Add new comment

last bit

Everyone knows sexual abuse fucks children up, but can anyone tell you WHY sexual abuse fucks children up? Most of the mainstream stuff it's just an observed fact, they can't say why.

Psychoanalysis kinda can. If the bad parent's bad genital has actually been inside you, this may reinforce the sense that this bad part is still inside you and you're permanently contaminated or poisoned or made bad, or that the good objects are dead because they can't exist in your inside along with the bad object. So there is probably a part inside of you that you identify with your father. There's probably part of you which does not want to forgive your father, ever, whatever his excuses; and then there is a sense that you have some aspect of your father inside you, meaning that you, too, are unforgiveably bad and to blame for everything (doubly so if you ever desired fusion with the good version of said parent; triply so if they also try to blame you for the abuse). Alternatively, one part of you thinks the father-identified part is unforgivable. But there's other parts which value the good objects and want to reconcile and repair everything, and turn the bad objects into good objects (for instance, to have a good internal father). The depressive trend becomes strongest when you have a strong sense the bad father is permanently inside you, the good objects are irreparably destroyed or dead, and as a result, there's a kind of cosmic collapse, nothing has value any more, etc. You might also become hostile or suspicious of others, who stand for the father in various ways, or if they are symbolic siblings for instance then they also have the bad father inside them. The manic trend if I remember rightly is a defence mechanism which posits instead that you are powerful, the good objects are not destroyed and you can protect them, and the bad objects can be destroyed without harming the good objects. Klein prefers the depressive stage to the manic, which worries me rather, but it's based on the fact that there is a more realistic integration of the good and bad parts of the self and of other people in this stage; in her theory, one passes through it through a kind of reparation and rebuilding which transforms the internal bad objects into good objects and builds a kind of harmony among them (turn the wastelands into land projects, the police stations into squats, the evil pigs into harmless wild boars, etc) while also letting them be imperfect, and to be whatever they are. I think with anarchists the affinity-group, scene, project, community, movement, and/or the desired liberated future are substitute good objects which recreate the imagined happy family on a higher level, in rebellion and defiance against the bad objects identified with the system, state, capitalism, and often the "real" family. Action takes the form of trying to reshape the outer world in line with the harmonised inner vision which is projected into the future, in response to the cosmic collapse of the present. This is why political failure and defeat can be so debilitating.

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Enter the code without spaces.