Mellor Aggrawal Hickey SP.Pdf

Home , Lee Mellor, Necrophilia, Somnophilia

FIRST EDITION

UNDERSTANDING NECROPHILIA A Global Multidisciplinary Approach

EDITED BY

LEE MELLOR, ANIL AGGRAWAL, AND ERIC HICKEY Bassim Hamadeh, CEO and Publisher Kassie Graves, Director of Acquisitions Jamie Giganti, Senior Managing Editor Jess Estrella, Senior Graphic Designer Kristina Stolte, Senior Field Acquisitions Editor Gem Rabanera, Project Editor Elizabeth Rowe, Licensing Coordinator Allie Kiekhofer, Associate Editors

Copyright © 2017 by Cognella, Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reprinted, reproduced, transmit- ted, or utilized in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying, microfilming, and recording, or in any information retrieval system without the written permission of Cognella, Inc.

Trademark Notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe.

Printed in the United States of America

ISBN: 978-1-63189-968-3 (pbk) / 978-1-63189-969-0 (br) For my dear friend and confidante Stephenie Burke, whose support and good humour have meant so much to me over the years. As a registered nurse, she has saved the lives of countless people, cared for them in their final days, and comforted the grieving relatives of the deceased. I am so very proud to call you a friend, Steph.

—Lee Mellor

To Surya and Monica For their love and affection

—Anil Aggrawal TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABOUT THE COEDITORS ��XI

ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS ��XIII

INTRODUCTION ��XXI

Part I. Descriptive and Legal Issues 1

Chapter 01 Defining Necrophilia ��3 By Jason C. Crow

Chapter 02 Wider Shades of Pale: Expanding the Necrophilic Behavioral Spectrum ��13 By Lee Mellor

Chapter 03 Mincing Words: Refining the Language and Interpretation of Mutilation ��25 By Lee Mellor

Chapter 04 The History of Necrophilia Laws Internationally ��41 By Anil Aggrawal

Chapter 05 Laws Pertaining to Necrophilia Within the United States ��49 By Cody N. Charette vi UNDERSTANDING NECROPHILIA

Chapter 06 Dead Inside: Female Necrophilia, UK Law, and the Penetration Paradox ��67 By Carla Valentine

Part II. Cultural Aspects: A Global Approach 79

Chapter 07 Chinese Ghost Marriage ��81 By Heng Choon (Oliver) Chan, Emma L. W. Wong, and Harriet H. Y. Yuen

Chapter 08 No Necrophilia Please, We’re British ��87 By Jason Roach

Chapter 09 A Brief History of the Online Death Fetish Community ��103 By Victoria Hartmann

Chapter 10 Necrophilia in Literature, Poetry, and Narrative Prose ��107 By Michael Arntfield

Chapter 11 Why Is Romance DEAD? “Neo-necrophilia” and the Rise in Romantic Revenants ��119 By Carla Valentine

Chapter 12 Putrefying Venus: A Perspective on the Necrophilic Undercurrents in Art ��123 By David Gough

Chapter 13 Necrosexuality in Film ��127 By Patricia MacCormack

Chapter 14 Objects of Desire: Necroeroticism in Mainstream Pornography ��137 By Erica L. Wright CONTENTS vii

Chapter 15 Pseudonecrophilia and Popular Print Media: When Girls Meet Corpses ��151 By Bethany K. Walters and Eric W. Hickey, with Robert “Corpsy” Rhine

Chapter 16 New Media and Necrophilia ��159 By Michael Arntfield

Chapter 17 Transcending and Subjugating Death in Necrophilic Death Metal: Examining the Ethos of Abjection and Sex Pollution in a Niche Cultural Art Form ��171 By Vivek Venkatesh, Jason Wallin, Natalie Walschots, Jason Netherton, and Jeffrey Podoshen

Part III. Etiology and Evolution 181

Chapter 18 A Neuroscientific Perspective on Morbid Paraphilias ��183 By Jens Foell and Christopher J. Patrick

Chapter 19 Necrophilia-Spectrum Behavior and the Thematic–Derivative Model of Sexual Progression ��203 By Lee Mellor

Chapter 20 Windows into the Crypt: Proposing a “Scale of Sexual Animation” ��221 By Dallas Drake

Chapter 21 The Etiology and Nature of Necrophiliac Offending ��235 By Julian Boon

Chapter 22 The Five Allures of Necrophilia ��249 By Lee Mellor

Chapter 23 Homicidal Necrophilia ��259 By Jerrod Brown, Pamela Oberoi, Rachel Tiede, Sarah Herrick, and Jeffrey Long-McGie viii UNDERSTANDING NECROPHILIA

Chapter 24 Necrophilia, Cannibalism, and Other Paraphilias Among Serial Killers ��271 By Michael H. Stone

Part IV. Forensic Investigations and Treatment 281

Chapter 25 Medical Investigation of Necrophilia ��283 By Anil Aggrawal

Chapter 26 Enhancing the Identification, Assessment, and Diagnosis of Necrophilia and Other Related Paraphilic Disorders ��289 By Christopher D. Kunkle

Chapter 27 Cognitive—Behavioral Case Conceptualization for Assessment and Treatment of Necrophilia ��301 By Andrew E. Brankley, Alasdair M. Goodwill, and Jeffrey Abracen

Chapter 28 Typologies of Necrophilia ��319 By Anil Aggrawal

Chapter 29 Sexual Homicide Involving Necrophilia ��331 By Louis B. Schlesinger, Michelle L. Stein, and Anthony J. Pinizzotto

Chapter 30 Necrophilia in Armed Conflict ��343 By Joan Swart

Part V. Case Studies and Interviews 355

Chapter 31 Necrophilia: The Case of François Bertrand, the “Vampire of Montparnasse” ��357 By Peter Vronsky CONTENTS ix

Chapter 32 The NecroErotic: Modern-Day Necrophilia ��367 By The Michigan Ghoul

Chapter 33 Necro-files: Interviews with People in Love with the Dead ��377 By Katherine Ramsland

Chapter 34 Deathwork: Unmasking G. J. Schaefer, the “Butcher of Blind Creek” ��387 By Michael Newton

Chapter 35 The Case of Jeffrey Dahmer and Homicidal Necrophilia: Application of the Diathesis-Stress Model and Relational Paraphilic Attachments ��399 By Bethany K. Walters and Eric W. Hickey

Chapter 36 Stewart “Boetie Boer” Wilken: Serial Murder, Necrophilia, and Cannibalism: A South African Case Study ��411 Gerard Labuschagne

Chapter 37 Lam Kor-Wan: “The Jars Murderer” of Hong Kong ��419 By Heng Choon (Oliver) Chan ABOUT THE COEDITORS

Lee Mellor is the author of Cold North Killers: Canadian Serial Murder and Rampage: Canadian Mass Murder and Spree Killing and editor in chief of the esteemed true crime magazine Serial Killer Quarterly. A PhD student at Montreal’s Concordia University, where he teaches a class on social deviance, Mellor examines violent offenders using a combined psychological and sociological approach. His forthcoming dissertation looks at what he has termed “expressive/transformative” violence: acts of brutality that serve as a form of communication and identity negotiation for the perpetrator. He has con- tributed essays to the emerging field of literary criminology in The Criminal Humanities: An Introduction (2016), and has penned chapters on sexually sadistic, necrophilic, and psychopathic offenders for Homicide: A Forensic Psychology Casebook (2016), which he also co-edited. Mellor has appeared on numerous television and radio programs, worked as a criminal profiler, and is chair of the American Investigative Society of Cold Cases’ academic consulting committee. He has acted as a consultant to police on three cold cases—including a series of sexual homicides—in which necrophilic behavior has been evident or strongly suspected.

Dr. Anil Aggrawal obtained his MD in forensic medicine and toxicology from the All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, and then proceeded to Edinburgh— traditionally regarded as the home of forensic medicine—for higher training. He was trained further in Japan and the United States under the prestigious WHO fellowship. His main field of interest is paraphilias, a subject on which he wrote two books: Forensic and Medico–legal Aspects of Sexual Crime and Unusual Sexual Practices (2008) and Necrophilia—Forensic and Medico–legal Aspects (2010), both published by Taylor & Francis. Aggrawal has also written Textbook of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology, a forensic textbook for postgraduate students; and Essentials of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology, a forensic textbook for undergraduate students—both published by Avichal Publishing Company in India. In both these books, he deals with paraphilias in some detail. Aggrawal currently teaches forensic medicine, including forensic psychology, to undergraduate and postgraduate students at the Maulana Azad Medical College, New Delhi, and edits a peer-reviewed Internet journal on this subject at anilaggrawal.com.

xi xii UNDERSTANDING NECROPHILIA

Dr. Eric Hickey is a professor of forensic psychology at Walden University and Editor-in-Chief of The Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology. A former dean of forensic studies at Alliant International University and professor Emeritus at California State University-Fresno, Hickey has taught many courses involving the psychology of crime, serial and mass murder, profiling sexual predators, crime scene investigations, victimology, criminal personalities, threat assessment, and school and workplace violence prevention. Hickey has considerable field experience working with the criminally insane, psychopaths, sex offenders, and other habitual criminals. He consults with private agencies and testifies as an expert witness in both criminal and civil cases. He is a court-qualified expert in criminal paraphilia, including pedophilia, child molestation, and fetishes; stalking; adult rape and sexual assault; and violent criminal behavior, including robbery, burglary, and homicide (solo and serial). His current research focuses upon the development of his theory of relational paraphilic attachment and sexual predators. His expertise is regularly sought by the media, including appearances on CNN, Fox News, History Channel, NPR, Larry King Live, 20/20, A&E Biography, Oxygen, Good Morning America, CBC, truTV, Discovery, BBC, OWN, and TLC. Hickey has published several books and articles on the etiology of violence and serial crime. His most frequently cited book, Serial Murderers and Their Victims (7th ed., 2015; Cengage Learning), is used as a teaching tool in universities and by law enforcement in studying the nature of violence, criminal personalities, and victim- offender relationships. ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS

Jeffrey Abracen, PhD, serves as a psychologist at the Correctional Service of Canada.

Michael Arntfield, PhD, is an associate professor in the Department of English and Writing Studies at Western University (Canada), where he specializes in literary criminology and forensic writing. He is also a previous visiting Fulbright Chair at Vanderbilt University (United States), specializing in law and literature, is a fellow with the Center for Research in Forensic Semiotics at the University of Toronto (Canada), and is coeditor of Peter Lang’s criminal humanities and forensic semiotics collection. A former police officer with more than 15 years’ experience across myriad areas of investigative and analytical specialization, he sits on both the law enforcement and academic com- mittees of the American Investigative Society of Cold Cases, he is co-director of the Murder Accountability Project in Washington DC, and regularly serves as an investigative consultant for government, industry, and media.

Julian Boon is a British Chartered Forensic Psychologist who has worked in the field of Psychological Profiling, Crime Assessment and Offender Assessment for over thirty years. In those capacities he has worked on hundreds of serious crime cases with Police Constabularies in the UK and has also been invited to contribute to investigations in other parts of Europe, Scandinavia, and North America. His specialist area is personality development and its mental and behavioural manifestations in individuals from their childhoods, through adolescence, and on to adulthood. He is currently Honorary Senior Lecturer in Forensic Psychology at the University of Leicester. In addition he is a member of the specialist cadre of forensic experts appointed to advise on serious cases by the U.K.s National Crime Agency.

Andrew E. Brankley, MA, is a doctoral student in the Clinical Psychology program at Ryerson University, Toronto. His research has focused on improving the accuracy of risk assessments for violent or sexual offending and how that risk is communicated. He is also the founder and director of Youth Psychology Service.

xiii xiv UNDERSTANDING NECROPHILIA

Jerrod Brown, MA, MS, MS, MS, is the treatment director for Pathways Counseling Center, Inc. Pathways provides programs and services benefiting individuals impacted by mental illness and addictions. Brown is also the founder and CEO of the American Institute for the Advancement of Forensic Studies; lead developer and program director of an online graduate degree program in forensic mental health from Concordia University in St. Paul, Minnesota; and the editor in chief of Forensic Scholars Today.

Cody Charette holds a PhD from the Psychology, Policy, and Law program of the California School of Forensic Studies at Alliant International University in Fresno, California. He specializes in threat assessment, deception detection, intelligence analysis, and the use of technology for indirect assessment of offenders. Charette has made acknowledged contributions regarding school shooting incidents to Dr. Eric Hickey’s Serial Murderers and Their Victims, 6th edition. He also assisted with prerelease editing of cryptographer, computer security, and privacy specialist Bruce Schneier’s recent publications, Liars and Outliers: Enabling the Trust That Society Needs to Thrive and Data and Goliath: The Hidden Battles to Collect Your Data and Control Your World, regarding the psychological theory behind human behavior as it relates to trust systems in society. In addition to his degrees in psychology, Charette holds a bachelor’s of science in business information systems with a mathematics minor and an MBA in marketing, both from California State University in Fresno.

Heng Choon (Oliver) Chan is an assistant professor of criminology at City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, SAR. He received his PhD in Criminology from the University of South Florida and was the recipient of the 2012 Outstanding Criminology Ambassador Award. In 2014, Chan has been awarded the honorary title - Early Career Award - by the Hong Kong Research Grants Council of University Grant Committee. His research focuses on sexual homicide, offender profiling, sexual offending, homicide, stalking behavior, and criminological issues related to the Asian population. Chan has published extensively in the area of sexual homicide, including his most recent single-authored research monograph, Understanding sexual homicide offenders: An integrated approach published by Palgrave Macmillan in 2015.

Jason Crow, PhD, is the clinical services manager of Aegis Treatment Centers, LLC, and also serves as an adjunct faculty member for the California School of Forensic Studies at Alliant International University. He earned his PhD in forensic psychology with an emphasis on psychology, policy, and law in 2012. His primary research interests center on human compulsion, with a particular interest in addiction, sexuality, sex crimes, and paraphilia.

Steve Daniels is a charter member and past president of the Wisconsin Association of Homicide Investigators. He is also the chair of that association’s cold case review team.

Dallas S. Drake is the principal researcher and cofounder at the Center for Homicide Research in Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Jens Foell, PhD studied psychology in Germany, received a PhD in neuropsychology from the University of Heidelberg, and has since relocated to Florida State University in Tallahassee. His main research methods ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS xv

focus on neuroimaging and psychophysiology, such as functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and electroencephalography (EEG), while his research topics range from individual personality characteristics, emotion processing, and psychopathy to body perception, chronic pain, and sensory illusions. His work on the use of fMRI to investigate the mechanisms behind a treatment for phantom limb pain has been recognized with a major pain-research award.

Robert Fusfeld is a retired probation and parole agent from the Wisconsin Department of Corrections, where he supervised high-risk sex offenders, facilitated the violent offenders’ treatment group, served on the Security Threat Groups task force, and was a member of the gang task force.

Alasdair M. Goodwill, PhD, is the Director of the Criminal Investigative Research and Analysis Group and an Associate Professor of psychology at Ryerson University in Toronto.

Victoria Hartmann, PhD, MPH, ACS, is a board-certified clinical sexologist and executive director of the Erotic Heritage Museum in Las Vegas. She also serves on the board of directors for the World Erotic Museum Consortium. She is a workshop facilitator, researcher, speaker, consultant on women’s sexuality, and an advocate for transgender and sex worker rights. Hartmann spent 4½ years working with survivors of sexual assault and has also trained in crisis and counseling centers serving the homeless and those with chronic drug/alcohol addictions. She has spent more than 15 years investigating paraphilic behavior.

David Van Gough is an artist whose style is Necrorealism. Originally from Liverpool, England he now lives and works in California.

Sarah Herrick, MA, LP, LPCC, CCFC, has worked with sexual abusers ranging in age from 10 to elderly since 1991, in residential, community mental health, and secured settings. Currently, she is working with civilly committed sexual abusers and is an adjunct professor with Concordia University’s (St. Paul, Minnesota) Forensic Mental Health online graduate program.

Christopher Kunkle, PhD, is a forensic psychologist and criminal investigation consultant with nearly 20 years of combined experience in the assessment of violent offenders and the investigation of violent crimes. He has been recognized as a national expert on the assessment and treatment of high-risk sexual offenders and is currently the director of the New York State Sex Offender Civil Commitment Program. Kunkle has published and presented research on violent offenders and has recently partnered with colleagues at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice to study victimology and crime patterns among serial sexual offenders. He has served on the faculty at the College of St. Rose in Albany, New York, since 2010, where he routinely teaches courses in serial crimes and criminal profiling.

Gérard Labuschagne, PhD, is currently a Director of L&S Threat Management, South Africa’s first sole- purpose threat assessment and management company focusing on workplace violence. Before taking up this position he was the Section Head of the South African Police Service’s (SAPS) Investigative Psychology xvi UNDERSTANDING NECROPHILIA

Section (IPS) for 14 years where he resigned on the rank of Brigadier. The IPS is responsible for assisting the SAPS with investigations of psychologically motivated crimes such as serial sex offences. He is a clinical psychologist with the Health Professions Council of South Africa, a Criminologist with the Criminological Society of Sothern Africa, and an admitted Advocate of the High Court. He is on the editorial board for the Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling and the Journal of Threat Assessment and Management, and a fellow of the International Academy of Investigative Psychology. He is a member of the British Psychological Society, and the International Homicide Investigators Association. He currently holds an Honorary Associate Professorship in the Division of Forensic Medicine and Pathology at The University of the Witwatersrand in Johannesburg, South Africa.

Jeffrey Long-McGie, MA, MBA, is a police officer in Jordan, Minnesota, and a criminal justice graduate student at St. Cloud State University.

Patricia MacCormack is a professor of continental philosophy at Anglia Ruskin University in Cambridge, United Kingdom. She has published many articles on philosophy, feminism, sexuality, the posthuman, animal rights, body modification, and horror film. She is the editor of The Animal Catalyst: Towards Ahuman Theory (2014), the coeditor of Deleuze and the Schizoanalysis of Cinema (2008), and the author of Cinesexuality (2008) and Posthuman Ethics (2012).

Michigan Ghoul published the NecroErotic as a paper magazine from mid-1995 until the summer of 2002 and maintains the NecroErotic blog to this day.

Jason Netherton is the founding member, vocalist, and bass guitarist of the American death grinders Misery Index and a founding ex-member of Dying Fetus. Netherton is originally from Maryland and is currently a PhD candidate in the faculty of Information and Media Studies at the University of Western Ontario in Canada. He has been an active writer on metal and oversees the online metal fanzine archive called Send Back My Stamps!

Michael Newton is an American author of numerous books, both fiction and non-fiction.

Pamela Oberoi, MA, is the director of Refugee and Immigrant Services at Pathways Counseling Center, Inc., where she trains and supervises staff in the provision and delivery of psychological services to refugee and immigrant populations. She also works as a psychotherapist. Oberoi conducts diagnostic assessments, many of which are requested by the court and/or professionals working in the correctional or criminal justice system. She also conducts research for the American Institute for the Advancement of Forensic Studies and has authored and coauthored several articles on topics related to culture, psychology, and forensic aspects of psychology. She provides training on psychological aspects of culture for mental health professionals working in this field. ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS xvii

Christopher J. Patrick is a Professor of Clinical Psychology at Florida State University. His scholarly interests include psychopathy, antisocial behavior, substance abuse, personality, fear and fearlessness, psychophysiology, and affective and cognitive neuroscience. He is author of more than 240 articles and book chapters, and Editor of the Handbook of Psychopathy (Guilford Press, 2006; 2nd ed. in press). A recipient of Early Career awards from the American Psychological Association (APA; 1993) and the Society for Psychophysiological Research (SPR; 1995) and a Lifetime Career Contribution award from the Society for Scientific Study of Psychopathy (SSSP; 2013), Dr. Patrick is a Past President of both SPR and SSSP, and a Fellow of APA and the Association for Psychological Science. He served in 2010 as a Workgroup Member for the National Institute of Mental Health’s Research Diagnostic Criteria (RDoC) initiative, and from 2008-2013 as a Scientific Advisor to the DSM-5 Personality and Personality Disorders (PPD) Work Group. He is currently a member of the American Psychiatric Association’s DSM-5 Review Committee for Externalizing Disorders and Personality Disorders.

Anthony J. Pinizzotto is a Clinical Psychologist, a retired Senior Scientist with the FBI’s Behavioral Science Unit, and the author of multiple publications.

Jeffrey S. Podoshen is an associate professor in the Business, Organizations, and Society Department at Franklin and Marshall College in Lancaster, Pennsylvania. Podoshen’s area of research relates to dark con- sumption and dark tourism practice, and he often blends and bridges theory from a variety of disciplines (such as marketing, social psychology, and sociology) in order to explain phenomena and build theory. One of the early pioneers of the use of netnography in social sciences research, Podoshen utilizes a myriad of mixed- method and cutting-edge qualitative techniques to distill complex data into more easily defined categories that allows for greater introspection on specific subcultures.

Katherine Ramsland, PhD, teaches forensic psychology and criminal justice at DeSales University in Pennsylvania. She has published more than 1,000 articles, stories, and reviews, and 58 books, including The Mind of a Murderer, The Forensic Science of CSI, Inside the Minds of Serial Killers, and The Murder Game. Her book Psychopath was a number one best seller on the Wall Street Journal’s list. She presents workshops to law enforcement, psychologists, coroners, judges, and attorneys, and has consulted for several television series, including CSI and Bones. She also writes a regular blog for Psychology Today called Shadow Boxing and consults for numerous crime documentary production companies.

Robert “Corpsy” Rhine intimately knows about the subject of death, having clinically died at age 10 from a massive skull fracture. Spending fifth grade in the hospital, he survived with 64 stitches in his head. Rhine’s first published book, My Brain Escapes Me (Sun Dog Press), featured an X-ray on the cover with his fractured skull from childhood. He has also sold fiction to more than 100 magazines and a dozen published anthologies, including the Bram Stoker Award–winning Dark Delicacies (Carroll & Graf) alongside Ray Bradbury and Clive Barker. In 2002 Rhine created and became the deaditor in chief of Girls and Corpses Magazine, a globally distributed newsstand publication about the taboo subject of death. xviii UNDERSTANDING NECROPHILIA

Dr. Jason Roach is a chartered psychologist and reader in crime and policing at the Applied Criminology Centre of the University of Huddersfield in the United Kingdom. He is also the director of the Crime and Policing Research Group at the university, which undertakes a broad range of criminological and psychological research for various UK police forces. His research interests are in criminological and forensic psychology, where he has published work on topics such as evolutionary psychology and crime, self-selection policing (identifying serious offenders from minor offenses), criminal investigative practice, police decision making, behavioral analysis, terrorism, violence, homicide, and child murder. Previously, Roach worked as a trainee clinical psychologist, taught and researched at the University of Manchester, and worked as a criminologist for the UK Home Office. He continues to act as an advisor on serious crime, criminality, and investigative practice to several UK police forces.

Louis B. Schlesinger, PhD, is a professor of forensic psychology at John Jay College of Criminal Justice and a diplomat in forensic psychology of the American Board of Professional Psychology. He has published eight books and numerous chapters and articles in peer-reviewed journals on various types of extraordinary crimes.

Michelle Stein is a Clinical Psychologist and currently works at Florida State Hospital.

Michael Stone, PhD, is a professor of clinical psychiatry at Columbia University. His areas of specialty are psychoanalysis, personality disorders, and forensic psychiatry. He is the author or editor of 11 books and the author of more than 250 articles and chapters. He serves as the host of the Discovery Channel program Most Evil, for which he has interviewed serial killers, mass murderers, and other high-profile men and women convicted of serious violent crimes, some of whom exhibited various paraphilias.

Joan Swart, PhD, received her doctorate in forensic psychology at the Eisner Institute for Professional Studies in Encino, California; holds an MS with a forensic psychology specialization at Walden University in Minneapolis, Minnesota; and also holds an MBA. Swart served on the editorial board of the American Psychological Association’s International Journal of Behavioral Consultation and Therapy, is a behavioral science consulting member of the American Investigative Society of Cold Cases, and is editor in chief of the Journal of Cold Case Review. She has published several books, book chapters, and articles in peer-reviewed journals, including a book published by Springer titled Treating Adolescents With Family-Based Mindfulness.

Rachel Tiede, MA, is a clinical trainee therapist for Pathways Counseling Center in St. Paul, Minnesota, where she works with individuals with serious and persistent mental illness as well as chemical dependency issues. Tiede is also a forensic mental health research assistant and professional trainer with the American Institute for the Advancement of Forensic Studies and has conducted trainings for organizations throughout Minnesota. She is also an adjunct instructor at Concordia University in St. Paul.

Carla Valentine is a senior anatomical pathology technician with a degree in forensic and biomolecular science. She spent nearly 10 years assisting at autopsies before becoming the technical curator at Barts Pathology Museum, part of the Queen Mary University School of Medicine and Dentistry in London. She is currently ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS xix

undertaking a part-time MA in museum cultures with a focus on exhibiting the body and working on her dissertation, The Taboo View: Medical Museums, Anatomical Display, and the Sexualised Gaze. As a result, she blogs her sex and death research at http://www.thechickandthedead.com, and her forthcoming book, Past Mortems, will be published in 2017.

Vivek Venkatesh is an associate professor in the Department of Education and the former associate dean (2012–2015) for Academic Programs and Development at the School of Graduate Studies at Concordia University in Montreal, Quebec. Venkatesh is a filmmaker, as well as an interdisciplinary and applied learning scientist who investigates the psychological, cultural, and cognitive factors impacting the design, development, and inclusive adoption of digital media in educational and social contexts. Venkatesh avails of a vast network of international collaborators and works on a series of novel research and research-creation activities, including evaluating innovative technopedagogical practices that foster critical dialogues rooted in citizen education and digital literacy within secondary and postsecondary classroom contexts; developing digital media applications to sensitize and prevent online hate speech among the general public; and curating live artistic performances in the global extreme metal music scene using sounds, texts, and visuals collected via mobile and social media.

Peter Vronsky, PhD, completed his degree at the University of Toronto in the fields of criminal justice history and the history of espionage in international relations. He is currently an investigative historian at Ryerson University in Toronto, where he teaches the history of terrorism, espionage, new military history, and international relations. He is the author of two histories of serial homicide, Serial Killers: The Method and Madness of Monsters and Female Serial Killers: How and Why Women Become Monsters, published by Penguin Group USA; and a military history, Ridgeway: The American Fenian Invasion and the 1866 Battle That Made Canada, from Penguin Random House. Vronsky is currently completing a third volume for Penguin Random House (Berkley Publishing Group) updating recent historical phenomena in serial homicide, Serial Killer Chronicles: A New History and Geography of Monsters, scheduled to be published in 2016–2017. Vronsky’s website is located at http://www.petervronsky.org.

Jason J. Wallin is an associate professor of media and youth culture in curriculum in the Faculty of Education at the University of Alberta, Canada, where he teaches courses in visual art, media studies, popular culture, youth culture, and cultural curriculum theory. He is the author of A Deleuzian Approach to Curriculum: Essays on a Pedagogical Life (Palgrave Macmillan); coauthor of Arts-Based Research: A Critique and Proposal (with Jan Jagodzinski, Sense Publishers); and coeditor of the forthcoming collection Deleuze and Guattari, Politics and Education (with Matthew Carlin, Continuum). Wallin is an assistant editor for the Journal of Curriculum and Pedagogy (Routledge) and reviews editor for Deleuze Studies (Edinburgh University Press).

Natalie Zina Walschots is a freelance writer based in Toronto, Ontario. She is the author of DOOM: Love Poems for Supervillains (Insomniac Press, 2012) and Thumbscrews (Snare Books, 2007), which won the Robert Kroetsch Award for Innovative Poetry. She writes about comic books, video games, combat sports, role-playing games, fan fiction, sadomasochism, feminism, Canadian literature, and difficult music. She is xx UNDERSTANDING NECROPHILIA

currently working on a novel about a henchwoman and a collection of polyamorous fairy tales, and exploring the poetic potential of the notes engine in the video game Bloodborne.

Bethany Walters, MA, is a doctoral student in clinical forensic psychology. Her training and research has focused primarily on psychopathy, personality disorders, violent and sex offenders, and risk assessment. Utilizing a biopsychosocial approach in her work, she has a special interest in genetic and physiological research as it relates to criminology and psychology.

Emma L. W. Wong is a research officer at City University of Hong Kong. She received her bachelor of social sciences (honors) in criminology from City University of Hong Kong and is currently pursuing her master’s degree in social work.

Erica L. Wright holds a masters degree in forensic science from Nebraska Wesleyan University. She is the author of the award-winning thesis Carnage and Carnality: Gender and Corporeality in the Modern Horror Film, first published by the University of Nebraska–Omaha’s journal No Limits! A Journal of Women’s and Gender Studies. Wright was the recipient of the 2011 Nebraska Coalition for Victims of Crime Award of Excellence. Building on her 12 years of experience in victim advocacy, she founded Nemesis Consulting, LLC, in 2011, through which she provides services such as threat assessment, statement analysis, and col- lateral materials analysis. Wright has lectured at academic symposia and universities on a number of subjects, including international crime trends, technology-facilitated stalking, criminal sexuality, occult practices, horror films, and the fabricated snuff film genre. Recently, writers and filmmakers have approached her as a subject matter expert in the above topics.

Harriet H. Y. Yuen is currently a student of bachelor of laws (LLB) at City University of Hong Kong. In addition, she holds a bachelor of social sciences (honors) in criminology from City University of Hong Kong. INTRODUCTION

Necrophilia is one of the darkest forms of paraphilia known to any society. The behavior, in its many forms, carries with it societal taboos, religious denunciations, and criminal penalties. Necrophilia exists because it has and does serve specific needs and wants throughout the world and throughout history. Engaging in sexual gratification, activities, and fantasies with real or pseudo corpses and/or body parts, although repugnant to most, provides a world of escape, security, experimentation, fulfillment, or a sense of malignant power for others. Necrophilic themes have found their way into movies and books to enhance the horror factor, and of course, sales. Given a sustained public interest in zombies and vampires and a cadre of horror movies such as the popular Walking Dead series depicting the dead, an enduring Darkside industry has emerged that embraces death, the dead, the occult, and walking dead. Coupled with Internet access and a myriad of crime shows such as True Detective, Fargo, Criminal Minds, Forensic Files, Dexter, Profiler, CSI, and Cold Case Files, sexual experimentation and increased interest in various forms of paraphilia, pornography, and “obscene” material have become commonplace. Movies such as Love Me Deadly (1973), Kissed (1996), Necrophilia Americana (2006), and Necrophilia: A Love Story (2013) indicate a continued public interest in sexual activities with corpses. Some female sex workers have cashed in on the predilec- tions of men by specializing in specific paraphilia such as necrophilia. In such cases sex workers will perform sexual acts with their clients in graveyards, coffins, or morgues. Men can pay extra for the sex worker to ice herself down, dust on white powder, and climb into a coffin in order for him to crawl in on top of her or vice versa. Some serial killers prefer to create small cemeteries for their victims in order to return later to mutilate and/or have sex with the corpses. Jeffrey Dahmer was known to frequent graveyards after his first kill in hopes of being able to disinter young males who recently died and had been buried. Dahmer voiced his desires to be with someone who had been buried. Other offenders engage in “hot burglaries” or break-ins where they know a person will be inside, usually asleep. Some of these men have reported feeling sexually aroused at watching their victims sleep. This is known as somnophilia and is a precursor to certain forms of necrophilia.

xxi xxii UNDERSTANDING NECROPHILIA

In other cases morticians and lab workers have been caught having sex with corpses they are preparing for burial or examining for evidence. And the list goes on. Yet serious public discussion of necrophilia is a walk on the Darkside that makes most people uncom- fortable, very quickly. Part of this reaction comes from asking sexually “normal” people to imagine what it would be like having sex with a corpse. The “ick factor” response, not surprisingly, is very high. Necrophilia is a process of sexual fantasies and behaviors that crosses a spectrum of acts with the dead. We find them in morgues, funeral parlors, mortuaries, cemeteries, brothels, and hospitals, and chase their shadows at crime scenes. Thus, we are faced with horror and disgust in an array of fantasies and behaviors far more common than we realize. Even more important is to understand the etiology of necrophilia. Participants usually are not mentally ill, meaning they are not schizophrenic or psychotic. They usually do not report hearing voices and, as Jeffrey Dahmer noted upon his arrest, he had lived a pathetic life. What drives a person to desire sexual gratification with a corpse or body parts? Simply because necrophilia rates high in gruesomeness and horror should not preclude scientific inquiry into the phenomenon. To that end, Dr. Anil Aggrawal, a medical pathologist and coeditor of this anthology, produced a scientific study of necrophilia in his book, Necrophilia—Forensic and Medico–legal Aspects in 2010, which was the first standalone book on necrophilia in the world. The text primarily focused on the medico–legal, criminological, psychological, and investigatory aspects of the phenomenon. It is exactly this kind of scientific inquiry that generates further debate and investigation. In 2014 Aggrawal teamed up with coeditors Lee Mellor (Canada) and Dr. Eric Hickey (United States) to collaborate in the development of Understanding Necrophilia: A Global Multidisciplinary Approach, a book that examines necrophilia from international perspectives and one that brings many professional, cultural, social, and legal insights to bear. The purpose of Understanding Necrophilia is to be a complete reference tool for those interested in understanding the dark and often complicated world of necrophilia.Understanding Necrophilia is a broad, interdisciplinary text aimed at students and professional practitioners interested in the intersection of clinical psychology, forensic psychology, abnormal psychology, social psychology, cultural sociology, criminology, criminal justice, forensic anthropology, medical pathology, and legal systems. Understanding Necrophilia is designed for professional practitioners such as psychologists, social workers, law enforcement investigators who work in crime scene investigations, criminologists focusing on sex crimes and homicides, forensic anthropologists, cultural sociologists, psychologists, sex therapists, women’s studies faculty, attorneys, victimologists, and others interested in one of the darkest criminal paraphilia known to mankind. Understanding Necrophilia is also an incredible companion text for faculty teaching specialty courses in sex crimes, investigative behavioral analysis, homicide and crime scene investigation, abnormal psychology, victimization, addictions, or violent crimes. The many talented contributing authors, who come from Australia, Canada, China, England, India, South Africa, and the United States, address a variety of inquiries, including:

• What are the current explanations and theories behind necrophilia or pseudonecrophilic behavior? • What are the psychosocial profiles of persons who engage in necrophilia? • What other paraphilia co-exist within the fantasies and behaviors of a necrophile? • Where are the organizations that support and promote necrophilic acts? INTRODUCTION xxiii

• What is the influence of the entertainment industry on how acts of necrophilia are depicted? How do professional practitioners address the investigations of necrophilic acts, provide treatment, assess punish- ment, and develop interventions to prevent repeat offending? • How might early childhood maltreatment contribute to necrophilia? • What is the etiology of necrophilia? • Are there stages of development in becoming a true necrophile? How do culture, religion, and mental health influence necrophilia? • How do investigators process crime scenes where necrophilic acts may have occurred? • How do legal systems around the world view necrophilia within their own countries? • What is the best way to categorize necrophilic behaviors and fantasies?

Indeed, this text explores all these questions and many, many more. To provide a balanced and applied approach in studying this phenomenon, Understanding Necrophilia offers several cases of necrophilia examined by various local and international experts. The text includes interviews with persons who have practiced necrophilia. The text is divided into several themes: descriptive and legal issues; cultural aspects; etiology and evolution; forensic investigations; typologies and homicide; and case studies, interviews, and forensics. We trust that you will find this to be one of the most compelling and revealing texts ever to be added to your collection of books. PART I DESCRIPTIVE AND LEGAL ISSUES

CHAPTERS

1. Defining Necrophilia, By Jason C. Crow 2. Wider Shades of Pale: Expanding the Necrophilic Behavioral Spectrum, By Lee Mellor 3. Mincing Words: Refining the Language and Interpretation of Mutilation, By Lee Mellor 4. The History of Necrophilia Laws Internationally, By Anil Aggrawal 5. Laws Pertaining to Necrophilia Within the United States, By Cody Charette 6. Dead Inside: Female Necrophilia, UK Law, and the Penetration Paradox, By Carla Valentine 3

CHAPTER Defining Necrophilia 01

BY JASON C. INTRODUCTION CROW Alliant International Necrophilia is a term ascribed to Joseph Guislain (Nobus, 2002). Necro- originates University from the Greek language meaning “death,” “corpse,” or “dead tissue,” and the suffix-philia means “affection,” “fondness,” or “friendship.” Etymological roots of necrophilia make it clear necrophilia represents some type of fondness for the dead. Though not obvious in the etymology of the word, its intended purpose was to express sexual fondness of the dead. The contemporary meaning of necrophilia reflects Guislain’s first use. However, there is contextual nuance in emphases related to the core characteristics of affinity, sexuality, and death. As has been emphasized by Nobus (2002), the conceptual definition of necrophilia has been more conveniently understood etymologically rather than understood in terms of scope and intentions. Definitions, scope, and intent flow from context, which results in variability and multiple definitions. For this chapter, context refers to the use of words to explain a term like necrophilia and to convey a particular meaning. The following paragraphs will illustrate though the core idea of sexuality and death are ever-present in definitions of necrophilia, there is conceptual unevenness in context that constrains a fuller understanding about necrophilia and stifles communication about where it comes from (etiology) and how it exists (ontology). This chapter scrutinizes the denotation and connotation of a sample of several definitions of necrophilia, identifies context as a key challenge to better understanding the phenomenon, and provides rec- ommendations about a way to define necrophilia that better permits clarity and conceptual freedom.

3 4 UNDERSTANDING NECROPHILIA

Complexity in Defining Necrophilia

In the United States the defining body of choice when it comes to sexual variants tends to be the American Psychiatric Association, and a definition of necrophilia is present in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition (DSM-5; American Psychiatric Association, 2013). The authors place necrophilia within the category of Other Specified Paraphilic Disorder. This category contains human sexual variations that meet the criteria for paraphilia as defined within the DSM-5: “The term paraphilia denotes any intense and persistent sexual interest other than sexual interest in genital stimulation or preparatory fondling with phenotypically normal, physically mature, consenting human partners” (American Psychiatric Association, 2013, para. 3). Necrophilia is not given an independent category in the DSM-5 because, according to the authors of the manual, it does not meet the following criteria for independent classification: “they are relatively common, in relation to other paraphilic disorders, and some of them entail actions for their satisfaction that, because of their noxiousness or potential harm to others, are classed as criminal offenses” (American Psychiatric Association, 2013, para. 1). The DSM-5 contains only one reference to necrophilia within the diagnostic language of Other Specified Paraphilic Disorder as an aside containing the word corpses in the second paragraph (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). The etymological core of necro- and -philia is maintained in the DSM-5; with the addition such behavior does not resemble generally acceptable forms of sexuality and is inherently pathological. As will be demonstrated shortly, the DSM-5 definition is similar to the conceptual iterations that came before it, as it relies on psychopathology as the defining context of necrophilia. While the DSM-5 expresses its definition as the absence of socioculturally acceptable sexual states and behaviors, other definitions emphasize the addition of maladaptive characteristics. Krafft-Ebing (1922), one of the earliest to study and write about paraphilias, opined

“this horrible kind of sexual indulgence is so monstrous that the presumption of a psychopathic state is, under all circumstances, justified. … An abnormal and decidedly perverse sensuality is required to overcome the natural repugnance which man has for a corpse, and permit a feeling of pleasure to be experienced in sexual congress with a cadaver” [emphasis added]. (p. 611)

Though he does not provide an explicit definition, the emphasized portion captures a basic definition of necrophilia. Krafft-Ebing attaches the context of significant psychopathology, as later reflected within the DSM-5 (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). Krafft-Ebing’s assessment of psychopathology, as it concerns a definition, was supported half a century later by East (1955), who wrote, “Necrophilia, sexual intercourse with a female cadaver, is a very uncommon offence, and my own experience is limited to four cases in which each offender was mentally defective” (p. 59). Where Krafft-Ebing implies rarity, East specifies it. East’s provision that the cadaver (e.g., the sexual object) be female and there be a presence of mental “defectiveness” serves as a good example of how specific yet variable contexts of necrophilia can be. Defining Necrophilia 5

Aggrawal (2009) recapitulates the basic theme set forth by Krafft-Ebing: “sexual gratification by having sex with the dead [emphasis added], is one of the weirdest, most bizarre, and revolting practices of abnormal and perverse sexuality” (p. 293). Again, the addition of maladaptive characteristics is stressed. The emphasized portion denotes Aggrawal’s definition. In this case the core of the literal definition (i.e., sexual affinity for the dead) is made more specific by requiring that the affinity be manifested as a behavior and be pleasurable (i.e., gratifying). Like Krafft-Ebing, the latter aspect of Aggrawal’s definition implies that necrophilia is a marginal sexual variation relative to other types of human sexual variation. It is also clear Aggrawal’s, like Krafft-Ebing’s, definition positions necrophilia within a sociocultural value system in which it is unfavorable relative to any other human sexual variant—though the adjectives used are relativistic and sensational. However, it is likely those who engage in sexual activity with corpses do not find the practice so bizarre or revolting as to inhibit the activity from occurring. As a result, Aggrawal’s contextualization holds true on the basis of value for some people and circumstances, but not for all. The context of the definitions crafted by Krafft-Ebing, East, and Aggrawal suggests sexual affinity for the dead has value when defined relative to other sexual variants in terms of typicality (i.e., how often they occur compared to other sexual variants), value relative to other variants, and the presence of maladaptive characteristics. Another way to consider this is each definition goes beyond expressing the nouns (e.g., adult corpse, child corpse, animal carcass, or some other once-alive-and-now-deceased entity) and verbs (e.g., genital union, cunnilingus, fellatio, or other sexual activity) of mere necrophilia. The definitions also differ in terms of whether necrophilia is best understood as the absence or presence of certain characteristics. However, there appears to be agreement among the definitions about emphasizing the social undesirability of necrophilia, and that necrophilia involves the dead and sexual behavior. Thus, each author has found value in including information or context beyond the core characteristics of necrophilia. By virtue of the construction of the definitions described so far, some authors have deemed it insufficient to maintain the definition ofnecrophilia as merely some sexual state or behavior involving the dead. Other definitions have not explicitly coupled a (mal)adaptiveness orientation to necrophilia in an apparent way. Within the most extensive research undertaken to examine necrophilia in modern social science, Rosman and Resnick (1989) defined necrophilia as, simply, “a sexual attraction to corpses” (p. 153). Not only does their definition fail to require any assessment of social appropriateness, it also does not require actual physical sexual activity between the living and dead, just sexual attraction. In their study of 122 cases involving necrophilic behavior, Rosman and Resnick expanded their definition to specify that “the genuine necrophile has a persistent sexual attraction to corpses. The sexual attraction may be manifested in the necrophile’s fantasies, or in a series of necrophillic acts” (p. 154). The authors clarified sexual attraction is explained as resulting in fantasy or sexual activity. This context places primacy on the perception of the person as well as the actual behavior. However, Rosman and Resnick’s (1989) definition also requires tackling the relative term persistent. Though the bounds of frequency or duration are not clear within their definition, persistence invokes direct emphasis on typicality, whereas such an emphasis was only implied in other definitions. If persistent is assumed to mean more than once in a lifetime, Rosman and Resnick’s definition would not permit one sexual encounter with the dead as meeting the definitional criteria for necrophilia. The question would be, then, does a single imagined or actual sexual act with the dead constitute necrophilia? 6 UNDERSTANDING NECROPHILIA

Hickey (2002) departs from adding the context of typicality when he defines necrophilia as “having sexual relations with dead bodies” (p. 25). In this definition the mechanical action of sexual behavior is emphasized as a requirement without concern for how it originates or how typical it is when compared to other forms of sexual behavior. There is no requirement the person engaging in necrophilia enjoys, or otherwise approves of the behavior within Hickey’s definition. In slight contrast, Stein, Schlesinger, and Pinizotto (2010) offer a definition that hints at attraction as a subjective requirement and sexual activity as an objective requirement while still not requiring a frame of reference to any version of conventional sexual normalcy: “Necrophilia literally means love of the dead and is generally defined as sexual relations [emphasis added] with corpses” (p. 443). The definitions by Rosman and Resnick (1989); Hickey (2002); and Stein, Schlesinger, and Pinizotto (2010) do not contain any direct requirement of psychopathology. Perhaps one of the reasons is the study of necrophilia has failed to uncover significant evidence to support that those who practice necrophilia are necessarily and globally “mentally deficient, psychotic, and incapable of obtaining a consenting sexual partner” (Rosman and Resnick, 1989, p. 159). Supporting this, Stein, Schlesinger, and Pinizotto (2010) discovered about half of 16 participants studied were able to obtain a consenting sexual partner, while 6 maintained long-term intimate relationships among sexual homicide offenders who committed necrophilia. While intentional or not, the absence of a psychopathology component to the last three definitions suggests there is disagreement as to whether understanding necrophilia requires psychopathology as a contextually defining feature and whether the subjective or objective matter of necrophilia should be emphasized. Heasman and Jones (2006) add an admission of complexity to the matter of defining necrophilia in reference to contemporary contextual viewpoints: “Although this is the basic understanding of necrophilia, perhaps the definition can be clarified by additionally recognizing related necrophilic behavior. Necrophilia, to the general public, is sexual intercourse with a dead person” (pp. 273–274). The issue of definition is the general idea of necrophilia being sexual relations with dead bodies does not allow for associated sexual variations (e.g., sexual activity with a human pretending to be dead, etc.). In this case, the authors seem to call for a definition sufficiently broad to include any aspect related to human sexuality in association with death. The argument by Heasman and Jones bespeaks the difficulty in forming contextual boundaries between sexual variants somehow involving death (necrophilia versus necromania versus erotophonophilia versus pseudonecrophilia versus thanatophilia, etc.). This argument also suggests a clear division between how the general public perceives necrophilia as compared to experts’ definitions. A brief, informal examination of definitions readily available to the general public was undertaken to explore any division. Readily available reflects an Internet search method popularly used by the general public when seeking information. A search of the phrase “necrophilia defined” using a popular search engine returned 76,600 results. The first result, from TheFreeDictionary.com (“Necrophilia,” n.d.a), returns a two- part definition: “1. Obsessive fascination with death and corpses. 2. Erotic attraction to or sexual contact with corpses.” The second result, from Merriam-Webster (“Necrophilia,” n.d.b), provides a more consolidated definition: “Obsession with and usually erotic interest in or stimulation by corpses.” According to Urban Dictionary (“Necrophilia,” n.d.c), the definition of necrophilia is:

Inter-course [sic] with a dead corpse, enjoyed by many, remember the body stays warm for up to 3 hours after death occurs, so that still almost counts as being alive, and its especially fun when Defining Necrophilia 7

rigamortis [sic] kicks in its like being strapped into the buggy on a mouse trap ride at Blackpool [sic]. And if your partner dies during sex and you’ve almost came its ok to finish off.

The issue at arriving at a sufficiently broad yet sufficiently precise definition is apparent when examining the definition of necrophilia provided by A Descriptive Dictionary and Atlas of Sexology (Francouer, 1991):

A severe but rare paraphilic condition of being responsive to or dependent on sexual activity with a dead body in order to achieve erotic arousal and facilitate or achieve orgasm. This condition almost always occurs in psychotic males who have no interest in relating sexually with live persons. In necrophilia, the obsession is with death; in lust murder or erotophonophilia, the obsession is with killing as a source of sexual arousal and orgasm. The two conditions may also coexist. See also necromania. (p. 424)

A reader may notice several features this definition has in common with others already discussed. However, the reference made to necromania is important for this definition because it creates a separation between necromania as a state and necrophilia as a behavior from the standpoint of literal definition while keeping them directly linked. Necromania as defined in Francouer’s (1991) dictionary and atlas is “a pathologic desire for sexual relations with a corpse, usually accompanied by a morbid interest in anything associated with dead bodies, such as autopsies, funerals, morgues, and cemeteries. This condition is almost exclusively found among males. See also necrophilia” (p. 424). The implication necrophilic states and necrophilic behaviors are linked from a definitional standpoint also allows their linkage from a conceptual standpoint. If necrophilia and necromania are reflective of the same phenomenon, then the definition requires that an affinity for death can be manifested as sexual behavior or thought. Francouer (1991) echoes the sense of other definitions as there are distinct conceptual boundaries when it comes to types of sexuality and the dead, but uncertainty as to where the boundaries should be. The separation of behavior and state, as has been demonstrated, does not seem to be neatly understood or agreed upon. As another example, a casual search of the definition of necromania uncovers a definition by Dictionary.com (“Necromania,” n.d.) that defines necromania identically to necrophilia. As found in the definitions of other authors, the definition by Francouer (1991) contains the basis of necrophilia to include typicality (rare) and intensity (severe). The definition provided by Francouer also requires necrophilia be understood in the context of psychosis, male gender, and disinterest in sexual activities with living humans. This harkens to the emphasis on comparing and contrasting sexual normalcies as contextually important for a definition. Based on the sample of definitions provided in this chapter, the basic aspects that separate definitions of necrophilia from the definitions of all other human behaviors are generally agreed upon: death and sexual affinity. The problem is determining the conceptual scope of the aspects and in what way they intersect. We know it has something to do with death and something to do with attraction, but there are many ways to capture the context of death as well as attraction. Accurate definitions are fundamental for investigating any 8 UNDERSTANDING NECROPHILIA

phenomenon, and the difficulty of context generates difficulty for meaningful investigation where necrophilia is concerned, demonstrated by MacCormack (2006):

Perhaps it is difficult to define necrophilia as a dividuated sexual act at all. Primarily one must select the paradigm by which the corpse is defined... If, according to Monique Wittig, sexuality creates gender through opposition, is necrophilia still considered either heterosexual or homosexual? (p. 3)

Reflecting upon the sample of definitions discussed in this chapter provides us with the basic agreement necrophilia is referring to the dead and sexuality. Beyond that, there is not clear agreement regarding the kinds of sexual states, sexual behaviors, and types of sexual targets (granting they are dead) necessary for defining necrophilia. In short, there is no agreement on context. It remains unclear whether including psychopathology (i.e., adaptiveness), typicality, or tangibility (i.e., behavior or state) as defining characteristics is necessary or useful to a definition of necrophilia. Each of these contextual challenges will now be addressed below.

THE INCLUSION OF ADAPTIVENESS

One difference that occurs among the definitions of necrophilia is whether adaptiveness is applied as a contextual feature. Adaptiveness, for this chapter, means the degree to which necrophilia coincides with states or behaviors deemed socially appropriate, psychologically sound, medically safe, and legally acceptable; the definitions that include some mention of general adaptiveness all place necrophilia toward the maladaptive end of the spectrum. Adaptiveness may be reflected directly by definition or within the visceral reaction connoted within some definitions (e.g., repulsive, disgusting, or other like terms). For many definitions, necrophilia is in violation of many social standards, reflects psychological disorder, creates potentially dangerous medical circumstance, and is legally proscribed. There are conceptual possibilities related to adaptiveness that are important from a definitional standpoint and must be considered. Many authors of the definitions assert those engaging in necrophilic behavior are defined by social or psychological dysfunction. By inversion it must also be assumed someone who demonstrates adequate social and psychological function is not capable of engaging in necrophilia. Cases exist that demonstrate this to be a less than universal trait for those engaging in necrophilia (for example, see Nobus, 2002; Rosman & Resnick, 1989). It appears some people who engage in necrophilia are able to maintain socially appropriate human relationships and be free of any obvious and pervasive mental disorder. Thus, any definition requiring socio- or psychopathology would fail to take into account those who engage in sex with the dead in addition to sexual behaviors in other, even adaptive, ways. It is of diagnostic interest to provide for psychopathology for the purpose of treatment. However, because there is evidence necrophilia in association with any degree of psychopathology can vary, necrophilia makes better sense as a symptom that can be understood inductively rather than representative of a syndrome that must be understood deductively. Requiring a statement of psychopathology also presumes within the definitions that there are homog- enous standards of social, psychological, medical, and legal criteria by which a definition of necrophilia may Defining Necrophilia 9

be applied universally. The authors of the DSM-5, for example, take it as granted that healthy sexuality equates specifically to genital stimulation or foreplay between consenting adults who have completed puberty and are free from any physiological deviation or defect. There are quite a few logical issues this raises in general. The challenge of adaptiveness directs us to an important question that must be answered when defining necrophilia: Is it possible for a person to engage in sexual behavior with a corpse without violating the terms of adaptiveness? From the perspective of anecdotal case evidence, research evidence, and logic, the answer is yes. A person who engages in necrophilia is not required to be wholly maladaptive because it is possible for a human to engage in necrophilic behavior and exhibit different levels of adaptiveness elsewhere. It is inordi- nately restrictive and contextually confusing to require maladaptiveness as a fundamental factor in defining necrophilia. However, issues of definition aside, the degree adaptiveness is associated with any instance of necrophilia remains vital for informing diagnostic, clinical, or social (e.g., legal) response—having a good definition and contextual framework improves this from the outset.

THE INCLUSION OF TYPICALITY

Another inconsistency for definitions of necrophilia, though not as common, has been some degree of inclusion of typicality as a context. The type of typicality emphasized, when it is a part of a definition, is usually frequency through nomothetic comparison to other sexual behaviors. Nomothetic comparison can be understood, in terms of necrophilia, as the incidence of all necrophilic sexual contact compared to all other sexual contact. The contexts applied to necrophilia have largely supported, as discussed previously, the notion that the incidence of necrophilia is rare when compared to the incidence of other paraphilia, and even rarer when compared to the incidence of all sexual behavior. This rarity becomes important for researchers because it suggests a unique and infrequent convergence of etiological factors to arrive at an affinity for, or the eventuality of, necrophilic behavior. However, the perception of rarity can interfere with a full understanding and description of any term. Burg (1982) confronts the assumption of rarity and describes the effect such an assumption has had on the field:

There are perhaps only two points on which those who have investigated sex with the dead and its various manifestations almost universally agree: that necrophilia is extremely rare and that the volume of research and scientific literature on the subject is severely limited. However, the first assumption is dubious and the second is entirely incorrect. (p. 242)

As Burg (1982) contended, the approaches to address necrophilia have developed from its perceived rarity. Because rarity is assumed, the factors associated with necrophilia are also likely assumed to be rare, and research methodologies and theories are tailored to rarity. The context of rarity is influential for clinical pur- suits for similar reasons: if necrophilic behavior or attraction is relatively rare, the assessments and treatments applied in order to mitigate or extinguish the behavior must presume rare biopsychosocial configurations. Finally, the rareness of necrophilic behavior informs societies and cultures as to the degree of response that is necessary. Because it is rare, the legal or social response to necrophilia is limited compared to other sexual 10 UNDERSTANDING NECROPHILIA

behaviors many cultures find untoward (e.g., adult–child sexual contact). This seems apparent when one considers there are few places where there is a specific legal pronouncement for necrophilia as a violation of law, apart from, for example, grave desecration (Troyer, 2008). Although understanding necrophilia from the standpoint of typicality is useful in a variety of circumstances, is it useful in the definitional circumstance? The benefit that thinking in terms of typicality provides for research, clinical, and legal purposes may stifle an accurate understanding of necrophilic behavior. What may occur, due to low base rates, is researchers, clinicians, and society in general may assume the origins, development, and disposition of necrophilia are equally rare and, as discussed in the previous section, may encourage perceived homogeneity without due investigation. Given basic physiological and neurophysiological sexual arousal are a part of the necrophilic encounter, there is the logical suggestion necrophilia shares factors with other sexual variants. Target choice (i.e., age, sex, morphology, or other objective characteristics) varies between those engaging in necrophilia as it does between those that do not have sexual contact with the dead (contrast, for example, the cases of Jeffrey Dahmer, Karen Greenlee, and Andrei Chikatilo). There is also the possibility of variation between preferred methods of sexual interaction (i.e., penetrative sex, orifice of choice, positioning, lighting, speed, force, and so forth) from person to person and instance to instance of necrophilia; as is the case with other sexual behaviors. Requiring nomothetic typicality in a definition of necrophilia creates a conceptual universe in which potentially crucial possibilities cannot be contained in the definition and are therefore ignored or missed. Based on the arguments made in this section, it may be enticing to include idiographic typicality (a person’s behaviors compared to his or her other behaviors) as an alternative to including nomothetic typicality. However, even more variability must be accounted for in the definition when idiographic typicality is introduced, and this would not permit a generalized definition. It is better to exclude typicality as an epistemological requirement for definition and instead address typicality as a matter of method and epidemiology.

THE DIVISION OF BEHAVIOR AND STATE

The final difference between definitionsnecrophilia of to be addressed is whether behavior, state, or some combination is contextually emphasized. Behavior is meant in this section to be any action by an agent (i.e., a person that has will) that may have a direct effect on some object in the environment. State represents processes of thought and emotion specific to an agent that results in the attachment of value. For this chapter, behavior refers to activity directly involving the dead, and state refers to cognitive and emotional appraisals of a person about the dead. In some instances the emphasis tends toward behavior without any mention of fantasy or ideation. The definitions by Aggrawal (2009), Hickey (2002), and East (1955) all emphasize behavior. In other instances the definition includes varying degrees of emphasis on state. For example, the DSM-5 involves “intense and persistent sexual interest” (American Psychiatric Association, 2013, para. 3) and does not specify that actual sexual behavior is a necessary feature for a definition. Krafft-Ebing (1922) included both state and behavior when he specifies “a feeling of pleasure” associated with “sexual congress with corpses” (p. 611); however, it is unknown if he meant physiological stimulation, emotional arousal, or both. In contrast to most positions, Rosman and Resnick (1989) emphasize sexual behavior as a manifestation of sexual attraction; the state of Defining Necrophilia 11

necrophilia is fundamental and might be manifested as behavior. Other definitions provide relatively equal weight to both behavior and state, e.g. Francouer (1991). It is clear definitions vary in terms of whether they contextually emphasize state or behavior. What is not clear is whether state alone, behavior alone, or some combination is required for a phenomenon to be accurately considered necrophilia. What exacerbates this issue is that most definitions that emphasize state or behavior do not clearly require the absence of either. Does sexual behavior with the dead lead to development of cognitive and emotional attraction to the dead? It makes sense from a behavioral standpoint to assume orgasm as the result of sexual contact with the dead (i.e., positive reward) would reinforce further sexual contact with the dead and less sexual contact with the living (i.e., conditioned response). One could also reasonably assume positive reinforcement would occur at the cognitive and emotional level in association with the behavior leading to physiological sexual stimulation (i.e., positive feelings regarding planning or fantasizing about sex with the dead) but only in response to actual sexual behavior. Thus, a definition of necrophilia from a behavioral standpoint would emphasize direct sexual contact without associated states needing to be granted or denied. However, emphasizing mere behavior presents a definitional issue where it concerns the ways necrophilia may manifest. In a purely behavioral approach to necrophilia, fantasy and ideation about having sex with the dead becomes irrelevant no matter the degree of frequency, intensity, or duration of the thoughts: thought processes about sex with the dead are theoretically salient only in association with actual sexual behavior with the dead. On the opposite end of the philosophical spectrum is the argument that having any positive regard toward sexuality involving the dead is sufficient to define necrophilia. In this case, whether actual sexual behavior with the dead occurs is irrelevant. What matters is a person perceives sex with the dead as favorable behavior. This provides for a tremendous increase in the breadth of phenomena by which necrophilia may be applied, but the breadth can reach such proportions as to make defining necrophilia a pointless exercise altogether because it could be detected in any variety of states and behaviors. For example, Fromm exemplifies this sort of breadth when he emphasizes necrophilia (the life-thwarting self) is an existential orientation in opposition to biophilia (the life-furthering self) (Landis, 1975). From this perspective, the state of necrophilia is so encompassing any human behavior, including sexuality, may have some degree of necrophilic expression.

ARRIVING AT A DEFINITION

The term necrophilia was created as a communicative shortcut about human sexuality associated with the dead. Its use made it convenient to discuss, and conceptualize, sex with the dead. However, sex with the dead can occur in many different ways and can mean many different things to those who sexually engage the dead. As a result, those who enjoy the convenience of the term also face the challenge of context. A struggle has occurred in terms of which context is definitive of necrophilia and has resulted in a struggle about agreeing to the accurate usage of the term. Though there is agreement the term necrophilia symbolizes human sexuality coupled with death, the contextual emphasis has varied for its use. This chapter identified contextual differences in emphasizing (mal) adaptiveness, typicality, and necrophilia as a behavior or state. These contextual differences are valid concerns for research, treatment, and sociocultural response. However, as argued in this chapter, contextual emphasis serves to interfere with a definition consistent with communicating etiological and ontological possibilities. 12 UNDERSTANDING NECROPHILIA

Based on the analysis and argument presented in this chapter, a potential solution is to allow all contexts while maintaining the conceptual bounds that delineate necrophilia from any other -philia. The definitions presented suggest a definition must contain some symbol representing sexuality, some symbol representing death, and some symbol representing affinity. These symbols form the bounds of the definition. This author recommends a definition strikingly similar to the literal definition but also containing contextual breadth within the definitional boundary: Necrophilia is sexual gratification associated with the dead.

REFERENCES

Aggrawal, A. (2009). Forensic and medico-legal aspects of sex crimes and unusual sex practices. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Retrieved from http://dsm.psychiatryonline.org/doi/book/10.1176/appi.books.9780890425596 Burg, B. R. (1982). The sick and the dead: The development of psychological theory on necrophilia from Krafft-Ebing to the present. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 18(3), 242–254. East, N. (1955). Sexual offenders. London: Delisle. Francouer, R. T. (Ed.). (1991). A descriptive dictionary and atlas of sexology. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. Heasman, A., & Jones, E. (2006). Necrophilia. In E. W. Hickey (Ed.), Sex crimes and paraphilia (pp. 273–280). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education. Hickey, E. W. (2002). Serial murderers and their victims (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomspon. Landis, B. (1975). Fromm’s theory of biophilia-necrophilia: Its implications for psychoanalytic practice. Contemporary Psychoanalysis, 11(4), 418–434. MacCormack, P. (2006). Necrosexuality. Rhizomes: Cultural Studies in Emerging Knowledge (11/12), Fall 2005/ Spring 2006. Retrieved from http://www.rhizomes.net/issue11/maccormack/index.html Necrophilia. (n.d.a). In TheFreeDictionary.com. Retrieved from http://www.thefreedictionary.com/necrophilia Necrophilia. (n.d.b). In Merriam-Webster. Retrieved from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ necrophilia Necrophilia. (n.d.c). Urban Dictionary. Retrieved from http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term =Necrophilia Necromania. (n.d.). In Dictionary.com. Retrieved from http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/necromania Nobus, D. (2002). Over my dead body: The histories and cultures of necrophilia. In R. Goodwin & D. Cramer (Eds.), Inappropriate relationships: The unconventional, the disapproved, and the forbidden (pp. 171–190). Malwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Rosman, J. P., & Resnick, P. J. (1989). Sexual attraction to corpses: A psychiatric review of necrophilia. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online, 17(2), 153-163. Stein, M. L., Schlesinger, L. B., & Pinizotto, A. J. (2010). Necrophilia and sexual homicide. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 55(2), 443–446. Troyer, J. (2008). Abuse of a corpse: A brief history and re-theorization of necrophilia laws in the USA. Mortality, 13(2), 132–152.