Freudian connotations involving my best friends crotch?

Acid_Violet

Right so I had a dream last night that was really really odd about one of my best friends who's male and I'm female. I'll give my opinion on what it means after I get some feedback, I want fresh opinions first.

In my dream I was in someway injuring my friend, who I'll call Dave, in the place that it hurts the most, but not in a major way. There was some friendly dialogue in there yet I was starting to hurt him more and more and I think I may have started hurting him by kicking him and progressed to using a knife......Anyway, after a while it became apparent that I had done a lot of damage and I assumed that he wouldn't mind if I pulled his trousers out to have a look at what damage I did and so I pull his trousers and boxers down and his left testicle was really bruised, dark purple and possibly severred and there was generally damage done.

So.......I don't expect people to be able to explain this very well to me but if anyone can to any extent that'd be great. I know it's a really weird, somewhat disturbing dream, so I don't blame anyone expressing repulsion at it. Thanks for any help provided!

Black Swan

Freud is too cliche', especially for women, given that his case studies primarily focused on men. He would probably label it some kind of envy? Pffffff! His daughter did write a book on dream interpretation, but I wouldn't waste my time reading it, except for an historical perspective (psychoanalysis was male dominated back then with the expected bias).

If I was to attempt to interpret your dream, I would not try to be literal. Your dream obviously has sexual content and regards someone you know of the opposite sex. Your relationship with him would be the key to unravelling the mystery, if it can be done?

Acid_Violet

Ha, envy, I agree with you on that one, but obviously sexual connotations in the dream.

The way I interpret it (bearing in mind the past between my friend and I) is to do with me having a huge crush on him for a long time, and getting more close to him as a friend in a more huggy way especially. I told one of my best friends about Dave being especially huggy with me and he thought that that didn't sound like Dave as he's not particularly huggy so I think this dream depicts me gradually getting closer to him in a sexual way (by me injuring him in the crotch and gradually getting more extreme). I've no idea what the sadism in the dream denotes however.... Make any sense?

Black Swan

Acid_Violet wrote:

I've no idea what the sadism in the dream denotes however.... Make any sense?

Just remember that dreams are rarely to be taken literally. Do you now wish the relationship to go beyond friendship? Are you frustrated that it hasn't yet? Are you waiting for him to make the first move, and he hasn't? Have you been thinking about making that first move yourself, but are reluctant? Is the tension building to do something?

Oh, I really like your "My drama..." sig!

Acid_Violet

Blue_Lagoon wrote:

Just remember that dreams are rarely to be taken literally. Do you now wish the relationship to go beyond friendship? Are you frustrated that it hasn't yet? Are you waiting for him to make the first move, and he hasn't? Have you been thinking about making that first move yourself, but are reluctant? Is the tension building to do something?

I always kind of was his friend wanting more, that's how friendship started kind of and I've kind of given up/realised it was unrealistic and stuff like that as we became better friends, but I've always hoped that things would develop romantically and always flirted with the notion that they might, but I never made a move because I was scared it'd wreck our friendship.

Oh, I really like your "My drama..." sig!

Thanks!

Black Swan

Methinks you have now interpreted your dream? Curious... Any more dreams about him?

DublinWriter

Acid_Violet wrote:

I always kind of was his friend wanting more, that's how friendship started kind of and I've kind of given up/realised it was unrealistic and stuff like that as we became better friends, but I've always hoped that things would develop romantically and always flirted with the notion that they might, but I never made a move because I was scared it'd wreck our friendship.

You've just worked it out for yourself!

brianthebard

I disagree with the idea of envy. I'm only reading Freud's interpretation of dreams at the minute, so I'm no expert, but judging by what you have said (and continuing the Freudian interpretation theme) the act of mutilating your friends genitals is the way in which you can gain control over who you are attracted to. In reproductive terms a man with a banged up cock is not a very suitable partner, and so your attack on his penis is your subconscious removing him from the section of the population marked potential partners. In most of Freud's dream analysis the events of the day preceding the dream are probably the most important-can you tell us something about what had happened to cause this dream? Or is that important to you?

Edit: how was your friend reacting to having his knob hacked at with a knife?

Double edit: B_L, many, perhaps the majority of case studies and examples of dreams that Freud uses in The interpretation of dreams are from women patients. I do realise that there are issues with the way Freud approached gender, he's not always right. But sometimes people are overeager to dismiss him outright.

Black Swan

brianthebard wrote:

I do realise that there are issues with the way Freud approached gender, he's not always right. But sometimes people are overeager to dismiss him outright.

Problems with S. Freud's theories? Oh, let me count just a few...
1. Gender bias - Freud often diagnosed women as hysterical, and men not. After all, how can a man have a "wandering womb?" (origin of the word hysterical). Furthermore, men dominated the psychiatric profession for more than a 100 years (The first woman to be licensed as a psychiatrist was Karen Horney, which occurred relatively close to the time of Freud's death).
2. Social bias - Freud was raised in a family that was well-to-do and had servants. Later, most of the patients he served were of this wealthy class (who could pay his high bills), unlike the majority of the population, so how can he make generalisations to the larger population?
3. Patient bias - Freud was trained first in the medical model approach, consequently he only examined patients with problems. How are the mentally ill representative of the population?
4. Narrow view - Freud has been labelled a sexual reductionist for good reason. Repressed sexuality does not account for all human behaviour.
5. Early development bias - Freud contended that most developmental problems occurred during childhood, negating that people are constantly changing from birth to death. For example, menopause is a major life-changing event for women, which Freud failed to address in this early development theory.
6. Ecological fallacy - an ecological fallacy occurs when you reason from one unit of analysis to another unit of analysis. In other words, Freud examined individuals, then generalised his results to entire populations in his Society and Its Malcontents book. The same thing occurred when he studied Anna O., then drew conclusions about all women based upon that one case.
7. Lack of peer review - Freud published very few of his case studies, consequently his methods and results were not subject to much scholarly review.
8. Circular arguments - Anyone challenging Freud was seen as someone that was being defensive. If you challenged him, you must have something to hide?
9. Suggestion - Freud has been criticised for pressuring young, immature women into believing the source of their problems stemmed from repressed sexuality. He often interpreted women's dreams in this way, consistent with his sexual (reductionist) theory. In essence, Freud convinced many of his patients to believe his interpretations, then wrote up the results confirming his theory in a self-fulfilling prophecy way.

Call Me Jimmy

"If I can't have you, nobody will". Hence the wrecking his cock? No?

Black Swan

Dreams are not to be taken literally...

Acid_Violet

Had more dreams about Dave. Wanna help?

I don't remember this one well but I was meeting him with all my friends at th Gaeltacht where we all met and it was gonna be all of our last years there and he greeted me by hugging me, falling on top of me, staying there hugging me for a while, and possibly humping me.......I suppose all you can do is lol!

The whole falling on top of me was just like how he'd horseplay with me, rugby tackling me particularly for no reason. So all in all, twas like him kind of greetiing me normally, except with that little bit extra........ I think it means that I want things to be the same between us except with a little bit extra in that direction, any opinions? I've had loads more dreams recently about him but I unfortunately forget 'em all.

Black Swan

Acid_Violet wrote:

I think it means that I want things to be the same between us except with a little bit extra in that direction, any opinions? I've had loads more dreams recently about him but I unfortunately forget 'em all.

Well, are you going to make the first move, or are you going to keep waiting on him? Yes, you may risk the friendship, but then again you might get that "little bit extra" too?:cool:

Acid_Violet

Well I would make some move other than I don't really have much evidence that he wants the 'little bit extra' so I'll ride the storm of uncertainty for a bit till I see whatever the situation may be on yonder land. (Jaysus Pirates of the Caribbean has really gotten to me.........)

Black Swan

Love your Pirates lingo. Made me laugh. Well, smooth sailing matee, but find a better compass than Jacks!

Acid_Violet

Aye, you'll be informed if progressed be made through the doldrems.

brianthebard

Blue_Lagoon wrote:

Problems with S. Freud's theories? Oh, let me count just a few...
1. Gender bias - Freud often diagnosed women as hysterical, and men not. After all, how can a man have a "wandering womb?" (origin of the word hysterical). Furthermore, men dominated the psychiatric profession for more than a 100 years (The first woman to be licensed as a psychiatrist was Karen Horney, which occurred relatively close to the time of Freud's death).
2. Social bias - Freud was raised in a family that was well-to-do and had servants. Later, most of the patients he served were of this wealthy class (who could pay his high bills), unlike the majority of the population, so how can he make generalisations to the larger population?
3. Patient bias - Freud was trained first in the medical model approach, consequently he only examined patients with problems. How are the mentally ill representative of the population?
4. Narrow view - Freud has been labelled a sexual reductionist for good reason. Repressed sexuality does not account for all human behaviour.
5. Early development bias - Freud contended that most developmental problems occurred during childhood, negating that people are constantly changing from birth to death. For example, menopause is a major life-changing event for women, which Freud failed to address in this early development theory.
6. Ecological fallacy - an ecological fallacy occurs when you reason from one unit of analysis to another unit of analysis. In other words, Freud examined individuals, then generalised his results to entire populations in his Society and Its Malcontents book. The same thing occurred when he studied Anna O., then drew conclusions about all women based upon that one case.
7. Lack of peer review - Freud published very few of his case studies, consequently his methods and results were not subject to much scholarly review.
8. Circular arguments - Anyone challenging Freud was seen as someone that was being defensive. If you challenged him, you must have something to hide?
9. Suggestion - Freud has been criticised for pressuring young, immature women into believing the source of their problems stemmed from repressed sexuality. He often interpreted women's dreams in this way, consistent with his sexual (reductionist) theory. In essence, Freud convinced many of his patients to believe his interpretations, then wrote up the results confirming his theory in a self-fulfilling prophecy way.

You have issues.:p Seriously though you shouldn't dismiss freud's theories, and you should remember that they are just theories. He sometimes interpreted some women's dreams as stemming from repressed sexuality, but that is definitely not always the case. Many of your arguments are against the period and world that Freud lived in, rather than solely against him. Freud was one of the first people to think about mental illnesses in a way other than demons in people's heads, and much of his work still stands up today. As a pioneer in the psychoanalysis field with few if any peers to look to, its unlikely that all his discoveries will be perfect.

Black Swan

brianthebard wrote:

You have issues.:p Seriously though you shouldn't dismiss freud's theories, and you should remember that they are just theories. He sometimes interpreted some women's dreams as stemming from repressed sexuality, but that is definitely not always the case. Many of your arguments are against the period and world that Freud lived in, rather than solely against him. Freud was one of the first people to think about mental illnesses in a way other than demons in people's heads, and much of his work still stands up today. As a pioneer in the psychoanalysis field with few if any peers to look to, its unlikely that all his discoveries will be perfect.

No, the delineated (above) points are critiques of Freud (not just those of his era). Freud didn't understand women (few male psychoanalysts or alienists did during his time). Karen Horney (the first female allowed to enter Freud's profession), whom Freud publicly noted as a very bright woman, challenged his notions about women (while Freud still lived). You should read some of her critiques? She essentially puts Freudian theory on it's head (excuse the pun).

Furthermore, Eric Erikson demolishes Freud's heavy emphasis on childhood psycho-sexual developmental predominance with his 8 life stages (from birth to death). And Corrianne Hut suggests that the biology of behaviour is extraordinarily different between men and women (beyond the obvious), scientifically measuring differences in the brain. Freud was not scientific when using his armchair and couch case studies, and made research errors that would be cause for him to be laughed out of today's scholarly audience. Freud is only of historical importance, but not relevant today, especially when it pertains to interpreting the behaviour of women (either awake or dreaming).