Thomas_More
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I think many adults fail in perspicacity and remembrance of their childhoods.
Not everything in me comes from books / other person sources. My philosophy has developed from my own experiences, and I have subsequently come into contact with writers and thinkers who confirm what I already know from my own experience.
AI Overview
A child romance typically refers to a young, innocent crush or affection between children, or stories that explore youthful bonds in literature and film.Characteristics of Childhood Romance
• Innocence and Simplicity: Early crushes usually focus on simple moments like holding hands, sharing snacks, or walking home from school.
• Social Learning: These connections help children learn basic social rules, empathy, and how to navigate feelings outside the immediate family.
• Parental Guidance: Healthy limits (such as schoolwork focus, curfews, and open communication) help keep early friendships grounded and positive.Popular Depictions in Film and Media
Many classic family and coming-of-age movies capture the bittersweet, nostalgic feel of young affection:
• Flipped (2010)
• Bridge to Terabithia (2007)
• My Girl (1991)
• Little Manhattan (2005)
(Note: In psychological or literary terms, “family romance” can also refer to Sigmund Freud’s concept of a child’s subconscious fantasy about their parents and social standing, or adult romance subgenres that feature children or single parents in the main plot).I know it because I was a child.
https://www.fatherly.com/health/masturbation-what-is-normal-kids-when-parents-should-worry
Great. Thank you Piers.
BD, I was saying that children have sexual feelings long before puberty. They have romantic feelings and fantasies which we know are sexual, as Freud knew, without any adult interference or abuse, long before they know anything about the sexual act, and without requiring genital focus.
Their fantasies and romances will of course be informed by the culture they are growing up in, namely the children’s culture around them, comics, films etc.
If one can locate it, “Sex in a Free Society”, article by party member Ernst Fleischmann, is a genuine Marxist presentation of psychoanalysis. Comrade Fleischmann was (is?) a reichian therapist and SPGB member.
Again, this seems like the immature being ridiculous. (Not you. I mean the mixers).
As materialists, we know the causes of racism etc. are within capitalism and its divide and rule practices. Racism was originally justification for the slave trade.
A true understanding of psychoanalysis is to see it as an attempt to help the victims, in terms of neuroses and mental illness, of the capitalist system, whilst recognising that the only real cure is the abolition of this socio-economic system. A Marxist psychoanalyst would know this and proclaim it, as did Wilhelm Reich.
That is the only “mixing” that makes sense. One wouldn’t use a spanner for writing a letter.
Boys, without any interference from others, begin to masturbate by the time they are five years old.
Children have romantic desires and romantic friendships long before puberty and (although I can’t speak for today’s children) long before they know anything of sexual mechanics or how babies come about. They are conscious, even so, that the feelings they have are different from what most mean by friendship, and exceptionally powerful. The cultural indicators which constitute the individual child’s upbringing will determine the child’s notions of the romantic. They may be popular cartoon characters or film and TV narratives and characters; at one time characters in books.
Today, I dare say, blatantly sexual indicators are probably absorbed much earlier than in my time.All this stress on “death drive” etc. Aren’t you all throwing the baby out with the bath water?
Must we condemn all psychoanalysis on the basis of obvious errors?
Granted that capitalism is the cause of most neuroses and mental illness, there is much that is not explained by it. Phobias, for instance.
It is the immature who reject the totality of someone like Freud’s thought on the basis of obvious errors. Your vehemence and venom at any notion of psychoanalysis, when there is much we do not know about the mind (I mean – good grief! – many of you even believe in unmotivated will!) is practically bolshevist.
The best socialist précis I have read on Freud remains Blewitt’s two-parter in the Standard. It is calm and fair.
Germany and Russia conflict:
