It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by AccessDenied
FASCINATING thread topic.
Freud could be interpreted many ways , but the fact that the true male fantasy seems to be two women has endured the ages.
Duly noted that as our sexuality rises in society, there is much more of a bisexual incidence for females now.
If you don't mind, I'm going to include the info on your thread here from The Kinsey reports, for slight comparison, and to better the info.
[edit on 28-12-2009 by AccessDenied]
Originally posted by kingoftheworld
Frued was a sick, crooked, twisted freak. He only did sessions with upper-class women, and slept with most of them.
Originally posted by the_denv
I think the obsession with power relating to sex is that not only is it a way to "cheat" a positive spiritual energy charge. Those people you see with 10 wives etc (through out time) was a form of not just greed and lust, but of Eugenics. Keep it in the blood line eh?
EDIT: Read this book: Sex, Symbols and the Stars
(Symbols, Sex, and the Stars in Popular Beliefs: An Outline of the Origins of Moon and Sun Worship, Astrology, Sex Symbolism, Mystic Meaning of Numbers, the Cabala, and Many Popular Customs, Myth (Paperback))
[edit on 28/12/2009 by the_denv]
Originally posted by SteveR
Bisexual women are a turn off. Just my personal opinion, as a hetrosexual man. I don't understand these sweeping generalizations...
* * *
* * *
Originally posted by Astyanax
While I deplore the foul stench of narrow-mindedness, ignorance and bigotry (not to mention damned lies) emanating from the second post in this thread, it is certainly true that Freud's psychology is deeply suspect from a scientific point of view.
Freud did little clinical research and did not test his ideas rigorously. He created some brilliant metaphors for the human condition, which is why he is still regarded by many as one of the greatest thinkers of the twentieth century. However, even the greatest thinkers need not necessarily be right in the conclusions they draw, and this was often the case with Freud.
Modern psychology, which is strongly influenced by neuroscience, ethology and evolutionary biology, has little time for Freud. It is true that the psychoanalysis he pioneered remains popular with bourgeois folk, but I hazard this is due to a feelgood factor associated with the 'talking cure'--and the fact that people have dirty minds--rather than any real clinical benefit.
* * *
As to your sexual speculations: human beings throughout history have regarded their own culture's arrangements as 'normal' and deplored others'. There is certainly nothing particularly normal or natural about Ancient Greek pederasty. In ancient times, powerful men tended to form harems because they could; such a man might sleep with one, two or as many women at a time as he might choose to, or could afford. The dark obverse of this custom was that large numbers of ordinary men had to do without women at all, or at best with occasional adulterous liasons, hasty encounters with prostitutes and--let's state facts--the odd rape. Sex with other men was often an acceptable outlet when women were unavailable.
Where rich men have harems, societies grow violent, repressive, warlike and viciously competitive. There also tends to be an increase in both male homosexual activity, especially pederasty, and condemnation of homosexual behaviour.
However--from an evo-bio point of view--harem formation is quite normal. In many social species, subordinate males rarely or never have a chance to mate; the alpha male gets all the nookie, and keeps it.
Leaving aside the interesting harem question, normal male human sexual behaviour seems to be serial polygyny--one woman at a time, but several over a lifetime, with episodes of opportunistic promiscuity. The female pattern mirrors this, though with a tropism towards longer relationships punctuated by brief episodes of adultery. The variance between male and female reproductive strategies (and respective physical size and strength) explains these differences quite neatly.
Male homosexuality is almost certainly passed from mother to son (like male pattern baldness); if this is true we may infer that having a gay son carries a survival benefit for mothers. An alternative explanation is the 'gay uncle' hypothesis, which proposes that children enjoy a selective benefit by having a homosexual relative.
Lesbianism is rather more problematic; it is rarely or never seen among animals (as far as I know), and scientific explanations for its prevalance are hard to come by. Sadly, most of the literature on the subject is politically motivated and therefore untrustworthy; the Wikipedia entry is typical.
* * *
A balanced account of Freud's life and work from the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Wikipedia on Freud's legacy.
Wikipedia on Biology and sexual orientation
[edit on 29/12/09 by Astyanax]
Originally posted by caitlinfae
reply to post by dragonsmusic
This is a very interesting subject and I have enjoyed reading about Freud's research into this. I see your point about two bisexual women being possibly the ultimate male fantasy and it's roots in the hunter archetype (which I was talking about with a close friend just two nights ago, weirdly enough), but I suspect that there is perhaps another layer of modern meaning now attached to this scenario....that of the sexually liberated woman.
Although I don't give the free love attitudes of the '60's much weight in terms of true freedom for women and their sexual expression, I do acknowledge that they were possibly a starting point for the more equal expression of sexuality we're moving towards now. Despite the fact that it's now insanely trendy for girls to be with other girls, at least at some point in their relationship history, I really believe that many women...many more women than realise it....are genuinely bisexual. Our learned patterns and past emotional traumas can block off whole areas of expression, and perhaps when we learn to be honest about who and what we like, this is the natural state for us.
Astynax's point about the benefits of a gay son to the mother's survival will also hold true of the lesbian members of a society...more healthy, non-breeding females (and their girlfriends! ) to help raise and protect the children, without the considerable risks of childbirth to worry about.
Originally posted by Edrick
Freud did not have access to the knowledge that we do now, and as a psychologist, he necessarily determined that the human is a blank slate at birth.
We now know differently, that Genetics predispose people to certain conditions (Not discounting Environmental Factors, but adding Genetics to the mix) and make those actions and behaviors more likely.
The thought that all humans are born Bisexual is a childish theory, that MANY different factors debunk.
Sexual Hormones, Testosterone, and Estrogen necessarily make the human of whatever sex, desire copulation with a member of the opposite sex.
Occasionally, this is not the case... but deviation from Heterosexuality is the Exception, or the species goes extinct.
Natural selection precludes this sort of "Inherent" bisexuality, due to "Survival of the Fittest" actions on Genetics.
As far as Lesbianism, I would agree that it is nessecarily linked to the earlier sexual Hierarchies of human (and primate) society.
With the "Alpha" having supreme sexual access (There is your Harem), and all other males being cast to the wayside (So to speak)
Females are necessarily Hypergamous in this fashion, (as an attempt to secure provisions, alpha genes, and social status upon their offspring)
The Biological drive for the Sexes are much different.
Males are naturaly Polygamous, and Females are naturally Hypergamous.
This manifests in men as a desire to have multiple female partners at a time, giving rise to the "Lesbian" theme... two girls... getting themselves ready for you.... Ya know? IT is also a fundamental foundation of the "Harem", that all of your "Wives" get along with each other, as opposed to devolving into a squawking hen-house of Auditory pain and suffering, treachery, and madness.
For Females, it is different... Their biological Hypergamy manifests in fantasies of "The Prince Charming" or the "Knight on a white horse"
The female instinct is to Seek the BEST man, and get him to commit to her.
And since ALL females would seek the SAME best man, the harem would form itself.
Unfortunately, both of these instincts, while suited for animal level nomadic tribes...
Are completely counterproductive, and ultimately destructive to what we would term "Civilization"
The entire problem is that of Paternity.
Maternity is always a KNOWN factor, as no woman has to wonder if she is the mother of her child. (Rate hospital mix ups notwithstanding)
Paternity, on the other hand, is NOT a known factor.
Civilization itself is fundamentally BUILT upon the Knowledge of paternity.
(Yes, that would make Civilization and Patriarchy one in the same)
So that the men know that their efforts are going to their own genetic offspring, they therefore work harder to build a better world for them.
In a society where the vestigial instincts of human beings are allowed to take hold, you get a two fold effect on society.
1. Females seek only the "Best of the Best", and leave many men without access to reproduction.
2. Most Men no longer work for the betterment of society, since they do not have a future in it.
I'm pretty sure that you can see both of these effects at work in western society today.
Originally posted by caitlinfae
reply to post by dragonsmusic
I think it is something very primal....when we get past the conditioning of thinking that we should all just belong to one other and cannot interact with other humans, we enjoy it very much. Female bodies are generally much more attractive and more sensual to be around anyway, although there are exceptions of course.... There is also the issue of allowing ourselves to have sexual feelings and experiences that are benign in terms of risking pregnancy, so if Hunter Gatherer Man wants his woman to be happy, and amuse himself at the same time, wouldn't he encourage this behaviour to make sure his was the only way for her to conceive? Maybe for both of them?
The only reason I can think of for women to resist these ideas again goes back to conditioning....we are taught to feel that they are bad places to be...this bisexuality nonsense and the whole multiple partners thingy....and that to be bisexual is just greedy. Shame really. Expression is just that, and affection is nothing more complicated, but that's just my evolved pagan view of it.