The Anima is my absolute favorite part of Jung's theory

The Anima is my absolute favorite part of Jung's theory.

Does anyone (with knowledge) have any strong opinions on it or recommended scholarly reading?

Other urls found in this thread:

nytimes.com/2005/03/31/science/an-early-wartime-profile-depicts-a-tormented-hitler.html
philosopher.eu/others-writings/essay-on-wotan-w-nietzsche-c-g-jung/
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

The idea that there is a feminine part of my personality turns me on like you wouldn't believe

How are homosexuals accounted for in this theory? I remember Jung saying about Hitler, that his unconscious seems "female." This makes me suspect that at least some homosexuals follow a female typical pattern of sexual development. But I can't exactly verify if this is true. So I've never found this theory of sexual development particularly illuminating. At least in my own case.

I wish people would stop acting like sexuality is so fucking interesting. Its right up there with favorite color for trite bullshit

In hetrosexual people one's Anima is a type of other. It is a yardstick to measure femininity against, or a deep source of emotional turmoil that seems to rise up quickly and than disappear as fast as it comes.

To the extent that the Anima is viewed not as your other, but as yourself you are deviate from being heterosexual. You might view homosexuality, transgenderism, or fetishization of "being turned into a woman" as a different points on a scale. This is classic Jung though.

After gay rights activists and 2nd wave feminists started becoming a thing. The idea that the Anima resembled "stereotypical women" or that the theory of sexuality was "hetronormative" became problemetic. The result was that several new theories about the Anima were developed which more or less amount to confused rambling. For example that everyone has both and Anima and Animus (what the fuck is the Ego's role than?) that your Anima can have it's own Animus.

I wish people would stop complaining about stuff they know nothing about.

Anima is way more than sexuality.

Oh yeah, I'm sure you're an expert.

I prefer sophiology.

So? What do (you) suppose your JapAnima looks like?

You don't think then that a homosexual would develop like a heterosexual female? Females being affected by animus... I'm like a heterosexual female. I'm attracted to masculine dominant heterosexual men. But I'm biologically male. So I'm transgender homosexual (an extreme-end homosexual). I always felt competitive against females, and rather hateful. I can't imagine that my individuation is mediated through a feminine archetype, if I'm not attracted to females; if females don't serve me as a "call to life." I think of Anima as the Eternal Feminine of A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man. Thing is. There was a lot about this novel that was like my own sexual development. The constant and potent sexual images and feelings, and the maddening need and drive to act on them. In that sense I'm male. I also thought the female form was very beautiful. But I was not physically attracted to females. Only a male could give me anything like the feeling of life. It seems to me like I'm psychically an intermediary being. Having parts male and female. But it honestly seems like I have a broken sexuality. I like heterosexual sex and men. For a biological male that's a pretty fucked up predicament.

Reminder that Jung is Freud for plebs and if anyone says they like him it's a sign that they are easily swayed by mystification and should not be taken seriously

>You don't think then that a homosexual would develop like a heterosexual female

No because first of all the homosexual has no Anima, a woman does. Second the Animus is not a perfect replica of the the woman's ego, it's role isn't even limited to the sexual; it has functions in spirtual thinking.

In hetrosexual relationships you have this nice little formula where the man projects his Anima onto the woman and the woman projects her Animus onto the man. Since it expresses itself through projection there is no sexual ambiguity as this part of their psyche is a distinct 'other'. Harmony of opposites and all that.

Since the Anima or Animus is part of the identity in non-hetrosexuals rather than something projected, there's a kind of disharmony in how you view sex and gender.

I don't think it's a situation without any bad signs. The Animus is wonderful organ, without that you're spirtually dead, passionless, and nihilistic. You probably couldn't dream well without her.

Any psychology that has a weak explanation of mystical thinking is bad. Since the point of psychology is to discuss the irrational parts of thinking.

So when Jung said Hitler seems to have a female unconscious did he mean Hitler individuates by assimilating his animus projection in the manner of a heterosexual female? Or what exactly did he mean? He also said Hitler had a typical female handwriting. There are large portions of his writings I haven't read yet. And nothing at all about homosexuals. Freud wrote about da Vinci. He refers to him as a passive homosexual. I suspect Hitler was also a passive homosexual. An idea that OSS thought probable as well from their report. But I don't think homosexuality is a product of poor or eccentric parenting. Brain scans show an intermediary position between male and female in certain sex diamorphic features. So I suspect that affects a priori the system governing projection and repression. Or the nature, strength and type of the archetypes governing individuation.

Well nonetheless I am still ranting on the matter

Having a weak explanation of mystical thinking is distinct from mystifying a concept.

>DUDE IS OK TO BE AN HOMO

Like I said Anima is more than just being effeminate (and it's effeminacy is not identical to that of heterosexual females, it's just comparable). She can dive into the really deep parts of the unconscious and bring up spirtual treasures. She's a whirlwind of passions. She's heavily involved in art (the Muses) and religious ecstasy. She can also be incredible cruel in her own way.

Hitler was very passionate spiritually. So was Davinci, so homosexual tendencies showing from being involved so heavily with the Anima are not surprising.

And you are correct that homosexuality is almost certainly something that happens before you leave the womb. I think Jung was write about it's psychological traits, but these are not causes, they are affects.

I personally think anima possession is the most uplifting, powerful, interpretation of homosexuality there is.

Could you tell me the source of Jung's writing on Hitler? I have not gotten to that myself.

I've met my anima a few times in my dreams desu

These are pretty great moments. Every encounter with her I had has been profound.

...

This. I've met her once. Looks like redacted. Very tranquil dream, like a lazy evening awake. I felt an incredible bond, as if she were a kid sister I had to protect.

Not really. Campbell has a little to say about it in The Power of Myth, and probably a bit more in Occidental Mythology. Re-read The Greek Myths with an eye on the nymphs and naiads. Daphne and Atalanta, especially.

Love looks not with the eyes but with the mind, And therefore is winged Cupid painted blind.

>Any psychology that has a weak explanation of mystical thinking is bad. Since the point of psychology is to discuss the irrational parts of thinking.
Fuck you. You can have your stinking Jung but don't pollute psychology like this. It is trying to be a respectable field and people like you give it such a bad name and give food for STEMfundies

Sure it's from his essay Civilization in Transition from volume 18 of the collected works. He also talks about Mussolini, who he describes as having a Latin and very masculine temperament. Very interesting work. Also you might find the OSS report on Hitler relevant. Here's the NYT article on it. I'm interested to have your opinion since all manner of academics have tried "accounting for Hitler."

Sry forgot the link. nytimes.com/2005/03/31/science/an-early-wartime-profile-depicts-a-tormented-hitler.html

I don't think he thought Hitler was homosexual.

>Looks like redacted.

Well played.

Have you tried just not being a faggot?

Yeah but I can't help my sexual feelings. Besides girls would never fuck me. I'm small and thin with a girlish face and large eyes. I'm also shy, sensitive and bookish. If I was straight (and you know, certis paribus and all that) I'd be stuck doing prostitutes like my friend.

you sound pretty qt to be desu

>recommended scholarly reading?
The Anima is in Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious

Ha thank you. I look a lot better as a female than I ever did as a male.

Thank you for the source!

My opinion is that the description is fueled by a fear of the man and as such tells more about the writer than it does about it Hitler.

It seems to built on the assumption that cruelty and a strong preference for leadership are abnormal. For instance it's not a "messiah complex" if you really are capable of leading well. People with extraordinary abilities naturally see them-self as extraordinary. The whole report seems to about finding something "wrong" with him. This is a guy who had extraordinary will and courage yet the report is talking as if he were just a complete loser.

I did find the bit about how to psychologically torture the man amusing.

I believe Jung gave an account of the archetypes (Germanic in this case) that are central to accounting for Hitler and his charisma. I can't remember the work in question. But it will no doubt be in the collected works.

Guido! Don't close your eyes tonight, we're going to get rich! Asa Nisi Masa! Asa Nisi Masa!

WHATS THE BEST BOOK TO GET INTO JUNG, FAMILY?

PLEASE RESPOND

>It is trying to be a respectable field
i.e., it is trying to be accessible to plebs. Not interested. Psychology is the successor of philosophy, and we should embrace this.

ah, monsieur, i believe we can discuss Jung seriously here, and avoid all mention that we merely do so as a pretext for repeating talking points from a 8 minute Jordan Peterson video i just saw about how i can get a girlfriend even though i'm a misogynist (which i assure you, monsieur, as a scientist of reaction, that i am)

nice dubsI see you first new namefaggot we've had in a while keep it up my dude

Aion if you're the op. You can just google a pdf of it.

You have no understanding of psychology or philosophy, stop spouting nonsense and leave this board.

His autobiography.

ah, monsieur, i am not new. you might even say, monsieur - he he - that i am old, monsieur. very old. older than your self-respect, perhaps, monsieur?

I have studied both at undergrad and one through postgrad. I am so sick of the push for psychology to become a hard science. It is a baseless attempt and it is why psychology has become a laughing stock - because it has tried to become something it cannot.

What's wrong from a Jungian therapeutic point of view with fantasizing about being the little girl with a little penis, ultimately?

>Well you see the animus dominus misaligns with the three wolves horizon and you must slay your single mother archetype

Yeah yeah, but for what practical reason and how is that bad and from what point of view other than it rubbing mythology the wrong way?

Is it that e.g. I am less self-efficacious than I could be or that I am bound to be anxious and depressed or suffer from anything palpable at all? I don't feel anxious. I feel like my fantasies ground me, I feel like the dildo I shove up my ass sometimes while I imagine a real man taking me makes me go through life with more inspiration and drive.

I tried asceticism before and while inner calm is great and all that, it's not fulfilling like the dildo.

So what is your problem that you say I have a problem?

Therapy for what?

Make a definite claim here please, if there is one to be made with Jung. I am genuinely curious what he had to say here.

I'm with you OP. Anima is the concept that got me into Jung.

>What's wrong from a Jungian therapeutic point of view with fantasizing about being the little girl with a little penis, ultimately?

You're essentially asking what's wrong with being crippled. And ultimatly there is nothing "wrong" with being a cripple if there is nothing that can be done about it. If you were born without legs it's understanble you would have a wheelchair. However if you were born with weak legs, legs that could still function if you put some effort into it, and choose to settle into a wheel-chair. That's kind of sad.

The general problem with this type of Anima relationship is that it leads to psychological immaturity, essentially you never grow up. This is pretty self-evident if you look at how such transsexual people express themself (the love the word little) or even any indicators of sucess (for instance suicide rates).

An Anima image that is defined entirely by sexual or parental terms is pretty much stage 1. Very undeveloped. In healthy develop you would go to stage 2 (Helen) sometime in your teenage years. In other words there are degrees of success in gender dysphoria. If you're going to fantasize at being a woman at least fantasize about being a cool woman instead of a prostitute-mother.

Can you fill us in on the current state of analytic psychology? I am only familiar with early texts.

Such a big question that it definitely seems like b8.

Jungian therapy really does not come into the mainstream courses that teach how to understand and treat mental illness. To be honest, it is still fringe. Maybe it always will be. To really delve into this more, I would need to complete more specific training in a Jungian school beyond postgraduate studies.

Having said that, most of the practitioners I have come across are familiar with the basic Jungian frameworks, and since most practitioners are eclectic in their approach, they tend to not have a problem with using these models if they are helpful for specific clients.

Well specifically can you tell me how analytic psychology interacts with the newer developments. I think neurology and new information about dream patterns would be fantastic to try and use to map out the boundries between the various parts of the psyche.

I remember once for instance reading we know think dreams happen non-stop not just in REM sleep. Well dreams are where the anima is at her strongest.

Agreed. Case in point "psychometric instruments" or as its known in the colloquial, a questionnaire. How old were you when you started masterbating about men? The men in your fantasies were a) masculine b) slightly masculine c) slightly feminine d) feminine. Have you ever between the ages 13 and 21 been sexually aroused by nude male bodies? It doesn't take a genius to figure out why social psychology has a 75% replication failure rate. Empirical psychology might (huge caveat) be able to describe observable behavior. But the actual psyche, no.

This is what they do? Christ, that's probably less more helpful to the individual than making posts on message boards asking "has anyone else felt this way".

Thanks for the nice reply. The thing is I'm not an actual tranny but it's still a (highly) stimulating fantasy for me to be taken by a man as a qt little trap. Acting out on it beside the dildo and some makeup never did anything for me though. So it's 99% mental and I'm fine with that, I'm a responsible adult and all that.
But perhaps there is still something to be said about such fantasy in itself which, I should also point out, doesn't even necessarily involve masturbation?
Hope to hear back from you.

For realz. The identity politics crowd on both sides usually cant get laid though, hence their investment in it as an identity.

user, there is no scientific consensus yet (only competing theories) about what dreams actually ARE and where they come from.

>the boundries between the various parts of the psyche
What boundaries? Physical? Neurology as a science is also at such a baby stages that it's difficult for them to say specifically what regions of the brain are responsible for what functions. The widely accepted theory is that functions are mapped onto large portions of the brain, so that many parts contribute, not isolated pockets.

But the problem with what you're asking is that it's difficult to take Freudian and Jungian approaches and "map them onto" modern approaches. Partly because most of the great contributions of those guys have become (sometimes untestable) presuppositions in the field, and partly because they theorised about literally EVERYTHING, so how can you slice apart their worldview into pieces and then try to link them up to modern psychology, which has become fragmented into many sub-sub-sub-sub-disciplines that have no communication or attempts to integrate with each other.

Look it depends. Some surveys are useful at predicting things, but usually by measuring variables that are at the level of common parlance anyway. Like, instead of asking one person about their attitude and an outcome, you ask 5000 and then use that to ground your philosophising with at least SOME evidence of how people are out there living their lives. But in terms of assessing the unconscious... BY DEFINITION it is not directly knowable to the individual.

Yeah I know lol. One psychology paper I read wanted to address the question why more adolescent females transiton into males than adolescent males into females. And after a considerable amount of statistical analysis they came to the brilliant conclusion that socially it's easier for masculine females to be accepted than it is for feminine males. This paper had like 6 authors attached. It just blew me away. Though to be fair I bet it's one of the few that didnt fail replication.

The utility of empiricism is a lot lower than I thought.

>modern psychology, which has become fragmented into many sub-sub-sub-sub-disciplines that have no communication or attempts to integrate with each other.

Well if you can't link them together by just throwing enough statistics together than this is understandable. Your essentially dealing with a collection of very broad, very deep theories. An average could never learn all of them, so there's no way to link em, at best they could learn the basics of each one and specialize in a handful of others. It's almost like asking for you to link all the different schools of philosophers together.

Sexuality is the most powerful social control mechanism in the world.

This?
philosopher.eu/others-writings/essay-on-wotan-w-nietzsche-c-g-jung/

post feet

Well it definitly leads to identity and insecurity issues. Your initial post you were obviously threatened felt threatened.

The "fantasy itself", at least from my sources, is an expression of animus-identification. Essentially rather than looking for a female to interact with you take that image of the ideal woman and put it on yourself, possibly putting an image that represents yourself on the form of another man.

Speaking very generally, allowing people (real or imaginary) to be something that acts as an idol, a stand-in for parts of your psyche, is not productive. You essentially loose a bit of your spirit, you stop developing or 'listening' to that part of your psyche and use the stand-in as a surrogate. You risk really muddling yourself if that person or object were to leave your side. Obviously this is considerably less hazardous if the stand-in isn't going to leave your side (as a fantasy does or a very stable monogomous relationship).

I really can't give you something simple about what you should or should not do. These types of complexes are sometimes nessiary to keep people stable and removing them is disastrious. On the other hand they are sometimes the result of the psyche being confused. Imagery and fiction that blurr or confuse the line between genders is EVERYWHERE. I'm not just referring to the obvious stuff but very simple things such as fashion or that there are now very few jobs that are distinctly masculine or feminine.

I believe the vast majority of gender-dysphoria is not a result of an unusual chemical make-up, or a necessity to keep a troubled psyche stable, or any other natural state, but a result of a psyche that never learned proper masculine/feminine distinction. The fact that there are groups actively campaigning against such a distinction makes it clear as day.

My own theory is that it's because there is a general hostility to masculinity, in non-technical terms society has become effeminate and faggotized. I imagine such a theory would have trouble getting published.

>studying the psyche as an object
buttblasted nerd

So how would you interpret these passages from the nyt article in light of the Anima archetype? You mention Anima as mediating artistic genius as well as intense cruelty or perversion. I don't know enough on this topic to hazard a guess. But speaking from personal experience, being an effeminate homosexual is very humiliating. And in my private fantasies I would often imagine myself as having incredible power. I'd watch videos of the Wehrmacht parades in Berlin or Paris. I'd collect pictures of German guns tanks and other weaponry; and generally was in awe of a man who had managed to collect so much power into his hands and make the world pay for it. The slaughter he inflicted, particularly on the eastern front was a morbid fascination to me. But the fact is at bottom I felt weak and degenerate. At school I was very anxious. I refused to change with the other boys during P.E. I just felt so uncomfortable with them seeing me like that. I thought I looked very ugly. I had a weak girlish face with big eyes that made me look like a bug. I hated school with a passion. And I hated my father who I considered a complete brute. He was always asking me about my grades. And I didn't do well because I considered school an utter waste of my time. I preferred to read books. Mostly philosophy and poetry. And my father considered this idle and self destructive. But I didn't care becasue I hated everything. Him especially. I wanted him dead. I thought that if I was just my mother that I could be as idle as I wanted. I only had a few friends. All the them homosexual except one. I hated females with a passion who I considered as a group a bunch of degenerate sluts. I was such a miserable and hateful adolescent that I had no choice. I told my parents I couldn't go on living as a boy and I had to transition into being a girl. My father was surprisingly kind. He's much easier to me now than he was before. He doesn't put so much pressure on me and my life is generally a lot easier. Life for males was too hard. I feel like I failed. I probably did. But I rather just own my sexual feelings and be happy rather than fester in a murderous aggression. Anyway here's the first passage.

"He was a feminine boy, averse to manual work, who was "annoyingly subservient" to superior officers as a young soldier and had nightmares that were "very suggestive of homosexual panic." The mass killings that he later perpetrated stemmed in part from a desperate loathing of his own submissive weakness, and the humiliations of being beaten by a sadistic father."

. "The growing boy, a frustrated romantic who loved painting castles and temples, and who was enthralled with architecture, also developed "a profound admiration, envy and emulation of his father's masculine power and a contempt for his mother's feminine submissiveness and weakness,"

>The cruelity of the anima
She's cruel the way a mother or a girlfriend who has very high exptations can be. If she scolds you it will make you feel ashamed. Think of the girlfriend who applies a negative jugement to her man when he 'loses', and in doing so tries to get him to 'man up'. Another thing is the overbearing mother. If you've ever seen the movie Fire and Ice, the necromancer's mother fits that archtype perfectly.

>I thought that if I was just my mother
The mother is the first thing the anima identifies and learns from her. You've also grown up in a society which has constantly expected you to learn to be masculine, which is something first contextualized by the father. So it's natural you would feel your father is the source of your problems.

It's either your fault for failing to live up to him or it's his fault for having this unreachable standard. You probably feel a mixture of both.

>Life for males was too hard.
That's the type of psychological failing I mentioned, something where the Anima taking the role is essential. Essentially your ego (the masculine part of yourself) feels inadequate and has lost it's will, if another part of your mind doesn't pick up the slack you would have a complete collapse. The anima is the natural choice, because of the thought process "if being a man is weak, than being a woman is strong" As a result it is GOOD that your anima takes the driver seat. Either it will remain that way all your life or you will develop your Ego so as it is strong enough to (at least occassionally) take control. The reason you would want to work towards this is is with your Ego crying in a corner, another part of your mind needs to work 2 shifts, including one job it wasn't trained to do, it's exhausting for her.

It probably creates a negative feedback loop where you feel guilty and self-loathing for not being able to carry your weight as a man, which in turn puts more of the burden on her since your spending all your energy moaping.

>Nazi stuff
When a certain part of your psyche is weak and loses faith in it's self. It needs to be energized by archtypical imagery. Basically since you have (probably rightfully) decided that you suck at being a man you need something to show how to do that correctly. So Nazi stuff is masculine, powerful, successful, maybe you even relate to the fact that they were defeated. You want to learn about Hitler because you think he had the same condition as you.

That's my impression of you. Speaking as a homosexual man myself that had a much lesser version of your experience. What you need to is to break out of the habit of self-loathing and to do that you need to stop running from pain and start embracing it. I specifically mean the cruelity your anima gives to you. There's a bit of philosophy in Kali theology that essentially goes 'Do not run from suffering. Pain is freedom'. This relates back to what I said about her cruelty, it can be a gift.

After studying some of Jung's work I can identify with his concept of mandala's as a symbol of the universe and of the self. He analysed people across cultures and noticed that these mandala's would present themselves to people in dreams or while awake and were taken to be symbols of unity.

This is one that I have seen.

These mandalas helped Jung make his argument of the collective unconscious that all humanity shared.

Yeah sry to sound like a psycho and all that. What you say is true. I need to accept cruelty. But it's hard because my life as a male was so unbelievably hard, and it sucks that the best life I can get is as a trap. And people are always saying how unhealthy it is. But I can't be more masculine. I tried so hard. And all it did was make me hateful, miserable and drenched in cruel thoughts. I generally agree that men and masculinity deserve more respect and appreciation. And that men ought to take pride in their masculinity, rather than succumb to a kind of false effeminacy that's looks more like shame than anything else; but if you have no masculinity and it's too hard, society ought to give you a place as a female and not make you feel bad about it. I think it's healthy provided you don't think of yourself as actually female. Anyway your right about my attraction to and identification with Nazi defeat. Its funny you found that out. And my father is actually a very nice man. It's just that as a adolescent I felt that he treated me so roughly, and in my mind I really didn't understand how he (or the world at large) could be so rough. And he would tell me things to the effect that I better toughen up because thats the way people are and you aren't going to make it if you keep acting like this. Etc... Ironically the only way I could grow up and be responsible and take care of my survival was by becoming a trap. It's interesting your being homosexual as well. In school all the gay kids found each other out even before anybody came out lol. I'm going to read more of Jung. He can't cure my condition but I'm sure he can help me live better. Your ideas on Anima are very interesting. That's why I had to ask you about the Hitler material as well as da Vinci. I want to make my life work for me. And I've always felt that I was in a potent relation to this archetype. I was artistically ambitious (even obsessive since I tried desperately to repress my sexuality) and quite spiritual. But also depressed morbid, prone to idleness and daydreaming and always talking to myself. Etc. Are you familiar with Jung's work on alchemy? I'd like to read both the original alchemical writings along with his commentary. He sees the alchemy, if I'm not mistaken, as an allegory of the soul being individuated.

great argument
really convinced me

bump

I am not familiar with his writings on alchemy. However if it's anything like his text on Gnostism, you should read Jung first than the source material otherwise it will just sound like riddles. I know he got into alchemy later in his life so you'll be reading a more mature Jung.

I'd recommend looking at his dream analysis as well, detailed in Man and his Symbols. Dreams are were the Anima is most powerful. I found at a lot about her in my own dreams, in one of them I had my entire sexuality explained to me in very direct terms.


>cure my condition
It's not something that is "cured". You have to take what you have an weaponize it. If you are effiminate weaponize that shit. The reason you should want to be masculine is because masculinity is a really potent form of power. Basically you want to do both, that's part of the advantage of having such a possessive Anima tasks can be delegated between yourself and her.

Talent for art is another thing. Another big one is spirtual thinking. Like I said you have to weaponize what you have.

Being in a good relationship with her, it's like divine marriage.

>pain
Here's a quote from an extremely masculine person that taught Jung half of what he knew.

"I assess the power of a will by how much resistance, pain, torture it endures and knows how to turn to its advantage."

Replace your thoughts of self-loathing with that. Than things will start to fall into place naturally.

I've met mine too.. I was lucky to write down the entire dream plus it's subplots in my dream journal. Needless to say it's the best entry in it... filled with jungian archetypes and symbolism in general . Many of which I couldn't interpret before writing them down and reading it. After the dream I've thought about her often since then and also applied a fitting name to her.

Jung writes about dreams with strong plots, dialogue, and primitive scenery, but my dreams never really have any of this. I can never remember any dialogue, no matter how clear I can get the dream with a dream journal. And rarely do they seem primitive. I mean a few dreams definitely stand out, but usually my dreams are just odd. And I don't think I've ever met any archetypes, certainly not my anima or shadow. Is the only solution to keep writing them down in a dream journal and hope for the best?

You're getting anima and animus confused. Anima is female, animus male.

Yeah I typoed a few times there.

It's 'cause he goes from what his patients tell him. He's reconstructing, it's all post-fact. That's why they all seem to make so much sense: they're basic. It's like using camera and then saying the world is a photo.

In my case I'm so narrative drunk that some of my dreams have been been almost exact rehiterations of what I've thought or come up with as fun stories.

jungians should form their own colony where they can keep their brain aids to themselves.

Same. I've multiple dreams where me and a girl are being chased by something and I'm able to stand up to it, but I have to help the girl (my anima?). In some cases, the figure oscillates between m/f in different scenes.

I remember lines and things from my dreams.

Where did the Jungian touch you, user?

/jng/ is not a bad idea actually, to minimize bad information. maybe a reading of the red book. his complete works are fucking enormous though. there'd be a lot of pseuds.

It helps to practice good sleep hygiene. e.g. don't use screens before bed, no alcohol before you sleep, go to bed at a reasonable hour., etc. It also helps to read about this stuff - I think it stirs something up in your psyche and makes it more receptive to what's generated by the unconscious. At least that's been the case in my life.

I've had the same experience on all counts. Alcohol was the biggie. Soon as I stopped for a few days I had five vivid dreams one night and two more the next before they stopped. It's like my unconscious had something to say.

getting molested as a child would probably make one go jungian
i'm talking an actual island, alternatively a re-education camp

This idea connecting Anima and homosexuality is absolutely brilliant. I don't know why I didn't make this connection before. I knew about Jung but I thought you had to be heterosexual to individuate under her tutelage. I'm going to begin with the dream analysis. Do you have any thoughts on the interpretation of historical events using psychoanalysis? Back in high school I read a few books that analyze propaganda from this point of view. Mostly Otto Rank and Stanislav Grof. I'm currently reading Erich Neumann, The Origins and History of Consciousness.

Wow, great insult about child molestation, did you come up with it yourself?

What would you educate them with, user? How to bury their heads in the sand and count the grains like a good little empiricist slave?

you did though? a jungian projecting, why isn't that a surprise?
through physical torture.

It's not projecting if it is actually observable in the other, user. You did basically say "no u", and me calling you on it is not projection. Maybe this is why you hate Jungian theory so much, because you don't really understand any of it properly.

And fantasising about torturing strangers? Oh well, at least you'll get to know your shadow if you keep letting him fuck you up the ass so rigorously.

if you weren't pointing out how commonplace the molestation insult was then you were just pointing out how i turned it around on you? that's just strange.
sorry i meant labour.

In the middle of an argument I say your insult was lazy and stupid
>that's just strange
What are you doing, user?

Besides, you're fantasising about a bunch of Jungians doing physical labor on an island... I don't think you have the room to call others strange here.

How sad and weird of a human being do you have to be to pretend that it takes any intellect or effort to regurgitate the "Where did X touch you?" joke?

Where did I ever say it took intellect or effort? See, THAT is actual projection, user.

You said my reply to your insult was lazy and stupid when you made that same insult first. I get that you're pretending not to grasp this so I'll just say how unsurprised I am that a jungian is playing rhetoric games because they're weak losers who can't face reality.

>I knew about Jung but I thought you had to be heterosexual to individuate under her tutelage

From personal experience, that's definitly not true. I think if you're gay you have I think you have a much higher level of affinity with, preciously because your relationship with her is a lot more intimate, in a way you are her but also yourself. She takes on extremly powerful forms when I encounter her. One of my encounters with her was the most profound that happened in my life.

It's something where you really need to take the first step yourself. That step is sort of "finding her": little images of women or femininity that seem fascinating to you, sudden moments of being 'possessed', you have to differentiate her if you want tutelage.

Reading Jung sort of tells you how to do that, but the really advanced stuff, the personal stuff. That's something you have to figure out for yourself, no one fits perfectly into the little patterns he lays out, people are unique.

>Do you have any thoughts on the interpretation of historical events using psychoanalysis
No, I am not capable of that. From what I've read it's treated as an evolution of archtypes.

So us Jungians and non-jungians are not so different after all... Hmm, it's almost as if they are IDEAS not PEOPLE.

HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM.

I don't think this question deserves a thread of it's own so I'll ask here.

Where do I start with Jung?

Pic. Collection of five essays. First one is by Jung himself, describing his system. The rest are by some of his students:

1. APPROACHING THE UNCONSCIOUS
Carl G Jung

2. ANCIENT MYTHS AND MODERN MAN
Joseph L. Henderson

3. THE PROCESS OF INDIVIDUATION
M-L von Franz

4. SYMBOLISM IN THE VISUAL ARTS
Aniela Jaffe

5. SYMBOLS IN AN INDIVIDUAL ANALYSIS
Jolande Jacobi

CONCLUSION: SCIENCE AND THE UNCONSCIOUS
M-L von Franz

Adding to this, von Franz made Jung's system her life's work and published some pretty interesting stuff, like Projection and Re-Collection. The other essayists were kind of hard to get through, but when you've finished Jung's bit the book is pretty much over. Still it's the best introduction I can think of besides his own Memories, Dreams, Reflections.

Memories, Dreams, Reflections

When I was reading this thread I began to individuate and my anima started lovingly biting my ear

Cool story, bro.