Freud

[Anonymous No.21852602]

>mainstream psychology declares the Oedipus complex ridiculous and false
-step mom / milf porn one of the most popular genres
>Mainstream psychology declares penis envy is sexist and not real
- girlboss feminism entirely predicated on women dressing and acting like alpha males, followed by legions of young women transitioning to male through medical intervention

He was right about everything

[Anonymous No.21852667]

>>21852602
freud was a genius, but it's unfortunate that psychoanalysis was not in fact a science like he'd thought - he was misguided there. also unfortunate is all the horrible experiments that happened during the 20th century in the name of neuroscience

[Anonymous No.21852693]

>>21852602
The Oedipus Complex is definitely still around... It's the foundation of how psychologists analyze romantic relationships and different attachment styles in men with insecure and avoidant attachment stemming from mothers that neglector abuse their children respectively. This is founded on the idea of our sexual attraction being rooted in our mothers.

[Anonymous No.21852752]

Even though I highly regard him and even though I understand many of his terms were used metaphorically trying to label some incredibly astute observations, some case studies read ridiculous with his explanatory model. Wolf man for example.

[Anonymous No.21852931]

>>21852667
>horrible experiments that happened during the 20th century in the name of neuroscience

QRD?

[Anonymous No.21852952]

>>21852602
Freud was not necessarily wrong, but he only saw psychopaths like himself. That's why Jung shitted on him and proved that Freud was not scientific.

Jung was a psychological genius who was "normal" in regards to his personal psychological behavior. He also had an insane high IQ. Freud on the other hand was a psychopath and because Freud made the assumption that his psychology was "normal", he thought his thoughts of fucking his own mother were normal and his strange behavior of wanting to suck anything in reach was a general behavior of all people.

Freud was just unable to analyze psychology, because he was not a sane person with a healthy mind. If you want to know the real psychology, Jung is where you have to look at. Jung solved all puzzles of psychology except one.

The only reason Jung didn't want to publish his findings was because he couldn't enter the inner psychology of other people and only his own. Because his analysis was useless for therapy (Jung realized his books require an IQ that is too high, so he didn't even try to get people to study his psychological way to perfection), Jung simply did some minor things and left his real psychological analysis into his Red Book.

The problem with his Red Book is that if your IQ isn't high enough, you simply can't understand it. It's literally impossible to understand Jung's Red Book with a low IQ, because you need insane brain power to reach the 4th dimension, which is in summary what you will reach if you understand the Red Book.

[Anonymous No.21852979]

>>21852952
Hello Jung's ghost

[Anonymous No.21852999]

>>21852602
I'm unironically a psych major and you're right.
Modern psychology is a joke of a science and nobody, except Jung, ever developed such a sophisticated and all embracing theory of mind like Freud did

>>21852952
nice bait

[Anonymous No.21853006]

>>21852952
>o reach the 4th dimension, which is in summary what you will reach if you understand the Red Book.
delete this line next time and you'll get more takers

[Anonymous No.21853028]

>>21853006
He might be right though. Unfortunately, nobody who understood the Red Book and and ascended into the 4th dimension ever came back to tell us of it.

[Anonymous No.21853049]

>>21852602
>another thread about lowbrow americans believing that "people saying the Oedipus complex isn't universal is equivalent to saying that the Oedipus complex is false
You should start reading actual books so you get basic knowledge on how to theorize: the bigger the extension of a concept, the smaller its comprehension; the smaller the comprehension of a concept, the bigger its extension. The Oedipus complex is real, but it is too general so mostly npcs are subject to it at 99% accuracy (and most of them are over-mediatized US subhumans)

[Anonymous No.21853076]

>>21852931
Lobotomies, raping children (unironically) to see if they could turn someone gay, removing genitals and then raping them to see if they could make them identify as an opposite gender, tormenting patients with electricity and other things, etc.

[Anonymous No.21853085]

>>21852602
>legions of young women transitioning to male through medical intervention
Meds now

[Anonymous No.21853097]

>>21852602
More of a fan of cognitive psychology. Gerd Gigerenzer is my guy and my affinity is strengthened by the fact he and I are both musicians. Seems a lot of the people in social sciences I like are also in the arts.

[Anonymous No.21853100]

>>21853049
Came here to post the same.

[Anonymous No.21853302]

>>21853085
>raping children (unironically) to see if they could turn someone gay, removing genitals and then raping them to see if they could make them identify as an opposite gender

what the fuck? Any more info on this? I knew about the other stuff but this is another level of horrifying

[Anonymous No.21853387]

>>21853302
dr john money - origins of gender identity theory.
if you want to wake up to how retarded transgender ideology is

[Anonymous No.21854061]

>>21852602
>He was right about everything

yes, but the puritanical anglos could never forgive this dirty old jew for reminding them of their animalistic side, so they have spent an entire century trying to furiously debunk him, and just ended up embarrassing themselves in the process

[Anonymous No.21854624]

>>21853076
You mean John Money and that awful case of the twins? Yeah that was horrific.

[Anonymous No.21854754]

>>21852602
He's actually wrong about everything; but he is more wrong than anybody has ever been right.

>>21852952
Jung was deranged like every other analyst, check out his collected writings, specifically his early clinical experimentations. Therapists of all kind are maniacs. Medicine, shamanism is one the oldest cult -power relation- in history.

[Anonymous No.21854765]

I think Beyond the Pleasure Principle is, at the very least, worthwhile.

[Anonymous No.21854834]

>>21852602
>mainstream psychology declares the Oedipus complex ridiculous and false
It doesn't exactly declare that, tho. Rather, it declares Freud's theory of the complex as the universal process of male psychological development false (and it is), but maintains that the sorts of mental pathologies that Freud described are definitely real and close to what Freud described them as. In fact, the common understanding differs in being way more complex and fucked up than Freud ever imagined them to be. He was right (and definitely brilliant for his time and state of science) to identify and describe neurotic conditions stemming from mommy issues, but he was wrong to describe the entirety of male psychological development through it.

>step mom / milf porn one of the most popular genres
The points of Freud I pointed out are supported by this phenomenon, but his overall framework is proven wrong by the fact that step mom porn is just ONE of the most popular genres. If the framework was right, it would be the one dominant genre, and only an extreme minority of men would jerk off to teen, lesbian, gangbang, loli, interracial, BDSM, brother-sister incest, exhibitionism, cuckoldery, watersports, etc - which is blatantly not the case. Oedipus complex just cannot account of the sheer variety of common sexual fixations that we actually observe in reality, so it can't be the end-all be-all of psychological development.

And that's before we consider how many men jerk off to milf porn without paying much attention to it being milf porn (it is one of the most vanilla genres out there, after all), and how many of men watching this sort of porn never had milfy mothers, and therefore developed attraction to milf sans Oedipus.

>Mainstream psychology declares penis envy is sexist and not real
It doesn't, though. It classifies it as a symptom (of depression or that "gender dysphoria" thing or whatever), while Freud declared to to be universal (and therefore normal). By agreeing with Freud on this you're essentially saying that ALL women are FtM troons in various stages of denial, no exceptions.

[Anonymous No.21854838]

Jung based.

[Anonymous No.21854861]

>>21852999
Are there any recent big psych breakthroughs?

[Anonymous No.21854862]

>>21853076
no they just drilled skulls and fucked with literal brains. what the fuck is wrong with you?

[Anonymous No.21854906]

>>21852602
> -step mom / milf porn one of the most popular genres
Relatively common perverts are still fringe on the absolute
> girlboss feminism entirely predicated on women dressing and acting like alpha males, followed by legions of young women transitioning to male through medical intervention
Most of these women maintain a feminine appearance and often incorporate feminine characteristics into a capitalist framework. There are no "legions of pooners" lmao

[Anonymous No.21854948]

>>21854834
Saying the Oedipus isn't a universal developmental crisis is kind of saying that Freud's wrong, though. And, also, despite the relative acceptance of attachment theory, mainstream psychology absolutely treats psychoanalysis as ridiculous and false, seems silly to deny this. The narrow view of what it takes to counter Freud's argument ("not all porn is about mommies!") is kind of misunderstanding the idea that negotiating triangular conflict in the object world and the threat/experience of castration is the basis for the institution of a person's mature superego (and therefore adult personality development). Similarly, the idea that penis envy is simply analogous to gender dysphoria, and a special case rather than a generality, misses Freud's point about constitutional bisexuality and the consequential dynamic repression that attends the establishment of any child's identity.

[Anonymous No.21854960]

>>21853387
omg GOLD
Do you have some other cases like that one? This is a rabbit hole I can't wait to get in

[Anonymous No.21854983]

>>21852602
>He was right about everything
I've been saying this for years. There are way too many people who will actively lie about themselves and their opinions on things while being completely uninformed low IQ and retarded. It will only get worse so enjoy this while you can. We're nearing the end of this cycle of advanced civilization. Humans are always the culprit.

[Anonymous No.21855134]

>>21852602
I’ve always thought that people who vehemently deny Freud too much without needing to be much prompted probably had Freud make them uncomfortable for some reason or another. Honestly it’s so elementary that it could be recognized as such even pre-psychology

[Anonymous No.21855191]

>>21854948
>Saying the Oedipus isn't a universal developmental crisis is kind of saying that Freud's wrong, though.
That's why I stated "it doesn't EXACTLY declare that". My point is that psychoanalysis was a vital historical point for development of psychology, and it was so because Freud made some brilliant observations and conclusions - even if he proceeded to develop those into a skewed theory. Mainstream psychology outgrew psychoanalysis, not discarded like a false dead end - therefore it's not exactly in direct and hostile opposition to Freud's findings, as OP suggests.

>The narrow view of what it takes to counter Freud's argument ("not all porn is about mommies!") is kind of misunderstanding the idea that negotiating triangular conflict in the object world and the threat/experience of castration is the basis for the institution of a person's mature superego
So is the popularity of step mom / milf porn as an argument for prevalence of Oedipal influence - OP already assumes unresolved complex. I merely extend OP's own logic further until it contradicts reality - "if dudes jerk it to mommies because of universal Oedipal fixation, then how come people jerk to everything else as well?"

[Anonymous No.21855204]

>>21855134
>I’ve always thought that people who vehemently deny Freud too much without needing to be much prompted probably had Freud make them uncomfortable for some reason or another
I think it's true both for people who deny Freud too much and for the people who say he was entirely correct about everything.
>"N-no I don't have mommy issues it's not true fuck you!"
>"Yes I do have mommy issues, and so do you - shush, don't you deny it, I know you do! Otherwise I suffer from mommy issues while other people just don't, and I don't like that"

[Anonymous No.21856323]

>>21852999
Trips of truth

[Anonymous No.21856335]

>>21855134
thats usually the case

[Anonymous No.21856340]

I think it's important to understand that the Oedipus complex doesn't have to mean that you LITERALLY WANT TO FUCK YOUR MOM. It's about competing with your dad over the first "female" you're aware of, which is somewhat different.

But yeah, men tend to marry their mothers, i.e. women who are very much like their mom. There's a reason why beautiful women seem kind of "heavenly" and it's because of the divine feminine archetype that largely stems from the experience of one's mother.

Although desu I lean more toward Jung as evidenced by this post.

[Anonymous No.21856372]

Mr. Nabokov, would you tell us why it is that you detest Dr. Freud?

I think he's crude, I think he's medieval, and I don't want an elderly gentleman from Vienna with an umbrella inflicting his dreams upon me. I don't have the dreams that he discusses in his books. I don't see umbrellas in my dreams. Or balloons.

[Anonymous No.21856376]

>>21852952
99% of the difference is between Freud's Jewish character and Jung's more traditional Germanic heritage.

[Anonymous No.21856379]

>>21852602
Agreed. I have been making my through his Basic Writings, and I really do find it to hard to believe he was some crack pot or weirdo. He was far ahead of his time. People are rightly afraid of Freud, mainly because Freud's psychoanalysis is a mirror, it shows you yourself in all of its ugly form, everything hidden away is revealed, it bleeds out into seemingly erroneous actions, through symptomatic actions, through speech, reading, writing, and so on. The average person, especially today, is afraid of what lies in their unconscious.

[Anonymous No.21856442]

>>21852602
Freud = degenerate subversive
Jung = based
This thread is atrocious.
"However, by means of these speculative leaps, Freud managed to diagnose
Western culture as essentially neurotic while apparently, on the basis of the
argument in Moses and Monotheism, holding the view that Judaism represents
the epitome of mental health and moral and intellectual superiority. Freud
appears to have been well aware that his highly subversive conjectures in Totem
and Taboo were entirely speculative. When the book was called a “just so” story
by a British anthropologist in 1920, Freud was “amused” and stated only that his
critic “was deficient in phantasy” (Gay 1988, 327), apparently a concession that
the work was fanciful. Freud stated, “It would be nonsensical to strive for
exactitude with this material, as it would be unreasonable to demand certainty”
(in Gay 1988, 330). Similarly, Freud described Civilization and Its Discontents as
“an essentially dilettantish foundation” on which “rises a thinly tapered analytic
228
investigation” (in Gay 1988, 543)."
"The theory of the Oedipal complex, childhood sexuality, and the sexual
etiology of the neuroses—the three central doctrines that underlie Freud’s radical
critique of gentile culture—play absolutely no role in contemporary mainstream
developmental psychology. From the standpoint of evolutionary theory, the idea
that children would have a specifically sexual attraction to their opposite sex
parent is highly implausible, since such an incestuous relationship would result in
inbreeding depression and be more likely to result in disorders caused by
recessive genes (see MacDonald 1986). The proposal that boys desire to kill their
fathers conflicts with the general importance of paternal provisioning of
resources in understanding the evolution of the family (MacDonald 1988a; 1992):
Boys who had succeeded in killing their fathers and having sex with their mothers
would not only be left with genetically inferior offspring, but also be deprived of
paternal support and protection. Modern developmental studies indicate that
many fathers and sons have very close, reciprocated affectional relationships
beginning in infancy, and the normative pattern is for mothers and sons to have
229
very intimate and affectionate, but decidedly nonsexual, relationships."

[Anonymous No.21856453]

>>21856442
"Finally, another general mistake, and one that illustrates the political nature of
Freud’s entire agenda, is that sexual urges are viewed as having a powerful
biological basis (the id), while traits such as responsibility, dependability,
orderliness, guilt, and delay of gratification (i.e., the conscientiousness system of
personality theory) are imposed by a repressive, pathology-inducing society. In a
comment indicating the usefulness of these psychoanalytic notions in the war on
gentile culture, James Q. Wilson (1993a, 104) correctly states that the belief that
conscience “is the result of repression is a useful thing to believe if you would like
to free yourself of the constraints of conscience—conscience becomes a ‘hangup’ that prevents you from ‘realizing yourself.’ ” It fact, conscientiousness is a
critical biological system which has been under intensive eugenic selection within
the Jewish community (see PTSDA, Ch. 7). An evolutionary perspective implies,
rather, that both systems have a powerful biological basis and both serve critical
adaptive functions (MacDonald 1995a, 1998c). No animal and certainly no human
has ever been able to be devoted entirely to self-gratification, and there is no
reason whatever to suppose that our biology would solely be directed toward
obtaining immediate gratification and pleasure. In the real world, achieving
evolutionary goals demands that attention be paid to details, careful plans be
made, and gratification be deferred."

[Anonymous No.21856519]

mom =/= milf

[Anonymous No.21856649]

>>21856442
>>21856453
literally nothing of the pseudery you posted disproves Freud in any way

[Anonymous No.21856674]

>>21856376
Precisely. Freud thinks that individuals are horrible until some kind of law descends on them from above. It is a thoroughly Judaic way of thinking. He's too philosophically clumsy to ask the question of how the "law from above" gets there; since he's an atheist, he has to believe that nothing comes from "above" and everything begins at the root with human beings. But if we're corrupt in the first place, there can be no such top-down discipline.

Jung is more philosophically adroit, so he doesn't have these issues.

[Anonymous No.21856678]

>>21852602
>-step mom / milf porn one of the most popular genres
It's not, it's a niche. Freud said it's for everyone, it's not even for the majority.
>- girlboss feminism entirely predicated on women dressing and acting like alpha males, followed by legions of young women transitioning to male through medical intervention
Another niche subculture of twitter-brained retarded women.

Another garbage thread from the lowest IQ board on this site.

[Anonymous No.21856691]

>>21852999
>I'm unironically a psych major
Post discarded

[Anonymous No.21856694]

>>21856678
>It's not, it's a niche.
It's not. It rose to one of the most viewed genres and rose to that status faster than any other category of porn in the history of porn.

[Anonymous No.21856704]

>>21856694
Ok post your source that the majority of men enjoy step mom porn.

[Anonymous No.21856753]

>>21852602
>>21855134
My mom having dark skin/ phenotype like that and claiming to be part Buryat from Russia is absolutely why I have such a strong AF fetish nowadays even if it was untrue schizo shit. I don’t think I would be thinking or dreaming about Cait so much nowadays if I had a wasp looking mother.

I also kind of wish the Buryat thing were true because that would be hotter than WMAF. WMAF is kind of predatory to me because it makes me think of all those creepy guys who buy women from China and stuff like property and it makes me feel dirty.

[Anonymous No.21856866]

>>21853076
>raping children (unironically) to see if they could turn someone gay
Who were these doctors perfoming these experiments?
And were they perchance from a specific ethnical minority?

[Anonymous No.21856972]

>>21856866
A certain tribe perhaps..

[Anonymous No.21857074]

>>21856866
rent free

[Anonymous No.21857081]

>>21856372
>I don't have the dreams that he discusses in his books. I don't see umbrellas in my dreams. Or balloons.
I thought Freuds whole point is that our dreams are very personal and that certain symbols don't always mean anything in particular. How the fuck did he come to that conclusion

[Anonymous No.21857103]

I thought the biggest implication was just that children learn to emulate their same sex parent which kind of makes sense

[Anonymous No.21857420]

>>21856340
>competing with your dad over the first "female" you're aware of
Psycho analytic literature goes even more abstract. The complex is about realizing there are limits and permissions on your drives that are set by those two people (even one, because father is a function). This can have constitutional effects. The very notion of two people, the division of the world in those two poles, the distance that allows individuation, the entrance into society, the acceptance of mores, the setting of direction in life by the discourse of those people, almost everything is attributed to the complex.

[Anonymous No.21857459]

>>21857103
The big implication that no one likes is that we are much less free in our will that we like to think.

[Anonymous No.21858821]

>>21857074
post nose

[Anonymous No.21858825]

>>21852602
My own little theory for why milf porn (and fetish porn in general) is so popular is because it's a way for humans to engage in sex without the inherent risk of pregnancy (older women being less/not fertile) same with all other fetishes, even homosexuality.
Either that, or it's somehow simply evolutionary advantageous to "cast a wide net" and be horny for everything, as opposed to exclusively to optimal mating partners (young fertile healthy women)
It's really not that complicated, evolutionary psychology gets a lot of flack in academic circles but Occam's razor is always at its side, especially if you have to compete with wacky psychoanalysis

[Anonymous No.21858829]

>>21856442
Freud = Jew

Buddha = Based aryan. The most based psycologist by far.

[Anonymous No.21858832]

>>21858825
see also pederasty in numerous human cultures: "boys for fun, women for children"

[Anonymous No.21858836]

>>21858829
The most low soul is the sexual soul (Semitic in nature).
The warrior soul is superior to the sense soul.
The superior soul is the rational non sensual soul (Logistikon). That is the noble (Arya) soul.

[Anonymous No.21858838]

>>21858832
Absolute animalistic degenaration. You can no go lower that jewish psychology.

[Anonymous No.21858840]

>>21856376
>Jung was a psychological genius who was "normal" in regards to his personal psychological behavior.
Hahaha, is this post-ironic parody bait?

[Anonymous No.21858849]

>>21858840
Bot detected

[Anonymous No.21858863]

>>21852999
>Modern psychology is a joke of a science and nobody, except Jung, ever developed such a sophisticated and all embracing theory of mind like Freud did
>except Jung

Jung and his gobbledygook schizoid New Age fantasies were completely bodied by Lacan, who did it by reviewing and updating Freud.