Part I: The Sexual Aberrations
It seems to be that Freud has absolutely no idea how to account for or explain bisexuality. What is the object and aim of bisexuals? Freud's argument seems unable to account for this sort of attraction separate from genitals. His use of the word "object" seems to focus more on the sexual organs, which are parts of a body as opposed to the entirety of the human form.
Part II: Infantile Sexuality
Freud claims that infantile sexual manifestations have three characteristics: they are attached to some vital somatic function, they do not have a sexual object (auto-erotic), their aim is dominated by an erogenous zone. So is infantile sexuality the first instance of the individual objectifying parts of the self? Do humans develop first by understanding pieces of themselves and then the whole? I'm trying not to delve into Lacan.
Part III: The Transformations of Puberty
Does viewing the mother as the first sexual object, according to Freud, lead to greater cases of inversion in females? In general, I'm wary of theories that suggest that parents are responsible for exposing their children to sexual and non-sexual love. It doesn't follow that puberty itself is responsible for fueling the transformations necessary to turn libidinal energy from the self/the mother to another individual of the opposite sex. Also, the bit about women changing their leading erogenous zones after puberty is false.
"Splitting of the Ego in the Process of Defense"
If repression is the inevitable result of the ego splitting, how is this an effective defense mechanism employed by the mind? Seems to me that repression, more times than not, leads to worse consequences than acting on that desire.
--Nupur
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I'm responding to question 2, on Infantile Sexuality. It appears to me that Freud imagines that the transition from infantile sexuality to adult sexuality revolves around one key factor. That is that the sexual objects of infants are unrelated to reproduction. In this manner, it seems that children are indeed fixated on "unpractical" sexual objects such as their thumb or a toe whereas adults fixate primarily on the genitalia and on reproduction itself. Freud is implying that this primacy on the genitalia leads to a more holistic and "normal" view of the body. Thus this supposed process of sexual maturation is analogous to a progressive adherence to the Gestalt Theory, that is the whole is greater than the sum its parts.
~Jordan Carter~
Post a Comment