Cancelling Sexuality (ft. Jamieson Webster)

Alfie was in Belfast with Jamieson Webster, one of the prominent psychoanalysts on the Left - talking about toxic masculinity, sexual abuse, childhood sexuality and what it means to by psychoanalytic about sexuality.
Support Us on Patreon
/ dietsoap

[@johnryan3913]

Great interview, she has a deep understanding of Freud and modern life and how important psychoanalysis could be.

[@beauzeph]

I love this interview so much! I have recently been researching Dr. Webster's videos where she speaks of Michèle Montrelay's "re-enchantment of language, giving words back their value". Also I love Webster's article on Paul Celan where she characterizes poetry as "an attempt to gain reality, to make reality visible". The internet is a better place with Webster's wisdom, I hope to see more channels spread her ideas like wildfire. Would love to hear more about 34:41's "jesse pearson psyche ward fruit cup", there's so much content from reddit and the internet that can be repackaged as a textbook freudian interpretation haha.
Thank you Sublimation Media and Alfie for landing this interview ❤

[@kimona6473]

Are you able to link the video where she mentions Michèle Montrelays? Thanks!

[@beauzeph]

@@kimona6473
I realized after my comment that Dr. Webster mentions Dr. Montrelay at 10:40 in this current video, as for Montreley's "re-enchantment of language" you can find that snippet from Dr. Webster's "Listening to Hysteria" video : ua-cam.com/video/QcmG7ELJrIw/v-deo.htmlm10s

[@kimona6473]

@@beauzeph thank you

[@lsimulacruml]

Every interview she’s given and book she’s written is so important. It’s sort of sad how this project of perpetually attempting to salvage psychoanalysis from all of the misreadings/misunderstandings/misattributions, etc. needs to be continually renewed, but thank God Jamieson Webster’s on the frontlines. Can’t wait for this new book.

[@leftistgamer768]

cheers guys!

[@ryanschneer]

Wow she is brilliant

[@tomkelly6361]

I really like Alfie. He seems like a real non-tool

[@emilianosintarias7337]

4:29 refreshing ...4:37...aaaaaand I spoke too soon, we're going to go ahead with the bourgeois misandry anyway?

[@emilianosintarias7337]

@@No23Name23 She offers the caveat that she affirms the salience of "patriarchy", "(male) entitlement", "mansplaining", she just doesn't think they are enough. We know that neither she nor the interviewer would accept the salience of the opposite of these terms such as gynocentrism, female manipulation and conniving (and that's fine by me, because that would be misogyny).
And so this is indeed misandry.
The interviewer then clarifies "you aren't defending men", as if that's a good thing ( so i am not singling her out). Again, do we want the reassurance that we aren't defending women? Not being politically correct here, we simply can't grasp social relations with feminist conspiracy theories based on upper class chivalry, that most of our class rejects anyway.

[@emilianosintarias7337]

@@No23Name23 more directly, how can the route not be misandry if ideas like patriarchy and male entitlement are noted as legitimate ? Might as well say, "look, anti-semitism is justified, but it doesn't really address the big issues", and then disclaim anti-semitism. And to say, well Me Too was interesting, because here women were speaking about their experiences, but the Depp/Heard case, a watershed case permitting half the world's domestic abuse victims recognition for the first time ever, is just divisise, repressive, tragic - that's pretty noteworthy. This is all run of the mill, I am just applying socialist standards given the channel it is on.

[@JCT1926]

@@emilianosintarias7337 My issue with what you're saying is that historically men have had almost all the power and, indeed, have explicitly withheld power from women: Forbidding women from voting for example. Further, men commit more violence on women than vice-versa. Given the profundity and ubiquity that I believe the oppression of women has had, I don't see why there would be a need to suggest misogyny and so called misandry are on the same level.
It also occurs to me that "toxic masculinity" is a useful strategy in the capitalist workplace, and so much of what might be termed "misandry" is little more than toxic masculinity appropriated by women. In a dog-eat-dog world toxic masculinity is an adaptive strategy.

[@emilianosintarias7337]

@@JCT1926 Hi Chris, how are you, thanks for conversing. No offense, but I think the issue is because everything you just wrote fits, unintentionally driven by bourgeois class imperatives and myths, into one of the following boxes:
-empirically unsupported
-confusing demographics with groups, even with classes
- ignoring gender dynamics (and their relation to class as well), specifically the offloading of tasks by each sex to the other. (example: I suspect you wouldn't call the fact that more women abuse and even kill minors than men do, "toxic femininity" and rightfully so- as it comes as a side effect of tasks offloaded onto women.)
-Mis-ID of what misandry and misogyny are (not related to sex of "perpetrators")
-Abusing historicism. And this goes to my note of groups and classes (above) as well. We care about history for good reasons, but historical gender relations (which are not quite what you just said they were) can't build up to shape (outside of genetics) the present. Race and class and imperialism can, sexism can't. The only exceptions to this would be certain remote villages or settlements composed almost entirely of one sex.
It's a lot, so I can break any of them down for you if you want, Cheers.

[@lexparsimoniae2107]

You hit the nail on the head. Bourgeois misandry is the fundamental fantasy of this characteristically hysteric woman.