Freud claims that the roles male and female play in society are determined by their sexual development. Men and women reach their full psychological characters as a result of the various stages of their natural sexual development. The particular psychology that individuals develop as a result of their natural sexual evolution forces them to assume certain roles, duties and responsibilities along gender lines. Freud supports this claim by using an abductive or best explanation argument.
Freud's argument consists in the analysis and description of the sexual development of individuals that supposedly leads to the final formation of distinct male and female personalities. Freud bases the order of the sexual stages which defines the character of the genders by relying on evidence received during his analytic practice.
The Formation of Boys
Early infancy is, for Freud, the beginning of sexual urges which are associated with the satisfaction of basic needs such as food, shelter and care. The mother or caretaker becomes the love-object as the infant begins to associate her with the satisfaction of his most primeval needs. In this stage the male infant "derives pleasurable sensations" from his penis as the major erotogenic zone. This is the phallic or masturbatory stage.
The boy continues his sexual attachment to his mother into early childhood. Yet he soon realizes that a competing male, his father, is his mother's source of the sexual attention. The little boy wants exclusivity in his mother attention and therefore, he experiences feelings of envy and hatred towards is father, as he concomitantly he he continues to desire his mother. Freud refers to these feelings and responses of the male child for his mother as the Oedipus complex, in which... "all. these factors- the slights, the disappointments in love, the jealousy, the seduction followed by the prohibition- are after all, also in operation in the relation of a boy to his mother and are yet unable to alienate him from his mother" ( 128).
As the Oedipus complex intensifies, the little boy begins to fear that his father might harm him by severing his genital organ, which he associates with his real yet illegitimate, desire of his mother. The little boy fears castration or as Freud states it: "At this (stage) the boy recalls to mind the threats he brought of himself by his doings with that organ, he begins to give credit to them and falls under the influence of fear castration. (129) Such fear of castration or castration complex causes feelings of fear and shame which have a crucial role to play in the formation of the human male as a morally proficient being
In effect, as the little boy comes to accept that his mother does not belong to him but to his father, he experiences feelings of guilt for his strong attachment to his mother. He also fears that his father is going to castrate him. These feelings of guilt and fear are the basic elements for the formation of the idea of justice, that is to say, of the subjective apprehension of the difference between the personal or private sphere and the sphere of the Other. The Super-Ego is the subjective faculty which allows men to behave morally and its origins are in the castration complex.
The sexual development of the boy has a telos the formation of a well-adjusted adult which Freuds defines as someone capable of moral behavior. The Super-ego is responsible for the moral relationship that the adult human male establishes with the world. A moral relationship with the world requires social activity and all sort of human interaction ideally mediated by rules and procedures. Men are biologically and psychologically prepared for managing the norms and procedures required by the social or public sphere successfully, since the super-ego allows them to do so.
The Formation of Girls
The masturbatory of phallic stage of the infant female is equal to her male counterpart. The "little girl is a little man" and associates the satisfaction of her needs and desires with the mother or caretaker. She derives pleasure from exploring her genital organ and remains sexually attached to her mother.
In early childhood the little girl realizes that she does not have a penis and feels penis envy. The little girl wishes she had a penis and thus becomes jealous of the what the little boys have that she does not have. Truly, the little girl does not immediately "submits to the fact" that she does not have a penis and passively and enviously longs for one. She now feels worthless in comparison to the boy, "her self- love is mortified" (129). Her feelings of worthlessness cause that she ceases to enjoy her phallic sexuality. This is truly the first stage of the female Castration complex, and probably the source of the female's sexual repression.
The second castration complex-- or the second phase of the castrations complex in the life of the human female-- occurs when the girl realizes that her mother does not have a penis either. The "individual misfortune" of the girl's recognition that neither she nor her mother have penises extends to other females. The penis envy severs the little girl from the love for the mother that occurs in the masturbatory stage.. Now the separation from her mother translates into hostility. The little girl's love "was directed to her phallic mother; with the discovery that her mother is castrated it becomes possible to drop her as an object, so that the motives for hostility, which have long been accumulating, gain the upper hand" (130).
The little girl turns to the father to obtain the penis that her mother" has refused her and that she now expects from the father" (130). A baby from her father is the equivalent to the actual possession of a penis, and the little girl wishes she had one. A transference occurs in the girl's psyche. The love she had for her mother is directed towards her father. The little girl is now in the midst of her Oedipal Complex such that she sees her mother as a rival and has feelings of hatred towards her.
The Oedipus complex in women is not resolved until the time in which they fulfill their longing for a penis by actually having babies. Freud claims that women's happiness is bigger if the "baby is a little boy who brings the longed-for penis with him" (130). Yet, Freud claims that a female happiness is never truly achieved since she grows to "demolish" the Oedipus complex only "incompletely" (131).
Girls do not have a "real" castration complex in the sense of that experienced by the boys, and they cannot form a Super-ego. The absence of the super-ego is equal to the absence of the concept of justice which is necessary for moral behavior. For the boy castration complex is "the most powerful motive force in his subsequent development" (129) since it enables to overcome the Oedipus complex and attain the "strength and independence" necessary for moral behavior, whereas for the girl the castration complex leads them to the Oedipus complex as a "haven of refuge". Freud concludes that for women the absence of a castration complex, along with an Oedipus complex which is never totally resolved, interfere with the development of the Super-ego in women. Therefore, women must be "regarded as having little sense of justice" (134) a fact that is explained "by the predominance of envy in their mental life" (134).
Freud has make his case for the conclusion that men's and women's natural psycho-sexual development justifies the social roles they should play. Men's independence is achieved through the formation of the Super-ego, women's passivity and domesticity is explained by her ill formed or non-existent Superego.
Critical Evaluation of Freud's Argument.
Scottish philosopher John Stewart Mill (1773-1836) is skeptical about the Freudian argument from nature i.e. the idea the division of men's and women's social are determined by their biology and psycho-sexual development. Mill claims that it is impossible to specify what the natural difference between the sexes is since there is no available example of sexes living in such a natural state. For Mill the denotation and sense of the term' nature' or 'by nature' is not clear. This implies that any theory that uses this concept to explain a major phenomena is from the outset a weak or ill-formed theory. Freud's theory uses the concept nature to explain the division of social roles among the sexes. Therefore, Freud 's theory is ill formed.
The natural state is the pure biological state, with no contamination with elements from the social order. Mill adds that since the sexes always interact in some kind of social milieu we can only make " conjectures more or less probable, (157) of how they lived or would live in the so-called natural state. Since conjectures are not the basis for developing a coherent theory any theory that make generalizations based on them is ill formed. Freud theory explains the division of roles between the sexes by making no concession to social influence an relying solely in the natural or biological development. This way or arguing is known as the argument from nature. Hence, Freud's theory based in the argument from nature is ill formed.
Furthermore, Mill sustains that the social milieu in which the sexes interact are characterized by the hegemony of men over women. Therefore, it is possible that the roles traditionally assigned to women in society are nothing other than the result of the non- egalitarian quality of the societies in which the sexes have traditionally interacted.
Mill is implying that the term 'nature' or rather, 'by nature' means that people will behave as they are supposed to behave regardless of any constraints. If this is so, then putting constraints that will force women to behave in a certain way is excluded by definition. Moreover, the fact that there are women that do not behave as they are supposed naturally to behave, in spite of the norms created by men, serves as evidence that it is not in woman nature to behave in a particular way, that is to say, be passive, domestic or submissive.
Mill's argument has the advantage of pointing to the ambiguity of the term 'nature'' and stating that the obscurity of the meaning of this term disqualifies it as a valid theoretical construct that can serve to make generalizations about the way human beings behave or ought to behave. Thus, a theory such a Freud's, which has scientific pretensions can be seriously affected if the terms that make it up are not useful to explain coherently a wide array of phenomena. In Freud's case this lack of scientific clarity becomes very serious since the psychoanalysis has therapeutic pretensions. Freud's best explanation argument is seriously affected if the explanatory concepts are as obscure as the concept "nature' by' nature' or 'human nature'.
Furthermore, Mill seems to question the term nature by opposing to it the concept of freedom of choice. He seems to be saying that giving women the choose to select the social roles they want to play is the most useful thing to do. If it is true that women are determined by nature to perform certain role, it is wise to let nature follow its own course by not putting constraints that will force women to do what is, anyway, in their own nature. To constraint is what is natural is a contradiction in terms and creating such constraints to force women to do what they are supposed to do anyway is a waste of unnecessary theoretical energy. Freedom of choice seems here the most logical practical alternative.
Works Cited
Jaggar, Alison M & Paula
S. Rothenberg. Feminist Frameworks. Alternative Theoretical Accounts
of Relations Between Women and Men. McGraw-Hill: New York, 1993.
