Three Contributions to the Theory of Sex quotes

… attraction emanates the sexual object, and the action towards which the impulse strives the sexual aim, then the scientifically examined experience shows us many deviations in reference to both sexual object and sexual aim, the relations of which to the accepted standard require thorough investigation.

The popular theory of the sexual impulse corresponds closely to the poetic fable of dividing the person into two halves—man and woman—who strive to become reunited through love.

It is therefore very surprising to hear that there are men for whom the sexual object is not woman but man, and that there are women for whom it is not man but woman. Such persons are called contrary sexuals, or better, inverts;

We are thus instructed to separate this connection between the impulse and the object.

The sexual impulse is probably entirely independent of its object and is not originated by the stimuli proceeding from the object.

Whereas those sexual inverts whose sexual object does not belong to the normally adapted sex, appear to the observer as a collective number of perhaps otherwise normal individuals, the persons who choose for their sexual object the sexually immature (children) are apparently from the first …

The same overestimation spreads over the psychic sphere and manifests itself as a logical blinding (diminished judgment) in the face of the psychic attainments and perfections of the sexual object, as well as a blind obedience to the judgments issuing from the latter.

The full faith of love thus becomes an important, if not the primordial source of authority.

[14]

In the latter exception we find the connection with the normal. He who abhors the former as perversions, though these since antiquity have been common practices among mankind, yields to a distinct feeling of loathing which protects him from adopting such sexual aims.

The limit of such loathing is frequently purely conventional; he who kisses fervently the lips of a pretty girl will perhaps be able to use her tooth brush only with a sense of loathing, though there is no reason to assume that his own oral cavity for which he entertains no loathing is cleaner than that of the girl.

Our attention is here called to the factor of loathing which stands in the way of the libidinous overestimation of the sexual aim, but which may in turn be vanquished by the libido.

The manner in which the libidinous excitement is frequently awakened is by the optical impression, and selection takes account of this circumstance—if this teleological mode of thinking be permitted—by making the sexual object a thing of beauty.

The covering of the body, which keeps abreast with civilization, serves to arouse sexual inquisitiveness, which always strives to restore for itself the sexual object by uncovering the hidden parts.

This can be turned into the artistic ("sublimation") if the interest is turned from the genitals to the form of the body.[20] The tendency to linger at this intermediary sexual aim of the sexually accentuated looking is found to a certain degree in most normals;

In these cases a piece of psychic work has been accomplished in which, in spite of its gruesome success, the value of an idealization of the impulse can not be disputed.

The omnipotence of love nowhere perhaps shows itself stronger than in this one of her aberrations.

The highest and the lowest everywhere in sexuality hang most intimately together. ("From heaven through the world to hell.")

The omnipotence of love nowhere perhaps shows itself stronger than in this one of her aberrations.

The highest and the lowest everywhere in sexuality hang most intimately together.

("From heaven through the world to hell.")

The symptoms are therefore partially formed at the cost of abnormal sexuality.

The neurosis is, so to say, the negative of the perversion.

[25]

This is not only because neurotics represent a very large proportion of humanity, but we must consider also that the neuroses in all their gradations run in an uninterrupted series to the normal state.

Moebius was quite justified in saying that we are all somewhat hysterical.

Hence, the very wide dissemination of perversions urged us to assume that the predisposition to perversions is no rare peculiarity but must form a part of the normally accepted constitution.

Note 13: The most pronounced difference between the sexual life (Liebesleben) of antiquity and ours lies in the fact that the ancients placed the emphasis on the impulse itself, while we put it on its object.

The ancients extolled the impulse and were ready to ennoble through it even an inferior object, while we disparage the activity of the impulse as such and only countenance it on account of the merits of the object.

Note 14:

indeed we are told that we have uttered remarks which proved to grown-ups that we possessed understanding and a budding power of judgment. Still we know nothing of all this when we become older.

Why does our memory lag behind all our other psychic activities?

We really have reason to believe that at no time of life are we more capable of impressions and reproductions than during the years of childhood.[3]

… can only be explained by the fact that the individual already possesses a sum of recollections which have been withdrawn from conscious disposal and which by associative connection now seize that which is acted upon by the repelling forces of the repression emanating from consciousness.[4]

We may say that without infantile amnesia there would be no hysterical amnesia.

I believe that the infantile amnesia which causes the individual to look upon his childhood as if it were a prehistoric time and conceals from him the beginning of his own sexual life—that this amnesia is responsible for the fact that one does not usually …

To be sure, the gratification of the erogenous zone was at first united with the gratification of taking nourishment.

He who sees a satiated child sink back from the mother's breast, and fall asleep with reddened cheeks and blissful smile, will have to admit that this picture remains as typical of the expression of sexual gratification in later life.

But the desire for repetition of the sexual gratification is separated from the desire for taking nourishment; a separation which becomes unavoidable with the appearance of the teeth when the nourishment is no longer sucked in but chewed.

It does not, however, appear so certain whether the character of the pleasurable feeling evoked by the stimulus can be designated as "peculiar," and in what part of this peculiarity the sexual factor exists.

Psychology is still groping in the dark when it concerns matters of pleasure and pain, and the most cautious assumption is therefore the most advisable.

We may perhaps later come upon reasons which seem to support the peculiar quality of the sensation of pleasure.

but along with the erogenous sexual activity they are noticeable even in the infantile years as separate and independent strivings.

The little child is above all shameless, and during its early years it evinces definite pleasure in displaying its body and especially its sexual organs.

A counterpart to this desire which is to be considered as perverse, the curiosity to see other persons' genitals, probably appears first in the later years of childhood when the hindrance of the feeling of shame has already reached a certain development.

… of the Infantile Sexual Investigation.—It can be stated in general about the infantile sexual theories that they are reproductions of the child's own sexual constitution, and that despite their grotesque mistakes they evince more understanding of the sexual processes than is credited to their creators.

Children also perceive the pregnancy of the mother and know how to interpret it correctly; the stork fable is very often related before auditors who confront it with a deep, but mostly mute suspicion.

But as two elements remain unknown to the infantile sexual investigation, namely, the rôle of the propagating semen and the female genital opening—precisely the same points in which the infantile organization is still backward—the effort of the infantile investigator regularly remains fruitless, and ends in …

The normality of the sexual life is guaranteed only by the exact concurrence of the two streams directed to the sexual object and sexual aim.

It is like the piercing of a tunnel from opposite sides.

The new sexual aim in the man consists in the discharging of the sexual products; it is not contradictory to the former sexual aim, that of obtaining pleasure;

it is not contradictory to the former sexual aim, that of obtaining pleasure; on the contrary, the highest amount of pleasure is connected with this final act in the sexual process.

The sexual impulse now enters into the service of the function of propagation; it becomes, so to say, altruistic.

If this transformation is to succeed its process must be adjusted to the original dispositions and all the peculiarities of the impulses.

The sexual impulse later regularly becomes autoerotic, and only after overcoming the latency period is there a resumption of the original relation. It is not without good reason that the suckling of the child at its mother's breast has become a model for every amour.

The object-finding is really a re-finding.

[5]

The sexual impulse later regularly becomes autoerotic, and only after overcoming the latency period is there a resumption of the original relation.

It is not without good reason that the suckling of the child at its mother's breast has become a model for every amour.

The object-finding is really a re-finding.[5]

she pats it, kisses it, and rocks it, plainly taking it as a substitute for a full-valued sexual object.[6]

The mother would probably be terrified if it were explained to her that all her tenderness awakens the sexual impulse of her child and prepares its future intensity.

She considers her actions as asexually "pure" love, for she carefully avoids causing more irritation to the genitals of the child than is indispensable in caring for the body.

Infantile Fear.—The children themselves behave from their early childhood as if their attachment to their foster-parents were of the nature of sexual love.

The fear of children is originally nothing but an expression for the fact that they miss the beloved person.

They therefore meet every stranger with fear, they are afraid of the dark because they cannot see the beloved person, and are calmed if they can grasp that person's hand.

It is not easy to estimate the effectiveness of the constitutional and of the occasional factors in their relation to each other.

Theory is always inclined to overestimate the first while therapeutic practice renders prominent the significance of the latter.

By no means should it be forgotten that between the two there exists a relation of coöperation and not of exclusion.

"Aunt, talk to me, I am afraid because it is dark." "How will that help you," answered the aunt; "you cannot see anyhow." "That's nothing," answered the child; "if some one talks then it becomes light."—

He was, as we see, not afraid of the darkness but he was afraid because he missed the person he loved, and he could promise to calm down as soon as he was assured of her presence.

Note 8: Cf. here what was said on page 83 concerning the object selection of the child; the "tender stream."