An Existential Reading of Sadomasochism and Erich Fromm's Call to Love Salvatore Palazzolo
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Duquesne University Duquesne Scholarship Collection Electronic Theses and Dissertations Summer 2007 Demystifying A Sexual Perversion: An Existential Reading of Sadomasochism and Erich Fromm's Call to Love Salvatore Palazzolo Follow this and additional works at: https://dsc.duq.edu/etd Recommended Citation Palazzolo, S. (2007). Demystifying A Sexual Perversion: An Existential Reading of Sadomasochism and Erich Fromm's Call to Love (Doctoral dissertation, Duquesne University). Retrieved from https://dsc.duq.edu/etd/1008 This Immediate Access is brought to you for free and open access by Duquesne Scholarship Collection. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Duquesne Scholarship Collection. For more information, please contact [email protected]. DEMYSTIFYING A SEXUAL PERVERSION: An Existential Reading of Sadomasochism and Erich Fromm’s Call to Love A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the Department of Psychology of Duquesne University for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Clinical Psychology by Salvatore Aloysious Palazzolo Ezequiel Peña, Ph.D. Director Daniel Burston, Ph.D. Reader Jessie Goicoechea, Ph.D. Reader i TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1 PART ONE CHAPTER 1: The Birth of the Sadomasochistic Complex 18 Section A: Richard von Krafft-Ebing’s Publication of Psychopathia Sexualis 18 Section B: The Contributions and Limitations of Krafft-Ebing’s Theories 22 • Degeneration Theory and Male Heterosexism 22 • Krafft-Ebing’s Definition of Sadism: A Moralistic Biologism 24 • Consequences of Biologism for Theories of Sadism and Masochism 27 • From Simple Algolagnia to Intentional Cruelty 30 Section C: Krafft-Ebing’s Definition of Masochism 31 • The Strengths and Weaknesses of the Classification of Masochism 33 • Krafft-Ebing’s Attempt to Connect Sadism with Masochism 35 Section D: Havelock Ellis and the Modernist Perspective 36 • Ellis’s Progressive Views of Sexuality 38 • Ellis’s Differences from Krafft-Ebing 40 • Ellis’s Significance in the History of Sadomasochism Theories 44 CHAPTER 2: Freud’s Theories of Sadomasochism 47 Introduction: An Overview of Freud’s Approach to Sadomasochism 47 Section A: The Influences of Krafft-Ebbing and Ellis on Freud 48 Section B: Freud’s Theories of Sadomasochism 50 • Freud’s First Phase: Sadism as a Primary Process 50 • Freud’s Second Phase: The Oedipalization of Sadomasochism 58 • An Appraisal of Freud’s First Two Phases of Sadomasochism Theories 61 ─Sexual Polarities 61 ─Oedipalization and the Pathology of Normalcy 63 ─Rejecting Alternate Hypotheses 65 • Freud’s Final Phase: Masochism as a Primary Process 66 • Evaluating Freud’s Final Phase of Sadomasochism Theory 69 ─Freud’s Use of Dualisms 69 ─The Scientism in Freud’s Theory of Sadomasochism 72 • Concluding Remarks on the Freudian Era of Sadomasochism Theory 74 ii CHAPTER 3: Orthodox and Revisionist Psychoanalytic Theories onSadomasochism 76 Introduction: 76 Section A: Cultural and Interpersonal Theories 77 • The Influence of Sociocultural Change on Sadomasochism Theories 77 • Wilhelm Reich 78 ─Reich’s early Days 78 ─Reich’s Rejection of the Death instinct and Primary Masochism 80 ─Reich’s Contribution to Sadomasochism Theory 81 ─Limitations of Reich’s Approach 85 • Harry Stack Sullivan 87 • Karen Horney 89 Section B: Neo-Psychoanalytic Sadomasochism Theories 92 • Theodor Reik 92 • Melanie Klein’s Object-Relations Theory of Sadomasochism 94 • Ian Suttie’s Theory of Love 100 Section C: Concluding Remarks on the Orthodox and 105 Revisionist Era of Sadomasochism Theories PART TWO CHAPTER 4: Setting the Stage for Erich Fromm’s Theory of Sadomasochism 108 Introduction: Fromm’s Background and Early Frankfurt Years 108 Section A: Fromm’s Differences with Freud 111 • Fromm’s De-centering of the Sexual Libido 111 • Examining the Philosophical Foundations of Freud’s Theory 113 • Fromm’s Theory of Character Development 115 Section B: Influences on Fromm’s Theory of Sadomasochism 121 • Fromm’s Humanism: Combining Marx and Freud 121 • Fromm and Bachofen 123 • Object-Relational Insights 127 • Interpersonal Psychology 129 Section C: Fromm’s Rejection of the Death Instinct and His Differences with Reich 130 • Fromm’s Misgivings about Freud’s Death Instinct 130 • Implications of Fromm’s Differences with Reich on His Theory of Sadomasochism 132 Section D: Erich Fromm’s Call for an Analysis of Love, Sadomasochistic Pseudo-love, and His Existential Analysis of Destructiveness 136 • Fromm’s Call for a Theory of Love 136 • Sartre’s Being and Nothingness and a New Era of Sadomasochism Theory 141 iii CHAPTER 5: Fromm’s, Sartre’s, and Post-Sartrean Theories of Sadomasochism: A Comparison of Existential Approaches 142 Introduction: 142 Section A: Fromm’s Theory of Sadomasochism 143 • Existential Foundations 143 ─Thrownness and Facticity 145 ─Existential Aloneness 147 • Fromm’s Mechanisms of Escape:A Different Psychological Nosography of Sadomasochistic Relations 150 ─Symbiosis 151 ─Authoritarianism 153 ─Destructiveness 155 ─Herd Conformity 157 ─The Orgiastic Solution 158 Section B: An Overview of Sartre’s Existential-Phenomenology of Sadomasochistic Relations 160 Section C: Post-Sartrean Perspectives of Sadomasochism 167 • Medard Boss’s Daseinsanalytic Approach to Sadomasochism 167 • Beauvoir’s Use of the Master/ Slave Dynamic in ‘The Second Sex’ 171 • Africana Existentialism: Franz Fanon’s “Fact of Blackness” 175 Section D: Contrasting Fromm with Sartre and Post-Sartrean Perspectives 178 • Similarities 178 ─The Rejection of the Sexual Libido as the Core of Sadomasochism 178 ─Agreement on the Unsuitability of the Natural Sciences as the Basis for Human Subjectivity 180 ─Fromm’s and Sartre’s Resistance to the Pathology of Normalcy 182 ─Fromm’s and Sartre’s Rejection of the Psychoanalytic “Spirit of Seriousness” 185 • Differences 188 ─Sartre’s and Fromm’s Different Inscriptions of Subjectivity 188 ─Sartre’s Lack of Intersubjective Reciprocity vs. Fromm’s Notion of Intersubjectivity as Mutual Reciprocity 191 CONCLUSION: Fromm’s Concept of Love as a Response for Sadomasochism 195 Bibliography 218 1 DEMYSTIFYING A SEXUAL PERVERSION: An Existential Reading of Sadomasochism and Erich Fromm’s Call to Love Introduction The history of sadomasochism is an elusive and complicated narrative that involves more than the discovery and classification of a sexual transgression. A complete examination of this concept would involve a review of psychiatry, philosophy, psychoanalysis, anthropology, psychology, pornographic literary fiction, autobiographies, art, theology, ethics, and film. Such an exhaustive survey of sadomasochism however, is beyond the scope of this dissertation, which will remain within the purview of psychology. At the same time, I will draw from other disciplines in order to help clarify some of the problems that have interfered with a full understanding of sadomasochism as a psychological disorder. The controversy and confusion surrounding sadomasochism began when sadism and masochism were first classified as two separate sexual perversions by Richard von Krafft-Ebing (1886/1965). He separated sexual sadism and sexual masochism according to the “intercourse of the sexes [where] the active or aggressive rôle belongs to man; [and the] woman remains passive” (Krafft- Ebing, 1886/1965, p. 56). According to Krafft-Ebing, sadism was “the experience of sexual pleasurable sensations (including orgasm) produced by acts of cruelty, bodily punishment afflicted on one’s own person or when witnessed in others, be they animals or human beings” (p. 53). Masochism was considered as the feminine “counterpart of sadism” (p. 34) by Krafft-Ebing. He defined it as “a 2 peculiar perversion of the psychical sexual life in which the individual affected, in sexual feeling and thought, is controlled by the idea of being completely and unconditionally subject to the will of a person of the opposite sex” (p. 86). It was Krafft-Ebing who first coupled sadism and masochism as “perfect counterparts” (p. 140), though he never used the term “sadomasochism” when describing their relationship and viewed them as opposites. The actual first usage of the term “sado-masochism” is unclear. One source makes reference to the term being coined in 1922 to explain the derivation of pleasure from the infliction of physical or mental pain on others or oneself (“Sadomasochism,” 2006, p. 1).1 Nevertheless, while Krafft-Ebing viewed sadism and masochism as separate entities, he reported numerous cases where instances of both could be found in the same individual. In every case however, he maintained that one of the two perversions always dominated and admitted he was unable to explain their simultaneous occurrence in the same person (Krafft-Ebing, 1886/1965, p. 142). Havelock Ellis (1903/1936) was the first to declare that elements of sadism and masochism should not “be regarded as opposed manifestations” (chap. 3, p. 119). He viewed sadism and masochism as interchangeable components of the same psychological entity and argued to abolish their distinction (Robinson, 1976, p. 24). Moreover, Ellis downplayed the differences between active and passive roles according to gender and posited that sadism and masochism are always present in the same individual, and should therefore be seen as complementary states. It was Ellis’s assumption that the sadomasochist is an 1 Laplanche and Pontalis (1973) report that the term “sadomasochism” is used in sexology to highlight the interplay between the intersubjective conflict of domination and submission