JEWISH SEXUAL PERVERT, SEX CRAZED, INCESTUOUS FRAUD SIGISMUND SCHLOMO (SIGMUND) FREUD AND HIS SISTER ADOLFINA FREUD.
While researching parapsychology, I read Sigmund Freud's "On Dreams" in the sixties, and later his "Interpretation of Dreams", I found him to be a literal fraud, a pervert, and a liar! As a teenager, I had documented some 4-5 Royal College copy-books filled with my dreams that totally disproved Freud's interpretative generalisation and interpretations. BAFS
Un Juif parle par Roger Dommergue Polacco de Menasce
Pour me soutenir financièrement (fais pas ton juif ! ) dans la lutte et pour encore plus de vidéos subversives qui dérangent la mafia en place !
The real truth about how healthcare Is worldwide. Why did John D Rockerfeller use homeopath? which most say Is quack medicine. It's time to take our health Into our own hands of healing.
WIKIPEDIA "The Interpretation of Dreams (German: Die Traumdeutung) is an 1899 book by the psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud, in which the author introduces his theory of the unconscious with respect to dream interpretation, and discusses what would later become the theory of the Oedipus complex.
Freud revised the book at least eight times and, in the third edition,
added an extensive section which treated dream symbolism very literally,
following the influence of Wilhelm Stekel. Freud said of this work, "Insight such as this falls to one's lot but once in a lifetime."[1] The book was first published in an edition of 600 copies, which did not sell out for eight years. The Interpretation of Dreams later gained in popularity, and seven more editions were published in Freud's lifetime.[2] Because of the book's length and complexity, Freud also wrote an abridged version called On Dreams. The original text is widely regarded as one of Freud's most significant works."
This edition of On Dreams by Sigmund Freud (1856–1939) was translated into English by James Strachey and published in 1952 by the Hogarth Press and the Institute of Psycho-Analysis. On Dreams, first published in 1901, is an abridged version The Interpretation of Dreams
(1899), in which Freud first introduced his theory of the unconscious
in terms of dream interpretation. Freud interprets dreams as
wish-fulfilment – products of the unconscious that serve to process
events or feelings, past or recent, that are repressed and unresolved. Freud’s development of psychoanalysis has had a profound influence on western thought and culture. The Interpretation of Dreams is regarded as one of his most significant works.
English translations of Freud
Although A A Brill first translated The Interpretation of Dreams
into English in 1913, James and Alix (née Sargant-Florence) Strachey
were Freud’s first authorised English translators. Freud approached them
about the work in the early 1920s, when the couple were working with
and being analysed by him in Vienna. The Stracheys translated 26 of
Freud’s essays, published from 1927 until 1950. After the Second World War, James began work as editor on the Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud
in 24 volumes (1953–74). With their commitment and diligence, the
Stracheys played a crucial role disseminating Freud’s work in England
and in the English language.
Freud, the Hogarth Press and Virginia Woolf
In 1924 James Strachey approached Leonard Woolf with the idea that the Hogarth Press, the publishing house run by Leonard and Virginia Woolf,
should become the official English publishers of the International
Psychoanalytical Library. In spite of the risks involved – including a
large financial outlay – Leonard agreed to the work. Leonard’s
introduction to Freud had come in 1914, when he reviewed a translation
of Psychopathology of Everyday Life (1901) for the New Weekly. Although Virginia Woolf and Freud shared a deep interest in the
workings of the human mind, Woolf claimed that she did not read the
psychoanalyst’s work seriously until late 1939. Woolf and Freud met for
the first time on 28 January 1939, after Freud moved to London with his
family following the Nazi annexation of Austria. Letters and other
writings prior to 1939 reveal that Woolf had expressed disdain for
psychoanalysis and Freud’s theories, though she perhaps did not
understand them in great depth. In the last years of her life, however,
Woolf found a great affinity with the work.
Was Freud right about dreams after all? Here’s the research that helps explain it
Josie Malinowski does not work for, consult, own shares
in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would
benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations
beyond the academic appointment above.
The Conversation UK receives funding from Hefce, Hefcw, SAGE,
SFC, RCUK, The Nuffield Foundation, The Ogden Trust, The Royal Society,
The Wellcome Trust, Esmée Fairbairn Foundation and The Alliance for
Useful Evidence, as well as sixty five university members. View the full list Republish this article
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under Creative Commons licence.
Dreams may be our innermost, suppressed wishes.
charnsitr/shutterstock
It is the most well known – and perhaps infamous – theory of
dreams in the Western world. At the turn of last century, Sigmund Freud
published his book, The Interpretation of Dreams, arguing that our
dreams are nothing more than wishes that we are looking to fulfil in our
waking lives. Some of these wishes are relatively innocent, and in
these cases our dreams picture the wish just as it is. However, there
are other wishes that are so unacceptable to us (such as sexual or
aggressive impulses that we can’t admit to or act out) that our dreams
have to censor them. Such unacceptable wishes are typically suppressed by the conscious
waking mind but turn up in the dream in an unrecognisable and often
bizarre way. But with the help of a psychoanalyst and methods like free
association, Freud argued, the wish behind the dream could be
discovered.
Sigmund Freud.wikimediaDespite the theory’s fame and influence on other psychological
theories it has fallen into disrepute in recent years, and been roundly debunked by modern dream scientists. Dozens of theories about why we dream now exist
– from helping to process our emotions and strengthening new memories
to rehearsing social or threatening situations. But no one theory now
dominates, as Freud’s once did.
Revealing experiments
However over the past decade or so, a new series of experiments have
begun to demonstrate that at least one part of Freud’s theory might have
been correct after all: that we dream of things we are trying our best
to ignore. The first of these experiments was conducted by Daniel Wegner, who noticed that when we are trying hard to ignore or suppress a thought, it often just keeps coming back.
He suggested that this is because we have two psychological processes
at work at the same time when we try to suppress a thought: an operating
process that actively suppresses it, and a monitoring process that
keeps an eye out for the suppressed thought. Thought suppression is
therefore complicated and can only be achieved when the two processes
are working together harmoniously. Wegner suggested that these processes might fail during
rapid-eye-movement (REM) sleep. During REM sleep parts of the brain that
are needed for thought suppression – such as those involved in
attention, control and working memory – are deactivated. We know that a
large number of our dreams come from REM sleep, so Wegner hypothesised
that we would see a lot of suppressed thoughts making a reappearance in
dreams. Interestingly, he managed to test this idea in 2004. In his experiment,
participants were asked to identify a person they knew and then to
spend five minutes writing a stream-of-consciousness (about whatever
came to mind) before going to bed that night. The first group of these
participants were told specifically not to think about the
person during their five minutes of writing, whereas a second group were
told to specifically think about them. A third group could think about
whatever they wanted. When they woke up in the morning, they all
recorded any dreams they could remember having that night. The results
were clear: the participants who were instructed to suppress thoughts of
a person dreamt of them much more than the participants who were
instructed to focus their thoughts on the person and the participants
who could think about whatever they wanted. Wegner called this the
“dream rebound effect”. Since that experiment, we’ve learned a lot more about the dream
rebound effect. For example, it has been found that people who are
generally more prone to thought suppression experience more dream rebound, and that suppressing a thought not only leads to more dreams about it, but also to more unpleasant dreams.
Antonio de Pereda’s 1655 painting.wikimediaIn some of my recent research, I found that people who generally try to suppress their thoughts not only dream about their emotional experiences from waking life more
– in particular unpleasant situations – but also have worse sleep
quality and higher levels of stress, anxiety and depression than others.
In fact, we know now that suppressing thoughts is related to a whole host of mental health concerns. Because of this, we really need to better understand what happens to
thoughts when we try to suppress them. Paying attention to our dreams,
then, could help us to identify things in our lives that we’re not
paying enough attention to that are causing us problems. This may mean
that there is merit to exploring dreamwork in therapy. In fact, recent
research has shown that exploring dreams is an effective way of
obtaining personal insight – both in and out of therapy settings.
The verdict on Freud
There are still plenty of aspects of Freud’s theory of dreaming that
haven’t been (and can’t be) tested empirically. It’s possible to argue
that fulfilment is involved in almost any dream, but it’s impossible to
prove or disprove it. In later writings, Freud admitted that the theory
could not account for all types of dreams, such as the nightmares associated with post traumatic stress disorder.
His theory also takes the agency of the dream interpretation away from
the dreamer and into the hands of the analyst, which is at odds with ethical guidelines for dreamwork that are now typically followed. Nevertheless, some aspects of the theory have stood up to experimentation – for example, dreams from REM sleep are full of aggressive interactions, which Freud could have used as evidence of suppressed aggressive impulses playing out in our dreams. So while the exact extent to which Freud’s theory about dreams was
correct remains unclear, in at least one respect, it looks like he got
it right after all: dreams really are the royal road to a knowledge of
the unconscious –- where banished thoughts live on.
Monday, Apr 16th 2018
Was Sigmund Freud really just a sex-mad old fraud? The
founder of psychoanalysis was a money-obsessed cocaine addict who groped
women patients and had a genius for self-promotion
Professor Frederick Crews suggests that Sigmund Freud was a fraud
He describes the founder of psychoanalysis as a vile sex-crazed creep
In the book, he writes how Freud would sexually assault his female patients
Women would come away from his treatments in much worse a condition
Gimmicky,
perhaps, that the ‘E’ in ‘FREUD’ on the jacket of this book has been
crossed out and replaced with a scrawled ‘A’. But it’s apt. ‘Freud =
Fraud’ sums up the message.
Anyone who enjoys reading the systematic dismantling of a reputation will relish this riveting exposé.
It’s written not by a scientist or psychologist, but by an eloquent American Emeritus professor of English, Frederick Crews.
Over
650 pages, he builds up a portrait of Freud as the most vile, medically
useless, misogynistic, snobbish, petulant, jealous, crazy, sex-obsessed
creep you could ever hope not to look up at from a couch — and a man
whose ‘treatment’ you wouldn’t wish on your worst enemy.
+4
Professor Frederick Crews portrays Freud as a vile sex-obsessed creep in his new book Freud: The Making Of An Illusion
‘Lock
up your daughters!’ I wanted to scream, when yet another innocent young
Viennese woman with a cough or an aching leg got sent to Freud for
treatment at today’s equivalent of £230 an hour, and came out a few
months later totally traumatised and much more ill than she had been
when she started.
Not once in this account does Freud do or say a single kind or unselfish thing.
Though
a doctor, he had no Hippocratic sense that each human being deserved
respectful treatment. He once remarked in a letter: ‘I have found little
that is “good” about human beings . . . In my experience, most of them
are trash.’
But this is such a damningly one-sided portrait that I did sometimes wonder: ‘What is your problem, Crews?’
Share this article
Share
His accusation that Freud ‘wrenched
his patients’ histories into alignment with his theory’ could be
levelled at the author, who wrenches every detail of Freud’s doings and
writings into alignment with his theory of Sigmund as an incompetent
monster.
It’s all highly convincing, though.
The
rot seems to have set in during Freud’s childhood, when the family
moved to a lower-class Jewish enclave in Vienna, instilling in him a
ruthless determination to distance himself from his origins and an
unquenchable thirst for wealth and fame.
Crews
deduces that while his parents were away and he was left in charge of
his younger siblings, the teenage Freud sexually abused his younger
sister. He was in love with his mother, admitting later to his friend,
Wilhelm Fliess: ‘I have found, in my own case, the phenomenon of being
in love with my mother and jealous of my father, and I now consider it a
universal event in early childhood.’
+4
After Freud and his wife
Martha's (picture left, with Freud) sex life ceased, he had a
clandestine affair with her sister, Minna, who came to live with them
when she was widowed
His
friend’s (well, ex-friend’s) eventual damning verdict on Freud was that
‘the reader of thoughts merely reads his own thoughts into other
people’.
An early adopter and promoter
of cocaine as a medical drug, Freud was a lifelong cocaine addict
himself, and this, Crews thinks, must have marred his ability to think
straight.
Freud liked to diagnose his patients with whichever ‘ailment’ was currently preoccupying him.
So,
when a young woman, Emma Eckstein, came to see him with an aching leg
and bad period pains, he forced her story into line with his current
theory that ‘a misconstrued erotic incident, having befallen a virgin
prior to the onset of sexual awareness, gets suppressed and thereby
becomes a cause of hysteria, but only when a second such incident
reawakens that memory and renders it horrifying’.
If a patient didn’t come up with a nice pre-pubescent erotic incident, he or she was being ‘resistant’.
After
many hours of probing, Freud eventually managed to get Emma to admit
that a shopkeeper had once tried to grab her genitals when she was a
child.
At the same time, Freud had
latched on to the theory that the nose was the ‘control centre for other
organs and their maladies’. He diagnosed Emma with a double-syndrome,
‘hystero-neurasthenia’, the neurosis-part brought on by masturbation
(Freud’s pet-hate).
The treatment? The
surgical removal of a bone from the poor girl’s nose. Emma haemorrhaged
blood. A month later, she was still bleeding profusely. Freud worked out
that her bleeding came from ‘sexual longing — expressing her desires
through spurts of blood’.
+4
Freud performed ‘pressure
treatment’ on women’s foreheads and bodies in his darkened consulting
room, telling them to remove any tight clothing and then searching their
bodies
This was typical. Freud
went through a phase of doing ‘pressure treatment’ on women’s foreheads
and bodies in his darkened consulting room, telling them to remove any
tight clothing and then searching their bodies for their ‘hystereogenic
zones’, while coercing them to tell him details of their sexual history.
As
you read this book, it becomes ever-clearer that the real problem was
inside Freud’s own head — what Crews calls ‘his interior house of
horrors’.
Not only did he think all
boys were in love with their mothers and wanted to murder their fathers,
in accordance with his own Oedipus complex, he also had a weird theory
that women — all women — were sinister creatures whose vagina threatened
to castrate any male who crossed its threshold.
He
divined that the secret ambition of every female was to acquire the
‘envied penis’ by severing it. His mind, Crews tells us, ‘conjoined
illogic and bizarre ideas with misogyny, prurience and cruelty.’
What
Freud did have was a gift for gripping writing, using lots of literary
references to heighten his prose. His written accounts of his so-called
‘solved cases’ became popular because they were a satisfying mixture of
detective stories (Freud saw himself as ‘the Sherlock Holmes of the
unconscious’) and soft porn.
‘Tell me one thing,’ he would write, recalling a case. ‘What part of his body was it that you felt that night?’
+4
Freud: The Making of an Illusion by Frederick Crews (Profile £30)
His
disciples were titillated, and they lapped up these accounts of the
thrilling tension between the wise analyst and his resistant patient.
Those cases, Crews writes, ‘belong not to the genre of clinical report, but of detective fiction’.
A
genius at self-promotion, who bribed his way to a professorship at
Vienna University, Freud parasitically latched on to the theories of his
peers and then later condemned those whose theories had given him a
leg-up.
In The Interpretation Of
Dreams, he reinvented himself as a uniquely sagacious authority, finding
examples from literature and history to prove that all human behaviour
had always been ‘Freudian’.
Pity Freud’s wife. Martha Bernays was a sweet, playful, ardent, young woman whose personality Freud slowly extinguished.
In
Die Brautbriefe — the whinging, self-obsessed letters he wrote to
Martha during their four year-long engagement when he was frantically
seeking success — there are frequent signs of what we would now call
coercive control.
He cut her off from her own family and friends and made her renounce her Orthodox Jewish faith.
‘If I have become unbearable recently,’ he wrote to her threateningly, ‘just ask yourself what made me so.’
After giving birth to six children, Martha lost her figure and Sigmund saw her as a used-up woman who belonged in the nursery.
Their
sex life ceased, and Freud had a clandestine affair with her sister,
Minna, who came to live with them when she was widowed.
How
unfair it seems that many of the great physicians who worked alongside
Freud are now forgotten, while Freud is a household name.
This devastating book might kick‑start the long-awaited process of his downfall from grace.
A mind that thinks on auto-pilot is as much
of a curse as it is a blessing. For even
amidst the grief over the recent gut-wrenching spectacle of mommy
dearest
laid out in her casket, the ever-active mind of
your bereaved blogger here could not refrain from
philosophizing
while recalling the words of 19th Century British
political giant Benjamin Disraeli (cough cough), which he attributed
(via a fictional novel based upon real people) to Lionel Rothschild (cough cough):
"The
fact is you cannot
destroy a pure race of the Caucasian organization.
It is a physiological fact; a simple law of nature...The mixed persecuting races disappear, the pure persecuted race (Jews)
remains." (here)
It's
all spelled out in PLANET ROTHSCHILD I & II
This latest "thinking man moment" was triggered by the welcome sight
and warm embrace of my long-time-no-see and still very active 100 year old
Italian Godmother - born in
the same year in which British Secretary of the
Admiralty Winston Churchill and U.S. Naval Secretary Franklin
Roosevelt
deliberately set up The Lusitania to be sunk!
This prompted
me to take stock of the gathering. The assessment was not good.
There
were quite a few nonagenarians in the house -- old Irish and
Italian lions and lionesses who, back
in the day, were like a second layer of
parents -- a few of them not at all shy about going upside the thick
head
of juvenile smart-ass Mikey King when necessary,
which was quite often. Bowed and broken down, these awe-inspiring 'Dons'
commanded respect and reverence.
Octogenarians
and Septuagenarians were also well-represented,
with 50 to 60-somethings comprising the largest segment of the
rank
and file. Then came "the kids" - me (just 50) being affectionately referred to by most of those
on dad's Irish-Italian
side as "the baby" (still!). After "the baby" came the "kiddie table" of 40-somethings
-- cousins from mom's younger and larger pure Italian side of the family.
Then, came the first ominous signs of "genocide". The handful of 30-somethings not only
represented a noticeable drop among the room's age distribution, but none of them were married nor had any children.
The 20-somethings (children of the 50-somethings & 60-somethings) outnumbered
the 30-somethings, but none
of them were married or yet engaged. There was one
18-year old daughter of a cousin, but no other teen, pre-teen,
nor even so much as a toddler left at home.
NOTHING! That's an 18 year (and counting) birth-drought
for what were once two young, fertile and boisterous Italian-Irish-Catholic families.
The Invisible Genocide
The shocking reality, unnoticed
to all but philosopher Mike (as if I didn't have enough sh_ _
on my plate to deal with!) was that among the large extended families from both sides, there were as many centenarians (1) as there were teens and pre-teens! In the grand scheme
of things, the death of the grand old woman-of-the-hour, devastating as
it was, cannot in
any way be described as tragic. She lived a good and long life. She died. We mourn. We heal. We carry on.
But the genocide-by-attrition of these beautiful extended
families -- now that's a human tragedy. Again, speaking in the grand scheme of things, would there
be any difference between a team of machine-gunners mowing down every
relative in that room, as opposed to the ongoing slow death of
two great legacies by infertility? Either way, a entire branch
of a bloodline would be erased.
For the occasion, my sister-in-law had put together
a grand collage of photos from the happy decades of fun and
family
(1950's through 1980's). Children,
children everywhere -- often at my childhood home because we had the
built-in
swimming pool. The current crop of
nonagenarians and octo's were all so happy back then -- vibrant, strong
and proud
of their loud litters of close-knit cubs. The nostalgia was so thick that I couldn't bear to even to look at all of the photos, given the current circumstances,
but certainly will in a few days.
And now,
a big fat zero birth gap between ages 0 to 18? My God, what have they done to us?! We suspect know that many
of our dear readers can tell of similar deadly declines among their own bloodlines. Make no mistake. The infertility of the White Western man is neither
unique to our family, nor is it by accident. You see, before "they" can totally enslave the non-White
peoples of the world, the 'powers that be' (cough cough) feel
it necessary to first wipe out their hated
historical rival, namely, European Man and his
American / Australian / Canadian / South African offshoots. That would
leave
the Tribe as the only Caucasian subset still in
business. Again, we quote Disraeli's Rothschild -- from the novel, Coningsby:
The Next Generation (1844):
"The fact is you cannot destroy a pure race of the Caucasian organization. It is a physiological
fact; a simple law of nature...The
mixed persecuting races disappear, the pure persecuted race (Jews) remains."
Respect for other races and cultures does not mean that Western Whites should
commit suicide.
To that demonic end of wiping
out Whites through attrition, the Globo-Zionists, through their
wholly-owned media and entertainment industries,
have engineered a degenerate culture that denigrates religious
practice,
glorifies casual sex, devalues the institution of
marriage, belittles White men, encourages easy divorce, discourages
motherhood,
brainwashes young women to pursue "careers" above
all else, disrespects our history and ancestors, makes it harder
and harder for a young man to earn a decent enough
living to even support a family, and promotes adultery, homosexuality,
lesbianism, and now, freakin' cross-dressing!
Indeed, one distant member of the King clan is suspected of being a closeted / celibate queer himself. Sad, because
he really is good-hearted guy.
The genocidal force - the same force which has effectively erased western borders
- is invisible to most, but very, very real.Hear the
hate, straight from their own filthy Marxistmouths and Trotskyite tongues:
"The
goal of abolishing the white race
is on its face so desirable that some may find it
hard to believe that it could incur any opposition other than
from committed white supremacists. Make no mistake
about it, we intend to keep bashing the dead white males, and
the live ones, and the females too, until the
social construct known as the white race is destroyed – not
deconstructed but destroyed.”
– Noel Ignatiev, Harvard University
& Massachusetts College of Art Professor
"Unlike,
say, the bald eagle or some exotic species of muskrat, you (White
people) are
not worth saving. In forty years or
so, maybe fewer, there won’t be any more white people around who
actually remember that Leave it to Beaver,
Father Knows Best, Opie-Taylor-Down-at-the-Fishing Hole cornpone
bullshit
that you hold so near and dear to your heart.
There
won’t be any more white folks
around who think the 1950s were the good old
days, because there won’t be any more white folks around who
actually remember them, and so therefore, we’ll be
able to teach about them accurately and honestly, without
hurting your precious feelings, or those of the
so-called “greatest generation” — a bunch whose
white members were by and large a gaggle of
miscreants who helped save the world from fascism only to return home
and
oppose the ending of it here, by doing
nothing to lift a finger on behalf of the civil rights struggle.
So to hell with you and all who revere you. By then,
half the country will be black or brown. And
there is nothing you can do about it.
And by then you will have gone all in as a white nationalist
movement
— hell you’ve all but done that now — thus
guaranteeing that the folks of color, and even a decent
size minority of us white folks will be
able to crush you, election after election, from the Presidency on down
to the 8th grade student council.
We are planning even now — your destruction. And I do not mean by that your physical destruction. We don’t play those games.
We’re not into the whole “Second Amendment remedies, militia, armed resistance” bullshit that
your side fetishizes, cuz, see, we don’t have to be. We don’t need guns. We just have to be patient. And wait for your hearts to stop beating. And stop they will. And for some of you, real damned soon, truth be told. Do you hear it? The
sound of your empire dying? Your nation, as you knew it, ending, permanently? Because I do, and the sound of its demise is beautiful.
-
Tim Wise - Activist, Author, College Lecturer
"He
or it (the expected child) must be dark in any case, no more towheads(blonds). Let us banish all these will-o'-the-wisps! (light color ghosts)"
– Jewish
Psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud, writing to a pregnant acquaintance
The
enemy within: "White" (Jewish) professors Wise
and Ignatiev magnanimously call
for the end of "their" own race. These calls for
genocide-by-attrition
echo that of the sex-obsessed
Jewish Psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud.
Is all hope lost for the big bad White man? In America and Western Europe, it does
appear so. But there is hope elsewhere:
“Choosing to have a second child is already a potential choice in favour of a third.
It is important that families make that step . . . I am convinced that the norm in Russia
should become a family with three children. In
order for Russia to be a strong and sovereign
country, there must be more of us and we must be
better in morality, in our competences, our work and our creativity.”
(here) - President Vladimir Putin
Russia -- aka 'The Third Rome' is our only chance to save the White Man
-- and the rest of the world too! (Some bad-ass White Boys right there)
Oh, by the way, to
digress as we wrap this up, for those
of you who keep sending me photos of Putin doing
photo-ops with Rabbis -- relax! It's just strategic public relations
designed
to keep all of world Jewry from uniting and turning against Russia. For goodness sake, my own son (who believes
as I do) once served as an usher at the wedding of a Jewish friend of his. The
"anti-Semitic" leaflets that Putin is dropping over the
heads of idiot ISIS fighters carry far more weight
with this journalist than some harmless Menorah lighting stunt. Have
a look at a Putin action that really matters:
The dreadful Dr. Sigmund Freud knowingly condemning his sisters to death? A very bad novel.
Macedonian
writer and Gender Studies devotee, Goce Smilevski, draws in his latest
novel on an alleged episode from the life of Sigmund Freud to show that
the founder of psychoanalysis was a misogynistic pervert, fascinated by
Nazism, and obsessed with money and masturbation: in short, a repulsive
character. To do so, he has constructed a novel written in the
first person, but the narrator is none other than Adolfina Freud, one of
Freud’s sisters, turned into a witness of Fin-de-siècle Vienna for fans
of Grand Guignol. But just before being gassed at
Theresienstadt, she recounts her fate and that of several women abused
by famous artists. Throughout the pages we are told the lot of two of
her fellows in sorority: Klara Klimt and Ottilie Kafka, victims of their
appalling brothers. Reinvented by Smilevski — who seems to be
unaware that there were no gas chambers at Therensienstadt — Adolfina
depicts the beginning of her story with a scene in May 1938 during which
she is supposed to have begged her brother Sigmund to take her with him
into exile in London with her other three sisters: he needed simply to
add four names on the “list” next to those of other family members, so
that all might be saved. But Freud refused to answer her as he
stroked two statuettes of his collection: a small monkey and a
mother-goddess naked. Adolfina then tells how, in her youth, after she
had been left by her lover, the same brother is supposed to have helped
her, without any comforting words, to terminate a wanted pregnancy.
After describing other misfortunes, she completes her plea with the
mention of a breastfeeding scene, symbol of the greatness of motherhood,
which she was deprived by an abortionist brother, yet one entranced by
the famous Bellini’s Virgin and Child. We should laugh reading
this maternalist book, dowdy and filled with clichés. But we are
astonished when we know that it has been translated into twenty
languages,received an award and is intended to prove to historians that
Freud was actually primarily responsible for the extermination of her
sisters. To make matters worse, the French publisher has chosen
another title: “Freud’s List”, when the literal translation would have
given “Freud’s sister”. A way to turn Freud into an anti-Schindler. It
has to be noted and remembered that Freud did not write any “list” when
he left Vienna on June 4th, 1938, with Martha, his wife, Anna, his
daughter, Paula Fichtl, his housekeeper, Lün, his dog and Dr. Josefine
Stross. None of the characters of this story was able to obtain an exit
permit for Adolfina and her sisters, all four older than 70 years old.
Adolfina died of malnutrition in Theresienstadt on February 5th, 1943,
Paula was gassed at Maly Trostinec along with Maria, and Rosa Graf at
Treblinka in October 1942. We would love a writer to take up the
pen to tell the story of this tragedy. But to do so, he would still have
to put in epigraph Alexandre Dumas’ precept: “We have the right to rape
history on the condition of begetting beautiful children”.
Republished with the author’s permission. Appeared originally in French in Le Monde, literary supplement, September 20th 2013. This translation by Anthony Ballenato.
QUEEN VICTORIA: WOMEN IN POLITICS
"DISGUSTING"
By Mike King
"I
am most anxious to enlist everyone who can speak
or write to join in checking this mad, wicked folly of "Women's
Rights",
with all its attendant horrors, on which her poor
feeble sex is bent, forgetting every sense of womanly feelings and
propriety.
Feminists ought to get a good whipping. Were woman to "unsex" themselves
by claiming equality with men, they would become the most hateful, heathen anddisgusting of beingsand would surely perish without male
protection. I love peace and quiet, I hate politics and turmoil. We women are not made for
governing, and if we are good women, we must dislike these masculine occupations."
-
Queen Victoria, 1870
The Frumpy Frau
(Germany)
Killary Rotten Clinton
(USA)
Prime Minister Theresa May
(UK)
Prime Minister Beata Szydlo
(Poland)
Prime Minister Erna "Regrigerator" Solberg
(Norway)
Christine Lagarde
- IMF Director
(possible
tranny)
Senator Susan Collins
Maine
Senator Lisa Murkowski
Alaska
Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi
(California)
Rep. Maxine Waters
California
Senator Diane Feinstein
California
Cristina
Fernandez de Kirchner
(Ex- President, Argentina)
Senator
Elizabeth Warren
Massachusetts
Debbie Wasserman-Schultz
Ex-Chairwoman, Democrat Party
Senator Tammy Baldwin
(open lesbian)
Wisconsin
Killary Rotten Clinton
(USA)
Prime Minister Theresa May
(UK)
Prime Minister Theresa May
(UK)
Prime Minister Erna "Regrigerator" Solberg
(Norway)
Christine Lagarde
- IMF Director
(possible
tranny)
Senator Lisa Murkowski
Alaska
Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi
(California)
Senator Diane Feinstein
California
Cristina
Fernandez de Kirchner
(Ex- President, Argentina)
Debbie Wasserman-Schultz
Ex-Chairwoman, Democrat Party
Senator Tammy Baldwin
(open lesbian)
Wisconsin
"Hateful disgusting beings" Ya sure nailed
that one, Queenie!
No comments:
Post a Comment