You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
Married couples and lovers frequently have pet names for each other, although the society does not call for it and may even subject it to ridicule. The phenomenon in general, and the choice of names by a particular couple, are spontaneous expressions of psychic needs.
Pet names assure the users that the selves they are with each other are not identical with their general social selves, or even with their selves among friends. The culture recognizes three levels of intimacy: (1) That of acquaintances who use last names (though modern business relationships are exploiting the emotional connotations of first names;) (2) Friends who use first names; (3) and of lovers, who spontaneously evolve pet names. Because of this meaning of pet names, quarreling couples drop them, or use them with embarrassment or sarcastic intent.
The dynamic basis of the separation of the different Egos one is with acquaintances, friends, and lovers, is as follows: (1) The first name is identified with narcissistic cathexes, which can be shared with friends of similar interests and temperament. (2) Use of the last name in more socially distant situations protects this Ego from being “called out,” as it were, and involved beyond the capacities of the relationship for empathetic satisfactions. (3) The pet name protects the special libidinal Egos of the lovers by proclaiming their differentness from other Egos—thus it is most frequently used in moments of intimacy—but also protects the narcissistic first name's Egos against total self-surrender in the relationship. Thus the pet name is less as well as more intimate than the first name—it involves less of the total self but allows more libidinal intensity. Use of first names in moments of libidinal intensity may be less of a slight than an embarrassment, a self-exposure. It is for this reason too