A brief essay on sexology, the power of freeing your libido, and the misleading truth many will tell you because of their own individual and homophobic fears. Sex is power!
Sexual objectification is the act of treating a person as a mere instrument of sexual pleasure. Objectification more broadly means treating a person as a commodity or an object without regard to their personality or dignity. Objectification is most commonly examined at the level of society, but can also refer to the behavior of individuals. The concept of sexual objectification and, in particular, the objectification of women, is an important idea in feminist theory and psychological theories derived from feminism. Many feminists regard sexual objectification as deplorable and as playing an important role in gender inequality. However, some social commentators argue that some modern women objectify themselves as and expression of their empowerment.
Objectification theory suggests both direct and indirect consequences of objectification to women. Indirect consequences include self consciousness in terms that a a woman is consistently checking or rearranging her clothes, or appearance to ensure that she is presentable. More direct consequences are related to sexual victimization. Rape and sexual harassment are examples of this. Additionally, sexual harassment is one of the challenges faced by women in the workplace. Research indicates that objectification theory is valuable to understanding how repeated visual images in the media are socialized an translated into mental health problems, including psychological consequences on the individual and societal level. These include increased self-consciousness, increased body anxiety, heightened mental health problems, including psychological consequences on the individual and societal level. These include increased self-consciousness, increased body anxiety, heightened mental health threats (depression, anorexia nervosa, bulimia, and sexual dysfunction), and increased body shame. Therefore, the theory has been used to explore and array of dependent variables including disordered eating, mental health, depression, motor performance, body image, idealized body type, stereotype formation, sexual perception and sexual typing. Body shame is a byproduct of the concept of an idealized body type adopted by most Western cultures that depicts a thin, model type figure. Thus, women will engage in actions meant to change heir body such as dieting, exercise, eating disorders, cosmetic surgery, etc. Effects of the objectification theory are identified on both the individual and societal levels.
The book Symbolic Wounds by Bruno Bettelhiem suggests that because a large portion of Western culture is Christian, and the Christian religion has its roots in Judaism, Bettelhiem argues that Freud’s castration complex, riddled with its anxieties, is predominantly seen in advanced Western cultures. In Western cultures their seems to exist an exacting “father figure.” A “father figure” known as God who imposes stringent behavioral requirements in return for his love and care in the eternal thereafter. God tells his people, “Obey my laws or I may not love you. If you don‘t obey my laws, you may be cast into the eternal fires of hell.” Isn’t this what social media is telling our young people? This message sent to young people, and people in general, is saying the same thing. In its effect it says, “If you make yourself look like Pamela Anderson, they will like you. If you built it, they will come.” Mainstream media sends a message to people to help them increase their libido and advance free expression.
Bettelhiem suggests that surgical manipulations of one’s body isn’t necessarily a bad thing. Women who wish to undergo plastic surgery to augment their body in an attempt to free their libido so they may live their lives more happily, with attained self-confidence shouldn’t be considered a sin. It’s effects can be quiet positive. Yet, some people treat it in a negative way as to support the negative consequences to sexual objectification.
To demonstrate the positive effects of plastic surgery and freeing the libido, Bettelhiem gives the following example in comparison to preliterate tribes’ ritualization of penile subincisions.
Cases involving rhinoplasty of a young girl’s nose
One young girl’s deeper and largely unconscious motives were guilt, masochism and doubts about her femininity. But the conscious reason for surgery was her desire for success ins sexual life, as it it the conscious reason fro circumcision in preliterate society. The final result of the operation supports the idea that the conscious reasons won out, though this may have been because the operation also satisfied unconscious needs simultaneously. Before rhinoplasty the girl had seen herself as an ugly duckling (not without some reason, though with the exception of her too prominent nose she was not much below average attractiveness and had many good friends of both sexes), and, at the age of about twenty, was still very dependent on her parents. Immediately after the operation and before marriage, she broke away from her parents and achieved a degree of independence she had never thought possible. She had not expected this as a result o surgery and was astonished that it so happened. The belief that she had become a desirable sex object – and possibly also the satisfaction of unconscious masochistic desires and need of punishment, of which she remained unaware – seemed to lead to psychological independence from the parents even before full sex enjoyment. Thus a traumatic physical experience (the act of surgery) made possible psychological independence, if not maturity. It might be said that this girl had deep feelings of inferiority which she had rationalized by focusing responsibility on her big nose. She believed that removal of this external source of inferiority feelings would and did bring emotional well-being. Though much more complex psychological mechanisms were undoubtedly at work, her final experience, nevertheless, was that the results more than compensated for the surgical trauma. Soon after her operation, she was married, made good sexual and marital adjustments and since has lived a rather happy life. Moreover, with heightened self-esteem and greater satisfaction of her narcissism, she became less masochistic and guilty. Her supposed ugliness had made her fear other associations and had forced her into unsatisfactory, ambivalent and guilty dependence on her mother. Able to strike out for herself after her operation, she was less dependent on, hence less disappointed by, her mother, and less hostile and guilty. All this, and most of all her sexual success, she experienced as the result of surgery, which she felt had finally changed her into a woman.
It may be suggested that this proves that plastic surgery is experienced as castration, that through it the girl got rid of (or was deprived of) and imagined penis and so was forced into femininity. If the operation permitted her to resolve her ambivalence about femininity – and thus helped her to accept and to succeed in the feminine role. . .
Whatever else it may show, this example indicates that physical traumata that in our society would be experienced most commonly as a castration threat can, within another psychological constellation, acquire a very different meaning and have other consequences than to increase sex anxiety.
Durkheim has pointed out how ritual cruelties are commonly executed on a particular organ or tissue in the belief that this will stimulate its vitality.
Feeling ugly, she may have turned back toward herself a great deal of emotional energy in order to maintain self-acceptance and inner integration. After surgery libido at first may have been drawn toward the nose. But while in the hospital the girl had a new experience: what she had invested with libido was so invested also by others. The organ which up to then had stood, subjectively at least, in the way of gratification. The surgeon, the nurses, her friends showed great interest in and concern with it. The nose suddenly received attention and praise. Later this investment of libido in one part of her body came to be distributed over the rest – perhaps under the influence of the flattering attention that was now paid to at least a part of her body. She now felt more attractive, hence was more attractive. This new feeling may have been at first the consequence of narcissistic libido, but the final effect of the interest and approval of other person was to free libido for investment in object relations.
Powerful they [manipulations of organs and tissue] undoubtedly are, and probably also painful, but nothing the people say or do permits us to conclude that they experience these rituals as cruel. Once more we see an example of the Western observer imposing his own value judgments.
A possible explanation is that before the operation this girl had withdrawn libido from the external world which had disappointed her.
The contention that these physical traumata may be felt as painful but not as cruel, and hence not as trauma in the psychological sense, seems supported by the experience of persons undergoing cosmetic plastic surgery. Nobody I know has regarded such surgery as “cruel”; even the pain seems reduced by the desire with which the operations are approached. The person who complains volubly about everyday suffering may minimize great pain when the emotions connected with it are strongly positive.
Who are we to judge a person for undergoing the surgical trauma of plastic surgery in order to increase their libido, feelings of sexual prowess in order to obtain the enjoyment of their “magic powers?”
Richard von Krafft-Ebing in 1886 published a landmark book entitled Psychopathia Sexualis. Addressing such arcane topics as clitoral stimulation, reduced libido, and homosexuality. The discipline Krafft-Ebing founded is known as sexology.
Remember what your mother told you? It was all a lie. There’s nothing wrong with freaky and squicky. In fact, it turns out that it’s quite normal.
“Unlike the origins of electromagnetic energy, the origins of desire remain mysterious and controversial. There’s no consensus on which sexual interests are normal, abnormal, or pathological. Scientists can’t even agree on the purpose of female orgasm, whether there is such a thing as having too much sex, whether sexual fantasies are innocent or dangerous.” ~A Billion Wicked Thoughts by Ogi Ogas and Sai Gaddam
The human psyche and its search for sexual content as it turns out is remarkably identical to each other. When it comes to the diverse list of homo sapients’ sexual interest, as expressed on internet searches, only lists twenty different site specific content that account for 80 percent of the searches. This might seem like a lot, but once you consider the number of individuals who use the internet, it is kinda rather amazing there isn’t more diversity. This means that most people’s desires are clustered together into a relatively small set of common interests. Some of the top interests are as follows: Youth (free non-nude teen videos), Gay (straight guys paid to have gay sex), MILFs (Mother’s I’d Like To F#@% in bikinis), Breasts (huge boobies), Cheating Wives (cuckold porn), Vaginas (shaved women‘s genitals), Penises (huge male endowments), Butts (hot Latino asses), Cheerleaders (free cheerleader porn).
Here are some images to consider with regard to the study of sexology and freeing one’s libido.
Images of freed libido . . . .
Sex as Female-to-Female Object
Sex as Male-to-Male Object
Sex as Female Straight Object
Sex as Male Straight Object
Sex as Sadism and Masochism Object
Sex as Fetish (transvestites)
Sex as Male Transgender Object
Sex as Female Androgynous Object
How do you feel about person’s right to freely express themselves? Are you more liberating or castrating?