Sexual perversion is usually implicitly assumed to mean some kind of unnatural, abnormal form of sexual behaviour.
Perversity can be broken down into two categories: perverse acts and perverse objects. Acts which involve some other use of the genitals beyond the insertion of the penis into the vagina followed by ejaculation have often been categorized as perversions. Masturbation, either mutual or solitary, comes into this category, as does Oral sex. The use of contraception to thwart the reproductive purpose of intercourse has also been defined as perverted. It might be supposed that the one act which can always be defined as the normal, natural thing is sexual intercourse intended for the begetting of children (or at least, without the deliberate interposition of means to prevent this happening) between two persons of opposite sexes married to one another.
At least in the abstract this is the case, but when it comes down to the practical, even the most reproductively intentioned married couple may be engaging in something which someone could define as perversion. The very position which one society regards as almost too natural even to think about may be regarded by another as an obscene variation calculated to inflame sensuality.
Acts which may in themselves be regarded as either perverse or bordering upon perversity may, however, be considered permissible if they conduce to better reproductive sex between married couples.
Acts which may in themselves be regarded as either perverse or bordering upon perversity may, however, be considered permissible if they conduce to better reproductive sex between married couples.
Just as before, people could deviate from the norm of "approved" coitus mainly in two ways:
1. By choosing the "wrong" sexual object.
2. By choosing the "wrong" sexual activity.
For example, a male was sexually "perverted" if, instead of choosing a nonrelated female of his own age, he chose
• himself (autoeroticism),
• another male (homosexuality),
• two or more females at the same time (troilism),
• a close relative (incest),
• a child (pedophilia)
• an old woman (gerontophilia),
• an animal (zoophilia or bestiality),
• a dead body (necrophilia),
• a statue (pygmalionism),
• an inanimate object (fetishism),
Needless to say, these "perversions" became aggravated when they appeared in combination, as for instance when a young man chose a boy (homosexual pedophilia), or when he chose the dead body of an old woman (gerontophilic necrophilia). However, even if a man chose the "right" sexual object, he could still prove to be perverted if, instead of engaging in simple coitus, he derived his sexual satisfaction mainly from
• observing nudity and sexual activity in others (voyeurism), people in yahoo chat use web cam for this.
• exposing his own sex organs (exhibitionism),people in yahoo chat use web cam for this
• rubbing his body against that of his partner (frottage),
• engaging in oral intercourse (oralism),
• engaging in anal intercourse (analism),
• hurting or humiliating his partner (sadism),
• being hurt or humiliated by his partner (masochism),
• wearing clothes of the other sex (transvestism),
• stealing something (kleptolagnia),
• setting fires (pyrolagnia),
• playing with his own or his partner's urine (urolagnia),
• playing with his own or his partner's excrement (coprophilia).
Again, these perversions were aggravated in combination, as for instance when someone preferred anal intercourse while inflicting pain on his partner (sadistic analism), or when he liked to be insulted while playing with his partner's urine (masochistic urolagnia).
By the same token, the height of sexual perversion was reached when someone preferred the "wrong" sexual activity with the "wrong" sexual object. This was the case, for example, when a man engaged in oral intercourse with several women at the same time (oralistic troilism), or when he publicly masturbated into the soiled diapers of his baby daughter (exhibitionistic coprophilic incestuous pedophilic fetishism). Finally, all of these perversions and possible combinations of perversions could be rendered even more serious by an "excessive" sexual urge, called "satyriasis" in males and "nymphomania" in females, or "erotomania" in both sexes.
1. By choosing the "wrong" sexual object.
2. By choosing the "wrong" sexual activity.
For example, a male was sexually "perverted" if, instead of choosing a nonrelated female of his own age, he chose
• himself (autoeroticism),
• another male (homosexuality),
• two or more females at the same time (troilism),
• a close relative (incest),
• a child (pedophilia)
• an old woman (gerontophilia),
• an animal (zoophilia or bestiality),
• a dead body (necrophilia),
• a statue (pygmalionism),
• an inanimate object (fetishism),
Needless to say, these "perversions" became aggravated when they appeared in combination, as for instance when a young man chose a boy (homosexual pedophilia), or when he chose the dead body of an old woman (gerontophilic necrophilia). However, even if a man chose the "right" sexual object, he could still prove to be perverted if, instead of engaging in simple coitus, he derived his sexual satisfaction mainly from
• observing nudity and sexual activity in others (voyeurism), people in yahoo chat use web cam for this.
• exposing his own sex organs (exhibitionism),people in yahoo chat use web cam for this
• rubbing his body against that of his partner (frottage),
• engaging in oral intercourse (oralism),
• engaging in anal intercourse (analism),
• hurting or humiliating his partner (sadism),
• being hurt or humiliated by his partner (masochism),
• wearing clothes of the other sex (transvestism),
• stealing something (kleptolagnia),
• setting fires (pyrolagnia),
• playing with his own or his partner's urine (urolagnia),
• playing with his own or his partner's excrement (coprophilia).
Again, these perversions were aggravated in combination, as for instance when someone preferred anal intercourse while inflicting pain on his partner (sadistic analism), or when he liked to be insulted while playing with his partner's urine (masochistic urolagnia).
By the same token, the height of sexual perversion was reached when someone preferred the "wrong" sexual activity with the "wrong" sexual object. This was the case, for example, when a man engaged in oral intercourse with several women at the same time (oralistic troilism), or when he publicly masturbated into the soiled diapers of his baby daughter (exhibitionistic coprophilic incestuous pedophilic fetishism). Finally, all of these perversions and possible combinations of perversions could be rendered even more serious by an "excessive" sexual urge, called "satyriasis" in males and "nymphomania" in females, or "erotomania" in both sexes.
It must further be noted that not all perversions were considered equally bad. For example, "fetishism" was more easily tolerated than "homosexuality" which, in turn, was more acceptable than "incest".
Still, whatever the level of his pathology or its potential for harming others, it was mainly the "pervert" who needed professional help.
On the other hand, as soon became clear, almost everyone suffered from some form of perversion, if only to a very moderate extent. Millions of men and women masturbated or fantasized about sexual orgies. Countless people had homosexual impulses or incestuous wishes, and a great number treasured some love letter, hair, handkerchief, or piece of clothing obtained from a beloved person. Many also enjoyed looking at nudity or displaying their own bodies, became aggressive or submissive in their sexual encounters, were fascinated by bathrooms, and loved "dirty" words.
These observations finally suggested that sexual perversions were not bizarre special diseases, but rather exaggerations of "normal" tendencies, i.e., matters of degree. Therefore, more and more psychiatrists came to believe that only exclusive or nearly exclusive wrong sexual choices deserved to be called perverse. Someone who chose the wrong sexual object or activity only occasionally, and who otherwise remained capable of enjoying "healthy" coitus, was not a true pervert. As a matter of fact, some psychiatrists demanded a drastic reduction of the old catalogue claiming that, even in their exclusive forms, such behaviors as "autoeroticism", "homosexuality", "troilism", "gerontophilia", "oralism", "analism", and "transvestism" were not perversions at all. They could perhaps be described as narrow personal habits, but they were clearly outside the province of medicine.
These observations finally suggested that sexual perversions were not bizarre special diseases, but rather exaggerations of "normal" tendencies, i.e., matters of degree. Therefore, more and more psychiatrists came to believe that only exclusive or nearly exclusive wrong sexual choices deserved to be called perverse. Someone who chose the wrong sexual object or activity only occasionally, and who otherwise remained capable of enjoying "healthy" coitus, was not a true pervert. As a matter of fact, some psychiatrists demanded a drastic reduction of the old catalogue claiming that, even in their exclusive forms, such behaviors as "autoeroticism", "homosexuality", "troilism", "gerontophilia", "oralism", "analism", and "transvestism" were not perversions at all. They could perhaps be described as narrow personal habits, but they were clearly outside the province of medicine.
When it comes down to cases, there is, in fact, considerable agreement that some forms of sexual behavior give cause for concern. This applies especially to behavior that is
• compulsive,
• destructive, or
• distressing to the individual.
Clearly, any sexual activity that distresses those who engage in it deserves to be changed. Destructive behavior, quite apart from its subjective effects, can become harmful to other people and must therefore be stopped. Sexual compulsions, even if they harm no one else, lead to unhappiness and frustration.
• compulsive,
• destructive, or
• distressing to the individual.
Clearly, any sexual activity that distresses those who engage in it deserves to be changed. Destructive behavior, quite apart from its subjective effects, can become harmful to other people and must therefore be stopped. Sexual compulsions, even if they harm no one else, lead to unhappiness and frustration.
In many of these cases, the negative behavior can be changed or at least improved by some form of psychotherapy. However, in order to succeed, such therapy must be based on the voluntary consent, or even better, the expressed desire of the maladjusted person. In this area, there is little to be hoped from involuntary treatment. Moreover, any involuntary modification of human behavior raises the most serious ethical questions. Except in truly extraordinary and extreme cases, it does not seem morally justified.
Another question is the criminal prosecution and punishment of destructive behavior which has harmed unwilling victims. Legal protection against sexual assault in all its forms is one of the elementary duties of government. (Whether convicted offenders can or should be treated by psychiatrists is a complex issue beyond the scope of this book.)
By the same token, unconventional sexual behavior without clearly identifiable complaining victims should not be criminalized. Persons with otherwise harmless specialized sexual interests can reasonably demand to be left alone by the police. Their persecution is unfair and ill-advised. (For details, see "The Sexually Oppressed.")
Another question is the criminal prosecution and punishment of destructive behavior which has harmed unwilling victims. Legal protection against sexual assault in all its forms is one of the elementary duties of government. (Whether convicted offenders can or should be treated by psychiatrists is a complex issue beyond the scope of this book.)
By the same token, unconventional sexual behavior without clearly identifiable complaining victims should not be criminalized. Persons with otherwise harmless specialized sexual interests can reasonably demand to be left alone by the police. Their persecution is unfair and ill-advised. (For details, see "The Sexually Oppressed.")