The phallic position : The core of Masculinity

[Schizophonia]

4 hours ago, aurum said:

Yeah I'm not following this.

We have better models than Freud or Lacan for understanding masculinity / femininity.

No.

 

[Schizophonia]

5 hours ago, aurum said:

Yeah I'm not following this.

We have better models than Freud or Lacan for understanding masculinity / femininity.

No.

18 hours ago, Judy2 said:

it gets a bit wacky in Lacan's reading because there it goes that women are the phallus and men have the phallus, because women serve as the "dialectical confirmation of [masculinity]". which i guess is true, but then Butler criticises how this view still originates in a matrix based on masculine desire alone and dismisses the idea of a preexisting feminine structure. which is as much as i can parrot from my university lectures; it's not like i understand the implications or if there'd be any alternative.

When you play Mario Bros, you're playing at perceiving lack (being on level one, starting a storyline where something "goes wrong") and at bringing back the phallus (completing levels and winning).

It's the same for a woman; she's full of voids/lack, and you're playing at erasing them.

The more neurotic you are, the less masculine you are, because you identify directly with lack; like you want it.

When you ruminate on tik tok it's neurotic for example; you're not playing with the lack of a third object as a phallic tool, you're playing at embodying the lack yourself. You want to growl.

Edited 9 hours ago by Schizophonia

[Someone here]

I read the entire thing . Thank you for writing and you have a brilliant mind . But it gets wayyyy tooooo complicated to the point it's pointless and there is nothing I could flesh out the juice of the matter .also as I was reading terms I have no idea existed the article was getting way lofty and sent me to la la land where we are talking about abstractions and things that don't even  exist.

[Judy2]

@Schizophonia idk. this part is interesting to me personally, because i know that Freud's theory basically equates mental illness with the feminine and mental health with the masculine. having been affected strongly by mental illness, i do wonder if this is really true and if there are ways for the feminine to be feminine and still mentally healthy. i hope so, and i hope that Freud missed something when theorising the feminine as inherently mad, hysterical, and pathological. i guess women can be that and we are probably naturally predisposed to experiencing more negative affect. but that's not all of what we are. i hope there are ways to be sensitive and emotional, yet resilient and grounded at the same time.

Edited 8 hours ago by Judy2

[Schizophonia]

16 hours ago, NewKidOnTheBlock said:

Right, I think that was laid out in the innitial parts of the post by describing how men are seeking to be phallic in their relation to the women and women want the phallus, however I thought the latter parts moreso contained the main idea which is that you should identify as the phallus regardless whether you'd lose a woman that way (since you'd lose her anyway by being a simp A.K.A. being non phallic and viewing her as the phallus) and that you should ideally be tending to your little garden, so to speak, meaning doing yo own thang and everythin

The girl's issues are your business. When you take charge of a woman and her problems, you're in a masculine position.
If you force or pressure her, you're creating the opposite situation, usually for neurotic reasons because obviously it's not pleasant for anyone and it won't work.
If it does work, because the girl has guilt issues or something like that, you're putting yourself in danger because sooner or later you'll be cheated on.
You'll be the guy she dates because he's "objectively good," and then in the end, your wife will cheat on you and experience orgasms like she never has with a random guy because he's significantly a better phallus for her.

16 hours ago, NewKidOnTheBlock said:

Yeah basically that's how I'd have to be if I was to really follow this line of thinking, since nearly any kind of activity one can do is basically a self improvement in disguise lol just lazy and not giving a shit

It's not a question of doing or not doing it, but of why you do it, of perspective.
In the idea of self-improvement, this element of language can have a neurotic, self-centered dimension, which is indirectly feminizing.

What's the difference between a guy who takes magic mushrooms to "fix" himself and a woman or a gay man who gets sodomized, lol? What's the difference between a guy who tries to improve himself in the sense of going from "not good enough" to "good enough" and a woman or a gay man who wears makeup, fake nails, a crop top, etc.? It's about unconsciously seeing yourself as a problem to be solved, instead of the other person/the object.

Hence the misogyny and denial in obsessive-compulsive neurosis, because a woman, and even other men in general, don't care about your personal development, how mature, "nice," "overly self-aware," and so on, you are; about this "self-image." Again, it's like a gay man saying, "Did you see my croc top? It's nice, isn't it? 😏👄"
Okay, lol, fine.

People expect you to have a generally phallic posture, that is to say, confident and/or reassuring and/or funny and/or rich and/or a good sports/games partner, etc.

I say "people" because men also expect you to be phallic, not because they aren't phallic, but because the vision of you as a phallic mirror is satisfying. That's the principle of 'friendship'.

11 hours ago, Joshe said:

It's about time Schizo clued us in on all his mysterious ramblings. Interesting and plausible, but they don't hold up or are at least insufficient, as was Freud. Good and interesting insights to explore- but psychological coherence? No.

It's true that childhood attention seeking strategies persists into adulthood, but the whole psycho-sexual frame is clearly absurd. 

@Schizophonia - move past Freud. 

You have a good foundation and good intuition, but Freud is keeping you stuck. You have to look at human psychology from your own analytic lens. Don't presuppose the pioneers got it right. They didn't. You have to take from multiple pioneers, and even more importantly, your own observations, so you don't get locked into a paradigm you didn't create. 

It's great to see how other paradigms comport with reality (which you do exceptionally well), but you also have to see where they fail. That benchmark has to come from your own observation of the subject matter. You're still young. Just watch humans for the next 2-3 years with no framework. Maybe your own framework will emerge. That's the path the other pioneers took. 

If the predominant psychologist of the time gets hung up on sexuality, of course it will seep into the psychological theory. 

I don't particularly adhere to Freud; I naturally use his epistemology in particular because it's very pure and effective.

If tomorrow I find more effective linguistic elements, I'll adopt them.

5 hours ago, Joshe said:

😂Fuckin mirror effect, obviously! 

😏

6 hours ago, AION said:

You need to get laid haha

I'm generally cerebral but yes

5 hours ago, SimpleGuy said:

Bro came up with a fkin theory because he ain`t got bodies

Ditto

10 hours ago, Princess Arabia said:

Lol, it's 'mirror' now. 

Best martingale

 

[Schizophonia]

I want to clarify that in all cases the object of desire is a phallic mirror, even for a man.
So, whether it's a male friend or a woman who is phallicized—that is, you're having sex while pulling her hair, etc.
When you have sex with a woman, she becomes a phallic mirror; she no longer has any problems or needs.

Edited 8 hours ago by Schizophonia

[Schizophonia]

50 minutes ago, Someone here said:

I read the entire thing . Thank you for writing and you have a brilliant mind . But it gets wayyyy tooooo complicated to the point it's pointless

Actually I was lazy and made the thread in one or two hours; if I'd taken a day or a week it would probably have been much longer and more complicated ahah.

But ty.

Quote

and there is nothing I could flesh out the juice of the matter .also as I was reading terms I have no idea existed the article was getting way lofty and sent me to la la land where we are talking about abstractions and things that don't even  exist.

It basically means not to push too hard/to give up self love.

Edited 8 hours ago by Schizophonia

[Schizophonia]

22 minutes ago, Judy2 said:

@Schizophonia idk. this part is interesting to me personally, because i know that Freud's theory basically equates mental illness with the feminine and mental health with the masculine. having been affected strongly by mental illness, i do wonder if this is really true and if there are ways for the feminine to be feminine and still mentally healthy. i hope so, and i hope that Freud missed something when theorising the feminine as inherently mad, hysterical, and pathological. i guess women can be that and we are probably naturally predisposed to experiencing more negative affect. but that's not all of what we are. i hope there are ways to be sensitive and emotional, yet resilient and grounded at the same time.

Freud didn't say that; men are just as crazy as women but the expression tends to be different. (hysteria vs. obsessive...)

[Judy2]

@Schizophonia ah ok. then the interpretation of the interpretation of the interpretation said that.

[Hojo]

@Someone here When you are a child you you want your mother to treat you like a king so you try to impress her. When you are 12 your queen tells you you arent good enough so you make up a random quest that you are useless and you must go out and find something that dosent exist to fullfill yourself. You can never find this thing.

Edited 7 hours ago by Hojo

[Cubbage]

8 hours ago, AION said:

You need to get laid haha

Yup

[Schizophonia]

32 minutes ago, Cubbage said:

Yup

That will be on my journal or my thread on Hinge.

Edited 6 hours ago by Schizophonia

[Schizophonia]

1 hour ago, Judy2 said:

@Schizophonia ah ok. then the interpretation of the interpretation of the interpretation said that.

lol, what do you mean

[Schizophonia]

2 hours ago, Judy2 said:

@Schizophonia idk. this part is interesting to me personally, because i know that Freud's theory basically equates mental illness with the feminine and mental health with the masculine. having been affected strongly by mental illness, i do wonder if this is really true and if there are ways for the feminine to be feminine and still mentally healthy. i hope so, and i hope that Freud missed something when theorising the feminine as inherently mad, hysterical, and pathological. i guess women can be that and we are probably naturally predisposed to experiencing more negative affect. but that's not all of what we are. i hope there are ways to be sensitive and emotional, yet resilient and grounded at the same time.

One way to look at it is that men are also pathological but project it whenever they can.

Sometimes men aren't phallic; men need to eat food, and quite a lot of it, to slee, etc; you actually need food and sleep to be stronger, to ultimately be phallic eheh.

But in a social context, the perception of lack is projected onto women,a car to use, a nation to save, etc.

That's why men seem more stoic; the problem, the lack (of phallus), what you call madness is more projected onto the object.

Edited 6 hours ago by Schizophonia

[Schizophonia]

When I speak of an object, I don't mean only an "external physical object," as we can intuitively think about, but symbols in general; Lacan would speak of the symbolic order.
The taste of a beer is a symbol; yet it is clearly "inside" and beyond the "physical" (I use quotation in relation to non-duality).

 

[Hojo]

@SchizophoniaCan you not say the object is the imaginary thing that society gaslit  you into thinking was missing. If you are an intellectual its intelligence, if you are political its politics, if you are a punk its being free.

Edited 6 hours ago by Hojo

[NewKidOnTheBlock]

@Schizophonia So the mission is to embody as many phallic qualities that are authentic to you as possible so that all the women who are phallus-less in that particuliar way, can obtain our particuliar unique phallus (in literal terms as well) and then reproduce with all of them so that Elon Musk can have as many people as possible for Mars terraformace. Got it

Edited 5 hours ago by NewKidOnTheBlock

[Hojo]

@NewKidOnTheBlockI think its to go back to being a kid. I think its saying you are chasing something that cant be fullfilled cause it dosent exist. When you do this you become the cock. Elon musk is the extreme version of trying really hard to find the thing that dosent exist, which is the madness. The more you cant find this thing the angrier and more malicious you get.

Edited 5 hours ago by Hojo

[Judy2]

1 hour ago, Schizophonia said:

lol, what do you mean

for example some scholar's reading of Butler's reading of Lacan's reading of Freud said that.

[Elliott]

 @Schizophonia 

Is this not counter to how you regularly rag on here about the guys having low libido?