On 2008-05-19 00:59 +0100, stephen allegedly wrote:
> On May 18, 3:43 pm, Daniele Futtorovic <da.futt.n...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> wrote:
>> If any group presses for action that goes against that basic goal,
then,
>> surely, it must be opposed. But it is nonsense (and admittedly sounds
>> very much like pure bigotry) to aim to "cleanse" socialism from
>> homo***uality, just because the actions of some homo***uals or
>> homo***ual "interest groups" were detrimental to the socialist cause.
>> This would imply that all homo***uals, to the very last of them, were
>> incapable of any other behaviour. And that's precisely what's
>> preposterous about SRD's position. It's like moving to ban all Jews
from
>> the Bolshevik party just because there happens to be one Jewish Bund.
>
> We adhere to different psychoanalytic schools of thought, and I won't
> try to resolves these issues here, at least not at this moment.
Well... you said you were a Freudian, didn't you?
> Also,
> understand that I am not equally sure of every point I make.
Uhuh. Yet you "make" them?
> I think
> homo***uality is essentially a character disorder, not a symptom
> disorder, as you believe.
No, no, it's certainly a character disorder. (what's a "symptom
disorder"?). No disagreement on that.
> I think homo***uals are invariably
> narcissistic and psychopathic.
As for narcissism, you're wrong. It's true sadistic/phallic-narcissistic
characters account for one half of the conscious homo***uals (the active
"men"), but you're forgetting the other part (the passive-feminine
characters). As for those with unconscious homo***ual pulsions, they go
throughout the board.
"Psychopathic". There may be some subtleties about that term I wasn't
aware of. I use it (and all the related terms) in the purely nominal
sense: psychopathology, pathology of the psyche, illness of the psyche.
"Psyche" itself is a bit hard to translate -- it's more than "mental",
as it encomp***** the whole emotional and intellectual (conscious and
unconscious) system.
Neurosis, psychosis and character disorder all fall under the general
category of psychopathology, in my terminology.
For all those who may be taken aback by such terms, or by using the term
"illness" to speak of, for instance, homo***uality, I feel I have to put
it in the proper context. Yes, speaking of "mental illness" may sound
harsh, but keep in mind that by those standards I'm speaking from
(Freudian psa.), about one person in one thousand on this whole planet
is NOT mentally ill. What's more, one wouldn't deem it harsh to speak of
someone with flu as being ill. But it's just that.
Also, to provide an example, homo***uality is (in some cases, probably a
majority, maybe all) a psychopathology, an illness of the psyche, but it
BY ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE MORE HARMLESS a pathology, both for the
individual and for society, than for instance religion -- which is,
without a doubt and in ALL cases, a psychopathology.
Aside all of this, SRD, I must point out that you didn't address at all
what I wrote in my last post, the gist of which you quoted. I said my
disagreement wasn't primarily about homo***uality, but about your takes
on homo***uality in relation to socialism. You answer only to the matter
of homo***uality. Please get back to the main issue.
--
DF.
to reply privately, change the top-level domain
in the FROM address from "invalid" to "net"
|
