Talk:Electra complex

References to films

I would like to add some references to films and television shows that portray an electra complex. I would also like to expound on it a little bit. I just read an article about these complexes and am fascinated by them. Eataboo (talk) 16:11, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Has Anyone Seen...

I believe the play, "Mourning Becomes Electra," by Eugene O'Neil is a very good example of the "Electra Complex." It is also a movie, for those of us who would rather do that. (I saw the film. The acting was phenominal.)

According to Wikipedia: "Mourning Becomes Electra is a 1947 film by Dudley Nichols adapted from the 1931 Eugene O'Neill play of the same title. The film stars Rosalind Russell, Michael Redgrave, Raymond Massey, Katina Paxinou, Leo Genn and Kirk Douglas."

Rubybaby (talk) 07:30, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Eves Bayou — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.25.247.33 (talk) 09:01, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Definition, please

Incredibly this article goes for three paragraphs before giving anything resembling a definition. First paragraph should explain what it is, not how it originated. (Er, consider this a request for a rewrite; this is not my area of interest :o) swain 00:18, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

I thought that too when i read it, so have done my best. Not a psychologist, so I hope it's accurate and reads OK. TrulyBlue (talk) 14:41, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Lack of Sources

This article does not meet Article standards as stated in the Wikipedia policies. Of peticular note is the complete lack of sources. This makes the entire article non-verifiable. I have added a References section with the first source I could. But I can not be sure this is where the original author got his information. I have left most of the article intact for the most part because I believe the sources do exist, but someone needs to make a comprehensive list of citations before furthur editing this page.

Please refer to Wikipedia:Citing Sources, Wikipedia:No original research, Wikipedia:Verifiability.

I removed the "Feminist objections to penis envy theory behind Electra complex" entirely because it contains POV statements and does not contain any sources or citations. Although this section should be added again when sources are stated.

--Yari 01:10, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Not quite spot on

"when she discovers that she lacks a penis during the phallic stage the daughter becomes libidinally attached to her father and imagines that she will become pregnant by him, while becoming more hostile towards her mother. This is due mostly to the idea that the girl is "envious" of her father's penis and wants to possess it so strongly that she dreams of bearing his children, thus the term "penis-envy".

Im inclined to disagree with this. Although I'm not the worlds biggest fan (or expert on Freud) of the concept of the 'Electra Complex', i do feel that it could be represented slightly more accurately by saying something like: 'at the phallic stage, the girl is interested in her anatomical equivalent of the penis, the clitoris. However, the size difference brings on an envious desire to have a penis of her own, 'penis envy'. The girl resolves her issues with regards to ‘penis envy’ when she realises there is no hope of achieving masculinity and reconciled herself to life without a penis, allowing the ‘Electra complex’ to take hold. The ‘Oedipus complex’ is resolved, in boys, by the ‘castration complex’ and the fear of castration, but girls, upset by being already ‘castrated’, turn their attention away from their mother, feeling they must have been punished, and a parallel between the two complexes is drawn by the attraction of the girl to her father.' maybe a bit long winded, and it doesn't really stick up for the patchy at best theorizing, but its a tad more precise. comments?--E.J.H.M

Hasn't all of these, from Penis envy to Oedipal and Elektra complexes been thoroughly debunked?

Yes. For the most part it has. Many philosophical and psychological models have been debunked but are still of historical interest. They get articles in Wikipedia too. Tom Coates 00:54, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

So can there be references to the de-bunkers, or references to the fact that they exist? TrulyBlue (talk) 14:42, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

From a text book on Freud:

"Furthermore, she is increasingly irritated by the mother's prohibitions, such as that on masturbation. Finally, and most upsetting, the girl discovers that she does not have a penis- a fact for which she blames the mother, 'who sent her into the world so insufficiently equipped' (Freud, 1925a, p193)...The little girl felt what Freud called penis envy, the wish to have a penis and to be like a boy...The father may not have paid any special attention to his daugher when she was in diapers, but now he may begin to admire her cuteness and growing femininity...thus inspired, she begins to spin romatic fantasies involving herself and her father. At first her thoughts include a vague wish for his penis, but this soon changes into a wish to have a baby and give it to him as a present...the little girl realises that she cannot, after all, marry Daddy...the girl resolves the oedipal crisis because she fears the loss of parental love...Still, lacking castration anxiety, her motivation to erect strong defenses against oedipal feelings must be weaker, and, as a result, she must develop a weaker superego." Theories of Development: Concepts and Applications. Fifth Edition. William Crain

Weaker superego

According to some radical psychologists, the male psyche is the dominant entity in human relations.  
This may be due in part to the belief that females have a weaker superego, where morality is
developed and values internalized

can someone explain me the logic (if any) of this sentences? Melaen 02:41, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Arguments and ommisions of paragraphs

There has been a lot of back and forth deleting of this paragraph. I'd like to reach a consensus here, rather than this turn into an edit war (which is accelerating...). Obviously there seems to be some kind of difference of opinion here. Here is some of the reasoning from the history: Tyciol 05:49, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

removed unsubstantiated "pay gap" claims, removed speculative paragraph with no references (with several non NPOV claims regarding "equality", education, wages, etc 24.85.83.170

(rv, you would HAVE TO cite your sources for that statement) Fenice

As well as an anonymous change without explanation by 24.173.0.199, which was rather suspicion considering Fenice's changes.

I'd like to know, are these three identities separate, or all Fenice on some kind of campaign to omit changes through mass deletion of additions? Only the last IP is one I accuse of vandalization, if Fenice and 24.85 are different from that then you are not included in the accusation, for explanations were provided. I simply found them inadequate and short-tempered. Tyciol 05:49, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

jadeknight: Alternative to lack of support for feminism/lesbianism being caused by man-hating?

I was just wondering, was the change because you think there might be some evidence out there? I suppose there definately could be in theory, as I fail to look at sexuality or sexual expression as being solely genetic, and they could thus be influenced by the hatred of the male sex.

Sexually, it wouldn't necessarily lead to lesbianism. It could also lead to celibacy, a sadistic heterosexual relationship, or repressed anger and anxiety. There's also not really any good explanation for why the mention is relevant if no cases have been isolated in any large number towards this. I'm sure we can find some though, there's bound to be a case of just about any malady you look up.

In looking at feminism though, it does seem likely that the hatred of men would lead to a focus on solely women's rights rather than universal human rights. This is of course, not to mean that all feminists are man-haters, but that most man-haters would be feminists. I am at a difficulty to think of an exception, except perhaps someone who hates gender and sexual division as a whole, and does not choose to let her bias influence her political direction, which is understandable, as Electra complex people could still be very well in control of their minds and competant citizens. -Tyciol 09:47, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Well the fact that this complex is not known to be present in female dominated societies, and in female dominated primates (like Bonobo chimps) leads me to believe that the view of women in a society as second class seems to cause the rise of things like feminism as a counter to these freudian and freudian derived therories.

I find these arguments highly implausible - should the civil rights movement be characterised by the hatred by all other races of white people? Should people who fight for gay rights be characterised as hating straight people? Lesbians and gay men are not gay because they hate the other gender, they're gay because they're gay - which is to say, either because they're born that way, or because of childhood experience or because of hormones or all kinds of other things. But what is clear is that—according to all serious medical experts—that they're gay or lesbian from a very early point in their lives and that on the whole it's not something they have control over. Given that, characterising it as based upon 'hate' seems highly unlikely. Can an infant hate an entire gender?

On the other hand, it's of course quite plausible that women who hate men might characterise themselves as feminist, but it seems more plausible to characterise feminists as people who believe that there are massive power inequalities between men and women and fight to redress this imbalance. If you don't perceive the imbalance then that's another question, and it may be worth arguing on those grounds, but characterising it as hate seems.... dubious. Tom Coates 22:08, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

You're bringing up a similar argument to the one I made, because as I said you don't see this as an issue in societies where females are dominant, it is a result of the treatment of womena as second class that causes the rise of feminist movements

---

Question? Why is the "Feminists Objection to Penis Envy" part of this page at all? I thought this is supposed to be an encyclopedia and not a soapbox. Wouldn't this fragment be better placed within a more suitable article and linked by a brief caption? Perhaps the "Femininst's Right's Movement". Or even spun into it's own article called "Objections by the Feminists Rights Movement".

Drlowell 22:32, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Re: Freud

I don't understand why there is no mention of the fact that Freud, and related/stemming theories have widely been discredited in the modern study of human behavior and development. The concepts are presented more as debated but accepted theories rather than dated understandings. I suggest that the article be re-worked to reflect the common regard that Freud's theories are unsound.

I've haven't seen a logical explanation for why Freud's theories are so quickly dismissed. However, I think I have seen the claim on every article I've found on the Electra Complex. Although, I don't recall seeing it in regards to the Oedipal Complex. Therefore, I'm inclined to think that the claim is based on Feminist ideology. barkmoss 00:10, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Part of the reason for its dismissal is due to the fact that his view of women basically regarded them as being basically incomplete men, and most modern psychologists have found nothing to support his view, in addition to the fact that his theories are unscientific, since you can't really attempt to falsify them, as for example if someone claimed they didn't go through a particular freudian phase they would be considered as repressing rather than having never actually underwent that phase. Also if you look at Female dominated cultures and the female dominated Bonobo Chimps you see no evidence of Freud's theories holding up, the truth is Freud's therories were more a result of his own personality and the society he lived in, they are, for the most part, in no way universal.

---

I'm sorry, but this is completely wrong. Freud did not come up with the Electra Complex, that was Jung - you've got the connection to penis envy all wrong... please read my update on the Oedipus complex article.

--Pteron 02:50, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Why not change it then? :P Wally 19:38, 6 Mar 2004 (UTC)

REmoved this bit: "This is often falsely ascribed to Sigmund Freud. In fact, it aroused Freud's anger, for he had a more complex construction of the female Oedipal complex", because it's not quite true. Freud did equate Electra complex with feminine Oedipus attitude: "It does little harm to a woman if she remains in her feminine Oedipus attitude. (The term 'Electra complex' has been proposed for it) [By Jung] She will in that case choose her husband for his paternal characteristics and be ready to recognize his authority. Her longing to possess a penis, which is in fact unappeasable, may find satisfaction if she can succeed in completing her love for the organ by extending it to the bearer of the organ, just as happened earlier when she progressed from her mother's breast to her mother as a whole person." -- Nunh-huh 06:16, 2 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I think the answer in the heading "Wow, bias" on this talk page says everything that needs to be said about this. (Barkmoss 07:06, 25 December 2007 (UTC))

history and criticism

I assume that the definition and explanation has changed over time in response to criticism. For concepts like this that have great historical significance yet are little used today it may be best to give a history of the concept and how it has been used and changed over time. --Gbleem 16:22, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

cleanup!

added a cleanup header for the numerous spelling errors and POV statements.128.208.125.95 02:14, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Yikes, FPOV everywhere

Wow, bias.

I agree with DrLowell above, this is not a soapbox. From the very beginning of this article there is an obvious criticism going on. Whether or not the criticisms are true is immaterial; this should be an objective explanation of the origin and explanation (from the progenitors) of the idea of the Elektra Complex. I'd do it myself but I'm not a student of psychology, would someone please just rewrite this thing so it sounds more like an encyclopedia article than an editorial?

And then whoever wants to detail feminist criticisms of the idea can make their own page called "Feminist Criticisms of the Elektra Complex" and feel free to link it as a related article here.

That would be ideal! (Barkmoss 07:06, 25 December 2007 (UTC))

If I erased somebody's signature, it wasn't on purpose. (Barkmoss 07:11, 25 December 2007 (UTC)) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Barkmoss (talk • contribs)

Warning

This article copies almost word by word these sources: http://en.allexperts.com/e/e/el/electra_complex.htm and http://en.allexperts.com/e/p/pe/penis_envy.htm

In fact, the 'Feminist criticisms' section that was removed also comes from there.

This may be basis for article deletion, please fix it. Cheers Raystorm 21:11, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

A good example

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oedipus_complex

The article for the Oedipus Complex (linked above) is a great example of how this article should be. First a basic definition with an explanation of its origin. Then various subheaders with explorations of related topics including a separate section for criticism. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by GKabik (talk • contribs) 22:11, 24 January 2007 (UTC).

title paragraph

The opening paragraph is terrible. I think some of the section "origins" could be spliced in to beef it up a little. Heck, something along the lines of "Oedipus for girls" would do. --MulletManDan 04:06, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

"Perversity"

Furthermore, if there is a "perversion" in the development of females or if their aggression is somehow stifled, resentment can in turn be displaced towards the dominant male (the father) or patriarchal cultures in general. Some say this explains lesbianism and feminism (though this is far from universally accepted, as it unsupportedly assumes that women loving and/or supporting equality for other women requires an animosity toward men and an inherent perversity in their nature).

This comment seems to imply that lesbianism is a form of perversion. Also, beginning a sentence with "some say..." is more the pervue of Fox News. While historically, homophobic bias was widespread, the fact is that homosexuality has not been considered a disease for forty years, and giving credence to a few denialists by citing them anonymously is pure rubbish.

This entire article is simply written poorly.

RSP72.78.156.235 06:43, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Elektra named after this?

I always assumed that Elektra (the comic book character) was named after the myth. Does anyone have any proof it's named after this instead? That seems unlikely. 98.213.163.145 (talk) 22:56, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Far more likely that Electra spawned both the complex and the heroine, I'd have thought. TrulyBlue (talk) 14:45, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Elecktra isn't an uncommon Greek name to the best of my knowledge. I don't know if there is any reason to assume the character is named after this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.209.6.41 (talk) 23:45, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

1998 film "Wicked"?

The film is also a good example of the Electra complex, where a daughter celebrates her mother's death because she is in love with her father.Musicguyguy (talk) 05:49, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

"Got Murder?"

I checked out the link where the Electra complex makes reference to the CSI episode, and after reading the episode summary I'm not sure that's the correct episode. However, I do not watch CSI so I can't fix it if it is wrong. TigerTail (talk) 02:32, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Really?

A "case study" from 1921? Surely our understandings of such things have progressed in ninety years.--172.191.214.206 (talk) 04:40, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Modern Psychological Opinion

This article desperately needs a section that addresses the scientific veracity of Freud's non-scientific assertions. --86.186.95.46 (talk) 22:33, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Just stumbled across this article seven years after this comment was made to reinforce that YES, this article desperately needs something that puts this into a modern context. It doesn't even need to be a full section: if there's any preexisting wikipedia article that addresses modern responses to psychoanalysis in general, I feel like linking to that would be sufficient just to avoid giving off the implication that this concept is uncontested. I might do it myself if I have the time, but as a non-psychologist I don't feel comfortable messing around in articles in this field. --2605:E000:141E:4073:3CA3:3AD7:B62C:5465 (talk) 10:18, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

I wanted something more specific than criticisms of psychoanalysis in general, so I dug up criticisms of the veracity of either the Electra complex or application of the Oedipus complex to women. I welcome contributions from others! Jno.skinner (talk) 20:09, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Marina and the Diamonds

I think Marina and the Diamonds's album Electra Heart could be a nod to this and it could be added to the page. There are a lot of nods linking to her problems with her father, maybe this is the reason to it. Just a mere speculation, though. 176.109.57.119 (talk) 10:39, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Freud's views

Poor description of Freud's view's on homosexuality. From your own entry on Freud:

In 1935, Freud wrote to a mother who had asked him to treat her son's homosexuality, a letter that would later become famous:[4]

I gather from your letter that your son is a homosexual. I am most impressed by the fact that you do not mention this term yourself in your information about him. May I question you why you avoid it? Homosexuality is assuredly no advantage, but it is nothing to be ashamed of, no vice, no degradation; it cannot be classified as an illness; we consider it to be a variation of the sexual function, produced by a certain arrest of sexual development. Many highly respectable individuals of ancient and modern times have been homosexuals, several of the greatest men among them. (Plato, Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, etc). It is a great injustice to persecute homosexuality as a crime –and a cruelty, too. If you do not believe me, read the books of Havelock Ellis.

By asking me if I can help [your son], you mean, I suppose, if I can abolish homosexuality and make normal heterosexuality take its place. The answer is, in a general way we cannot promise to achieve it. In a certain number of cases we succeed in developing the blighted germs of heterosexual tendencies, which are present in every homosexual; in the majority of cases it is no more possible. It is a question of the quality and the age of the individual. The result of treatment cannot be predicted.

What analysis can do for your son runs in a different line. If he is unhappy, neurotic, torn by conflicts, inhibited in his social life, analysis may bring him harmony, peace of mind, full efficiency, whether he remains homosexual or gets changed.[11]

71.130.152.15 (talk) 20:05, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Electra in music

In this section, the first and third paragraphs consist of WP:original research.--Quisqualis (talk) 19:40, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Neutrality- no criticism section

This article appears to describe Freudian psychology as fact and should have a criticism section explaining modern psychology finds these theories outdated and lacking in any empirical evidence

I have added a criticism section and I encourage others to add to it! Jno.skinner (talk) 20:09, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Update — I am removing "the neutrality of this article is disputed" banner from the page because I feel I've addressed it adequately. Jno.skinner (talk) 06:49, 1 December 2021 (UTC)