Dr. Freud. Stages of development. Personality. Free association. Defense mechanism.

1. Repression: we force traumatic experiences to be unavailable to memory retrieval
2. Regression: we go back to a more comfortable stage of development
3. Reaction formation: we make unacceptable impulses into their opposite
4. Projection: we take unwanted desires/feelings and attribute them to other people/objects
5. Rationalization: the primal desires of the id are exposed and we make excuses
6. Displacement: we take out aggressive impulses on something other than the target

1. Oral Stage
    Age: birth-2yrs.
2. Anal Stage
    Age: 2yrs-3yrs
3. Phallic Stage
    Age: 3yrs-6yrs
4. Latency Stage
    Age: 6yrs-13yrs
5. Genital Stage
    Age: 13yrs-death

People can get fixated in certain stages. They still experience the others, but they cannot seem to get out of particular ones. Example: people who smoke, chew, drink, ect. or have a sarcastic or "biting" humor are said to be fixated in the oral stage. Their anxieties were not reconciled in the first stage, so they are fixated in it. Example: we've all heard the phrase "anal-retentive" when someone describes a person who is characteristic-ly neat. They are said to be fixated in the anal stage, they can "hold it" and be "in control".

Neo-Freudians came into the picture when ideas did not settle well with them. For every artist, there is a critic, right? More of the famous ones, Carl Jung and Eric Erikson. They played with the ideas of collective unconscious and the psychosocial stages of development, respectively. Adler, a lesser known Neo-Freudian, developed the idea of inferiority complex.

Shakespeare. Sonnets. John Donne. Poetry.


The previous lines were taken from John Donne's "The Good-Morrow". This is also from the same man who wrote "The Flea". The previous is absolutely beautiful, the latter is hilarious. Picture an old tavern-ish place in the late 1500s. Most of the men are drunk and looking for a good time. Cue: cheese-y pick-ups lines.
"Oh look! A flea! You know, it sucked my blood a little while ago. Oh no! It sucked yours, too! You know, that's kinda like we are together. Two bloods mixed in one organism. It's like our child. And since we are together, why not *wink wink*?"
I love it. It's funny, yet intelligent. Lovely use of wit, John Donne.

This is just concerning me. I do not pretend to convey the ideals and beliefs of others. I live in America. I speak American English. I am a citizen by birth. I am not patriotic in the least. However, when one goes to a country to live, or even visit long term, one should learn, at least conversationally, to speak in the national language. When I walk into a store in the United States I expect to hear people talking. I should not hear adults speaking in a foreign language only to rely on their children to translate. If you are visiting another country, let's say France, you'd be expected to learn conversational French. They would not accommodate for you. Put English words on the opposite side of cereal boxes, have translations for you in bathrooms and under signs in department stores. No where else does this happen.
So, when I say the word "beaner" I am referring to those Hispanics who come to America and cannot speak English. Those who come here illegally and live off welfare and social security. Those who have over 6 children (by one or several mates) and have foodstamps. Those who have no job but cannot seem to make time to go to FREE classes to learn ENGLISH.
THOSE are the people I dislike. THOSE are the people I want out of the country. THOSE are the people I am referring to when I say "beaner".
I have nothing against those who can speak Spanish. If you can speak more than one language, more power to you. Great. I wish I had the brain capacity to speak more than one language. Even conversationally, that would be great. However, one must speak English if they are living in America, in my opinion.

I was in my Psychology class on Wednesday and we started discussing some very interesting topics. Obesity. Depression. Murderers' thoughts. Homosexuality. Insane things. I love it. I've never felt so normal, yet so different in my entire life.
Not everyone I speak to knows my past. I've struggled with anorexia for years. My daily thoughts and emotions would blow most people's minds. It's not as difficult to talk about now, but only around certain people. My parents, for instance, do not know that I classify myself as anorexic. At college, it is quite different. I'm not afraid to be myself.
All that aside, we were talking in class about Nature vs. Nurture. Was I brought up to be who I am? Was it my parents' fault for raising me in such a way that I have an eating disorder? Or was it ingrained in my genetics? Would I have turned out this way if I was brought up in an orphanage? Or shuffled from foster home to foster home? Is it really anyone's fault?
I'm mixed on this particular subject. I cannot say it was completely my parents' fault. I was an extremely active child. Dance, gymnastics, cheer leading, color guard. Furthermore, I cannot say it isn't completely excluded from genetics. My sister struggled with anorexia. My cousin is bulimic. My aunt was anorexic. Most of the family would be considered "overweight" or "obese". All eating disorders. So, which is it?
Anorexia, for me, is a daily choice...most days. I choose to wake up and not eat. I choose to skip a meal. I choose to stop eating after a certain amount. Some days, however, I have no control. Those days are few and far between now. Those were the days of diet pills and laxatives. (Which would also classify me as bulimic.) Those days ended, for the most part, earlier this year. I can honestly say that I have not had a diet pill since then. I cannot say I haven't thought about wanting one. I have been at the store alone, and I find myself looking at the boxes on the shelf. I've tried most of them. Some I cannot have due to a heart condition. I want to be thin, not dead. I want to be alive to enjoy my thinness. (That isn't to say I haven't wanted to die. I have.) So, is it a choice? I didn't wake up one day and say "I want to have an eating disorder. Starving myself sounds like fun." But I do have those thoughts. It's a strange mindset.
Depending on the day, the hour, the second, my answer will change. I love it. I hate it. It's all a matter of when you ask....

I am taking a Political Science course this year, U.S. Government. And today we broke into groups and each group of about 5 students created a government for a country. We all had the same type of citizens living in our countries; good-natured, well-meaning, not so bright people for the masses, with a smaller group of similar people who were a little smarter.
We had groups who talked about a dictator-like government, some chose communist ideals, some chose democracy while others still created a Parliament-ish government. Most groups addressed the idea of security. A force of police would be present to not only protect the country from others, but to protect the people from themselves. (After all, they aren't as smart as those in charge.) Most groups chose a small portion of law enforcement, but no one chose a large portion. (These people are good-natured and want for others more than themselves.) The education system was addressed as well. The dictator-like government said "no" to education. Reasoning went along the lines of: Why educate them? They will just over-throw those in charge. The Parliament-ish government said "yes" to education. Stipulation: You must pass a standardized test to be able to have a say in the government. The votes are weighed according to the test scores, high scores get more of a vote. These votes are used to elect those in charge (as long as those running pass the test and meet the standards) while those elected all have an equal vote. (This was the most interesting to me.) All but one of the groups addressed how to keep the people from over-throwing the government set up and how to keep corruption from taking over.
Now, what does this say about us? We first off, do not trust the government set up, even though it is fictitious. We are not a trusting people. Most of the groups assumed that the people in charge would not be of the same character of those being ruled. Everything done is to keep the few from having complete control of the many. It is apparent in American government as well. The "people" vote for those in charge, then blame the one in charge for when things go wrong. Is it not the people's fault? The people chose who should lead. Unfortunately, in America the people's vote for President doesn't really count. It goes to popular vote. The electoral college ultimately decides who gets the seat in the White House. We vote for those people though. Should we not be more aware of who is in that seat? There isn't as much stress put on the people for voting for the House of Representatives. Or the Senate. Not many people blame them for things going wrong. What happened to checks-and-balances? The President is only 1/3 of the power. He can be vetoed.
What does this say about people in general? We aren't trusting. We assume that once someone has power, that they are more likely to become corrupt. The power will "go to their head". We try so hard to get "good" people in positions of power, then we don't trust them once they are there.