David Yeagley is the great-great-grandson of Comanche leader Bad Eagle. 
BadEagle.com has dealt with the subject of race and sex many times in the past. What we have not attempted til now is to explain the basic elements of the sexual theory of Sigmund Freud (1856-1939), those that pertain directly with sexuality. That a Negro male in high social status should be surrounded with white women accusing him of sexual misconduct seems a perfect opportunity to deal some straight Freudian theory.
Cain and his accusers: a national exposure of the white woman/black male syndrome so intensely popular in modern American society.
The character of the white women involved is of no consequence. The fact that they are white and Cain is Negro is the only matter of concern when we speak of sexual theory and social behavior. The media hounds sniffing out their superficial moral scents are clearly sniffing up the wrong tree, and their bark will expose no jig thither entrapped.
Sigmund Freud (1856-1939), father of modern psychology.
According to Freud, sexual disposition begins in infancy. We cannot here cite every Freudian reference, but, we recommend two small volumes, one for the popular reader, the other for the more studious pursuant: Richard Appignanesi, Freud for Beginners (Pantheon, 1979), and Sigmond Freud, Three Contributions to the Theory of Sex, trans. A. A. Brill (Dutton, 1962). These books are small and accessible.
Freud was a Viennese Jew, of the late 19th and early 20th century (b. 1856, d. 1939). There are those who have written off his psychological theory as some highly subjective Jewish cultural malaise of modernity. In America, still Puritan in standard, Freudian theory has always been sublimated into a simple guilt relief device. Academic markets being what they are, Freud was soon replaced by other, more contemporary theorists. But those that understand Freud appreciate the universal validity of his theory.
Essentially, the infant’s first physical aversions pertain to its own waste, both of which kinds proceed from genital and anal orifaces, respectively. Whatever natural defense mechanism the species developed to protect itself from urine and feces, the result is a natural aversion–without knowledge of bacteriology or disease. Epidermal reaction (irritation and discomfort), and averse olfaction (i.e., to offensive odor) serve as unaccountable behavior in the individual species. The infant learns also inevitably learns to cope with the fact that the emission of waste is nevertheless pleasurable, as well as necessary.
The normal toddler is eventually ‘pottie-trained,’ and the child lives a number of years in a non-conflicting acceptance of the waste management he has been taught. (Yes, this management varies in different cultures, but we speak here of the Western civilizations, where sublimation is superior.) But just about the time the whole waste management system of the individual is fully mastered and psychologically written off as totally normal, puberty sets in. Suddenly, the most pleasurable emissions of all are found to occur in precisely the same genital area. The sexual organs are indeed the same as the liquid waste disposers. Thus, a short lifetime of careful aversion, natural and learned, is profoundly confused. You have sex with the same thing you go to the bathroom with.
Therefore, says Freud, we are all naturally confused about sex. The initial feeling is horrible. Sex is dirty, bad, averse, at least as averse as your reaction to your own waste. Our attitude that sex is nasty is manifest in our language. “Foul” language generally involves reference to the sex act, the sex organs, or sexuality. “F” this, “F” that, all testify to our conscious aversion to sex.
Now, when the libido energy has come to be appreciated and desired, the initial aversion itself becomes sublimated, in a sense, or disguised. It is a kind of natural schizophrenia, sex. We do it with the things we first and normally associate with waste elimination.
So, if sex is dirty, or bad, the male ego must clean it up, some how. The female must justify it. This is the secret of understanding exotic inter-racial sexual pursuits. In the case of the black (dark) male, the white woman’s body is the supreme cleanser. To the white female, the black penis justifies her abandonment in sexual excitement. Through abandoning herself to the black penis, she saves the world. It is what we have called the white woman savior complex. These are the foundational psychological conditionings, theoretically, conscious or unconscious.
In the overall sociological context of Western society, and particularly American society–so racially charged, the Herman Cain story is practically an archetype. It seems completely inevitable. BadEagle.com suspected that all the women would be white, long before they identified themselves. The character of the white women involved is not the matter of concern. It is the natural sexuality issue that dominates the story–if reporters and commentators were educated.
Is it possible that these white women are simply fantasizing about a Negro man? Is it not also possible that Herman Cain gave them special opportunity (intentionally or unintentionally)? Character is about self-control, not about natural urges and psychological conditioning. The American media is preoccupied with character and social behavior, and this will never be resolved. This is the Puritan preoccupation of the American psyche. Moral character–control over sexual behavior, trumps the understanding of sexual behavior. The media wants to nail someone, rather that understand anything.
The lesson to be learned in this case of white women (plural) and one Negro male–who happens to be a candidate for president of the United States, is that integration leads to interracial sex, or at least the fantasy thereof. Not to make here a judgment as to the wisdom or propriety of interracial sex, but, even the morality of extra-marital sex itself is passed over by the media. Sharon Bialek, in her first news conference (with Gloria Allred at her side), kept emphasizing her “boyfriend” as the reason sex with Herman Cain was undesired–as if to say, if she didn’t have a boyfriend, it would have been okay, regardless of whether Cain was married! This said it all.
But, again, the moral character of the white women involved is no concern. Their abandonment to the subconscious is clear enough. Whether they are fantasizing, or reporting the truth of sexual advances from a Negro, the case is closed. There are a goodly number, and an increasing number, of white women who are willing to abandon themselves to the Negro man. According to Freud, this is based on horrible feelings about sex, or at least natural aversions.
Also, modern psychology has demonstrated that much of interracial sex and miscegenation is related to sexual abuse. Often these white women suffered sexual abuse–from white males, and seek escape in exotic, overwhelming sexual excitation of one kind or another. Also, some may have had sexual encounters with the black male as young girls. They may have inherited aberrant moral standards early on.
These are the only real facts in the case of the white women and the Negro Herman Cain. Most people don’t like discussing Freudian sexual theory. Like the media, people love talking about sex. Everyone has his standards, expectations, pleasures, etc. But, the real nature of sex seems taboo. True, also, Freud’s theories were developed as the result of treating neurosis. He’s informants were mentally ill, and not normal people. I don’t know what this says about the white women and Herman Cain.
25 responses so far ↓
1 David Yeagley // Nov 9, 2011 at 4:30 pm
Even if a woman isn’t worthy of respect, the manly thing to do is to respect her anyway. Whores have their pride, and rightly so. As stated above, the moral character of these women, for better or for worse, has nothing to do with the understanding of sex, in the Freudian context.
2 wyoman // Nov 9, 2011 at 5:53 pm
Many years ago when I was a college freshman a black friend told me something that rings true. He said young black men do lust after white women to some extent but not for the reasons I might assume. He said as boys grow up adults tell them all sorts of things are bad or bad for them. Then they try these things and they find they are fun or pleasurable. So when adults tell them to stay away from white girls the black youth thinks “Wow, They must be out of sight.” This is not really your subject but I thought it was interesting.
3 Pamela K. // Nov 9, 2011 at 6:20 pm
“But, again, the moral character of the white women involved is no concern.”
It should be of concern. During her big press conference, Bialek giggled as she spewed her obviously contrived, poorly rehearsed, sordid sob story about fending off Cain’s lewd advances. She is treating this whole scandal like the joke that it is, only it’s not the least bit funny. How do any of us know what really happened on that night? She was so “desperate” for a job. Since were talking about the subconscious here, may be she is really the guilty party here. May be she came on to Cain. May be this is why she kept mentioning, “I had a boyfriend at the time.”
“Their abandonment to the subconscious is clear enough. Whether they are fantasizing, or reporting the truth of sexual advances from a Negro, the case is closed.”
So basically, what you are saying here is that whether Cain harassed these women or not, the fact that they are white women automatically means they’re secretly lusting after and long to be ravished by black men?
“There are a goodly number, and an increasing number, of white women who are willing to abandon themselves to the Negro man.”
What about black sistas, and Hispanic chicas? Females of the Asian persuasion? Or, is it just something that only applies to us white girls?
Blame our increasingly debased culture, not to mention the reinforcement by the social media of the longstanding myth about the superior sexual prowess of black males. The stereotype of the “big, black buck” should be considered an insult, but, many young black men today, especially the hip-hop artists, and professional sport stars not to mention legions of their impressionable followers, “groove on” perpetuating the media-generated, unsavory image of the sexy black slacker.
Women-whether white or black- who chase after these type of men, usually suffer from very low self-esteem. It really has nothing to do with being white and blonde and pretty. It has everything to do with being stupid and making poor choices for themselves that they often live to regret, while the “buck” swiftly moves on to greener pastures and their next conquest.
4 Maharishi of Mayhem // Nov 9, 2011 at 11:31 pm
BadEagle….I love ya bro, but are you back on the Peyote?
Relax, smoke it up in the sweat lodge, and put on some Pink Floyd….or on second thought….
(a Google original)
5 David Yeagley // Nov 10, 2011 at 9:04 am
“Smoke get’s in your eyes.” Kern and Harbach, 1933.
“Sometimes, a cigar is just a cigar.” S. Freud (attrib.)
6 David Yeagley // Nov 10, 2011 at 9:11 am
An appropriate alternative version?
7 Pamela K. // Nov 10, 2011 at 11:33 am
Since your into the psychosexual babble of Sigmund Freud to explain away the lustful urges white women have for black men here’s an even better alternative:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3L4spg8vyo
8 Pamela K. // Nov 10, 2011 at 11:38 am
“Woe to you, my Princess … I will kiss you quite red and feed you until you are plump. And if you are froward, you shall see who is stronger, a gentle little girl who doesn ‘t eat enough or a big wild man who has cocaine in his body. In my last severe depression I took coca again and a small dose lifted me to the heights….”
Sorry, this is not a newly uncovered love note allegedly written by Herman Cain to one of his accusers, but penned by old Sigmund himself.
“She don’t lie, she don’t lie, she don’t lie…cocaine!”
Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,912660,00.html#ixzz1dKDAicsL
9 David Yeagley // Nov 10, 2011 at 12:05 pm
I confess, I am virtually and entirely unfamiliar with any popular manifestation of Freudian sexual sublimation, nor am I familiar with the personal life of Dr. Freud, or any of his associates, media reports contemporary to his circumstances–alone or in the company for friends, family, patients…
(Actually, I am preparing an even deeper blog on the theory, and its juxtaposition with the theory of Carl Jung (pronounced “yoong,” for those perhaps unfamiliar).
Psycho babble, eh? Well, when you’re in graduate school, you have to take all these things seriously. At least I did.
Shall we discuss Guibert de Nogent? Yes, a special blog on the writings of the Medieval monk… (talk about repression!)
I think you’ll find the Jung extension of Freud to be interesting. (No sublimation intended.)
Is this harassment? Am I harassing my readers?
10 David Yeagley // Nov 10, 2011 at 12:17 pm
Hey, how do you know Freud was not simply disciplining a little granddaughter or something?! Tempting her with hot chocolate…
11 Pamela K. // Nov 10, 2011 at 12:59 pm
That said, how do we know “my Princess” wasn’t him talking to his dog for that matter? He could have also been addressing his sister-in-law, Minna Bernays, with whom he had an affair in the 1890′s.
Guibert de Nogent sounds interesting, but what about the opposite of repression?
Here’s an interesting subject:
http://www.lilith-ezine.com/articles/sex/Rasputin-Russia-Greatest-Love-Machine.html
What would possess any woman to swoon over this unkempt, slovenly monk?
Whatever allure the charismatic Rasputin had over women was definitely not of this world.
More like from the pits of Hell itself.
12 David Yeagley // Nov 10, 2011 at 4:22 pm
Now, lookie here. I know you have a sense of humor….!
13 Thrasymachus // Nov 10, 2011 at 4:32 pm
First of all, I’d like to post some links that might be helpful.
Sigmund Freud Collection at Bartleby.com.
Online Psychology information resource.
I am not a Freudian. I prefer the ideas of C. G. Jung, Dr. Henry C. Link, Dr. Abraham Low (also Jewish, but an opponent of Freud), et al.
I am not saying that Freud didn’t have some very real and original insights. It’s just that I believe that his basic theory of the Oedipal Complex has no empirical data to prove or demonstrate its validity. And hardly anybody these days accepts the Freudian theory that a distant father and a domineering mother encourages the development of homosexuality in males. “Dr. Phil,” the television shrink, insists that this theory is false and that the studies conclusively rule it out.
In all fairness, though, I also am not totally ruling out all possibility of the Oedipal Complex.
Popular Culture tells us that the relationship of Elvis Presley to his mother was unusually intense. Though clearly not openly or consciously sexual, it was suggestive of “romantic” interest. Elvis was not nearly as close with his father as he was with his mother; but he certainly wasn’t hostile to his father. The point here is that Presley’s case — which is something of an aberration in my opinion — could suggest a sublimation of the Oedipal complex. Or maybe not. I cannot really say for certain.
14 Thrasymachus // Nov 10, 2011 at 4:42 pm
Unless God has an interest in preserving the races he created, the conclusion is inescapable: the White Race is dying and will eventually be a museum piece.
Interracial relationships are increasing year by year. In present circumstances, there is absolutely no possibility for the long-term survival of the European American. Miscegenation, like a snowball, steadily increases over time, wherever racial integration is being lived and practiced.
White males are dating Asians, and, increasingly, black women:
yo kids will be beautiful cause you got u a white man
How we met!
15 Thrasymachus // Nov 10, 2011 at 4:59 pm
I have also found this lecture extremely interesting:
Alan Watts – Sex & Christianity.
Remember that Watts was a Christian Anglican priest before converting to Buddhism. (Thrasymachus is not a Buddhist.)
16 Thrasymachus // Nov 10, 2011 at 5:11 pm
I am very sorry to report my conclusion for the prospects of America, but here it is nonetheless:
The only time the racial tensions will be absent from American society will be when the mixed-race persons are overwhelmingly in the majority. This is certain to be achieved in the foreseeable future.
Europe is different. This is at least a possibility that Europe, with its history of fratricidal wars, will abandon Liberalism and restore itself.
But the U.S.? Never. Liberalism has made too deep inroads here ever to be overturned.
17 Thrasymachus // Nov 10, 2011 at 5:15 pm
Why do I have at least a faint hope for Europe but none for the States?
Swiss MP Oskar Freysinger – Have We Gone MAD?!
18 Thrasymachus // Nov 10, 2011 at 5:47 pm
You see, TWICE in recent American history, the White Conservative Population fled the Democratic Party: first when Lyndon Johnson was president, and again when Ronald Reagan ran for that office.
In both cases, when racially conscious Whites sought refuge in the Republican Party, that party refused to take up the cause. Because of the Republican Party’s refusal to take up the banner of preserving the racial balance of the country, the Liberals have won the political contest in this country.
19 David Yeagley // Nov 10, 2011 at 6:13 pm
Without Freud, there would have been no Jung. (Grossly overstated, perhaps.)
I admitted (I think on FB), that there is no way of demonstrating his theory in a laboratory. In that sense, it is not empirical. It is the work of years of clinical observations. The empirical is concluded–from recorded data, over a long period of time, not demonstrated immediately in an experiment or laboratory. I realize, therefore, it has to be classified as other than “scientific” in the strict sense of the word. One has to “see” it, or “grasp” it. That, of course, takes choice.
I also realize there are opponents. But, they are reactions to Freud. Therefore, always less, always weaker, and never original. I think Freud was as original as Beethoven! I even said that to Prof. Robert Paul, at Emory U. (He is the Freudian there.) Freud influenced Western culture more than anyone since Beethoven, I thought.
I think what people find offensive about Freud’s theory is that it seems to leave to room for creativity or freedom. But, I don’t think that’s really true at all. Those things are only superficial illusions anyway. You still have them.
I don’t say to live by Freud, but, just have him as a reference–at least for those looking for explanations.
In a sense, God wants obedience, and that’s “the whole duty of man.” How one interprets it, how one understands the forces in the great controversy, that’s up for grabs.
Personally, I find Freud useful. That’s all. Isn’t a question of true or untrue, when it comes to utility. His conclusions were based on years of treating neurosis. Very strange behaviors. He relieved them by getting the patients to deal with or face pretty deep traumas.
By the way, he rejected hypnotism.
20 David Yeagley // Nov 10, 2011 at 6:14 pm
Thras, your post #18 is spot on!!
And there’s a difference between sublimation and fear of being sued!
21 Thrasymachus // Nov 10, 2011 at 7:21 pm
Freud did not find hypnotism terribly effective in his therapeutic practice, so he rejected it; yet he did not live to see the other dimension: mass hypnosis — aka TELEVISION!
For you see, there are people who believe television to be a strong form of hypnosis. So, while television may not be therapeutic, it can be influential in helping to shape the beliefs of viewers:
Television – Mass Hypnotic Indoctrination.
22 David Yeagley // Nov 10, 2011 at 10:22 pm
Ah, yes, the British conspiratists! (Funny how they’re so into that, when most of the world’s conspiracy theories implicate England!)
I have a scientist (NASA) friend who always said TV was a brain massage (alpha wave bit).
But, you see, Freud joins us again: subliminal advertising!
Even on the surface, it is abundantly clear that the immediate purpose of media is . Of one kind or another, ideas are communicated, tutti con forti. Radio, TV, even hard copy print, in newspaper, magazines, etc.
This is actually collateral damage of capitalism, in my opinion. The torture of advertising.
23 Thrasymachus // Nov 11, 2011 at 2:17 pm
Another — and final — post of YouTube videos, the reason being that this is, in my opinion, the way of the future. American musical culture is black, her politicians are now increasingly black, her sports heroes are black, and her musical and cultural heroes are black.
Since the white woman and black man are already very common, I’ve limited the selections to the reverse:
Dangerously in love…
true love
My Interracial Love
Prediction: This phenomenon will increase steadily year by year until the mixed race population finally outnumbers the original White population. And notice from the videos that the accompanying music is negroid in character. It is not Beethoven!
Any White couple raising a young White child today is going to have to deal, in one way or another, with this new culture.
I can get a feeling of what it might be like to be the Last of the Mohicans. I mean, my race is dying in America, as miscegenation is a form of genocide.
If the American Indian is wise and rejects participation in this new American culture, he may well live to see the passing of the Whites who once had conquered him.
God’s will, not mine, be done.
– Θρασύμαχος
24 Thrasymachus // Nov 11, 2011 at 3:02 pm
This is what many of us Conservatives feel went wrong with the United States:
CULTURAL MARXISM — The Corruption of America
25 Thrasymachus // Nov 11, 2011 at 3:54 pm
Along with Cultural Marxism, we have the other side of the coin: CORPORATE FASCISM — The Destruction of America’s Middle Class.
You must log in to post a comment.