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.
A minor criticism which could be made of this essay is that it suggests that there is little analytic material available on the subject, revealing an incomplete survey of the literature. This general comment applies to all polemical authors. It is as if
they have to establish the fact that little or nothing has been written on a subject in order to justify its study. In this case a review of Abraham's work on anal sadism, Bettelheim's book on how to handle a Nazi, or my own past comments in The Psychoanalytic Forum on concentration camps might have been useful. On the whole, however, Dr. Asch accomplishes his aim of “provoking thought” very well, and I found the essay quite stimulating.
Proceeding with this Socratic approach, let us first examine the premise that superego and society are “not at all the same.” Putting aside the possibility of a visitation from God, where does Dr. Asch suppose conforming parents get their standards from? There is a profound relationship between group (societal) and personal (parental) superego which many writers (among them, Lindner and Waelder) have pursued, including this discussant in papers on “groupicide” and “psycholdanalysis” (sic).
The most provocative analytic hot potato Dr. Asch drops in one's lap is his observation concerning the relationship between the diffuse nature of the female superego and the low incidence of female crime. Freud commented on the former, but I am unaware of anyone ever before contrasting this with the latter. If Dr. Asch is right, the committing of crimes, especially the more serious crimes of violence, has much less to do with the cultural whims of the superego and much more to do with sexual disposition than we have heretofore believed. I first became intrigued with this subject many years ago when, as chief psychiatrist at a women's state prison, I became very much aware that man's potential for destructive behavior was markedly different quantitatively and qualitatively from woman's. This subjec