Anatoly Vorobey (avva) wrote,
Anatoly Vorobey
avva

немного англоязычного чтива-4

В результате случайного поиска наткнулся на статью психолога Лезли Фарбер в журнале Transition (посвящённом, как оказалось, в основном вопросам, связанным с негритянской расой: расовым проблемам в Америке, африканской политике, стихам африканских и афроамериканских поэтов итп.; статья Фарбер — скорее исключение из правила) 1965-го года ("I'm Sorry, Dear", Leslie Farber, Transition, 22(1965), pp. 10-17).

Вот как выглядела тогда Фарбер (фотография из статьи):


Статья посвящена психологии женского оргазма. Фарбер отстаивает точку зрения, согласно которой в некотором смысле женский оргазм есть "изобретение" сексологов 20-го века — точнее, не сам женский оргазм как физиологическое явление, а идея того, что каждый акт коитуса должен в идеале включать в себя как мужской, так и женский оргазм. Название статьи взято из довольно смешного "типичного" диалога на эту тему, который придумала сама Фарбер и которым она открывает статью:

The modern dialogue which furnishes me my title is practiced throughout the Western world. As a theme with only a limited number of variations, it cannot sustain much repetition: familiarity breeds silence; although never really abandoned, the script quickly becomes implicit. When reduced to a dumb show — or perhaps no more than a monosyllabic token — it still remains faithful to its pathetic premise. However, for the purposes of introduction I shall try to represent its essense in a wholly explicit manner. The man speaks first.

"Did you?"
"Did you? You did, didn't you?"
"Yes, I'm afraid I — oh, I'm sorry! I am sorry. I know how it makes you feel."
"Oh, don't worry about it. I'm sure I'll quiet down after a while."
"I'm so sorry, dearest. Let me help you."
"I'd rather you didn't."
"But, I..."
"What good is it when you're just — when you don't really want to? You know perfectly well, if you don't really want to, it doesn't work."
"But I do really want to! I want to! Believe me. It will work, you'll see. Only let me!"
"Please, couldn't we just forget it? For now the thing is done, finished. Besides, it's not really that important. My tension always wears off eventually. And anyhow — maybe next time it'll be different."
"Oh, it will, I know it will. Next time I won't be so tired or so eager. I'll make sure of that. Next time it's going to be fine!.. But about tonight — I'm sorry, dear."



Фарбер считает, что "изобретение" женского оргазма как феномена, соответствующего мужскому оргазму (и потому обязательного, в идеале, при каждом половом акте) возникло в качестве побочного эффекта движения эмансипации и женских прав в конце 19-го — начале 20-го века. Вот, например, что она пишет по этому поводу:

The political clamor for equal rights for woman at the turn of the century could not fail to join with sexology to endow her with an orgasm, equal in every sense to the male orgasm. It was agreed that she was entitled to it just as she was entitled to the vote. Moreover, if she was deprived of such release her perturbation would be as unsettling to her nervous system as similar frustration was thought to be for the man. Equal rights were to be erotically consummated in simultaneous orgasm. On the one hand it was unhealthful for her to be deprived of release and, on the other hand, psychoanalysis decreed that an important sign of her maturity as woman was her ability to achieve it. In other words, without orgasm she was neurotic to begin with or neurotic to end with.

Though simultaneous orgasm seemed to be a necessary consequence of equal rights, the problem remained that in matters of lust more than a decree of amendment was required for such an achievement. True, the sexologists were most generous with instruction, but each citizen had to discover over and over again the degree to which he is caught in the futile struggle to will what could not be willed — at the same time that he senses the real absurdity of the whole willful enterprise. The lover learns, as his indoctrination progresses, to observe uneasily and even resist his rush of pleasure if it seems he is to be premature. When no amount of resolution can force his pleasure to recede, he learns to suffer his release and then quickly prod himself to an activity his body's exhaustion opposes. In other words, he learns to take his moment in stride, so to speak, omitting the deference these moments usually call forth and then without breaking stride get to his self-appointed and often fatiguing task of tinkering with his mate — always hopeful that his ministrations will have the appearance of affection. While she is not likely to be deceived by such dutiful excuses, she nevertheless wishes for both their sakes that her body at least will be deluded into fulfilling its franchise.

Как же обстояли дела с женским оргазмом до уравниловки в правах с мужским, которую принёс с собой 20-й век? Согласно Фарбер, до этого женский оргазм был нормальным, но совершенно необязательным следствием полового акта, и в этом положении дел не было, по её мнению, ничего "неестественного". Наоборот, судя по всему, Фарбер считает, что так было куда более гармонично и менее "невротично" как для мужчины, так и для женщины, которая могла (и может) с гораздо большей вероятностью успеха вызвать оргазм путём мастурбации. Согласно Фарбер, именно в мастурбации, акте одиноком по сути своей и не требующем присутствия партнёра, женский и мужской оргазмы находят своё сходство, в то время как в коитусе, акте совместном, проявляется фундаментальные различия между ними, различия, в которых, однако, нет ничего плохого или зазорного, и отрицание которых сексологией 20-го века, отрицание, проникшее во всеобщую сексуальную практику, является, по сути дела (так считает Фарбер), именно что сексуальным неврозом. Вот ещё одна цитата на эту тему из заключительной части статьи:

As far as I know, little attention was paid to the female orgasm before the era of sexology. Where did the sexologists find it? Did they discover it or inventit? Or both? I realize it may seem absurd to raise such questions about events as unmistakable as those witnessed in our laboratory [речь идёт об эксперименте по изучению женского оргазма, который Фарбер критикует в своей статье — avva]. But I cannot believe that previous centuries were not up to our modern delights; nor can I believe it was the censorship imposed by religion which suppressed the supreme importance of the female orgasm. My guess, which is not subject to laboratory proof, is that the female orgasm was always an occassional, though not essential, part of woman's whole sexual experience. I also suspect that it appeared in regularity or predictability only during masturbation when the more human qualities of her life with her mate were absent. Further, her perturbation was unremarkable and certainly bearable when orgasm did not arrive, for our lovers had not yet been enlightened as to the disturbances resulting from the obstruction or distortion of sexual energies. At this stage her orgasm had not yet been abstracted and isolated from the totality of her pleasures, and enshrined as the meaning and measure of her erotic life. She was content with the mystery and variety of her difference from man, and in fact would not have had it otherwise.

Я также выкладываю всю статью для тех, кому интересно: farber.pdf (2Mb, семь страниц).

Если есть мнения по поводу статьи, высказанных в ней мыслей, цитат итп. — высказывайте, пожалуйста. Хоть аргументы Фарбер, кажется, не убеждают меня, отстаивает свою точку зрения она убеждённо и талантливо. Тема, мне кажется, интересная.
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 46 comments