• Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    50
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    truly beyond science why people might want a cute sexy woman to pamper them, really it just keeps stumping even the brightest minds in the field

    • SmoothOperator@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 hours ago

      But… Why does it have to be a mom-thing? Can’t the woman you’re presumably having sex with inhabit a non-mom pampering role?

      • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 hours ago

        who says it has to be a mom thing? people just use the societal roles they recognize because that’s how our brains work, easier to latch onto something familiar as reference than to ruminate on stuff and come up with a separate concept.

        There’s a lot of overlap between “mommy” stuff and nurse/maid stuff, all (ideally) calm and pampering.

        • SmoothOperator@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 hour ago

          Sure, nothing wrong with the abstract concept, but this meme is explicitly directed at the “mommy” version.

          Which does have some much wilder implications than nurse/maid stuff, you must admit. Such as the implication of someone wanting to fuck their mom.

      • rose_eye@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        While I understand his ideas are bad. Fraud is hard to say (atleast for me as someone who only knows Freud passingly). Like if he believed his own ideas, I wouldn’t call him a fraud, just bad

        • djsoren19@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          His crackpot theories made psychology a laughingstock of a science and basically killed interest in cognitive research for several decades. I will always hop on board to slander his fraud ass. Maybe he was too high to know what he was doing, I don’t know if I accept that excuse.

          • enkers
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            21 hours ago

            I literally switched majors after having to read Freud, so this is something I can get behind.

        • Thurstylark@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 day ago

          Nowadays, he’s only taught in a, “None of what this guy said has any basis in reality, but he basically started the field, so we’re learning this as HISTORY ONLY.” kind of way.

          You don’t need to know anything about the content of his work in order to say he is a fraud, as it is accepted as fact by the field of study as a whole.

          • rose_eye@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            19
            ·
            1 day ago

            I do not disagree that his ideas were bad. But fraud /=/ just bad/wrong ideas. Fraud is intentional deception, and I dont know if Freud did that so I can’t take that stance.

              • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                18 hours ago

                Bro and or broette and or brozone:

                1: That was Jung

                2: You’re talking about the times when a valid prescription was a vibrator and cocaine

                3: He has been accused of covering up sexual abuse by modern feminist scholars. I’d read those literal scholarly papers on the topic before taking internet comments seriously.

      • FundMECFS@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        His ideas were extremely misogynistic and used as “scientific” excuses to oppress women and people with disabilities for much of the 20th century