What is a person with a lingering Oedipal or Electra complex (see qualifications to those terms in the previous post) to do? First let me see if there should be more qualifications. The Wikipedia articles stress bodily sexual identification. Perhaps this is an over-materialist point of view. John Granger also spoke of 3 types of western knowledge that I didn’t write down. Maybe they were rational, democratic, and material? Much of our modern science is wholly materialistic where for something to exist, it has to be made of matter and energy. Mr. Granger dismissively said that truth statements such as that don’t even have matter and energy.

Freudian psychology may root everything in the material, but the relationships it describes as constrictive or therapeutic don’t seem to be as material. There is an illustration in the Electra Complex article that describes how Cinderella had to cease identifying with the wicked step mother (society) and identify instead with the Fairy God mother, who was good. “Identification” does not seem to be a materialistic word, unless one puts it on terms with the body only.

As an aside, I once saw a round table discussion on PBS where a group of psychologists were asked if they had any unresolved questions regarding their field of study. One said he still didn’t know why there is such a thing as psychological pain. Maybe because it can’t be completely understood on material terms, but neither is it divorced from it.

To not totally dismiss Freud or Jung, I think they had valid observations. If there is an age of gender discovery and corresponding shifts and identifications in relationships with each parent, there are valid statements to be made. Perhaps I am too dismissive of the body. My last post sounded so. You go take care of business, as it were. I treat the body as a slave, even though I also indulge its lazyness and gluttony, etc. I (the brain in charge of a loud heart) am a bad master. Perhaps because I don’t respect it. Anyway, there is detachment along with negative perceptions and experiences. The brain neglects it because it is a burden and it is selfish with it’s needs, aches, and pains. The body sulks away with food, or has to impatiently wait. Bad body.

Back to the heart. If Freudian female healing comes with identification with the mother so that the competition for the father ceases, how does that look? If this needs to occur at age 5, then I think the burden is on the mother. If she sees her 5 year old as a threat, then that will make the daughter feel rejection, anger, and will increase the urge to compete and win. A 5 year old has cuteness and freshness on her side. Mothers are scarred by childbearing. Part of mothering is also letting the children ascend in prominence. Not that she should let her daughter win. “Win” is a bad word, because the father may believe the mother should win too, so he also rejects the daughter. Or he may think the mother is being mean and side with the daughter. The mother has experience, wisdom, and hierarchy on her side. Insecurity in these (or actual wrongness in her husband) makes her turn on her daughter and see her as a threat. The confident, loving, wise mother will know how to keep healthy relationships with her daughter and her husband, if he too is properly ordered. She must guide both of them through it, or at least be watchful. Her goal for her daughter is to provide an environment for her to feel worthy of masculine love, in the proper context. Her goal for her husband is that he love his daughter and herself properly. Hopefully this is his goal too. This is very complicated, because it is trinitarian, which forces unselfishness, and I don’t know exactly how it should look, except that no one should feel like a loser. Since I think bodies are bad, except in a practical, work-related functional way, I have a pretty sensitive creep-out factor and a pretty narrow view about what is allowed.