Critically Appraise and Discuss the Issue of What Is “Normal” and “Abnormal” Sexual Behaviour.

Critically appraise and discuss the issue of what is “normal” and “abnormal” sexual behaviour.

What is normal sexual behaviour? it depends more to the point, when is sexual behaviour that is somewhat different from the norm, morally abnormal or a disorder. Current views of unusual unless the behaviour is associated with a substantial impairment in functioning, law, with a non consenting partner or an individual unable to consent due to age, disability or culture (Kennair et.al. 2009; Vaknin, 2006; Ubillos et. al. 2000.). sexual orientation according to Desouza (2005). Exists along a continuum that ranges from exclusive homosexuality to exclusive heterosexuality and includes various forms of bisexuality unlike sexual behaviour, sexual orientation refers to feelings and self concept. To understand why one would view a sexual behaviour of any kind as being abnormal one would need to understand foundations of societal values and origins of ideas as well as individual life experiences. In ancient Greece for example, paraphilia was apparent, socially practiced and accepted and celebrated, in a female submissive, male dominated, penis envying society which was governed by gods. This notion is supported by Field, (2008) & Johnson & Terry (2005); who note that aphrodisiac, eroticism, homosexuality, narcissism, nymphomania, pederasty are terms are derived from the language of ancient Greece which according to Johnson & Terry (2005) tells you something about its society. The myths of Homer and Plutarch told stories such as that of Aphrodite, goddess of sexual intercourse, who emerged from the foaming semen of her father's castrated testicles (Johnson & Terry, 2005) . Then there were the mortal heroes such as Hercules, who it is said ravished 50 virgins in a single night, but who also had an affair with his nephew “Iolaus” (Johnson & Terry, 2005). In today’s society this would be viewed as perverse behavior and unacceptable by clergy and persons with a strong Christian religious beliefs.
As with the various paraphilias which have been evident throughout history currently, according to the DSM IV TR, gender identity disorder, sexual dysfunction disorder and paraphilia are generally used to diagnosis an individual whom has “abnormal” behaviour or a set of symptoms (APA, 2000). Controversy has arisen the DSM, arguing that people who have sexually unusual interests whom may not be distressed or disabled by them, that there is no justification for classifying them as disordered. Labelling their conditions as “pathological” may only fuel social discrimination which could lead to psychological damaging distress (Moser & Kleinplatz, 2005). Whereas Spitzer (2003) argues that
“when severe paraphilias impair interpersonal sexual behaviour. Sexual behaviour that facilitates caring, bonding between people is normal – and that whihc impairs is abnormal, not merely an atypical variation. Spitzer (2003) continued by putting forward “that what is needed was more research on the treatment of the paraphilias such as paedophilia, as to removed them from the DSM would be the end of this much needed research”.

Who or what has decided what is normal and what’s abnormal sexual behaviour?
Most cultures have social norms regarding sexuality and define “normal” sexuality to consist only of certain legal sex acts which meet specific criteria of age, relatedness, race/ethnicity and/ or social role and status. Wikipedia (2010). From a historical perspective in most non-Christian cultures there were gods and goddesses of power and fertility with exaggerated genitals. Some cultures liked penis gods so much they had several; for instance, the ancient Greeks honoured Priapus, Dionysus and Hermes, the Egyptians exalted Osiris, Bacchus was the Roman version, and Shiva reigned in India (Wikipedia, 2010). Penis and, less commonly, vulva worship, were practised and this was reflected in objects connected with daily living. Vases in classical Greece were decorated with phalluses( Wikipedia, 2010). In the ruins of Pompeii penis symbols were found just about everywhere, on bowls, lamps and figurines (Wikipedia, 2010). Pitchers with enormous penis spouts were a unique speciality of the Mochica culture of Peru. The exteriors of medieval Irish churches were adorned with sculptures of Shelah-na-Gig, a vulva icon. In Egypt enormous symbols of penis power –the obelisk – were erected all over the landscape.. In the strongly patriarchal and male dominated societies of Ancient Greece and Rome, to be bi-sexual was considered to be normal sexual behaviour (Faraone,1999). The Dionysus cult (500 century BC ) had a public parade every year in which the men carried the largest penis possible by a team of men in a parade through the cities. To Ancient Greece, the penis was the main symbol of fertility and they even created dildos constructed from leather and marketed them (Halperin, Winkler & Zeitlin 1990). The male idea of female sexuality was that Greek men believed that women envied their penises thus would expose their penis to lure a potential partner. Could this be what we call exhibitionism? (Faraone,1999) Female homosexuality and female masturbation are rarely depicted unless seen with a dildo. (Halperin, Winkler & Zeitlin 1990) could this be considered abnormal sexual behaviour?
Rape was common in Ancient Greece and seen by men as a "right of domination" by Greek men. Zeus, the god, was the master rapist who raped many women. He raped Leda in the form of a swan (Beastiality) He raped Danae disguised as the rain (Ombrophile). He raped Alkmen disguised as her own husband. Zeus even raped other men, such as Ganymede (homosexuality) When homosexual men wrote about their love for other men the most loved boys were usually age 10-14 years (Faraone,1999. Flaceliere,1962. Garrison,2000. Halperin, Winkler & Zeitlin 1990).

Masturbation, although privately accepted by most as not being abnormal today has also been vilified in the past for a number of reasons (Haecker & Dickson, 2002.). For instance, the Taoists in China condemned male masturbation to the point of ejaculation as wasteful because too much "yang" or masculine energy would be lost with the expelled semen. The Christian church raised masturbation to a level of damnable sin. Penitential books published by the church during the eighth century, which outlined proscribed sexual practices and their accompanying penalties, emphasised masturbation over any other sexual offence. From the 18th century onward doctors and scientists joined in the battle against self-pleasuring. (haecker & Dickson, 2002) Vaknin (2006) notes that leader of the pack was Swiss physician Simon Andre Tissot, who in 1758 preached that masturbation was an abnormal sexual behaviour as it would stimulate an increase in blood pressure in the head, thereby damaging the nervous system and causing insanity. Other doctors quickly joined the battle, blaming masturbation for such ills as acne, backache, blindness, constipation, epilepsy, gout, infertility, nymphomania and vomiting (Haecker & Dickson, 2002.). These were not the opinions of a few in the medical profession but commonly-held beliefs throughout Western society (Haecker & Dickson, 2002., Vaknin, 2006.).

Theories
Theorists such as Thomas Nagel (1979) and Sara Ruddick (1994) on sexual ethics of what is normal and what is perverse have said to have had some influence in the area of sexual ethics , however both ultimately neglect the diversity and complexity of human sexual desire and behaviour. Ruddick (1994) in her paper “Better sex” draws a distinction between what she calls natural and perverted sexual behaviour. Natural sex is defined as that which may “serve the evolutionary and biological function of sexuality, namely reproduction”. “perverted” or abnormal sex is defined as a deviation from this principle Ruddick the goes on to state that it is not through these terms alone that we can reach a reasonable understanding of abnormal sexual behaviour. Indeed it would be undermining the complexity of the issue if one was to ignore human sexual desire. She therefore stipulates that a sexual act should have the potential for procreation, but this need not be the intent of the activity (Ruddick, 1994). In contrast with Ruddicks definition comes Nagel’s (1979) definition. Nagel suggests that if a particular inclination is abnormal then it must meet three conditions. The first condition is that it must be in some sense unnatural that is a deviation from a normal sexual behaviour. This point is problematic if we consider what exactly defines what is normal sexual development or behaviour. The second condition is that it must be an inclination rather than curiosity, for example if a couple decide to try an unfamiliar practice out of curiosity then the act is by no means abnormal. Nagel’s third condition is that for something to be described as sexually abnormal it must be an act which stems from an unnatural inclination, for example if someone preferred to be beaten over other types of conventional sexual acts then they could be said to have an abnormal sexual inclination. Once again this point is problematic when we consider the nature of normality. Whilst these theorists present useful and interesting ways of understanding abnormal sexual behaviour it is my opinion that these particular theorists fail to fully appreciate human individuality. Soble (2002) notes that there is no necessary connection between the naturalness and unnaturalness of a particular sexual act or a specific type of sexual activity and it’s moral and non moral quality, so why should we wonder if a particular sexual behaviour or act normal or abnormal? Soble (2002) puts forward that continuing discussions of normal/natural and abnormal/ unnatural, firstly helps to complete our picture of human nature to understand the human species more fully. Secondly, understanding the difference might be useful or the discipline of psychology as if we assume that a desire or tendency to engage in unwanted or abnormal sexual behaviour is a sign or symptom of mental pathology and thirdly Soble (2002) goes on to speculate that even though normal sexual behaviour is not alone morally good nor right, and abnormal sexual behaviour or is not necessarily morally bad or wrong, it is still possible to argue that whether a particular sexual act or type of sexuality is normal or abnormal does influence, to a greater rather than lesser extent weather the sexual behaviour is morally good or bad”. Just as weather a sexual act is considered abnormal or non-morally good that is produces pleasure and arousal for the participants, may be a factor, in evaluating the behaviour morally. Gray cited in Soble (2002) argues that there is difficulties with the notion of normal and abnormal, as normal may be used synonymously with “usual” and “ordinary” in which case abnormal would appear to be entirely culturally relative. On the other hand normal may be used to describe particular activities as the outcomes of naturally occurring processes. Thus such a definition would have a consequence that all perversions or abnormal behaviour are natural or normal , since the fetishes of the coprophiliac are much the outcome of his natural desires and propensities of those of the normal heterosexual, although Gray (2002) does go on to note that even if it were argued that there was a breakdown in the control mechanisms governing the behaviour of the coprophiliac, still that behaviour itself could be accounted for by naturally occurring events, e.g., biological law.
Because sexual inclinations are subjective experiences within the individual only they are in a position where they may judge what they consider what is abnormal sexual behaviour. This may be demonstrated using the following analogy: consider two people (which refer to A and B) watching a pornographic film. The film depicts a couple having anal sex. Let us suggest that A finds the depiction incredibly arousing but B finds it distasteful. To A the depiction on screen is in accordance with his or her individual sexual inclinations for he or she finds it arousing. To B the depiction is not in accordance with his or her individual sexual inclinations and so he or she does not become aroused by it. For B then the act on screen is a perverse sexual act because it does not comply with his or her set of tastes. B would be wrong however in describing the depicted act as universally perverse because A finds it incredibly arousing. It is ones individual sexual desires that defines what is sexually abnormal for that particular person. To define abnormal sexual behaviour as a violation of a universal law is to underestimate the complexity of an individual's desires. Such a definition may also lead to persecution and negative stigmatism. For example: if a universal moral law dictates that bestiality is a perversion then those who practice it become condemned or labelled as perverts, abnormal and deviants.
The meaning of individual sexual nature is regarded as our personal set of sexual desires and inclinations, all of which are inherently unknowable to other people due to their subjective nature, we can move on to identifying exactly what is meant by abnormal . By abnormal I mean inclinations or acts which would be contrary to ones individual sexual nature. This can be understood using the following example: imagine a case where a woman is in deep financial straits. She has no home, no next of kin and no other way of improving her status than selling her body. Whilst she is sure this is her only option if she wishes to change her situation for the better she has no sexual inclination toward such acts. To be more specific the woman's individual sexual nature does not stretch to prostitution. The idea of selling her body is repugnant to her and no sexual satisfaction could be derived from it. Here it is identified what the woman concerned may consider an act of abnormal sexual behaviour, that is an act which is contrary to her individual sexual nature as she would receive no sexual gratification from it. Only this kind of act should be considered a sexually abnormal.
The moral status of prostitution is an issue which plays on the mind of society. Its exact moral status is unclear however many still consider it as an immoral profession. This belief may stem from a preconceived idea of how sexual relations should occur. For example, many believe that only sex between married couples can be considered ethical.
This raises the moral issue of whether prostitution should be considered an abnormal sexual behaviour. I refer now back to the reference presented earlier where It was demonstrated a definition of sexual abnormality in reference to a woman whose only way to improve her financial situation is to sell her body. The act was repugnant to her because it deviated from her individual sexual nature and so, to her, prostitution is an abnormal sexual behaviour. Another example which deals with a woman with a different opinion on prostitution. Imagine a woman in a similar situation. She is poor, has no next of kin and no other way of improving her status than by becoming a prostitute. Unlike the previous woman however the very idea of selling her body is an arousing prospect which could fulfil her sexually time after time. To this woman prostitution is not sexually abnormal as it is in accordance with her individual sexual nature. As both demonstrate whether prostitution can be described as abnormal is entirely subjective. Such a definition may also apply to other areas of moral controversy such as incest, necrophilia, bestiality, and fetishism, to name just a few.
DSM Classification
All societies attempt to control the sexual behaviour of its members. One mechanism of exercising this control is to define a specific sexual interest as pathognomonic for a mental disorder. The American Psychiatric Association publishes the Diagnostic and statistical manual (DSM); it describes the criteria and defining features of all formally recognised mental disorders. It serves as a definitive resource for mental health professionals.. The DSM can have an impact that shapes how doctors and even the rest of society view sexuality. “A psychiatric diagnosis is more than shorthand to facilitate communication among professionals or to standardise research parameters” wrote Moser, Kleinplatz, in a 2005 paper published in the Journal of psychology and Human sexuality. “Psychiatric diagnosis affects child custody decisions, self-esteem, whether individuals are hired or fired, receive security clearances or have other rights and privilages curtailed. Criminals may find that their sentences are either mitigated or enhanced as a direct result of their diagnosis. The equating of unusual sexual interest with psychiatric diagnosis has been used to justify the oppression of sexual minorities and to serve political agendas. A review of this area is not only a scientific issue but also a human rights issue” (Moser, Kleinplatz, 2005).
Alexander (2008), notes that there has been no shortage of opinion of what should be changed, deleted or included in the DSM-V however suggests that a revision of diagnosis and the language that would separate arousal disorders into genital (more biological in origin) and subjective subtypes.
Conclusion
In conclusion it can be seen that a natural definition of what is considered abnormal would acknowledge that we each have a set of sexual inclinations which we are powerless to control. They arise seemingly without our consent. Because of this basic understanding we must conclude that the only fair way to define an abnormal sexual behaviour is on a person-to-person holistic basis for it is not anyone's position to decide for the whole of humanity what is and is not an abnormal sexual behaviour or sexual act. With this thought it may have some reflection upon what is and is not included, deleted and changed in the DSM-V.

REFERENCE
• Alexander, B. (2008) What’s “normal” sex? Shrinks seek definition. sexplorationhttp://www.msnbc.msn.com.
• American Psychiatric Association (2000) Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed., text revised). Washington, DC: Author
• Faraone, Christopher. (1999) Ancient Greek Love Magic. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
• Field, M. (2008). A brief cultural history of love and sex. The independent; Love & sex. http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/love-sex/culture-of-love/a-brief-cultural-history-of-sex-938527.html.
• Flaceliere, Robert. (1962) Love in Ancient Greece. New York: Crow Publishers.
• Garrison, Daniel H. (2000) Sexual Culture in Ancient Greece. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
• Gray. R, (2002) sex and sexual pervesion, The Philosophy of sex: contemporary readings. 4th Ed. Edited by Alan Soble. England: Rowman & littlefield.
• Haecker, S. & Dickson, P. (2002) Leisure and sexual behaviour: Masturbation- Normal or abnormal Leisure. University of South Australia. http://www.grin.com/e-book/107173/masturbation-normal-or-abnormal-leisure.
• Johnson. M & Ryan T. (2005) Sexuality in Greek and Roman Society and Literature. A Sourcebook. London and New York: Routledge.
• Kennair, L. E. O., Schmitt, D., Fjeldavli, Y. L., Harkem, S. K. (2009). Sex Differences in Sexual Desires and Attitudes in Norwegian Samples. Interpersona 3 (Suppl.1), 1-32.
• Moser, C. And Kleinplatz, P. (2005) DSM-IV-TR and the paraphilias: An argument for removal. Journal of psychology and human sexuality, 7, (43).
• Nagel, Thomas. (1979). "Sexual Perversion." Mortal Questions, 1st ed. London: Cambridge University Press.
• Ruddick, Sara. (1994)"Better Sex." Philosophy and Sex, 3rd ed. Edited by Robert Baker and Frederick Elliston. New York: Prometheus Books.
• Soble, A. (2002) The philosophy of sex: contemporary readings. 4th Ed. England Rowman & Littlefield
• Spitzer,R. (2003) Evidence Found for Effectiveness of
Reorientation. Archives of Sexual Behavior, Vol. 32, No. 5, October 2003, pp. 403-417.
• Ubillos, S., Paez, D. & Gonzalez (2000) Culture & sexual Behaviour. Psicothema.vol 12, pp70-82.
• Vakin, S. (2006). Sex and personality. http://personalitydirsorders.suite101.com/article.cfm/sexual_behaviour