What do you think about Freuds theory of infantile sexuality?

Question

I think its a bit unreal and unnerving. What's everyone elses opinion? (I like to find out other points of view before I make judgements-character flaw)

Answer 1

Freud recognised, as most other Freudians do, that children have neither the physical equipment, or the cognitive ability to have what adults would recognise as sexual feelings. What children experience are feelings and thoughts which later, according to Freud, go on to be the basis of adult sexual feelings. A good case in point is the Oedipus complex. On the surface it appears that the male child has sexual feelings towards his mother, but if you understand Freud that is not true. The child will have strong feelings towards his primary care giver, in most cases the mother. She is his protector, nourisher and guardian, and its a good survival strategy for the child to have those feelings. As in most instances with Freud, the successful resolution of the various stages will impact on later development, so a successful relationship with strong feelings towards the mother should, in theory set the scene for future relationships. Don't get too hung up over the term infant sexuality, in these days it can be so easily misunderstood. The feelings the child has are prototypical feelings for the future. Hope this helps.....Allan

Answer 2

If children didn't have infantile sexuality, then sexual abuse would be much less destructive, psychologically. No one is saying that children should ever be sexually active. They will not be ready until they have physically and psycologically become adults. But there is an innate gender separation concept that even young children have. From this comes the Aedipus Complex and The Electra Complex.
Our sexuality is so profoundly deeply routed in us as adults that that depth has to have a starting point going back some time. So childhood, on a limited basis, prepares us for this and all other aspects of being adults.

This is a complex area and can often be misunderstood. It doesn't help when the media deal with any sexual issues in such a disfuntional way.

One thing that is not commonly reported is that most child abuse in the UK is committed by other children. How would they recognise the effect of their bullying and violation unless they had some kind of hint that there was something "extra" there?

Freud was a brilliant man and the older that I get, the more his theories seem to make sense. It is easier to knock him and psychoanalysis when we are younger and less sophisticated, but we should never condem anything that we do not fully understand.

I certainly understand why you find the subject unnerving, even creepy. But these theories are genuine attempts to understand human mental functions and behaviours and not attempts to justify or condone the violation of innocents.

Answer 3

Well first of all the only way that Freud could have come up with any theories succinctly and as developed as they were made, was through the process of growing up and observing culture and being taught by example. We all learn from others from the moment we are born. So therefore before we are told as a child; about the birds and the bees, everything on our bodies is a function or a 'thing' to which we are exploring and trying to understand. The only time we are truly aware of what everything is for, is when adolescence kicks in and pubescent hormones arrive. And I would just like to say that child abuse is extremely damaging during the abuse, and the aftermath - it is damaging as a child because your body hasn't properly developed yet. And although you don't understand whats going on, half of you is anxious about your body being invaded as it can be frightening and confusing, so please don't underestimate the damage that just makes me furious. And it is only truly damaging as an adolescent because by then you know how it all works, and you are told it's wrong. But it doesn't make it less impacting as a child - a child doesn't maturely fancy, desire, or have fantasies about
anything. A child is capable of liking someone or fancying their looks, but it's just perverse to think that a child has a fair physical or psychological understanding of sexual feelings or practices.
We have all been children once, and I have no recollection of me being aware of that subject matter until I was told.
P.s this is for the other answer>> don't be all smart alec if you haven't been abused, I think personally I should know a great deal about different types of perversions and abuse more than Freud, who just has an OCD type complex around sexuality - this question just makes me mad and I'm suprised I didn't report this - abused in need of help is passable but talking about sexuality in children is just sick and shows our fascination towards our own perversions...

Answer 4

I am a big fan of Freud. I've read his major works, several biographies, took two classes on him in school and wrote my thesis on him. I can tell you point blank that his theory of infantile sxuality is without question his most controversial and problematic theory. Even the psychoanalysts that I interviewed for my thesis took issue with this particular theory. While many theorists discuss childhood exploration (Erickson being the most prominent), these theorists don't sxualize it as Freud does. I think that when you cut to the heart of it, children explore their bodies but it's about curiosity more than anything.

Answer 5

Freud was disturbed by his own disoriented sexuality, and thus saw 'sex' in alot of what he diagnosed, more like a doctor with cross-eye saying everyone needs to stop doubling up first.

Children do not view 'sexuality' the way adults view sexuality, simply because adult sexuality is a post adolescent idea. In other words, a child does not see their privates or can be categorized to relate to their privates in the same way a post-adolescent can.

And if they do, most likely its because they are picking up on the adult's (post-adolescent) attitude around them. Parent's who freak out when they catch their children 'playing' with themselves are bringing a post-adolescent view into a pre-adolescent situation.

From my own personal experience, I can say that my penis was not something all that 'special' to me until I hit adolescence, and even then it took several years for me to see it as something other than a bathroom function. My ears and nose were much more fascinating to me; those, at least, I could play with in public.

Answer 6

the actuality that he concentrated on early existence became a huge beneficial, although the emphasis on sexuality became intense. To me the telling factor is that he resisted such labels while relating himself (the classic 2d while his scholars noted that he constantly chewed on/smoked a cigar and he spoke back 'now and returned a cigar is in basic terms a cigar' it incredibly is under no circumstances what he might have pronounced if a shopper had come to be certain him and chewed on a cigar. in case you detect some issues approximately Freud charm you, check out the theories of Adler or Carl Jung. They take Freudian concepts and cause them to greater... palatable.

Answer 7

Freuds theories are a little far fetched. In his some of his studies, it just seems that he was making really distant and random links between things to get the final conclusion he wanted. It seems to me that he manipulates the situation a lot to suit himself and "support" his theory. I dont really believe it all myself.
Freud was a cocaine addict after all....

Answer 8

We are sexual beings by nature. Humans pursue pleasure and avoid pain both physically and emotionally during their entire lifespan. The oral phase is quite obvious to anyone who's spent any time around an infant. Ever try to change a diaper on a little boy? He's constantly reaching for it.

Answer 9

i think its gross how any one could go into such detail about children being obsessed with "sexual pleasure" and it's very disturbing how he states all children develop a deep sexual attraction towards the parent of the opposite sex and a dislike to the parent of the same sex. And all this before the age of 5? Some of the things he talks about are reasonable but the Infantile Sexuality stuff is pure cr*p!!! and just wrong!

Answer 10

I dont care a flying **** what Freud said or thought. It's what we think that counts