Dr. Warren J. Blumenfeld on the psychology of guns and what they mean to the discussion between genders.
____
Dr. Sigmund Freud, in his “Introductory Lectures on Psychoanalysis” (1933), expanded his theories on the interpretations of dreams to include weaponry as symbolizing the genitalia, and in particular, the penis. According to Freud:
“All complicated machines and appliances are very probably the genitals — as a rule the male genitals — in the description of which the symbolism of dreams is as indefatigable as human wit. It is quite unmistakable that all weapons and tools are used as symbols for the male organ: e.g., ploughshare, hammer, gun, revolver, dagger, sword, etc.”
Along with this, Freud developed his theory of “penis envy” in girls and women. Seeing the father, who has a penis, as the seat of power and authority in the home, stated Freud:
“Girls hold their mother responsible for their lack of a penis and do not forgive her for their being thus put at a disadvantage.”
While his theories, especially those relating to females, may seem misguided and misogynistic to many of us now, to Freud, the compulsion to own firearms stems from an unconscious need to compensate for a deep-seated psychological sense of insecurity and inadequacy in terms of power: in males, specifically for having a small or smaller-than-desired penis, and in females, in an attempt to symbolically grow a large penis.
In literature among other fields, this is a common trope. For example, in the 1890 stage play, Hedda Gabler, by Norwegian playwright, Henrik Ibsen, the play’s protagonist possesses a pair of dueling pistols formerly owned by her father. Though Hedda marries a man named George Tesman, she holds onto her family name of Gabler. In the Victorian age, guns were seen as masculine objects, and in Freud’s theories, guns symbolized the penis. In this sense, the pistols serve as a continual reminder that she will always be a Gabler like her father, and could likewise indicate that she desires to be a man or even sees herself as a powerful man.
In their effort to counter this societal discourse often circulated by opponents of the sweeping and ingrained firearms culture embedded in the fabric of the United States, many gun rights advocates, members of what I have termed the “Pro-Firearms with No More Regulations Movement,” have attempted to turn the psychological tables by attaching themselves to an alleged statement Sigmund Freud supposedly made:
“A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity.”
The problem for members of this movement, however, is that Freud never said this. Neither this statement nor anything even approaching it appears in any of Freud’s works in any of its translations. It is, rather, a quote falsely attributed to Freud, an opinion now circulating around the internet of Freud’s theories, specifically his 10th Lecture, “Symbolism in Dreams,” in General Introduction to Psychoanalysis.
Most clear thinking people understand that “hoplophobia” itself is anirrational term since there is nothing “irrational” about fearing that one could be listed among the 10,000+ gun-related homicides each year in the U.S., many perpetrated by people who purchased firearms legally. There is nothing “irrational” about fearing for women who date or are married to men with anger management issues who legally purchased firearms.
|
Be that as it may, members of this Pro-Firearms with No More Regulations Movement have embraced a new term – stemming from the (non-) quote attributed to Sigmund Freud — in their attempts to make themselves come across as rational while pathologizing those of us who are working for common sense gun control.
Though the term holds no official acceptance within any medical or psychological academy or association, and the American Psychiatric Association has not included it anywhere within the most recent or previous versions of its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), an American marine, Jeff Cooper, in 1962 coined the term “hoplophobia” (from the Greek ὅπλον – hoplon, meaning “arms” or “weapons,” and φόβος – phobos, meaning “fear”) to explain a so-called irrational aversion to weapons, or the fear of firearms or of armed citizens.
These hoplophile members of the Pro-Firearms with No More Regulations Movement may actually believe this strategy holds promise in silencing us, and help them to counter the psychological discourse connected to their obsessive attachments to firearms, but it will fail (“hoplophile” — from the Greek ὅπλον – hoplon, meaning “arms” or “weapons,” and ὅπλον – philia, meaning “love” or “intense friendship or sexual desire for”).
Most clear thinking people understand that “hoplophobia” itself is an irrational term since there is nothing “irrational” about fearing that one could be listed among the 10,000+ gun-related homicides each year in the U.S., many perpetrated by people who purchased firearms legally. There is nothing “irrational” about fearing for women who date or are married to men with anger management issues who legally purchased firearms. There is nothing irrational about fearing for the safety of children who reside in homes with firearms.
To paraphrase something else Freud never said or wrote, “Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar” (sorry to expose yet another folk myth), I say simply, “Fear of guns is just fear of guns since we have very good reason to fear guns. They kill, maim, permanently disable, and unalterably and negatively change lives.”
As a society, we must decide whether we will continue doing things over and over again as we have in the past and expecting different results (Albert Einstein’s definition of “insanity”), of try something new for our country in an attempt to extricate ourselves from the blood bath we ourselves created.
Photo credit: Getty Images
Study history. Japanese ninja began as peasant farmers who were oppressed the ruling warlords and their Samurai. They were forbidden to own weapons so they fashioned their own out of farming tools. Buddhist monks in China were pacifists, yet they developed Kung Fu and steel weapons to protect themselves from the violence of the outside world. Were either of those groups paranoid or delusional?
If I’m not mistaken silks you’re from the Scandinavian area. You may have a culture that is not so materialistic and maybe there is almost all folks are in the economic same boat. Americans have generally very materialistic wants and coupled with a great number of poor it sets up violence when taking ones stuff from other folks. Tjats why kids get killed for Mike tennis shoes. The attitude of many is I want I take. Maybe now you might understand us a bit better. Many of the mass shootings stem not only from crazy thoughts but a feeling of… Read more »
We don’t know what country Mr. Davis is from—perhaps he will tell us, so that we might all understand how awesome his country is by comparison with ours—but chances are it’s an English-speaking country, and if he checks his history books he will likely see that our country came to his country’s defense not too long ago, that an awful lot of Americans gave their lives to save his country along with ours and others, and that our military today is quite likely the only thing keeping the barbarians away from his gates. I was in Austria not too long… Read more »
I’ve said this more times then I can count…. I work with adolescent males in a residential treatment center and have posed the following through the years. Note that all the guys I work with have come to us through the court system and MANY have charges including possession of a firearm. I should also note that the majority come to us from Chicago which has some of the strictest gun laws in the country. Q. Would you rob someone if you knew they had a gun? General answer is no because they simply want to rob them, not get… Read more »
But Tom, people do get robben in America and criminals also enter people’s homes. Do mean the criminals knows who carry guns and who does not? And do the criminals know who has guns in their homes and who does not? I do not understand WHY Americans are so criminal and violent but that is another question. And if 34% of household in the U.S.has guns then what about the 66% of household that choose not to have guns? (correct me if my numbers are wrong). I do not want to enter this debate about guns in US,but I can… Read more »
First time I’ve been disappointed with the Goodmen site. This article is full of loaded language and veiled (or not veiled) insults to those on one side of the issue. Is this the kind of discourse Goodmen should have? How about reasoned, compassionate, fair, problem solving, and character driven/ supporting. Didn’t see these in the article.
I am amazed at how delusional your comment is (well, I shouldn’t, since you are merely repeating like a parrot what many others are saying), especially when you say it separates you from the rest of the world. Yes, it does, but in which way? It fills you up with constant insecurity. How is that working for you in the freedom department? Unless you think you are free because you constantly repeat that mantra. Many other countries are doing just fine, that you very much. I’m telling you now: either you embrace your gun culture and accept the insecurity, or… Read more »
I’ll assume you aren’t an American Dave.at least hopefully not. The 2nd is what separates us from the rest of the world. You may see it as bad. But trust me it is the one thing that keeps us free from the rest. In all of the imperfection it doesn’t get any better than this. It will not be the 2nd that kills us. It will be the challenges from the left that will delude us. That’s a fact. Jack.
Well stated Mark. I just saw a cartoon showing a guy up against a wall with a robber holding a gun to his back. The caption was “Wait, they outlawed guns and I turned my guns in like they wanted, you can’t do this, it’s illegal!” Then the robber’s thought bubble says “you dumbass.”
You don’t really want to put an end to the problem. Accept getting rid of you idiotic 2nd Amendment. Then, you will have something positive going. If not, you, as a country, are doomed,
The 2nd amendment has been around for over 200 years. It didn’t “doom” our country over that timespan, and it won’t “doom” it now. If you bothered to actually research US crime rates, you’d know that gun violence has actually decreased over the last 30 years.
First of all, Freud was of a long past time, psychology in its larval stage at best. The main thing he did was to bring organized discussion about the internal thought processes. Mind you I did not say correct, but at least a beginning. Adler is much more rational and correct in his viewpoints of what drives the human mind. Guns in his day were generally used against robbers. Also he was in Vienna a very civilized society of the day so he could make up all sorts of sexual connotation of power. Btw, I think Freud had a lot… Read more »
That’s the thing about interpreting: It can be done in many ways and none of them can be checked against reality.
Rihard
Hedda Gabler is story about female sexual repression around 1890.
She is mean,cold and jealous….beauty is the only thing she has to offer a man (but sexual she dares not be)
And she has a secret in her past .
So if there is also sexual repression in America 2015 ,then maybe Warren has a point?
We here about the hook up culture , but there is still sexual repression in America.
sorry , a typo:
We hear about the hookup culture……
This is the first time I heard that Ibsen’s Hedda Gabler wanted to be man.
The fact that she owned and used two guns that belonged to her father ,,,,is seen by Warren as penis envy?
Tonight I took the time to listen to the play one more time,86 minutes.
I can not see that this woman wants to be a man.
The two guns plays a major part in the play ,but can be interpreted in many ways.
If I were a woman, I would not date anyone with anger management issues, much less marry him. This seems to be a choice that is beyond the good doctor’s comprehension. If guns were as dangerous as Dr. Blumenfeld states, then we would have far more gun-related injuries and deaths than we do in this country. We have far more car-related injuries and deaths than we have with guns. No car ever hurt anybody without some human being at the controls to make it happen. Similarly, no gun ever shot anybody all by itself. It has to be deliberately used,… Read more »