Talk:Paraphilia

From Citizendium
Jump to: navigation, search
This article is a stub and thus not approved.
Main Article
Discussion
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
 
To learn how to update the categories for this article, see here. To update categories, edit the metadata template.
 Definition A sexual desire or behaviour that involves an nonreproductive source of gratification. [d] [e]
Checklist and Archives
 Workgroup categories Psychology and Health Sciences [Categories OK]
 Talk Archive none  English language variant Canadian English

Not sure that...

All images of a p-graphic nature are always voyeurism; I think that the way a lot of it is depicted is by intentionally creating some kind of visual link between the subject(s) (particularly with body and facial language) and the viewer whereas voyeurism I think is mostly viewing with no link (there are no suggestions between the subject(s) and the viewer(s)). --Robert W King 08:12, 27 December 2007 (CST)

"Perversion"

For better or worse, like it or not, most of humanity condemns these behaviors as so many "perversions." There are many exceptions, of course, but as a generalization, this is a fact that is obviously important to the overall topic, and we should not shy away from reporting it. It continues to shape how we think and write about the paraphilias. So I was amazed that the word "perversion" did not appear once in the article--that strikes me as a very unfortunate kind of political correctness. Mind you, neither in the article nor here on this talk page do I intend to take a stand on the question whether paraphilias are "wrong" (of course, I do think certain of them are not just wrong but frequently evil: rape and child molestation). I'm just saying that we are engaging in a kind of unnecessary self-censorship in failing to mention the obvious fact that much of humanity does regard them as either wrong or morally questionable or worthy of shame and ridicule. Also, the mere fact that psychologists treat them clinically, if they are pathological, should not stop us from reporting how others regard them.

Also, as a definition, "a sexual desire or behaviour that involves an nonreproductive source of gratification" implies that homosexuality is a paraphilia. Yet it is not listed. Either the definition should be revised, or homosexuality should be listed. I leave it to you to decide which is best; I don't know how the term "paraphilia" is usually applied so I can't tell you. --Larry Sanger 15:09, 25 September 2008 (CDT)

Might I suggest that "perversion" is more socially defined than psychologically, and, while I would hesitate to call an article "perversion", something along the lines of "societal views of sexuality" is more the place for the sort of discussion you suggest? The articles, of course, should be linked.
I would go farther than your including homosexuality, and include masturbation. There are a whole range of issues about consensuality that don't strictly belong under paraphilias, such as consensual sadomasochism among adults, which variously does or does not involve permanent damage. Rape is clearly nonconsensual, but the definition of "statutory rape" varies widely; some of the most challenging cases, with no general definition &mdash think of enthusiastic teenagers in a state where the age of consent is 16; is an act between classmates, one of whom is just short of the 16th birthday and one just after it, statutory rape?
Since rape can be reproductive, it's difficult to say where it should go. I agree it is evil, but am not sure it is paraphiliac, especially if it is more of a dominance than a sexual motivation. Howard C. Berkowitz 15:26, 25 September 2008 (CDT)

Well, I just added the above as a sort of drive-by contribution--didn't mean to set policy or get into a debate. Do what you will! Another piece of advice, however--the list should be based on how the term is actually used by experts who employ the term professionally, and the definition should be drawn from their definitions. These are things that it is pointless to debate about; what is needed is research. --Larry Sanger 13:07, 26 September 2008 (CDT)

I don't have a DSM-IV handy, but the definitions I used, which recognize they are not absolute in the reproductive context, are from Karpman's The Sexual Offender and His Offenses. As I remember from the last time I looked DSM-IV, however, there was a distinction on whether one could function sexually without the paraphiliac behavior. Homosexuality was not considered paraphiliac, but if a homosexual were incapable of sexual activity without the presence of a fetish, than the fetishism was parphiliac. Howard C. Berkowitz 13:17, 26 September 2008 (CDT)