Disclaimer: Sigmund Freud’s psychosexual theory of personality contains outmoded gender stereotypes as well as sexual and somatic elements that may not be appropriate for all audiences. If you are sensitive to these topics, consider skipping this article.
By Ryan Smith
It is well-known among psychologists that Sigmund Freud postulated a series of personality styles in his writings. However, as Freud never systematized these styles into a definite system (and as he furthermore kept revising his descriptions of the styles), there is considerable confusion as to how operationalize his personality styles.
In this article, I will attempt to flesh out an operationalization of Freud’s personality styles that is based on my personal understanding of Freud’s ideas.
The Eight Freudian Styles
In my operationalization, I will posit a total of four basic Freudian styles with two orientations for each, which gives us a total of eight personality styles:
|
Indulgent Oral |
Denying Oral |
|
Indulgent Anal |
Denying Anal |
|
Indulgent Phallic |
Denying Phallic |
|
Indulgent Hysteric |
Denying Hysteric |
A set of qualifiers is then added to the four basic styles, designating whether the individual attempts to indulge or deny his particular fixation: With the indulgent orientation, the individual freely seeks to indulge the undesirable traits that are typically associated with his style. Conversely, an individual with the denying orientation also has those same core desires, but he seeks to hold them back and makes stiff effort to resist them.
Since Freud’s personality theory is grounded in bodily sensations (whereas Jung assumed the sovereignty of the psyche), the basic assumption here is that each personality style has its roots in an unhealthy childhood fixation upon sensations that arise in relation to a bodily organ: The mouth [Oral style], the anus [Anal style], the genitalia [Phallic style], or the uterus [Hysteric style]. (In spite of what might be assumed, people of either gender can be every style, i.e. men can be Hysteric and women can be Phallic.)
For example, in the case of the Oral style, both the indulgent and denying versions have the same core fixations (which will be explained in more detail below): Passivity, receptivity, and dependency. But where the person who has an indulgent Oral style will typically be quite straightforward about it, and often be openly passive, dependent, and receptive, the person who has a denying Oral style will instead make an effort to come across as competent, self-sufficient, proud, and fiercely independent – in other words, to appear as the complete opposite of what his inner fixations actually dictate.
I will now explain all of the eight styles in more detail.
Oral Styles
As I just mentioned, all Oral styles are fixated around the themes of passivity, receptivity, and dependency. The person with an indulgent Oral style will surrender to these inclinations, and the person with a denying Oral style will vehemently deny that he has these inclinations, indeed over-compensate for them.
As a sense organ, the mouth can either be used to swallow or bite. I therefore call the two Oral styles the Oral-receptive (indulgent) and the Oral-aggressive (denying).
Oral-receptive
Individuals characterized by the Oral-receptive style are inherently passive and acquiescent, and they often feel tense at the prospect of having responsibility placed on their shoulders and having to fend for themselves. Chances are that they resort to biting their nails and smothering themselves in comfort foods (such as ice cream and milky beverages) in order to relieve their inner tensions. Inwardly, they are afraid that if they don’t accommodate others and give in to their demands, others will get angry with them and withdraw from their lives, leaving them with no one in their corner to fend for them. This prospect is inherently terrifying to them, because they feel that they cannot trust their own judgment or “make it on their own.” Hence they worry a lot about pleasing people and obtaining the approval of others, they internalize the ideas of others as their own, and they go to great lengths to avoid confrontation. Metaphorically, this personality style may be described as an over-fed infant smothered in breast milk. Due to the over-availability of nurture and care early in life, these individuals learned that you can get by simply by passively sucking down the milk of others instead of developing your own skills.
Oral-aggressive
People with the Oral-aggressive style are cynical, demanding, and easily frustrated with others. They appear proud, acerbic, and independent to a fault. Delivering verbal stings and disparaging analyses of others left and right, their outer image is one of cold and unapproachable aloofness. Little do others know, however, that while they are outwardly cold and derisive, they secretly wish that someone would come into their life and pamper them. Metaphorically, their personality style may be described as a neglected infant who was denied the essential nurture and care that they needed. Deprived of comfort and security from the earliest age onward, they learned that the world was a lonely place where independence and tough-mindedness were needed in order to thrive. Embittered with their parents’ failure to provide them with basic love and security in childhood, they developed a facility for ‘biting’ remarks. One reason that they are so verbally aggressive is that they are frustrated with others, feeling that no one really understands them. In trying to repair the lack of parental care and security that marked their childhood, they may be attracted to cold partners who cannot meet their emotional needs in adulthood.
Anal Styles
The central psychological fixation of the Anal style revolves around spontaneity, impulsivity, and excitement. In the indulgent Anal mode, the person characterized by this style will therefore be excitable and assiduously active all around him, but they will also “spread themselves too thin,” merrily involving themselves in one electrifying project after another. And inversely, in the denying Anal mode, the person will turn the themes of spontaneity and impulsivity on their heads in order to appear dutiful, conscientious, conforming, and “correct” to others.
Freud theorized that the Anal styles were formed during potty training, where one orientation let go whenever he felt like it (indulgent), and another kept the fecal matter in. I therefore refer to the two Anal styles as the Anal-expulsive (indulgent) and the Anal-retentive (denying).
Anal-expulsive
People with an Anal-expulsive style are temperamentally careless and messy, and their personal relationships are intense but unstable. They have a habit of shifting back and forth between over-idealizing and derogating the people in their lives. Restless and having a strong need for stimulation, they may sometimes act recklessly just to “keep things feeling fresh,” thereby exposing themselves and others to danger and hurt in the process. In their erratic emotional lives, they tend to experience intense ups and downs, and this may cause them to confuse sex with intimacy as it all blurs together in their mind-blowingly fast-paced lives. Metaphorically, this personality style may be described as the toddler who did not see the point of potty training and resisted it, instead going whenever he felt like it. Because these people never learned to reign in their urges in toddlerhood, they are incapable of moderating their search for adventure and excitement in adulthood. Hence they leap from project to project and partner to partner, always pining for instant success instead of staying with a single prospect for the long haul and bringing it to success by “holding it in” until fruition.
Anal-retentive
Seeking order and tidiness around them, these people are set in their ways and feel that everything they do should be impeccable and above criticism. They are meticulous at their jobs, hard workers, and more competent at what they do than most. But their accomplishments come at a price: Inwardly they are beset by incessant worrying and prone to punish themselves in their thoughts when they make a mistake. To avoid the dread of being in error, they establish firm rules and fixed procedures that it takes considerable effort and persuasion to get them to deviate from. Metaphorically, this personality style may be described as the toddler who over-internalized the demands of potty training, striving to keep the fecal matter in, even after it was safe to ‘let go.’ As a result, their adult personalities are penny-pinching and have a hard time parting with worn-out objects even long after they should have been discarded. In social situations they likewise have trouble ‘letting loose’ and come across as disciplined, constricted, and a bit reserved.
Phallic Styles
Domination, potency, and mastery are the central themes in the psychic life of the Phallic styles. In the case of the indulgent Phallic style, the person who exhibits this style will be characterized by an overtly egotistical outlook where he shamelessly places himself ahead of others and reacts very sorely to criticism. On the other hand, an individual with a denying Phallic style may secretly wish that he was able to dominate by virtue of simply being himself. But having experienced early in life that this option was not open to him, the denying Phallic developed great facility with analytical arguments as a means to dominate indirectly instead. In philosophy, Ayn Rand[1] may serve as an example of the indulgent Phallic style, just as Socrates or Immanuel Kant[2] may serve as an example of the denying Phallic style.
As a biological organ, the phallus may be used not just reproductively but also as an instrument of dominance, as seen in the behavior of dogs. As for the denying orientation, if the primacy of biological considerations over psychic life is assumed (as Freud appeared to do), it follows that the kind of impartial, academic analysis that was exhibited by Immanuel Kant is really an indirect means of compensation for the frustrated need to dominate.[3] I therefore term the two Phallic styles the Phallic-aggressive (indulgent) and the Phallic-compensative (denying).
Phallic-aggressive
Vain, aggressive, and self-centered, the Phallic-aggressive personality is preoccupied with matters of power and dominance. Metaphorically, this personality style may be described as the five-year-old who discovered that his genitals were able to provide him with a sense of pleasure and who was immensely proud to have made this discovery. Flaunting his genitals to the world and believing himself to be special because of them, this five-year-old did not learn to associate achievement with effort, thinking instead that achievement was something that followed passively from one’s intrinsic magnificence. As adults, these people therefore have an easy time convincing themselves that they are superior to others, and they often feel entitled to special treatment, even though they may have developed little in the way of actual skills to act as a foundation for this affected superiority. Additionally, as five-year-olds, you could metaphorically contend that these individuals mistook the pleasurable sensations that their genitals were able to provide for the very reason for having genitals, knowing nothing about their wider reproductive purposes. As adults, these Phallic-aggressive individuals are therefore often confused with regards to their own thoughts and motivations, steering mindlessly towards praise and gratification, while ignoring questions of fairness and reciprocity. Since, in their minds, success depends on intrinsic magnificence, and not on conscious effort, they are wont to believe that any criticism directed at them, or any denial of some gratification that they feel entitled to, is really is a denial of their intrinsic worth and a mean-spirited attempt to take it away – a castration attempt, as it were. Hence they tend to lose all sense of proportion when criticized, overreacting and responding in full force to even the mildest of criticisms.
Phallic-compensative
Individuals marked by the Phallic-compensative style are usually self-controlled, sober, and seemingly mild-mannered. They have a great facility with analytical arguments, which they use as a double-edged sword, pointing these arguments as much at themselves as they point them at others. Socially, they are a bit impassive and vacuous, and they may over-attach to someone whom they perceive to be better at social interaction and ‘all the emotional stuff’ than they are (such as a significant other or female parent). Consequently, they tend to neglect the development of themselves in social and interpersonal areas. Metaphorically, this personality style may be likened to a five-year-old who is aware that he is not the favorite child in the family but at the same time wishes that he were. As a result of this envy, these people have developed a compensative attitude where they dismantle the dominance of others by analytically picking apart their activities. By way of their analytical arguments, the Phallic-compensative individual lays bare the weaknesses of others and exposes the special treatment that these others have received and the double standards that they live by. However, while it may seem that the Phallic-compensative individual is just being equitable and even-handed, his true motivations are nevertheless personal envy and a longing to compensate for his frustrated need to dominate. One proof of the ignoble motives that underlie their seemingly noble actions is that Phallic-compensative individuals sometimes go overboard in their exposition of the flaws of someone whom they perceive to be ‘mightier’ than themselves. When that happens, they tend to come across as moralistic and persecuting, which forms a marked contradistinction to their usual easygoing selves.
Hysteric Styles
Finally, in the case of the Hysterics, sexual flirtatiousness, emotional excesses, and attention from others are the fixations that lie at the heart of these styles. Once again, the person who has an indulgent Hysteric style will surrender to these inclinations, while the person with a denying Hysteric style will vehemently deny them in himself.
As a biological organ, the uterus (also known as the womb) is a hollow muscular organ that is responsible for the development of the embryo and fetus during pregnancy. Historically, it has often been imagined by medical experts to expand or contract, even without an active process of impregnation to influence its movements. I refer to the expanding uterus as the Classic Hysteric (indulgent) style, and I refer to the contracting uterus as the Retentive Hysteric (denying) style.
Classic Hysteric
Having a strong need for attention and affection, individuals characterized by the Classic Hysteric style are not apt to sit idly by in the hope that these things will come to them of their own accord. Instead they actively crave center stage and seek the notice of others through attention-grabbing behaviors such as dramatized emotions, sexualized conduct and clothing, witty and eccentric manners, and so on. Notoriously fickle and flighty, Classic Hysterics often find themselves chasing the latest colorful image that has presented itself to their imagination instead of working out the implications of a topic in detail (by the time someone engages them on the nitty-gritty, they have already moved on to another topic). Metaphorically, the Classic Hysteric may be likened to a teenage girl whose uterus is twisting and turning, first to the one side, then to the other, causing emotional turmoil as it craves impregnation from the outside while at the same time resisting any definite commitment to it. In the same way, the Classic Hysteric’s actual personality is both sexually flirtatious and expressively overdramatic as a means of capturing people’s attention. While their spontaneous amiability tends to lead people to think that they are either being propositioned by the Classic Hysteric, or that they have just made a new best friend, the reality is that for the Classic Hysteric individual, these enticing behaviors are not necessarily meant as anything but ways of getting others to notice and care.
Retentive Hysteric
Polite, gentle, and unusually placid, Retentive Hysteric individuals have comparatively little interest in interpersonal relationships with others and are capable of being alone for long periods of time without feeling lonely. Having from an early age found that their own perceptions were at odds with those of others, they have retreated into an internal world of imagination and private perceptions. When others come into contact with the Retentive Hysteric, they tend to perceive them as asexual in presentation, often with stiff and affectively constricted, child-like manners (which may themselves come across as attractive, encouraging fantasies of exploitation and domination in others). Metaphorically, the Retentive Hysteric style may be likened to a teenage girl whose uterus is so afraid of impregnation that it shuts off every mating signal that the individual is able to produce, including charm and emotional availability. In the same way, the actual personality of the Retentive Hysteric may have marked difficulties with gender roles, giving others the psychological (though not necessarily physical) impression of an oddly a-gendered individual or prepubescent child. Like the teenage girl whose uterus contracted to shut off mating activities entirely, others tend to experience the Retentive Hysteric individual as having little positive or negative emotionality but only a certain “flatness,” attesting again to the fact that they come across as having ‘retired’ a bit into themselves. Apparently detached and somewhat indifferent to socializing and interpersonal affairs, little do others know that these people are capable of great creativity and originality when left to their own devices.
Relation of the Freudian Styles to the Modern Personality Styles
As the historical forerunners of the modern personality styles, the eight Freudian styles evince some correlation with their modern counterparts. The correlation is not perfect, however, and I see no modern counterpart to the denying Phallic orientation as well as only a weak similarity between the indulgent Anal orientation and the Hypomanic personality style. One interesting result from comparing the two is that the Dependent and Antisocial personality styles emerge as polarities of the same basic orientation. This similarity at a deeper level has sometimes been remarked upon by psychologists, but as far as I know, it wholly escapes the notice of modern discussions of the theme, such as the DSM. Further still, with regards to Jungian typology, we often seen ENTPs exhibiting either a Dependent or an Antisocial style, suggesting again, perhaps, that these superficially dissimilar personality adaptions may have a common fountainhead.
|
Style |
Indulgent |
Denying |
|
Oral |
Dependent |
Antisocial |
|
Anal |
(Hypomanic) |
Compulsive |
|
Phallic |
Narcissistic |
– |
|
Hysteric |
Histrionic |
Schizoid |
***
Acknowledgements
While the operationalization of the Freudian personality styles found in this article is distinctly my own, I acknowledge a debt to the prior studies of Karl Abraham, Wilhelm Reich, Nick Totton, and Michael Jacobs.
***
Image in the article commissioned for this publication from artist Darwin Cen.
NOTES
[1] Ayn Rand: “Love is not self-sacrifice, but the … assertion of your own needs and values.” / “It is for your own happiness that you need the person you love.” – Playboy’s Interview with Ayn Rand, 1964
[2] Immanuel Kant: “[The] principle of self-love … is perhaps compatible with my whole future well-being, but the question remains whether it is right. Hence, I transform the demand of self-love into a universal law and formulate the question thus: how would it be if my maxim became a universal law? Then I see at once that it could never be a valid universal natural law that agrees with itself but must necessarily contradict itself. For the universality of a law that everybody who believes himself to be in distress could … [break] … would make … its purpose impossible…” – Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals §4:422
[3] From the perspective of Jungian typology, we would say that Freud is here privileging Te and Se. However, this priority of Freud’s need not entail that Freud was a type with Se (as is so often assumed): Since Freud had a Compulsive (or Anal-retentive) style, Freud would logically find by introspection that inside every “civilized” or “academic” endeavor is a baser impulse towards immediate gratification that has been curbed.