SEX OFFENDERS: MASTURBATION
The definition of masturbation as “any self-stimulation which is deliberate and designed to effect erotic arousal,” which we employed in our 1948 volume on the male, is not wholly adequate in this present study. We must amend the definition in several ways. In the first place we use the term to denote self-stimulation specifically aimed at effecting orgasm from such stimulation. Secondly, we use the term generally to indicate solitary as opposed to sociosexual activity. These two points are raised because we wish to exclude from consideration here two forms of self-stimulation that ordinarily could be labeled masturbation. The first is self-stimulation designed not to produce orgasm from such stimulation, but to facilitate a sociosexual relationship. For example, a man may manipulate his own penis in order to induce the penile erection necessary for coitus. This we would not care to include as an instance of self-masturbation that did not result in orgasm, although technically that is what it is. The second phenomenon that we wish to exclude from our treatment of masturbation is the practice of many males of frequently reaching orgasm while engaged in homosexual activity by simultaneously manipulating their own genitalia. Thus a male, while fellating another male or while receiving another male’s penis in his anus, may manipulate his own penis and ejaculate. We wish to exclude this because the situation is basically sociosexual in its significance to the individuals and to society, and also because the orgasm is not purely the result of self-stimulation, but also in large part the result of the stimulation afforded by the contact with the sexual partner. In the same way, we would not count as masturbation a case wherein a male stimulated himself by rubbing against a willing female; an orgasm obtained in this way would be called petting to climax.
In this present study, then, we use the term “masturbation” only for self-stimulation resulting in orgasm in the absence of a sexual partner, unless we specify otherwise.
Like most forms of sexual behavior, masturbation can be many things. In one person it may be a temporary substitute for coitus or for a homosexual contact that is not readily available. In another, it may be a chosen form of sexual outlet that represents a major portion of the person’s total sexual behavior. In a third case it may be a component of compulsive behavior, which provides apparently little satisfaction or relief from sexual tensions.
Within the twentieth century masturbation has been divested of its reputation of being physically damaging, although it has retained in the eyes of some religious groups its quality of sin and self-pollution. Setting aside theology, one may say that masturbation has now been accepted as a normal activity for the young. Perhaps the word “tolerated” should be substituted for “accepted,” since efforts are still made to prevent or minimize masturbation; the current popular attitude seems to be not to punish or admonish a child for masturbating, but to prevent the activity by distracting him or substituting some other interesting activity. What to do with a masturbating teenager is a question that most authors writing on the subject avoid, and those who do treat the matter give the impression that they wish the activity could be kept minimal through “other interests” or by means of the standard “wholesome” activities that we elders are always urging upon teenagers. This stigma in regard to frequency grew from the logic that since there were no limiting factors in masturbation except privacy, one’s desire, and physical strength, it would tend to lead to “undesirable excesses.” Thus, while it could be tolerated as a substitute for heterosexual outlets, it was considered dangerous if condoned without restrictions. Since masturbation is so important in early life (it precedes and outweighs sociosexual behavior in many young individuals) it has come to be associated with youth, and, consequently, is often regarded as an infantile or juvenile activity which should not be perpetuated in adult life. Moreover, because of the purposive reproductive bias with which adult sexuality is regarded in our society, masturbation in grown men and women is looked upon as inappropriate behavior. The psychiatrists, and more particularly those with a psychoanalytic background, have been prone to label it regressive or immature behavior when it occurs in an adult.
At this point we should like to make clear our attitude toward masturbation. We contend that there is nothing intrinsically desirable or undesirable about it; like most phenomena it derives its significance from its context. At worst it may be, if quantitatively important in a person’s life, symptomatic of an inability to make the social and emotional adjustments required for most sociosexual activity. At best it may be a needed neurophysiological release which may also facilitate subsequent sociosexual behavior. In many instances it is essentially neutral: a transitory moment of pleasure without emotional content or consequence. In any case it is a source of pleasure, and as such deserves to be regarded as a potential asset in life. We must also reiterate that we have never seen a case where masturbation in and of itself had any deleterious consequences, physical or emotional.
In our study of sexual behavior in the male we discussed the significance of masturbation at some length, pointing out that while for most men coitus is the primary sexual outlet of a lifetime, masturbation is typically secondary. In our present sample, since the men are chiefly of high school education and below, the role played by masturbation is de-emphasized. It is generally true, however, that masturbation provides from a third to a half of the orgasms of a noncollege group prior to marriage. Marital and postmarital levels are typically lower, but still represent from 5 to 10 per cent of the total sexual outlet. Thus, in any analysis of the patterns of sexual activity of various types of sex offenders, particularly in their single years, the masturbation factor must be examined.
For our purposes here an analysis can perform several services. Since we in general consider masturbation to be typical male sexual behavior, engaged in to a varying extent at different ages, we clearly do not expect to use it as a gross tool for singling out abnormalities. Sex offenders, like other males, use masturbation as one of their important sexual outlets. However, when different types of offender groups show varying patterns of masturbation, there are inferences to be drawn about their basic differences in personality and types of behavior. The degree of early sexuality, the extent to which they repressed their overt sexual activity, the balance of solitary and sociosexual outlets, the amount of worry over masturbation, and a glimpse into the offenders’ dream world of masturbation fantasy—all these can be used as tools in gaining an understanding of the differing psychosexual patterns of various types of sex offenders
*278\161\2*
