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 paper is to define a perverse structure without falling back on sexual behavior in the strictest sense. Two drive models and the theory of affect serve as a starting point for this investigation. The definition of drives presented in this paper is not based on the erogenous zones but on the notion of instinct and the genital principle. Krause defines both the instinct and the genital principle as the “mute” organizational framework of behavior comprising the following elements: motivation, desire (Appetenz), and terminal action. He regards affects as being wishes which the subject can express vis-à-vis the object. Thus, he regards affects as belonging to the field of desire. As a result of these observations, he considers perverse structures as being “impossible combinations” of affect/desire on the one hand and terminal action on the other. Examples of such impossible combinations are disgust/ lust, fear/lust, or anger/lust. All these combinations are used by patients to protect and preserve their identity. They define their identity via a sexualized body image. This behavior is a result of the patients' learning history during which some parts of their body image have been erased as a result of social referencing during drive interactions, such as the handling of the genital area in cleanliness education. He elucidates the assumptions put forward in this paper by citing episodes from cases and by comparing them with those described by other authors. He discusses addictions, bulimia, and anorexia as being closely related nonsexual perverse structures. Finally, he provides some treatment recommendations with a view to the handling of the repetition compulsion centered around disgust themes.