12 The Feminine Voice in Freudian Theory of Psychoanalysis

Sigmund Freud is widely understood to be recognized for the popularization, expansion, and sometimes the creation of psychoanalytical theory. We wanted to shed light on some of the female figures who helped create the theory, used the theory, and who were, and still are, impacted by the theory. While Freud is well known for his revolutionary theories that have forever changed and shaped psychology, there are many women whose efforts towards this school of thought have gone largely unseen. Anna Freud, Freud’s own daughter, created the Psychoanalytic Diagnostic Profile which helped foster a deeper understanding of child psychoanalysis. Melanie Klein also used her psychoanalytical lens to study children. Additionally, she was one of the forerunners in the development of object relation theory. Lou Andreas-Salomé studies of psychoanalysis expanded, and sometimes contradicted, Freud’s concept of narcissism. Finally, there is the lasting sexist and harmful impact that Freud’s discussion of hysteria has left on women around the world.

Anna Freud was born in Vianna, Austria, on December 3rd, 1895. She was the youngest daughter of Sigmund Freud and was one of the founders of child psychoanalysis (Solnit, 1997). As a young woman, she started her professional life as a teacher, where she had the opportunity to observe children, which helped her develop her own psychoanalytic theory. She was also the chair member of the Viana Psychoanalytic Society from 1925 to 1928; during her time, she published her first paper on child psychoanalytic theory in 1927, called “Introduction to the Technique of Child Analysis” (Solnit, 1997).

During that time, other psychoanalysis were developing theories on child psychology mainly through “Play Therapy”; however, Anna followed the fundamental psychoanalytic theories developed by her father, Sigmund Freud but thought child psychoanalysis should be a whole different method (Solnit, 1997). She argued that the psychoanalytic process could only start when the child reaches the latency period, which begins at around age six (Freud, 1980). Her main focus before age six was to provide a supportive environment and stable environment for psychosexual development to the child to prevent neurosis (Freud, 1980).

As psychoanalysis started, the primary focus was on the therapeutic alliance to create trust and interest in the therapeutic process and engage the child. She also thought children should be treated as equals, therefore the same as adults who undergo psychoanalysis, however adapting each child’s needs and wants (Solnit, 1997). She also stipulates allowing the child to freely move around the room freely, providing creative materials and following along with the child since the free association was not feasible at such an early age (Solnit, 1997).

Children could express themselves by providing material for painting and drawing, and the outcome of those drawings was regarded as the exact value of a spoken word or free association. The purpose was to aid the development and develop a stable ego, superego and the ability to manage the id (Freud, 1980). According to her theory, there are ten defence mechanisms to protect the mind, so one of the purposes of child analysis was to work through the defensive mechanisms and learn to deal with conflict with less stress (Freud, 1946).

Finally, one of Freud’s main achievements was the creation of the Psychoanalytic Diagnostic Profile, which was based on three major factors (Mayes & Cohen, 1996):

1. The child’s development is not stage-based but a continuum with progressions and regressions.
2. Progression and development are innate or pushed through biological maturation and influenced by environmental conditions.
3. To understand what normal or abnormal psychopathology is, one needs to understand the complexity of normal development fully.

To further explain developmental lines are patterns of the superego and id, Freud created a revolution in child psychoanalysis because both the superego and id were studied separately, making it hard to grasp the difference between adult psychoanalysis and child psychoanalysis (Freud, 1980). The Psychoanalytic Diagnostic Profile has been updated and sharpened; however, it is still a hallmark and used in child psychoanalysis throughout the world (Malberg & Pretorius, 2017).

While Freud’s psychoanalytical theory is widely cited, acknowledged, and taught we rarely are able to give credit to some female scholars who expanded on his ideas in revolutionary ways. There are gaps in Freud’s psychoanalytical theory that leave little detail from the start of life, or the impact of the mother-child relationship. Melanie Klein is able to expand on these ideas. Klein looked at experiences that took place in infancy, arguing that these experiences also had a substantial influence on the development of personality.

Melanie was born in Vienna as the last of four children. She later found herself in an unhappy marriage to Arthur Klein and fell into a depression after the birth of her three children. With this she was introduced to psychoanalysis and read Freud’s famous book On Dreams. As per her treatment she began to investigate into analyzing her children. After her divorce from Arthur in 1926, she moved to Berlin. Here she continued her research on psychoanalysis and made expansions to Freud’s theory of the Oedipus complex (Sayers 1987). Freud’s Oedipus complex is what he describes as the child’s desire or feelings towards the parent of the opposite sex, while simultaneously feeling hatred or anger toward the same sex parent. Klein even slightly changed the wording of Freud’s original name – calling it the Oedipus situation. She believed that children came into this stage approximately at the age of four. This was caused by feelings of abandonment and exclusion from realizing the parents have their own sexual relationship that the child is left out from (Fear 2018). She went on to expand Freud’s account of depression and created detailed ramifications of the Oedipus situation (Sayers 1987). She created the basis of these ideas stemming from the influences of the research she did on her own children. She was one of the first people to use psychoanalysis with young children. She said that the infant-mother relationship is actually built on more than the importance of attachment of the baby and the necessity of feeding. She hypothesized that the mother’s attachment to the baby is actually just as if not more important.

Klein was also one of the pioneers of object relation theory. This theory looks at how everyone has an unconscious realm of relationships and these relationships then internalized and subsequently affect one’s psychological framework (Sayers 1987). Object relation theory describes one as perceiving object, connecting it to the self, and then understanding the relation between the self and the object (Good Therapy n.d.). Klein expands on the ideas with the use of phastasy. She says there is a preoccupation to keep the ‘good’ substances and objects. This idea hypothesizes the internalization of objects (Sayers 1987).  If the caregiver is unable to meet the needs of the infant, then the infant may have concepts of the mother being ‘bad’ and repress these feelings, causing issues in relationships later in life. Klein, unlike Freud, puts a huge emphasis on the very early months of the child’s life (Good Therapy n.d.). Klein suggests that with the understanding being built that individuals can possess both ‘good’ and ‘bad’, there is a better acceptance of oneself and others (Cohen & Husley 2022)

Today, there is a two-year certificate program in object relations theory which practicing members of the mental health field can obtain (Good Therapy n.d.). The goal is to focus on deficits in the client’s interpersonal functioning and explore new ways relationships can be bettered. In therapy, a client may explore how aspects from childhood object relations impact issues, feelings, and relationships currently. The goal is to decrease the internal conflict (Good Therapy n.d.).

In 1837, Luíza Gustavovna Salomé more often referred to as Lou Andreas-Salomé was born in St. Petersburg, Russia (Tantam, 2015). She affiliated herself with numerous men such as George Simmel, Wunderlich, Sigmund Freud, Rainer Maria Rilke, and, of course, Friedrich Nietzsch being among the prominent men she interacted with and was sometimes loved by (Tantam, 2015). She was particularly drawn to pairing up with two men at once, one of whom would be a passionate lover and the other an unfulfilled admirer: Rée and Nietzsche, Rilke and Andreas, her husband; Freud and Viktor Tausk. Andreas-Salomé became associated with the idea of a femme fatale after Tausk committed suicide and Rée fell to death from a mountainside (Tantam, 2015).

Moreover, Andreas- Salomé notices a contradiction in Freud’s beliefs regarding the ego’s formation, although not openly declared, she feels though these ideas require revision (Markotic, 2001). The disagreements between mainstream and French psychoanalytic theorists have centred on the issue of ego formation, as it is seen that Freud’s concept of sexuality is now accepted by most French analysts, in contrast to his account of the development of the ego, which is heavily contested (Markotic, 2001). In Freud’s time, other psychoanalysts, particularly Jung and Adler, rejected Freud’s concept of sexuality because they believed he overemphasised its importance for the development of the self (Markotic, 2001).

Lou was interested to see how the context of babies and how they know to act certain ways such as crying when hungry or in pain and how that baby becomes a person, Lou takes a deep dive to analyze how does an ego emerge (Markotic, 2001). According to Freud, the ego develops when our desires are not satiated and acts as a mediator between the libido and the reality principle (Markotic, 2001). Contrary to Freud, Andreas-Salomé thinks that the development of an ego is a necessary component of basic narcissism. Primary narcissism as defined by Freud in “On Narcissism” is what Andreas-Salomé aims to preserve, but she rejects the notion that it is the same as autoeroticism (Markotic, 2001). She maintains that a sense of unity that predicts the ego is a necessary component of primordial narcissism (Markotic, 2001).

Andreas-Salomé asserts that the child’s anal experiences are where the ego, which is prophesied throughout the time of basic narcissism, actually arises, being the stage, the youngster establishes their first awareness of boundaries and starts to control their urges (Markotic, 2001). The ego grows through a fluctuating feeling of one’s own drives as well as one’s sense of separation from and continuity with the universe (Markotic, 2001).

From the viewpoint of a woman, Andreas-Salomé retells Freud’s thesis of the primal horde. She thinks that as long as a primal father-god coexisted with woman’s “creatureliness” and she was solely his, she did not suffer terribly. She was eventually separated from the father-god, though, and was given to man, yet as a result of her potential servitude to humanity, women’s desire for equality emerged (Markotic, 2001). Andreas-Salomé states that she began to experience penis envy and makes it plain that she thinks this is socially rather than physiologically produced. As a result, she develops traits of rebellion and shame (Markotic, 2001).

Freuds view of hysteria has had detrimental impacts to women worldwide. While the nineteenth and twentieth century is marked by the vital progressions of women’s rights (History, 2023), Freuds work with hysteria can be viewed as a colossal step backwards for gender equality.

Hysteria is one of the oldest mental illness recorded, dating back to 1900BC (Tasca et al., 2012) It is also the first mental illness attributed particularly to women (Tasca et al., 2012). Until Freud came on the scene, the disorder thought to be due to a lack of conception and motherhood (Tasca et al., 2012). Freud however flips this concept on it’s head. He re-defines hysteria in the late eighteenth century as a disorder due to inhibited sexual fulfilment, or the repressing of one’s sexuality (Tasca et al., 2012). Rampant diseases of the nineteenth century such as syphilis, provide a more contextual theory for the frequency of hysteria Freud and his colleagues witnessed (Rudnick & Heru, 2017). While women were choosing to avoid sex that may result in disease, Freud was taking a much more reductive approach.

Today Freudian hysteria continues to perpetuate harmful stereotypes and promote male dominance. According to Freud, hysteria symptoms are merely an elaborate and observable display of an individuals repressed sexual desires (Tasca et al., 2012). This redefinition of hysteria puts both women and their sexuality in a vulnerable position for exploitation. Simply stated, Freud viewed hysteria as a manifestation of unresolved conflicts between the conscious and unconscious mind (Freud & Breuer, 1895/1957). He believed that the patient’s repressed sexual emotions and memories were so overwhelming that they could not be integrated into the patient’s conscious awareness, leading to physical symptoms, such as paralysis or blindness.. We only now begin to understand the consequences of Freuds emphasis on sexual conflict in the development of hysteria (Freud & Breuer, 1895/1957).

Freud’s views of hysteria undoubtably stemmed from ingrained patriarchal values. It’s evident that his perception of hysteria served to benefit the male-dominated society of the time (Schafer, 2019). We see this attitude in the way Freud speaks of women “Their superego is never so inexorable, so impersonal, so independent of its emotional origins…they show less sense of justice than men, that they are less ready to submit to the great exigencies of life, that they are more often influenced in their judgements by feelings of affection or hostility.” (Freud, 1925, pp. 257-258) Sadly, we still see this sexist and patriarchal attitude perpetuated in society today.

Even 100 years later, Freud’s heteronormative beliefs of women’s inferiority and submissive state are still of influence (Freud, 1925/1961). These harmful views can be ascribed to Freud’s work through the assimilation of his concepts into mainstream culture. These ideas have been criticized for promoting sexist stereotypes and reinforcing the idea of male dominance in sexual relationships (Tasca et al., 2012; Schafer, 2019). Freud’s view of hysteria lead himself and others to view women’s symptoms as a result unacceptable ideas and emotions (Freud & Breuer, 1895/1957, p. 21). In other words, women were blamed for their own psychological problems, rather than seeing them as the result of social and cultural factors. This approach has been criticized for promoting victim-blaming and for ignoring the impact of patriarchy and gender inequality on women’s mental health (Chodorow, 1978).

Freudian views on hysteria continue to shape the way that women are diagnosed and treated. Despite social advancements, cultural stigma of the ‘hysterical women’ is still present. Many women can feel ignored and marginalized by both society and medical system. This is thought to be a result of Freudian hysteria in which the women is overly emotional (Freud, 1925, pp. 257-258). The tragic consequence of this is reflected in society today, as women often won’t be taken seriously regarding how they are feeling (Holmes, 1992). Furthermore, Freud’s focus on the hysterical manifestation of unconscious sexual repression has contributed to a cultural belief that mental health symptoms are shameful or indicative of weakness. This can be thought to contribute to women feeling embarrassed or hesitant to seek help for their mental health (Cramer, 2021). Freud’s emphasis on the individual psyche led to overlooking the social and cultural factors that contribute to hysteria. Presently, this perpetuates a cultural failure to address the systemic and structural issues that affect women’s well-being, such as sexism, racism, and poverty. (Gurevich, 2021).

Ultimately, Freud’s views on hysteria, which were rooted in a sexist cultural and historical context, have had a lasting impact on how women are understood and treated.

Clearly there has been and will continue to be many female voices who have shaped and influenced the practice and theories of psychoanalysis. Whether it be from Anna Freud’s revolutionary creation of child psychoanalysis, to Klein’s practice of object relation theory, to Andreas-Salomé’s discussion of narcissism, or even the mass impact of Freud’s depiction of hysteria on women, we hope to continue to hear the feminine voices psychoanalysis through years to come.

References

Chodorow, N. (1978). The reproduction of mothering: Psychoanalysis and the sociology of gender. University of California Press.

Cohen, C. T., & Hulsey, T. L. (2022). Object relations-focused psychoanalytic psychotherapy in the treatment of narcissistic personality disorder. Clinical Case Studies, 21(5), 474–491. https://doi.org/10.1177/15346501221098071

Cramer, P. (2021). The stigma of mental disorders: A review. Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences, 75(3), 136-146.

Fear, R. M. (2018). Freud’s theory of the oedipus complex. The Oedipus Complex, 11–22. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429482595-2

Freud, A. (1980). Normality and pathology in childhood: Assessments of development. Hogarth Pr.

Freud, A. (1946). The ego and the mechanisms of Defence. International Univ. Press.

Freud, S., & Breuer, J. (1895/1957). Studies on hysteria. Standard edition (Vol. 2). Hogarth Press.

Freud, S. (1925/1961). Some psychical consequences of the anatomical distinction between the sexes. In J. Strachey (Ed. and Trans.), The standard edition of the complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. 19, pp. 245-258). Hogarth Press.

Freud S. (1925). Some psychical consequences of the anatomical distinction between the sexes. Standard Edition 19:243–258.

GoodTherapy. (n.d.). Object Relations. Retrieved March 4, 2023, from https://www.goodtherapy.org/learn-about-therapy/types/object-relations

Gurevich, R. (2021). Intersectionality and psychotherapy: Understanding the complexity of identity. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 77(2), 247-259.

History.com Editors. (2023). Women’s history milestones: A Timeline – history. Women’s History Milestones: A Timeline. Retrieved March 21, 2023, from https://www.history.com/topics/womens-history/womens-history-us-timeline

Holmes, J. (1992). Sex differences in mental health: The problem with applying a theoretical model. Social Science & Medicine, 35(3), 367-377.

Markotic, L. (2001). There where primary narcissism was, I must become: The inception of the ego in andreas-salome, Lacan, and Kristeva. American Imago, 58(4), 813–836. https://doi.org/10.1353/aim.2001.0023

Mayes LC, Cohen DJ.(1996). Anna Freud and developmental psychoanalytic psychology. Psychoanal Study Child. ;51:117-41. doi: 10.1080/00797308.1996.11822424. PMID: 9029954.

Norka Malberg & Inge-Martine Pretorius (2017) Anna Freud’s Diagnostic Profile: Then and Now, Journal of Infant, Child, and Adolescent Psychotherapy, 16:2, 127-130, DOI: 10.1080/15289168.2017.1308129

Rudnick, L. P., & Heru, A. M. (2017). The “secret” source of “female hysteria”: the role that syphilis played in the construction of female sexuality and psychoanalysis in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. History of Psychiatry, 28(2), 195–208. https://doi-org.ezproxy.capilanou.ca/10.1177/0957154X17691472

Sayers, J. (1987). Melanie Klein, psychoanalysis, and feminism. Feminist Review, (25), 23. https://doi.org/10.2307/1395033

Schafer, R. (2019). Problems in Freud’s Psychology of Women. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 67(3), 503–526. https://doiorg.ezproxy.capilanou.ca/10.1177/0003065119858947

Solnit, A. J. (1997). A legacy: Anna Freud’s views on childhood and development. Child Psychiatry and Human Development, 28(1), 5–14. https://doi-org.ezproxy.capilanou.ca/10.1023/A:1025136817483

Tantam, D. (2015). The contribution of female existential philosophers to psychotherapy. Existsential Analysis, 26(1), 36.

Tasca, C., Rapetti, M., Carta, M. G., & Fadda, B. (2012). Women and hysteria in the history of mental health. Clinical practice and epidemiology in mental health : CP & EMH, 8, 110–119. https://doi.org/10.2174/1745017901208010110