Comments on: the psychology of cheap halloween costumes today

By: DigiRomp.com/ Jincey Lumpkin

DigiRomp.com/ Jincey Lumpkin — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 19:19:29 +0000

I read the article, and while I found some of it interesting, I did feel that the author insinuated that the practice of BDSM is emotionally and mentally harmful or perverse in a way… and that kind of pissed me off.

By: Jules

Jules — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 02:19:08 +0000

The writing in that excerpt was hideous! I expected much better from a national magazine. However, what disturbed me most, was the combining of a story dealing with porn, fetishes, and parent-child attachment? WTF?? Did they run out of words before their word count and decided to throw yet another topic in? Ugh

By: random web plankton

random web plankton — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 19:30:24 +0000

The scenario they described with the excitement at maybe finding your fantasy, coupled with shame and thinking you’re doing something morally wrong rang true with me. I felt like that for a long time until I found a couple of sex positive websites, most importantly this one. Reading that reminded me how happy and thankful I am that there are places like this on the net.
It’s funny, it’s not often I feel more mature than someone when it comes to sexual matters, but when I was reading the fetishes part of their article with its generally confused stance, it was like looking down a mountain trail and watching someone stumble over rocks you conquered far below.

I also thought their attempts to categorise different kinds of introvert. Being similar to the woman they describe first, I tried myself to think where I fitted in a linear introvert-extrovert continuum. Reading about sexuality came to the rescue again, though– I think it’s as futile an effort as coming up with a set of rigidly identified genders (which I doubt can be done after reading something.. maybe something here).

By: Molly Ren

Molly Ren — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 18:52:58 +0000

Curious article. I think one of their main problems was trying to cover too many things at once–the sections are all about “abnormal” feelings, but putting lack of ambition next to fetishes just doesn’t read well.

By: windowscreen

windowscreen — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 17:45:43 +0000

These fetishes aren’t very ‘outre’…

By: Dan

Dan — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 11:19:52 +0000

I know grammar nazis are the bane of the internet, but I have to say, the sentence structure and poor use of punctuation in that excerpt made it almost unreadable.

By: Nerdmann

Nerdmann — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 07:46:56 +0000

Wilheln Reich posits SELF REGULATION. He says that “self regulation” is the normal, natural state of human beings. What he means is that rational, socially functional drives are primary.
This is in direct opposition to Freud’s theory that humans are naturally antisocial and self-oriented. Freud would say that we NEED “neurosis” to create social harmony.
Reich points out (and I believe he is correct) that it is precisely these neuroses that cause the perversity, sadistic aggression and masochistic tendancies, all of which mostly function unconsciously.
This was a HUGE issue in philosophy. What is “the good?” Well, Nietsche says the “meaning of life” is THAT WHICH IS EXPERIENCEWORTHY FOR ITS OWN SAKE. Kierkegaard seems to agree.
Thing is, this state of mind of “experienceworthiness” is not a function of neurosis, to the contrary. Actually, Kierkegaard describes Reich’s concept of “libido economy,” only in theological terms! Read Reich’s books, THE FUNCTION OF THE ORGASM, etc.
It’s NOT the expression of sadistic rage or self immolation that is experienceworthy. These only function to temporarily relieve tension, but not to discharge the tension completely, only to manage it.
Self regulation is where it’s at. As Blake says, BROTHELS ARE BUILT WITH BRICKS OF RELIGION, PRISON WITH BRICKS OF LAW.
(All this is not to condemn “fetishism” as creative play, of course.)