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.
The purpose of this article is to study in the clinic the incidence of so-called perverse phenomena in relationships, in order to find out when these phenomena depend on a perverse organization and when they are only a kind of erotic game between the couple, in both hetero-and homosexual aspects. The first difficulty was to find a definition of “perversion” shared by the authors who have carried out research on the subject and consequently to determine what characterizes a perverse marital bond. In contrast to neurosis, which can be defined by the use of the repression mechanism, the mechanism of disavowal is not exclusive for perversion since it can be found even in other psychical arrangements. Is it, then, a structure or a psychological organization? It is also considered to be a “truth” in psychoanalysis that the pervert cannot be analyzed. But is it the pervert who cannot be analyzed, or is it the analyst who cannot bear listening to him? Do the theoretical references of the analyst not give sufficient theoretical support to maintain his listening? This paper presents the hypothesis that perversion is an attempt - always a frustrated one, and for this reason indefinitely repeated - to elaborate a trauma in which the pervert, identified with the traumatic agent, touches a point equally traumatic for his partner, turning the partner into an object of enjoyment. This arrangement allows the pervert, at least in his imagination, to leave the suffered trauma behind, adopting towards the object a position of activity and domination. Identifying with the aggressor, he leaves his partner paralyzed in the traumatic point, a situation that he knows all too well.