The reasoning in a local sense is wonderful, despite the conclusions being wrong. The layered nature of conclusions is compelling in these Three Essays, the footnotes allude to the editing, insertion and omission which Freud adjusted his thoughts, all the while admitting that he was lost in the weeds and that we were all damaged goods The taxonomy of inversion and perversion is a ticklish curiosity.
Such must have been dangerously transgressive at the time.
For one, and you won't read this in any reviews or general talk about this book, i I suppose having an idea of how to think about Freud's work is necessary to begin to answer what one can/does/should think about it.
For one, and you won't read this in any reviews or general talk about this book, it's surprising that the public at large has only recently begun to accept (male) homosexuality as a genuine manifestation of sexuality rather than a perversion when Freud condoned that very notion when this was published in 1905.
As may be evident, I’m still recovering from all that. But recently, quite to my surprise, I have become increasingly open, amenable and even enamored with Freud and the psychoanalytical model. That’s a (less than economical) way prefacing the fact that I’m a neophyte when it comes to Freud.
But now is not the time or place to further elaborate (in any greater detail than what I have already over shared). In my training and early career, I rejected Freudian ideas, and I gravitated to evidence based therapeutic modalities, grounded in experimental science and sound theoretical fundaments. And it has vitalized my practice, world view, sense of self, way of being. So take everything I have to say on the subject with a serious grain of salt.
This assertion may have tacitly implicated some of the rich and powerful men in Freuds community as perpetrators of rape and incest.
In later editions of Three Essays, Freud included the (rather repugnant) concept of penis envy, to explain the symptoms of his female clients.
In earlier works, Freud had made (highly impolitic) assertions that his female clients were experiencing traumatic symptoms due to exposure to sexual trauma.So, do Freud's theories hold up under the nearly 100 years of criticism and revision (some friendly, some not)? But, reading the original is the best way to even begin to form an opinion of how and what one should think about Freud."Moreover, the kiss, one particular contact of this kind, between the mucous membrane of the lips of the two people concerned, is held in high sexual esteem among many nations (including the most highly civilized ones), in spite of the fact that the parts of the body involved do not form part of the sexual apparatus but constitute the entrance to the digestive tract."Freakin' Freud, man. I grew up in the 70s and 80s, during the time of peak therapy weirdness i.e.Is this the book that takes your innocence away, corrupts every fiber of your being and makes you think of anything but pure love when you see a mother breastfeeding her child? psychodrama, primal therapy, and all other forms of cringeworthy catharsis oriented human potential movement, new age hippy shit.Every time you look at mothers breastfeeding her baby you will think of everything but motherly or pure love. Well, fuck you Freud, you think too much; give it a rest. I mean, there are reasons not to mix them up for God's sake! But this guy just comes in full-steam, blasts the separator wall, and there you go: everything is sexual in nature. Once you learn it, it would be very hard to unlearn it (this is a word of warning), and I imagine many people would upset themselves to read things that would keep them awake at night, and think less of society. The reasoning in a local sense is wonderful, despite the concl We are not in a position to give so much as a hint as to the causes of these temporal disturbances of the process of development.Suddenly you're not that naive and innocent person you know anymore. Ask my friends, whom I called at 2 in the morning on daily basis, how neurotic I was in the month of March. But then he would say something like this, Above all, the small child is without shame, and at certain periods in its early years shows an unambiguous pleasure in revealing its body, particularly emphasizing the sexual parts. A prospect opens before us at this point upon a whole phalanx of biological and perhaps, too, of historical problems of which we have not even come within striking distance.Here, Freud outlines the core features of libido theory, his grand view of the psychology of sexuality: sexual perversion is a matter of human nature and "normal" sexual behavior only appears later in life, sexual urges begin in infancy, and these urges turn their attention outward as we mature through puberty.Freud first wrote Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality in 1905 and spent the next two decades making major revisions to the text. It's knowledge anyway; very tempting, just like the Apple of Eden, that once you've had it, usually you'd be in the point of no return—you'd fall.The fact that Freud basically theorizes that the first few years of a person's life will dictate how that person forms relationships with others (esp.amorous relationships) should be enough to put every potential and actual parent on full alert.That being said, overweening parents are annoying, and to back it up, Freud attributes some of the trauma that can occur in infancy and early childhood, which can affect a child in either beneficial or adverse ways, to accidents that may or may not be preventable.In fact, Freud notes that the doting parent is to blame for the neurotic-obsessive male and hysteric female (Freud's terms, not mine) in that if a child is showered with affection as soon as he/she demands it, that child will come to expect the same from a lover or even friends as one grows older.