|
|
Freud's Psychosexual Stage TheoryWhitewave said Dec 24, 2006, 3:17 PM: |
||
|
Does this resonate with anyone else?
This is from this page. This morning I'm starting to open up a little bit to the possibility that Freud was right about these things in some ways. I'm not sure if there was a problem in translation which makes the German meaning incomprehensible to us, but I still don't see the infant's openness to exploring the world of sensation as “sexual”. I see it more as “sensual”. The difference in meaning to me is that “sexual” is about orgasm which is physically located in the genital area of the body, and sensual is about all the human senses attaining their height of arousal and satisfaction with various ambrosial stimulations - including sound, sight, taste, touch, smell and all the others which are less concrete and have no corresponding “organ” of sense such as connection, feelings and emotions, purpose, beauty, truth and goodness and other such things. The reason I'm looking at this now is because over this past year, I've started having anal sex -and because of this, some inneresting things are going on in my interior. My more primitive impulses are being awakened and I'm entertaining them in my consciousness more. But more importantly, now, I'm starting to desire to explore oral sensation more - and I just realized that this is descending in Freud's developmental order! Because I have spent most of my life relating in very Hyper-Personal ways, I have disliked oral sex -either way - due to the intense consciousness present in the face interacting with pre-consciousness present in the genitals. Oral sex felt like an avoidance of personal interaction, and rejection - yes, both ways! My early history of extreme emotional neglect, combined with my experiences of sexualization as exploitation had really traumatized me to the point where I didn't “feel” loved unless I knew alot about my partner and empathically connected with his story and he reciprocated in kind - these being a function of consciousness and identity. The mingling of genitalia was the magic carpet ride where these two identities, minds and hearts would meet and travel together towards a glorious future with purpose and love. If my partner took his consciousness away from “me” and gave it to the “carpet”, I felt abandoned and alone. These poor guys probably thought they were impressing me with whatever abilities and I felt so rejected! And there was no way to solve the problem - even though more than a few swore that I would grow to love it if I let them do it because they did it right! I couldn't figure out what was wrong. I knew it wasn't because I was repressing sexuality, because I've always loved sex and never feared it or felt bad or immoral about it. It was something else entirely. So, as I descend here, in Freud's order, I'm wondering how my consciousness is altering and/or expanding. It isn't necessarily expanding into the heights, I see that. But I think there's room to expand into the depths and turn all that implicit pre-conscious stuff into explicit stuff. I believe that as I had more and more good experiences anally, something very deep and primal was waking up. A sub-persona or two. They were concerned with survival and power and their consciousness was limited to that like an animal - vague, not quite personal, nameless, unclothed. Scary. Unless, of course, they revealed themselves to me and let me know their secrets. And for about a year now, I've been struggling with how to find a way to record and express their secrets. Because they are no longer unfamiliar to me and no longer frightening, though I do still have discomfort when they act out without letting me help them or give them permission. So far, the only time I feel free to express their secret ways is during sex itself. And since I don't get this often enough, they feel quite bottled up. I'm anticipating the next awakening to the oral to be a little different. I don't think this is going to have quite as much power involved with it. I believe this will be more passive or, perhaps, just more trusting. And this is probably going to be a source of frustration because I am preparing to be permanently relieved of my current b/f's problems by the most drastic measures available - surgery. In 8 days, he will be gone and I will have to find someone else to play with. But because this is about expressing Trust, I will have to take some very uncomfortable and possibly disastrous risks. However! Because I will be bringing this into a more awakened place, the very primitive impulse to Trust will be less bound to my sub-conscious and more available to my conscious mind. This will have many benefits to me. Oh, how I wish the perfect partner would just fall out of the sky! But that won't happen. So I'll have to figure out how to create the perfect interface with the various imperfect people out there. Does this sound familiar or intriguing to anyone else? Want to discuss? ~Ww |
|||
|
|
Re: Freud's Psychosexual Stage Theoryfiremusic said Feb 5, 2007, 8:45 PM: |
||
|
my first impression is that instinct and reason battles to conquer pleasure, and surely trust is the main dish. so, as i see it, trust gives a sense to pleasure. a permission, ok now you can let it go… but there's fear , kind of uncertain pleasure and a possibility to get hurt. again conflict between pleasure and pain. but you do it before you act. then you choose to do what reason, in the circonstances, shows what is the safest act which will balance the pleasure of sexuality with the fear/pleasure of pain. |
|||
|
|
Re: Freud's Psychosexual Stage TheoryWhitewave said Feb 8, 2007, 12:34 AM: |
||
|
Ah, yes. This reminds me of another inquiry I have toyed with. Fetishism. —oOo— I guess when I speak about “trust” in this aspect, I am refering to my partner's ability to negotiate openly with me and not prey on me. I don't want any more doubt, I don't want to remain vigilant, I want to lay down my guns and rest. The oral stage is the earliest, when we are the most helpless. I want to be able to regress safely. I want to know that he will not simply harvest what he wants from me and leave the rest. I do not want to merely be or posess an object for him to consume. I want him to reverse the sublimation and take the Risk of negotiating with me for the security, affection and acceptance that he deeply wants. I take so many Risks when relating to men, and I get tired of sticking my neck out all the time. Security is an infantile need that loving sex can potentially fulfill, but not at the Personal level. As we progress to the Transpersonal, I believe security becomes a much deeper and more conscious thing because it is grounded in timelessness and the infinite. I think Ken Wilber said that emptiness should be a component of certainty. I have a long way to go, but I want to get there. ~Ww |
|||
|
|
Re: Freud's Psychosexual Stage Theoryjackii said Apr 5, 2007, 6:37 AM: |
||
|
the first thing that comes to mind is that you are, (or were three months ago) very head centered during sex. and that you are slowly becoming a whole bodymind, so that you can feel communion from any contact in any way. does that ring true?
|
|||
|
|
Re: Freud's Psychosexual Stage TheoryWhitewave said Jun 3, 2007, 12:31 AM: |
||
|
Wow. Yeah. I guess I'm really behind on all your posts. 58 days ago, you posted that. Ugh. Sorry for my inconsistency. |
|||
|
|
Re: Freud's Psychosexual Stage TheoryMeg said Jun 3, 2007, 8:57 AM: |
||
|
Hi everyone (or the few of us in this pod) I am so glad I found you guys! After having studied years of psychoanalysis both Freudian and Lacanian (Jaques Lacan) I am so very interested in integrating the past knowledge to the pos modern influence of Ken Wilber and Andrew Cohen! |
|||
|
|
Re: Freud's Psychosexual Stage TheoryWhitewave said Jun 3, 2007, 10:26 AM: |
||
|
Yay-Yay! These are the kinds of questions I want to see! I would love to see a huge flurry of various questions like these:
Yay! Exactly! All that and more! When I brought up Freud, that's the kind of thing I was looking for. This isn't about me. Nor is it about Freud. This is about all of our questions and trying to understand how this is all going to work now since things are changing.
YES! YES! YES! MORE MORE MORE!!! ~Ww |
|||
|
|
Re: Freud's Psychosexual Stage Theoryjackii said Jun 5, 2007, 11:47 PM: |
||
|
everytime i get back to this thread i'm really excited to respond, but energy is too low to put the effort in to get out the proper word/thoughts. perhaps freud has a theory about that. : ) |
|||
|
|
Re: Freud's Psychosexual Stage Theoryjackii said Jun 6, 2007, 10:09 AM: |
||
|
let's see, first welcome meg, your input is eagerly anticipated by me, too. I'm in the process of dropping alot of those old catagories about gender and sex and whatnot. The concept of “rushing in” is a big trap. It means that if women want to act like reptiles and just fuck anonymously - the way men openly want to - then they are labled something specific. Men don't ever seem to be accused of rushing in before really knowing and trusting someone. Like the term “promiscuous man” could be simply redundant, but a “promiscuous woman” actually means something. looks to me like you still have some shedding of labels to drop. tho, this is the stereotype, i'm pretty sure that some studies have shown that women are just as promiscuous as men. there is a new book out too, and i can't think of the name of it (sorry). it is by a lesbian that dressed as a man and acted like one in order to infiltrate many a men's group, to learn about men from the inside. she ended up being surprised at how much men actual don't fit into the stereotypes. anyway, i'm still guilty of falling into this trap, much more than i want to admit. i don't resonate with the cross identifying of these stages with brain clusters, prolly for the same reason as i stated above, all is fused as one for me. that doesn't mean your connections are not true and valid. it only means i don't have anything to add to it today. i also don't buy into any human-centered propaganda that says, according to human knowledge, humans are the only conscious and deepest loving about this or that. again, it doesn't mean it's not true, it only means that i think it's a bunch of crap. Meg, we are going to do whatever feels right. sometime discussing theories, sometimes exposing bits and pieces of ourselves, sometimes… and like in children of dune, irulan asks of the reverend mother if she's getting answers, she says, answers only create more questions. to which they agreed navigating between the two is the art and science of life. (boy did i bastardize that dialog, lol) the evolution of the romantic relationship is hopefully catching up with the ritual of the christian (and perhaps buddhist and others) marriage, where the priest reminds the couple that the church and the sacrament of marriage is about using the synergy (blessings) of the marriage to help others in need by sharing the Love that is tapped. unfortunately (maybe), the word/thought Love has been totally fucked (raped) over to mean something that blesses selfishness. is this a mirror for me? LOL If we take into consideration that romance is ego-centric how are we going to love beyond attachtments and fear of loosing the subject of our love and sexual attraction! Working our shadow? |
|||
|
|
Re: Freud's Psychosexual Stage TheoryWhitewave said Jun 6, 2007, 10:36 AM: |
||
|
SO MUCH WONDERFUL EXCELLENTNESS - SO LITTLE TIME!! |
|||
|
|
Re: Freud's Psychosexual Stage Theoryjackii said Jun 7, 2007, 7:47 AM: |
||
|
meg, |
|||
|
|
Re: Freud's Psychosexual Stage TheoryBluuBlox said Nov 30, 2007, 6:44 AM: |
||
|
Freud was a crackpot just like [Wilhelm] Reich… |
|||
|
|
Re: Freud's Psychosexual Stage Theoryjackii said Nov 30, 2007, 9:35 AM: |
||
|
i think freud and reich were important factors of their times, stimulating dialog among the other researchers. and like with all sources of authority, i pick and choose from the whole by what works for me in the moment. |
|||

Help



