Talk:Polymorphous perversity

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Psychology Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Sexology and sexuality Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

It is requested that an image or photograph of Polymorphous perversity be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible. The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other websites.

Upload

Does Freud think of sex merely in terms of "socially" normative behavior?

I'm no expert here, I admit.

But "normative" means conforming to a standard.

Of course all societies have such norms.

But many educated Westerners, especially in the past, thought in terms of natural norms, specifically, that penile-vaginal sex was "normal" because they thought it conforming to nature, that is, a natural rather than socially determined norm.

Just because young children allegedly pass through phases of pyschosexual development that didn't focus eroticism on the natural norms need not lead one to question the naturalness of adult sexuality, just as the fact that butterflies pass through a wormlike stage is no reason to think that it's natural for the adult to have a completely different form.

My question is, how did Freud think about this in regard to his theory of polymorphous perversity? I suspect that he thought that heterosexual penile-vaginal intercourse was normal in an absolute sense rather than as merely being the social of norm of this or that society, as it is, of course, for the vast majority of human cultures.

To say that such a view is mistaken, that there is no such natural sexual norms, is a matter of opinion rather than of fact.

We should frame Wikipedia articles from the point of view of the persons being reported on, after all.

So I repeat, how did Freud think about it?

12:56, 19 December 2013 (UTC) Michael Christian