Tuesday, March 22, 2011

Analysis #3 Pyschoanalysis




Freud's theory of fetishism is one that seems unlikely to many in today's society and exhibits many flaws and holes in its research. However, he is one of the few people who have given any remotely plausible reasoning to the development of fetishes in adults and is, therefore, worthy of consideration. The clip for this analysis displays several common and not so common costuming selections for serious fetishists and here, I will attempt to explain their significance through a Freudian perspective . Although some of them many seem initially obscure, Freudian analysis offers an explanation for their presence, whether it is accurate or not.
For instance, the animal costumes or "fuzzies" depicted in this video directly correlate with Freud's hypothesis that a young man's fetish is established by the last thing he observed before he realized that his mother no longer possessed a phallus. The fur in many of these costumes, according to Freud, would be a symbol of the mother's pubic hair which, "should have been followed by the longed-for sight of the pubic member". These individuals have focused their sexual attention on these costumes in order to redirect their fear of castration and deny their homosexuality. By focusing their sexual attention on the fur instead of the women, these fetishists can engage in sexual relations with women while continuing their sexual attraction to a phallic symbol and ignoring their fear of castration.
The latex outfits seemed a little less clear than the fur, as Freud didn't specifically address latex in his writing. They didn't seem to initially represent anything except a lack of hair, which would be contrary to the previous fetish, involving hair. This seemed extremely confusing for some time, however, a little inventive thinking clarified the situation. It donned on me after some time that a person clad in latex could physically represent the phallus itself. Fetishists could literally have sex with a sort of phallus without being considered homosexual or even having to consider the gender of the person they were engaging in sex with.

Unfortunately this video clip also addressed some issues with Freud's theories, not all of the costumes and practices observed seem in accordance with his beliefs. For instance, the balloon fetish don't seem to have any correlation with phallic imagery. Also Freud never considers variation in his fetishists. What if they are already openly gay? or female?
An openly gay man wouldn't need a symbolic phallus, as he has already addressed the desire for a penis. S&M and fetishism is popular in many homosexual circles, so it's not as if gay openly gay men are exempt from fetishes. Is this a fatal flaw in Freud's argument, or has our definition or fetish changed? It is possible that some people just immensely enjoy social taboo in a way that Freud's concept of "fetish" does not include.
In addition I found it interesting that Freud never addresses female fetishists. Although fetishists in the video seem to be primarily male, there is also a woman depicted. Does Freud's theory then become reversed? Do women experience the development of a fetish due to a fear of phalluses and the fear that they might grow some strange appendage from their groin? These incomplete thoughts lead me to question Freud's theories.

Works Cited

Current Media. "Youtube's Creepiest Fetish Costumes" Oct. 30 2009. Web. March 22 2011.
Freud, Sigmund. "Fetishism." (1927). Print. New York:W.W. Norton & COmpany.

No comments:

Post a Comment