A General Introduction to Psychoanalysis Part 17

There can be not the least doubt that the s.e.xual activities of these individuals are actually found in the absurdities, caprices and horrors that we have examined. Not only do they themselves conceive them as adequate subst.i.tutes, but we must recognize that they take the same place in their lives that normal s.e.x gratification occupies in ours, and for which they bring the same sacrifices, often incommensurate with their ends. It is perfectly possible to trace along broad lines as well as in detail in what way these abnormalities follow the normal procedure and how they diverge from it. You will also find the characteristic of indecency which belongs to the s.e.xual act in these vagaries, only that it is therein magnified to the disreputable.

Ladies and gentlemen, what att.i.tude are we to a.s.sume to these unusual varieties of s.e.x gratification? Nothing at all is achieved by the mere expression of indignation and personal disgust and by the a.s.surance that we do not share these l.u.s.ts. That is not our concern. We have here a field of observation like any other. Moreover, the evasion that these persons are merely rarities, curiosities, is easily refuted. On the contrary, we are dealing with very frequent and widespread phenomena.

If, however, we are told that we must not permit them to influence our views on s.e.xual life, since they are all aberrations of the s.e.xual instinct, we must meet this with a serious answer. If we fail to understand these abnormal manifestations of s.e.xuality and are unable to relate them to the normal s.e.xual life, then we cannot understand normal s.e.xuality. It is, in short, our unavoidable task to account theoretically for all the potentialities of the perversions we have gone over and to explain their relation to the so-called normal s.e.xuality.

A penetrating insight due to Ivan Bloch and two new experimental results will help us in this task. Bloch takes exception to the point of view which sees in a perversion a "sign of degeneration"; he proves that such deviations from the aim of the s.e.xual instinct, such loose relations to the object of s.e.xuality, have occurred at all times, among the most primitive and the most highly civilized peoples, and have occasionally achieved toleration and general recognition. The two experimental results were obtained in the course of psychoa.n.a.lytic investigations of neurotics; they will undoubtedly exert a decided influence on our conceptions of s.e.xual perversion.

We have stated that the neurotic symptoms are subst.i.tutions for s.e.xual satisfactions, and I have given you to understand that the proof of this a.s.sertion by means of the a.n.a.lysis of symptoms encounters many difficulties. For this statement is only justifiable if, under the term "s.e.xual satisfactions," we include the so-called perverse s.e.xual ends, since with surprising frequency we find symptoms which can be interpreted only in the light of their activity. The claim of rareness made by the h.o.m.os.e.xualists or the inverted immediately collapses when we learn that in the case of no single neurotic do we fail to obtain evidence of h.o.m.os.e.xual tendencies, and that in a considerable number of symptoms we find the expression of this latent inversion. Those who call themselves h.o.m.os.e.xualists are the conscious and manifest inverts, but their number is as nothing before the latent h.o.m.os.e.xualists. We are forced to regard the desire for an object of one's own s.e.x as a universal aberration of erotic life and to cede increasing importance to it. Of course the differences between manifest h.o.m.os.e.xuality and the normal att.i.tude are not thus erased; their practical importance persists, but their theoretic value is greatly decreased. Paranoia, a disturbance which cannot be counted among the transference-neuroses, must in fact be a.s.sumed as arising regularly from the attempt to ward off powerful h.o.m.os.e.xual tendencies. Perhaps you will recall that one of our patients under her compulsive symptoms acted the part of a man, namely that of her own estranged husband; the production of such symptoms, impersonating the actions of men, is very common to neurotic women. Though this cannot be ascribed directly to h.o.m.os.e.xuality, it is certainly concerned with its prerequisites.

You are probably acquainted with the fact that the neurosis of hysteria may manifest its symptoms in all organic systems and may therefore disturb all functions. a.n.a.lysis shows that in these symptoms there are expressed all those tendencies termed perverse, which seek to represent the genitals through other organs. These organs behave as subst.i.tute genitals; through the study of hysteric symptoms we have come to the conclusion that aside from their functional activities, the organs of the body have a s.e.xual significance, and that the performance of their functions is disturbed if the s.e.xual factor claims too much attention.

Countless sensations and innervations, which appear as symptoms of hysteria, in organs apparently not concerned with s.e.xuality, are thus discovered as bound up with the fulfillment of perverse s.e.xual desires through the transference of s.e.x instincts to other organs. These symptoms bring home to us the extent to which the organs used in the consumption of food and in excretion may become the bearers of s.e.xual excitement. We see repeated here the same picture which the perversions have openly and unmistakably lain before us; in hysteria, however, we must make the detour of interpreting symptoms, and in this case the perverse s.e.xual tendencies must be ascribed not to the conscious but to the unconscious life of the individual.

Among the many symptoms manifested in compulsion neurosis, the most important are those produced by too powerful s.a.d.i.s.tic tendencies, i.e., s.e.xual tendencies with perverted aim. These symptoms, in accordance with the structure of compulsion neurosis, serve primarily as a rejection of these desires, or they express a struggle between satisfaction and rejection. In this struggle, the satisfaction is never excessively curtailed; it achieves its results in the patient's behavior in a roundabout way, by preference turning against his own person in self-inflicted torture. Other forms of neurosis, characterized by intensive worry, are the expression of an exaggerated s.e.xualization of acts that are ordinarily only preparatory to s.e.xual satisfactions; such are the desires to see, to touch, to investigate. Here is thus explained the great importance of the fear of contact and also of the compulsion to wash. An unbelievably large portion of compulsion acts may, in the form of disguised repet.i.tions and modifications, be traced back to onanism, admittedly the only uniform action which accompanies the most varied flights of the s.e.xual imagination.

It would cost me very little effort to interweave far more closely the relation between perversion and neurosis, but I believe that what I have said is sufficient for our purposes. We must avoid the error of overestimating the frequency and intensity of perverse inclinations in the light of these interpretations of symptoms. You have heard that a neurosis may develop from the denial of normal s.e.xual satisfactions.

Through this actual denial the need is forced into the abnormal paths of s.e.x excitement. You will later obtain a better insight into the way this happens. You certainly understand, that through such "_collateral_"

hindrance, the perverse tendencies must become more powerful than they would have been if no actual obstacle had been put in the way of a normal s.e.xual satisfaction. As a matter of fact, a similar influence may be recognized in manifest perversions. In many cases, they are provoked or motivated by the fact that too great difficulties stand in the way of normal s.e.xual satisfactions, owing to temporary circ.u.mstances or to the permanent inst.i.tutions of society. In other cases, to be sure, the perverse tendencies are entirely independent of such conditions; they are, as it were, the normal kind of s.e.xual life for the individual in question.

Perhaps you are momentarily under the impression that we have confused rather than clarified the relation between normal and perverse s.e.xuality. But keep in mind this consideration. If it is true that a hindrance or withholding of normal s.e.xual satisfaction will bring out perverse tendencies in persons who have not previously shown them, we must a.s.sume that these persons must have harbored tendencies akin to perversities--or, if you will, perversities in latent form. This brings us to the second experimental conclusion of which I spoke, namely, that psychoa.n.a.lytic investigation found it necessary to concern itself with the s.e.xual life of the child, since, in the a.n.a.lysis of symptoms, reminiscences and ideas reverted to the early years of childhood.

Whatever we revealed in this manner was corroborated point by point through the direct observation of children. The result was the recognition that all inclinations to perversion have their origin in childhood, that children have tendencies toward them all and practice them in a measure corresponding to their immaturity. Perverse s.e.xuality, in brief, is nothing more than magnified infantile s.e.xuality divided into its separate tendencies.

Now you will certainly see these perversions in another light and no longer ignore their relation to the s.e.xual life of man, at the cost, I do not doubt, of surprises and incongruities painful to your emotions.

At first you will undoubtedly be disposed to deny everything--the fact that children have something which may be termed s.e.xual life, the truth of our observations and the justification of our claim to see in the behavior of children any relation to what is condemned in later years as perversity. Permit me first to explain to you the cause of your reluctance and then to present to you the sum of our observations. It is biologically improbable, even absurd, to a.s.sume that children have no s.e.xual life--s.e.xual excitements, desires, and some sort of satisfaction--but that they develop it suddenly between the ages of twelve and fourteen. This would be just as improbable from the viewpoint of biology as to say that they were not born with genitals but developed them only in the period of p.u.b.erty. The new factor which becomes active in them at the time is the function of reproduction, which avails itself for its own purposes of all the physical and psychic material already present. You commit the error of confusing s.e.xuality with reproduction and thereby block the road to the understanding of s.e.xuality, and of perversions and neuroses as well. This error is a prejudice. Oddly enough its source is the fact that you yourselves were children, and as children succ.u.mbed to the influence of education. One of the most important educational tasks which society must a.s.sume is the control, the restriction of the s.e.xual instinct when it breaks forth as an impulse toward reproduction; it must be subdued to an individual will that is identical with the mandates of society. In its own interests, accordingly, society would postpone full development until the child has reached a certain stage of intellectual maturity, for education practically ceases with the complete emergence of the s.e.xual impulse.

Otherwise the instinct would burst all bounds and the work of culture, achieved with such difficulty, would be shattered. The task of restraining this s.e.xuality is never easy; it succeeds here too poorly and there too well. The motivating force of human society is fundamentally economic; since there is not sufficient nourishment to support its members without work on their part, the number of these members must be limited and their energies diverted from s.e.xual activity to labor. Here, again, we have the eternal struggle for life that has persisted from prehistoric times to the present.

Experience must have shown educators that the task of guiding the s.e.xual will of the new generation can be solved only by influencing the early s.e.xual life of the child, the period preparatory to p.u.b.erty, not by awaiting the storm of p.u.b.erty. With this intention almost all infantile s.e.x activities are forbidden to the child or made distasteful to him; the ideal goal has been to render the life of the child as.e.xual. In the course of time it has really come to be considered as.e.xual, and this point of view has actually been proclaimed by science. In order not to contradict our belief and intentions, we ignore the s.e.xual activity of the child--no slight thing, at that--or are content to interpret it differently. The child is supposed to be pure and innocent, and whoever says otherwise may be condemned as a shameless blasphemer of the tender and sacred feelings of humanity.

The children are the only ones who do not join in carrying out these conventions, who a.s.sert their animal rights, who prove again and again that the road to purity is still before them. It is strange that those who deny the s.e.xuality of children, do not therefore slacken in their educational efforts but rather punish severely the manifestations of the very thing they maintain does not exist, and call it "childish naughtiness." Theoretically it is highly interesting to observe that the period of life which offers most striking evidence against the biased conception of as.e.xual childhood, is the time up to five or six years of age; after that everything is enveloped by a veil of amnesia, which is rent apart only by thorough scientific investigation; it may previously have given way partially in certain forms of dreams.

Now I shall present to you what is most easily recognizable in the s.e.xual life of the child. At first, for the sake of convenience let me explain to you the conception of the libido. Libido, a.n.a.logous to hunger, is the force through which the instinct, here the s.e.x instinct (as in the case of hunger it is the instinct to eat) expresses itself.

Other conceptions, such as s.e.xual excitement and satisfaction, require no elucidation. You will easily see that interpretation plays the greatest part in disclosing the s.e.xuality of the suckling; in fact you will probably cite this as an objection. These interpretations proceed from a foundation of a.n.a.lytic investigation that trace backwards from a given symptom. The suckling reveals the first s.e.xual impulses in connection with other functions necessary for life. His chief interest, as you know, is directed toward the taking in of food; when it has fallen asleep at its mother's breast, fully satisfied, it bears the expression of blissful content that will come back again in later life after the experience of the s.e.xual o.r.g.a.s.m. That of course would be too slight evidence to form the basis of a conclusion. But we observe that the suckling wishes to repeat the act of taking in food without actually demanding more food; he is therefore no longer urged by hunger. We say he is sucking, and the fact that after this he again falls asleep with a blissful expression shows us that the act of sucking in itself has yielded him satisfaction. As you know, he speedily arranges matters so that he cannot fall asleep without sucking. Dr. Lindner, an old pediatrist in Budapest, was the first one to ascertain the s.e.xual nature of this procedure. Persons attending to the child, who surely make no pretensions to a theoretic att.i.tude, seem to judge sucking in a similar manner. They do not doubt that it serves a pleasurable satisfaction, term it naughty, and force the child to relinquish it against his will, and if he will not do so of his own accord, through painful measures.

And so we learn that the suckling performs actions that have no object save the obtaining of a sensual gratification. We believe that this gratification is first experienced during the taking in of food, but that he speedily learns to separate it from this condition. The gratification can only be attributed to the excitation of the mouth and lips, hence we call these parts of the body _erogenous zones_ and the pleasure derived from sucking, _s.e.xual_. Probably we shall have to discuss the justification of this name.

If the suckling could express himself, he would probably recognize the act of sucking at his mother's breast as the most important thing in life. He is not so far wrong, for in this one act he satisfies two great needs of life. With no small degree of surprise we learn through psychoa.n.a.lysis how much of the physical significance of this act is retained through life. The sucking at the mother's breast becomes the term of departure for all of s.e.xual life, the unattained ideal of later s.e.x gratification, to which the imagination often reverts in times of need. The mother's breast is the first object for the s.e.xual instinct; I can scarcely bring home to you how significant this object is for centering on the s.e.xual object in later life, what profound influence it exerts upon the most remote domains of psychic life through evolution and subst.i.tution. The suckling, however, soon relinquishes it and fills its place by a part of his own body. The child sucks his thumb or his own tongue. Thereby he renders himself independent of the consent of the outer world in obtaining his sensual satisfactions, and moreover increases the excitement by including a second zone of his body. The erogenous zones are not equally satisfactory; it is therefore an important experience when, as Dr. Lindner puts it, the child while touching his own body discovers the especially excitable genitals, and so finds the way from sucking to onanism.

Through the evaluation of sucking we become acquainted with two decisive characteristics of infantile s.e.xuality. It arises in connection with the satisfaction of great organic needs and behaves _auto-erotically_, that is to say, it seeks and finds it objects on its own body. What is most clearly discernible during the taking in of food is partially repeated during excretion. We conclude that the nursling experiences pleasure during the excretion of urine and the contents of the intestine and that he soon strives to arrange these acts in a way to secure the greatest possible amount of satisfaction by the corresponding excitement of the erogenous membrane zones. Lou Andreas, with her delicate perceptions, has shown how at this point the outer world first intervenes as a hindrance, hostile to the child's desire for satisfaction--the first vague suggestion of outer and inner conflicts. He may not let his excretions pa.s.s from him at a moment agreeable to him, but only when other persons set the time. To induce him to renounce these sources of satisfaction, everything relating to these functions is declared indecent and must be concealed. Here, for the first time, he is to exchange pleasure for social dignity. His own relation to his excretions is originally quite different. He experiences no disgust toward his faeces, values them as a part of his body from which he does not part lightly, for he uses them as the first "present" he can give to persons he esteems particularly. Even after education has succeeded in alienating him from these tendencies, he transfers the evaluation of the faeces to the "present" and to "money." On the other hand, he appears to regard his achievements in urination with especial pride.

I know that you have been wanting to interrupt me for a long time and to cry: "Enough of these monstrosities! Excretion a source of s.e.xual gratification that even the suckling exploits! Faeces a valuable substance! The a.n.u.s a sort of genital! We do not believe it, but we understand why children's physicians and pedagogues have decidedly rejected psychoa.n.a.lysis and its results." No, you have merely forgotten that it was my intention to present to you infantile s.e.xuality in connection with the facts of s.e.xual perversion. Why should you not know that in the case of many grown-ups, h.o.m.os.e.xuals as well as heteros.e.xuals, the locus of intercourse is transferred from the normal to a more remote portion of the body. And that there are many individuals who confess to a pleasurable sensation of no slight degree in the emptying of the bowels during their entire lives! Children themselves will confirm their interest in the act of defecation and the pleasure in watching the defecation of another, when they are a few years older and capable of giving expression to their feelings. Of course, if these children have previously been systematically intimidated, they will understand all too well the wisdom of preserving silence on the subject. As for the other things that you do not wish to believe, let me refer you to the results of a.n.a.lysis and the direct observation of children, and you will realize that it is difficult not to see these things or to see them in a different light. I do not even object to making the relation between child-s.e.xuality and s.e.xual perversion quite obvious to you. It is really only natural; if the child has s.e.xual life at all, it must necessarily be perverse, because aside from a few hazy illusions, the child does not know how s.e.xuality gives rise to reproduction. The common characteristic of all perversions, on the other hand, is that they have abandoned reproduction as their aim.

We term s.e.xual activity perverse when it has renounced the aim of reproduction and follows the pursuit of pleasure as an independent goal.

And so you realize that the turning point in the development of s.e.xual life lies in its subjugation to the purpose of reproduction. Everything this side of the turning point, everything that has given up this purpose and serves the pursuit of pleasure alone, must carry the term "perverse" and as such be regarded with contempt.

Permit me, therefore, to continue with my brief presentation of infantile s.e.xuality. What I have told you about two organic systems I could supplement by a discussion of all the others. The s.e.xual life of the child exhausts itself in the exercise of a series of partial instincts which seek, independently of one another, to gain satisfaction from his own body or from an external object. Among these organs the genitals speedily predominate. There are persons who continue the pursuit of satisfaction by means of their own genitals, without the aid of another genital or object, uninterruptedly from the onanism of the suckling to the onanism of necessity which arises in p.u.b.erty, and even indefinitely beyond that. The theme of onanism alone would occupy us for a long period of time; it offers material for diverse observations.

In spite of my inclination to shorten the theme, I must tell you something about the s.e.xual curiosity of children. It is most characteristic for child s.e.xuality and significant for the study of neurotic symptoms. The s.e.xual curiosity of children begins very early, sometimes before the third year. It is not connected with the differences of s.e.xes, which means nothing to the child, since the boy, at any rate, ascribes the same male genital to both s.e.xes. When the boy first discovers the primary s.e.xual structure of the female, he tries at first to deny the evidence of his senses, for he cannot conceive a human being who lacks the part of his body that is of such importance to him.

Later he is terrified at the possibility revealed to him and he feels the influence of all the former threats, occasioned by his intensive preoccupation with his little organ. He becomes subject to the domination of the castration complex, the formation of which plays an important part in the development of his character, provided he remains healthy; of his neurosis, if he becomes diseased; of his resistance, if he is treated a.n.a.lytically. We know that the little girl feels injured on account of her lack of a large, visible p.e.n.i.s, envies the boy his possession, and primarily from this motive desires to be a man. This wish manifests itself subsequently in neurosis, arising from some failure in her role as a woman. During childhood, the c.l.i.toris of the girl is the equivalent of the p.e.n.i.s; it is especially excitable, the zone where auto-erotic satisfaction is achieved. In the transition to womanhood it is most important that the sensations of the c.l.i.toris are completely transferred at the right time to the entrance of the v.a.g.i.n.a.

In cases of so-called s.e.xual anesthesia of women the c.l.i.toris has obstinately retained its excitability.

The s.e.xual interest of children generally turns first to the mystery of birth--the same problem that is the basis of the questions asked by the sphinx of Thebes. This curiosity is for the most part aroused by the selfish fear of the arrival of a new child. The answer which the nursery has ready for the child, that the stork brings children, is doubted far more frequently than we imagine, even by very young children. The feeling that he has been cheated out of the truth by grown-ups, contributes greatly to the child's sense of solitude and to his independent development. But the child is not capable of solving this problem unaided. His undeveloped s.e.xual const.i.tution restricts his ability to understand. At first he a.s.sumes that children are produced by a special substance in one's food and does not know that only women can bear children. Later he learns of this limitation and relinquishes the derivation of children from food--a supposition retained in the fairy-tale. The growing child soon notices that the father plays some part in reproduction, but what it is he cannot guess. If, by chance, he is witness of a s.e.xual act, he sees in it an attempt to subjugate, a scuffle, the s.a.d.i.s.tic miscomprehension of coitus; he does not however relate this act immediately to the evolution of the child. When he discovers traces of blood on the bedsheets or on the clothing of his mother, he considers them the proof of an injury inflicted by the father. During the latter part of childhood, he imagines that the s.e.xual organ of the man plays an important part in the evolution of children, but can ascribe only the function of urination to that part of his body.

From the very outset children unite in believing that the birth of the child takes place through the a.n.u.s; that the child therefore appears as a ball of faeces. After a.n.a.l interests have been proven valueless, he abandons this theory and a.s.sumes that the navel opens or that the region between the two b.r.e.a.s.t.s is the birthplace of the child. In this way the curious child approaches the knowledge of s.e.xual facts, which, clouded by his ignorance, he often fails to see. In the years prior to p.u.b.erty he generally receives an incomplete, disparaging explanation which often causes traumatic consequences.

You have probably heard that the conception "s.e.xual" is unduly expanded by psychoa.n.a.lysis in order that it may maintain the hypothesis that all neuroses are due to s.e.xual causes and that the meaning of the symptoms is s.e.xual. You are now in a position to judge whether or not this expansion is unjustifiable. We have expanded the conception s.e.xual only to include the s.e.xual life of children and of perverse persons. That is to say, we have reestablished its proper boundaries. Outside of psychoa.n.a.lysis s.e.xuality means only a very limited thing: normal s.e.xual life in the service of reproduction.

TWENTY-FIRST LECTURE

GENERAL THEORY OF THE NEUROSES

_Development of the Libido and s.e.xual Organizations_

I am under the impression that I did not succeed in convincing you of the significance of perversions for our conception of s.e.xuality. I should therefore like to clarify and add as much as I can.

It was not only perversions that necessitated an alteration of our conception of s.e.xuality, which aroused such vehement contradiction. The study of infantile s.e.xuality did a great deal more along that line, and its close correspondence to the perversions became decisive for us. But the origin of the expressions of infantile s.e.xuality, unmistakable as they are in later years of childhood, seem to be lost in obscurity.

Those who disregard the history of evolution and a.n.a.lytic coherence, will dispute the potency of the s.e.xual factor and will infer the agency of generalized forces. Do not forget that as yet we have no generally acknowledged criterion for identifying the s.e.xual nature of an occurrence, unless we a.s.sume that we can find it in a relation to the functions of reproduction, and this we must reject as too narrow. The biological criteria, such as the periodicities of twenty-three and twenty-eight days, suggested by W. Fliess, are by no means established; the specific chemical nature which we can possibly a.s.sume for s.e.xual occurrences is still to be discovered. The s.e.xual perversions of adults, on the other hand, are tangible and unambiguous. As their generally accepted nomenclature shows, they are undoubtedly s.e.xual in character; whether we designate them as signs of degeneration, or otherwise, no one has yet had the courage to place them outside the phenomena of s.e.x. They alone justify the a.s.sertion that s.e.xuality and reproduction are not coincident, for it is clear that all of them disavow the goal of reproduction.

This brings me to an interesting parallel. While "conscious" and "psychic" were generally considered to be identical, we had to make an essay to widen our conception of the "psychic" to recognize as psychic something that was not conscious. a.n.a.logously, when "s.e.xual" and "related to reproduction" (or, in shorter form, "genital") has been generally considered identical, psychoa.n.a.lysis must admit as "s.e.xual"

such things as are not "genital," things which have nothing to do with reproduction. It is only a formal a.n.a.logy, but it does not lack a deeper basis.

But if the existence of s.e.xual perversions is such a compelling argument, why has it not long ago had its effect, and settled the question? I really am unable to say. It appears to be because the s.e.xual perversions are subject to a peculiar ban that extends even into theory, and stands in the way of their scientific appreciation. It seems as if no one could forget that they are not only revolting, but even unnatural, dangerous; as if they had a seductive influence and that at bottom one had to stifle a secret envy of those who enjoyed them. As the count who pa.s.ses judgment in the famous Tannhauser parody admits:

"And in the mount of Venus, his honor slipped his mind, It's odd that never happens to people of our kind."

Truthfully speaking, the perverts are rather poor devils who atone most bitterly for the satisfaction they attain with such difficulty.

What makes the perverse activity unmistakably s.e.xual, despite all the strangeness of its object, is that the act in perverse satisfaction most frequently is accompanied by a complete o.r.g.a.s.m, and by an e.j.a.c.u.l.a.t.i.o.n of the genital product. Of course, this is only true in the case of adults; with children o.r.g.a.s.ms and genital excretions are hardly possible; they are replaced by rudiments which, again, are not recognized as truly s.e.xual.

In order to complete the appreciation of s.e.xual perversions, I have something to add. Condemned as they are, sharply as they are contrasted with the normal s.e.xual activity, simple observation shows that rarely is normal s.e.x-life entirely free from one or another of the perverse traits. Even the kiss can be claimed to be perverse, for it consists in the union of two erogenous mouth zones in place of the respective genitals. But no one outlaws it as perverse, it is, on the contrary, admitted in theatrical performances as a modified suggestion of the s.e.xual act. This very kissing may easily become a complete perversion if it results in such intensity that it is immediately followed by an emission and o.r.g.a.s.m--a thing that is not at all unusual. Further, we can learn that handling and gazing upon the object becomes an essential prerequisite to s.e.xual pleasure; that some, in the height of s.e.xual excitation, pinch and bite, that the greatest excitation is not always called forth in lovers by the genitals, but rather by other parts of the body, and so forth. There is no sense in considering persons with single traits of this kind abnormal, and counting them among the perverts.

Rather, we recognize more and more clearly that the essential nature of perversion does not consist in overstepping the s.e.xual aim, nor in a subst.i.tution for the genitals, not even in the variety of objects, but simply in the exclusiveness with which these deviations are carried out and by means of which the s.e.xual act that serves reproduction is pushed aside. When the perverse activities serve to prepare or heighten the normal s.e.xual act, they are really no longer perversions. To be sure, the chasm between normal and perverse s.e.xuality is practically bridged by such facts. The natural result is that normal s.e.xuality takes its origin from something existing prior to it, since certain components of this material are thrown out and others are combined in order to make them subject to a new aim--that of reproduction.

Before we make use of our knowledge of perversions to concentrate anew and with clearer perspective on the study of infantile s.e.xuality, I must call your attention to an important difference between the two. Perverse s.e.xuality is as a rule extraordinarily centralized, its whole action is directed toward one, usually an isolated, goal. A partial instinct has the upper hand. It is either the only one that can be demonstrated or it has subjected the others to its purposes. In this respect there is no difference between normal and perverse s.e.xuality other than that the ruling partial instincts, and with them the s.e.xual goals, are different.

In the one case as well as in the other there is, so to say, a well organized tyranny, excepting that here one family and there another has appropriated all the power to itself. Infantile s.e.xuality, on the other hand, is on the whole devoid of such centralization and organization, its individual component impulses are of equal power, and each independently goes in search of the acquisition of pleasurable excitement. The lack as well as the presence of centralization fit in well with the fact that both the perverse and the normal s.e.xuality originated from the infantile. There are also cases of perverse s.e.xuality that have much more similarity with the infantile, where, independently of one another, numerous partial instincts have forced their way, insisted on their aims, or rather perpetuated them. In these cases it is more correct to speak of infantilism of s.e.xual life than of perversions.

Thus prepared we can consider a question which we certainly shall not be spared. People will say to us: "Why are you so set on including within s.e.xuality those manifestations of childhood, out of which the s.e.xual later develops, but which, according to your own admission, are of uncertain origin? Why are you not satisfied rather with the physiological description, and simply say that even in the suckling one may notice activities, such as sucking objects or holding back excrements, which show us that he strives towards an _organic pleasure_?

In that way you would have avoided the estranging conception of s.e.xual life in the tiniest child." I have nothing to say against organic pleasure; I know that the most extreme excitement of the s.e.xual union is only an organic pleasure derived from the activity of the genitals. But can you tell me when this organic pleasure, originally not differentiated, acquires the s.e.xual character that it undoubtedly does possess in the later phases of development? Do you know more about the "organic pleasure" than about s.e.xuality? You will answer, the s.e.xual character is acquired when the genitals begin to play their role; s.e.xual means genital. You will even reject the contrary evidence of the perversions by confronting me with the statement that in most perversions it is a matter of achieving the genital o.r.g.a.s.m, although by other means than a union of the genitals. You would really command a much better position if you did not regard as characteristic of the s.e.xual that untenable relation to reproduction seen in the perversions, if you replaced it by activity of the genitals. Then we no longer differ very widely; the genital organs merely replace other organs. What do you make of the numerous practices which show you that the genitals may be represented by other organs in the attainment of gratification, as is the case in the normal kiss, or the perverse practices of "fast life,"

or the symptoms of hysteria? In these neuroses it is quite usual for stimulations, sensations and innervations, even the process of erection, which is localized in the genitals, to be transferred to other distant parts of the body, so that you have nothing to which you can hold as characteristics of the s.e.xual. You will have to decide to follow my example and expand the designation "s.e.xual" to include the strivings of early childhood toward organic pleasure.

Now, for my justification, I should like you to give me the time for two more considerations. As you know, we call the doubtful and indefinable pleasure activities of earliest childhood s.e.xual because our a.n.a.lysis of the symptoms leads us to them by way of material that is undeniably s.e.xual. We admit that it need not for that reason in itself be s.e.xual.

But take an a.n.a.logous case. Suppose there were no way to observe the development of two dicotyledonous plants from their seeds--the apple tree and the bean. In both cases, however, imagine it possible to follow their evolution from the fully developed plant backwards to the first seedling with two leaf-divisions. The two little leaves are indistinguishable, in both cases they look exactly alike. Shall I conclude from this that they really are the same and that the specific differences between an apple tree and bean plant do not appear until later in the history of the plant? Or is it biologically more correct to believe that this difference is already present in the seedling, although the two little leaves show no differences? We do the same thing when we term as s.e.xual the pleasure derived from the activities of the suckling. Whether each and every organic enjoyment may be called s.e.xual, or if besides the s.e.xual there is another that does not deserve this name, is a matter I cannot discuss here. I know too little about organic pleasure and its conditions, and will not be at all surprised if the retrogressive character of the a.n.a.lysis leads us back finally to a generalized factor.

One thing more. You have on the whole gained very little for what you are so anxious to maintain, the s.e.xual purity of the child, even when you can convince me that the activities of the suckling had better not be called s.e.xual. For from the third year on, there is no longer any doubt concerning the presence of a s.e.xual life in the child. At this time the genitals already begin to become active; there is perhaps regularly a period of infantile masturbation, in other words, a gratification by means of the genitals. The psychic and social expressions of the s.e.xual life are no longer absent; choice of an object, affectionate preference for certain persons, indeed, a leaning toward one of the two s.e.xes, jealousy--all these have been established independently by unprejudiced observation, prior to the advent of psychoa.n.a.lysis, and confirmed by every careful observer. You will say that you had no doubt as to the early awakening of affection, you will take issue only with its s.e.xual nature. Children between the ages of three and eight have already learned to hide these things, but if you look sharply you can always gather sufficient evidence of the "s.e.xual"

purpose of this affection. What escapes you will be amply supplied by investigation. The s.e.xual goals of this period of life are most intimately connected with the contemporaneous s.e.xual theories, of which I have given you some examples. The perverse nature of some of these goals is the result of the const.i.tutional immaturity of the child, who has not yet discovered the goal of the act of copulation.

From about the sixth or the eighth year on a pause in, and reversion of, s.e.xual development is noticeable, which in the cases that reach the highest cultural standard deserves the name of a latent period. The latent period may also fail to appear and there need not be an interruption of s.e.xual activity and s.e.xual interests at any period. Most of the experiences and impulses prior to the latent period then fall victim to the infantile amnesia, the forgetting we have already discussed, which cloaks our earliest childhood and makes us strangers to it. In every psychoa.n.a.lysis we are confronted with the task of leading this forgotten period of life back into memory; one cannot resist the supposition that the beginning of s.e.xual life it contains furnishes the motive for this forgetting, namely, that this forgetting is a result of suppression.

The s.e.xual life of the child shows from the third year that it has much in common with that of the adult; it is distinguished from the latter, as we already know, by the lack of stable organization under the primacy of the genitals, by the unavoidable traits of perversion, and, naturally, by the far lesser intensity of the whole impulse.

Theoretically the most interesting phases of the s.e.xual development or, as we would rather say, the libido-development, so far as theory is concerned, lie back of this period. This development is so rapidly gone through that perhaps it would never have been possible for direct observation to grasp its fleeting pictures. Psychoa.n.a.lytic investigation of the neuroses has for the first time made it possible to discover more remote phases of the libido-development. These are, to be sure, nothing but constructions, but if you wish to carry on psychoa.n.a.lysis in a practical way you will find that they are necessary and valuable constructions. You will soon understand why pathology may disclose conditions which we would have overlooked in the normal object.