Full text unavailable
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.
IJP Open discussion
To comment on IJP Open, you have automatically been assigned a Disqus profile. You can view and contribute to article discussions by clicking on the Discuss icon located in the left toolbar.
Abstract
The author proposes a consideration of the above question by means of literature review.
‘Sexualisation’ has been under-studied as a topic. The author examines the published views on the metapsychology of sexualisation, contrasting and comparing their descriptions, and at each step assessing whether the views lend weight to either argument (defence or not). Along the way a case is built for the author's own personal view.
The direction of the arguments mirror the direction of metapsychological change over the years: Freudian/drive theories to Classical/Self to Kleinian/Bionic/Object Relations and thence to French/Lacanian ‘returns’. The author hopes to build some bridges between these ‘meta’ stances, and also hold in mind the relationship between ‘psychosis’ and perversion.
The author ventures that perversion is indubitably intervolved with psychosis: a retreat or a ‘stall’ on the path to psychotic oblivion, with deathly ‘attacks’ on connecting - for the pervert ‘freezing’ rather than annihilating. Like a piece of glass exposed to extremes of environmental heat and cold, splintering into a perversity, rather than the full ‘shatter’ of psychosis.
The paper serves as a preliminary theoretical overview, hoping to introduce a later paper of clinical material from a patient who vacillated between psychotic and perverse states.