and their own problems), and then adding women in as an afterthought, and having to figure out how to “explain us” (of course, from within their own adrocentric framework).
Chime in with any thoughts!!!! NYSMike – as one of our very-bestest feminist males here, I’d love to hear your thoughts, too. And Delphyne – come talk with us! Pretty please! NES, FF, Sophie – ????? And Karen – honey, don’t you give one thought to what that darn Freud would have said about your
oral fixation food stealing!!! (JOKE! 🙂 )
Filed under: Uncategorized