Hot dogs: A bizarre case of zoophilic exhibitionism and frotteurism

In previous blogs, I have separately examined zoophilia (sexual arousal from animals), exhibitionism (sexual arousal from exposing one’s genitals to one or more people), and frotteurism (sexual arousal from rubbing one’s genitals against other people). Today’s blog examines the only case ever published in the scientific literature of zoophilic exhibitionism and zoophilic frotteurism.

The case in question dates back to a paper published in 1991 by Dr. Richard McNally and Dr. Brian Lukach in the Journal of Behavioral Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry. Their case study involved a white 33-year old “mildly mentally retarded man” (who they called ‘Mr. Z’) who was the only child of separated parents – an alcoholic father and a schizophrenic mother who also suffered from epilepsy (and who died when he was 12 years old). Mr. Z’s preferred sexual behaviour was to expose himself and masturbate in front of large dogs of either sex, and who also liked to rub his penis on large dogs. He had no sexual interest in small dogs or other animals (and would therefore be classed as an exclusive canophile that I  examined in a previous blog on cynophilia). Unlike most exhibitionists, he never exposed his genitals in front of women, and he never had sexual intercourse with the dogs. Mr. Z had engaged in a series of “satisfactory sexual relationships with women” (and also had a three-year marriage but had ended)

Mr. Z also engaged in zoophilic voyeurism (which in Mr. Z’s case involved sexual arousal from watching dogs). Various publications have noted situations where people may have voyeuristic fantasies about sexual contact with animals without actually wanting to have sex with them. Nancy Friday in her book My Secret Garden, included 190 fantasies from different women (of which 23 involved zoophilic activity). Friday argued that zoophilic fantasies had the capacity to provide an escape from cultural expectations, restrictions, and judgments in relation to sex. R.E.L. Masters in his 1962 book Forbidden Sexual behavior and Morality also noted that interest in and sexual excitement at watching animals mate may be an indicator of latent zoophilia.

Mr. Z was first caught at the age of 20 years rubbing his penis on the back fur of a neighbour’s dog. He was consequently hospitalized in a psychiatric institution and while there was taught to masturbate by another male patient. On leaving psychiatric care Mr. Z first began to masturbate in front of dogs (i.e., he exchanged zoophilic frotteurism for zoophilic exhibitionism). His usual pattern of behaviour was to use food to attract stray dogs in his neighbourhood and to take the dog back to his grandmother’s house (if she was not in). if the house was occupied he would simply take the dog to a nearby wooded area and masturbate in front of the dog. Once he had ejaculated, he would get the dog to lick his penis. However, Mr. Z never attempted to have sex with any of the dogs he masturbated in front of. Mr. Z was also of the opinion that the dogs enjoyed him masturbating in front of them, and based his opinion on an incident where a dog had rubbed its penis on his leg after a masturbatory session in front of the dog.

Mr. Z’s paraphilic behaviour dated back to a specific incident in childhood when at the age of just four years old, a male cousin told him that it was “fun” to rub a penis on the fur of a dog’s back. Following an arrest for masturbating in front of neighbour’s dogs, Mr Z was referred for treatment to address his “compulsive sexually deviant behaviour” after a neighbour had discovered him masturbating in front of her dog in her garden. In 1991, McNally and Lukach  treated Mr. Z using masturbatory satiation, covert sensitization, and contingency management procedures (avoiding setting that may provoke the behaviour) over a six-month period. After 15 sessions, Mr. Z’s rated interest in his most exciting zoophilic scenario dropped from 10 to 0, and that his sexual arousal to non-deviant scenes increased from 5 to 10 after 12 sessions. The treatment resulted in a reduction in his sexual arousal to dogs with no more reported incidents of him masturbating in front of dogs (although as far as I can ascertain there was no long-term follow-up).

Dr. Anil Aggrawal in his 2009 book Forensic and Medico-legal Aspects of Sexual Crimes and Unusual Sexual Practices classified exhibitionists into four different types of exhibitionism:

• Fantasizing Exhibitionists: This type comprises people that fantasize about exhibiting their genitals to other people but don’t actually do it.
• Pure Exhibitionists: This type comprises people that expose their genitals to other people from a distance.
• Exhibitionistic Criminals: This type typically comprises sexual offenders that are primarily exhibitionists, but may engage in other sexual crimes (e.g., paedophilia).
• Exclusive Exhibitionists: This type typically comprises offenders that cannot form normal romantic and sexual relationships with other people. Here, exhibitionism is the sole outlet for sexual gratification.

Dr. Aggrawal specifically mentions zoophilic exhibitionists as belonging to the group of fantasizing exhibitionists and “may turn to zoophilic exhibitionism to fulfill their fantasies, since it apparently is a safer activity”. In a separate paper (in the Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine) presenting a new typology of zoophilia, Mr. Z would most likely be classed as a tactile zoophile who gets sexual excitement from touching, stroking or fondling an animal or their genitals but do not actually have sex with the animal. Aggrawal mentioned that that some tactile zoophiles engage in zoophilic frotteurism, and that for sexual pleasure rub their genitals against animals. Here, he seemed to be implicitly making reference to the case study by McNally and Lukach.

The paper by McNally and Lukach concluded that their case study was “especially unusual” for two specific reasons. Firstly, unlike most other zoophiles, “Mr. Z neither fantasized nor engaged direct sexual contact with dogs” but simply exposed himself in front of them. Secondly, his sexual preference was zoophilic exhibitionism over sexual intercourse with women.

Dr Mark Griffiths, Professor of Gambling Studies, International Gaming Research Unit, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, UK

Further reading

Aggrawal A. (2009). Forensic and Medico-legal Aspects of Sexual Crimes and Unusual Sexual Practices. Boca Raton: CRC Press.

Aggrawal, A. (2011). A new classification of zoophilia. Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine, 18, 73-78.

Duffield, G., Hassiotis, A., & Vizard, E. (1998). Zoophilia in young sexual abusers. Journal of Forensic Psychiatry, 9, 294-304.

Friday, N. (1973). My Secret Garden. New York, NY; Simon & Schuster

Hensley, C., Tallichet, S. E., & Singer, S. D. (2006). Exploring the possible link between childhood and adolescent bestiality and interpersonal violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 21, 910-923.

Masters, R.E.L. (1962). Forbidden Sexual behavior and Morality. New York, NY: Lancer Books.

McNally, R.J. & Lukach, B.M. (1991). Behavioral treatment of zoophilic exhibitionism. Journal of Behavioral Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 22, 281-284.

Fame in desire: A brief look at celebriphilia

In a previous blogs I have examined both Celebrity Worship Syndrome and whether fame can be addictive. Another behaviour allied to both of these is celebriphilia. There has been no scientific research on celebriphilia and I have only come across a few passing references to it in academic texts. In his 2009 book Forensic and Medico-legal Aspects of Sexual Crimes and Unusual Sexual Practices, Dr Anil Aggrawal describes it as a sexual paraphilia where a “pathological desire to have sex with a celebrity”. The online Medical Dictionary is slightly different and defines celebriphilia as “an intense desire to have a romantic relationship with a celebrity” (and is therefore slightly different is the focus on this second definition is romance rather than sex, although there is an implicit assumption that having romantic relationship would involve sex). Finally, the only other definition that I have come across is in the online Nation Master encyclopedia that was a bit more padded out and claimed that:

“Celebriphilia is the sexual fetishism and obsession with sex with a celebrity or famous person. Celebriphiliacs may stalk these celebrities and either observe them for sexual pleasure voyeuristically or try and approach them and have sex with them. Some may simply masturbate to images of them”

Despite this more in-depth definition, it actually complicates matters as it brings in other behaviours such as voyeurism and stalking that are separate entities in and of themselves. As far as I can tell, the first reference to ‘celebriphilia’ appeared in an article written by journalists Benjamin Svetkey and Allison Hope Weiner for Entertainment Weekly. Their article was about Bonnie Lee Bakley, the wife of American actor Robert Blake (star of shows like Baretta and films such as In Cold Blood), who was shot in 2001 (May 4) while sitting outside a Los Angeles restaurant in Blake’s car. (Blake was eventually charged with his wife’s murder but was found not guilty. The murder remains officially unsolved although Bakley’s grown-up children from previous relationships took out a civil suit on Blake and was later found guilty of wrongful death).

The focus of the article by Svetkey and Weiner was Bakley’s celebriphilia and her ‘celebrity obsession’ (more specifically, her long-term history of pursuing relationships with celebrities). Bakley’s close friends all stated that her aim in life was to marry someone famous and all of her actions were geared around achieving this goal. Bakley was quoted as saying “being around celebrities makes you feel better than other people”. Her pursuing of celebrities began in 1990 when she became obsessed with wanting to marry rock ‘n’ roll singer Jerry Lee Lewis. She even moved to Memphis where Lewis was living, met him, and befriended Lewis’ sister as a way of getting closer to him. Bakley may have had a brief sexual relationship with Lewis, and in 1993 she gave birth to a daughter and claimed Lewis was the father (and even went as far as to name the baby Jeri Lee). Paternity tests later proved that Lewis was not the father of Bakley’s daughter. Following a move from Memphis to California, she continued her celebrity obsession by pursuing many different celebrities including actor Gary Busey, singer-songwriter and guitarist Chuck Berry, singer Frankie Valli, actor Robert De Niro, singer-songwriter Lou Christie, publisher Larry Flynt, entertainer Dean Martin, and musician Prince, before having a relationship with Marlon Brando’s son, Christian (following his release from prison in 1996).

It was in 1999, that Bakley met American actor Robert Blake while still dating Brando. She became pregnant again (telling both Blake and Brando that they were the father of the baby). She believed Brando was the father of the daughter she gave birth to (naming the child Christian Shannon Brando). However, later paternity tests showed it was Blake who was the father (and the baby was then re-named Rose). In November 2000, Bakley and Blake married (and Blake became Bakley’s tenth [!!!] husband). When I first read about Bakley’s attempts to have a relationship with someone famous, the first words that sprang to mind was ‘groupie’ and ‘stalker’. However, the article by Svetkey and Weiner specifically stated that:

“People who attempt to make themselves ”feel better” by romantically pursuing the famous [are] not groupies: Groupies are merely overzealous, oversexed fans. They’re not stalkers, either. Bakley’s relationship with Blake wasn’t imaginary…nor is she known to have ever threatened him with physical harm. And although her past was hardly squeaky-clean…she wasn’t simply a grifter. What Bakley pursued with meticulous and methodical precision wasn’t so much cash as cachet, the reflected glory of being with a star. Any star would do — even one like Blake, who hasn’t shone for the better part of a decade. Unlike stalkers and groupies, people like Bakley generally don’t develop crushes on the stars they pursue — it’s fame itself that flames their desires, regardless of whom it’s attached to. Sometimes they don’t even seem to like those they’re chasing. While Bakley was attempting a relationship with Blake, for instance, she was also apparently involved with Marlon Brando’s son Christian”.

Most of the famous people that she pursued most actively (i.e., Blake, Brando, Lewis) had careers that were on the wane. She chose people that wanted validation that they were still famous. Both Bakley and the ‘stars’ she chased appeared to be yearning validation, attention and wanting to be perceived as special. An American psychotherapist – Donald Fleming – was interviewed for the article by Svetkey and Weiner. He speculated about celebriphiles:

”Often these people have serious identity problems. They lack a centered sense of self. They’re usually people that have not developed any particular skills or abilities in life. They never developed out of their grandiose childhood wishes and fantasies to be important. The only way they can feel important or special or unique is through famous people being part of their life…People who follow stars often have the obsessive-compulsive trait. They can fool almost anybody. They become so acute at reading how to meet another person’s needs that they can pick up on their vulnerabilities and play them like a violin”.

Dr. David Giles who wrote one of the best books on the psychology of fame – Illusions of Immortality: A Psychology of Fame and Celebrity – explains the relationships that people have with celebrities as a parasocial interaction:

”One of the things about fame is how incredibly new it is to human experience. It started with mass communication, which is only about 100 years old. And the speed with which it’s developed – radio and then TV – has been astonishing. In an evolutionary sense, we may not have caught up with the phenomenon of fame as a species”.

Celebrity (and therefore celebriphilia) is as Dr. Giles would argue a completely modern, man-made phenomenon. In typical journalese, Svetkey and Weiner wrote that celebrity has “been injected into the cultural bloodstream like an untested drug – with a similar rush of disorienting results”. They also speculate about other people that display celebriphilia:

“Courtney Love may have once suffered a touch of it. (‘Become friends with Michael Stipe’, Kurt Cobain’s widow supposedly jotted in a journal years ago, mapping her road to fame)…And certainly Whitney Walton – known around Hollywood as the mysterious ‘Miranda’ – has something like it. She became infamous for charming her way into telephone friendships with Billy Joel, Warren Beatty, Quincy Jones, Richard Gere, and…other celebrities [including] Robert De Niro”.

As noted above, there has been no empirical research on celebriphilia unless you include the small amount of research on ‘celebrity stalking’ (although very few academics who have written on the topic use the word ‘celebriphilia’). However, there are a few exceptions. For instance, Dr. Brian Spitzberg and Dr. Michelle Cadiz wrote a paper on the media construction of stalking stereotypes and described one of the types as ‘stalking as celebriphilia’ in a 2002 issue of the Journal of Criminal Justice and Popular Culture (although the authors didn’t actually define what celebriphilia was in this context). In a 2006 book (Constructing Crime: Perspectives on Making News and Social Problems) edited by Dr. Victor Kappeler and Dr. Gary Potter, the authors briefly noted (in what seems a follow on from the paper by Spitzberg and Cadiz) that “media reports eventually moved away from a dominant image of stalkers as exclusively experiencing ‘celebriphilia’”.

Dr Mark Griffiths, Professor of Gambling Studies, International Gaming Research Unit, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, UK

Further reading

Aggrawal A. (2009). Forensic and Medico-legal Aspects of Sexual Crimes and Unusual Sexual Practices. Boca Raton: CRC Press.

Giles, D. (2000). Illusions of Immortality: A Psychology of Fame and Celebrity. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Kappeler, V.E. & Gary W. Potter, G.W. (2006). Constructing Crime: Perspectives on Making News and Social Problems. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press.

King, G. (2011). Who murdered Bonny Lee Bakley? (part 7: Bony the celebriphiliac). Crime Library, Located at: http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/notorious_murders/family/bakley/7.html

Medical Dictionary (2012). Celebriphilia. Located at: http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Celebriphilia

Nation Master (2012). Celebriphilia. Located at: http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Celebriphilia

Spitsberg, B.H. & Cadiz, M. (2002). The media construction of stalking stereotypes. Journal of Criminal Justice and Popular Culture, 9(3), 128-149.

Svetkey, B. & Weiner, A.H. (2001). Dangerous game. Entertainment Weekly, June 22. Located at: http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,256019,00.html

Wiktionary (2012). Citations: Celebriphilia. Located at: http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Citations:celebriphilia

Sweat dreams: A brief look at osmophilia

In a previous blog on semen fetishes, I ended the article by mentioning that human sweat fetish was one of the few bodily secretion fetishes that I had yet to write about. Given that some of my colleagues and I (see “Further reading” section below) have actually carried out research into human pheromones (i.e., an excreted or secreted chemical that triggers a sexual or social response in members of the same species), I thought I would use today’s blog to fill the gap.

In 2008, the newspaper Japan Today reported the story of a 22-year-old gay man (Torao Fukuda), who was arrested for stealing money and playing kits from eight locker rooms of football clubs in Osaka and Nara (Japan) over a four-month period. It turned out that the money stolen was secondary to the real reason for crime. It transpired that Fukuda liked male athletes’ sports uniforms and underwear with the smell of sweat. Based on this brief news report, it may have been that Fukuda was an osmophile.

Dr. Anil Aggrawal in his 2009 book Forensic and Medico-legal Aspects of Sexual Crimes and Unusual Sexual Practices defines osmophilia as a sexual paraphilia in which an individual derives sexual pleasure and arousal caused by bodily odours, such as sweat, urine or menses (i.e., menstruating females). Dr. Robert Campbell claims (in his 2009 Psychiatric Dictionary) that osmophilia is a parosmia (an olfactory dysfunction characterized by the inability of the brain to properly identify an odor’s ‘natural’ smell). Personally (and based on what I’ve read on osmophilia), there is no evidence that such people have any kind of ‘inability’ to identify natural smells). Other names for the same condition include osmolagnia, osphresiophilia, and ozolagnia. The Wikipedia entry defined things slightly differently:

“Osmolagnia is a paraphilia for, and sexual attraction to, or sexual arousal by smells and odors emanating from the body, especially the sexual areas. Sigmund Freud used the term osphresiolagnia in reference to pleasure caused by odors”.

It should also be noted that Fukuda may have arguably also been a salophile. Salophilia refers to individuals who derive sexual pleasure and arousal from salty things – especially body sweat. As far as I am aware, there is no actual paraphilia concerned with sexual arousal to sweat alone (as osmophilia and salophilia are not exclusive to body sweat). There is certainly a market out there for sweat fetishists including online sweat stores and online sweat fetish sites (such as the Sexy Sweat and Maverick Men websites).

According to Dr. Brenda Love in her Encyclopedia of Unusual Sex Practices, at one time perspiration was thought to have magical qualities and was used in potions to counteract love spells. She said “the male wore out a new pair of shoes by walking and then drank wine from the right shoe which naturally mixed with the sweat from his foot. This reversed the spell and caused the man to feel hate towards the enchantress”.

Research and academic writings on osmophilia are scarce. As mentioned above, the first psychological references to the condition were made by Freud. A 1959 paper by Dr. Paul Friedman in the Psychanalytic Quarterly noted that:

“Freud’s interest in the vicissitudes of olfaction, both in human evolution and in the psychosexual development of the individual, was documented as early as 1897. In a letter to Wilhelm Fliess he drew a parallel between the two and discussed the organic component of repression: ‘To put it crudely, the current memory stinks just as an actual object may stink; and just as we turn away our sense organ (the head and nose) in disgust, so do the preconscious and our conscious apprehension turn away from the memory. This is repression.’ This line of thought was developed further by Freud in 1909, when he stated that ‘…a tendency to osphresiolagnia, which had become extinct since childhood, may play a part in the genesis of neurosis’; and in a footnote added in 1910 to the Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality he said: ‘Psychoanalysis…has shown the importance, as regards the choice of a fetish, of a coprophilic pleasure in smelling”.

In a previous blog on fetishism, I wrote at length about a study led by Dr G. Scorolli (University of Bologna, Italy) on the relative prevalence of different fetishes using online fetish form data. It was estimated (very conservatively in the authors’ opinion), that their sample size comprised at least 5000 fetishists (but was likely to be a lot more). They reported that some of the sites featured references to osmophilia (with 82 members of such fetish sites – less than 1% of all fetish site members). However, osmophilia was included along with mysophilia (deriving sexual pleasure from filth often women’s soiled knickers) so there is no way of knowing how many of the 82 fetish site members were osmophiles.

While researching this article I came across plenty of online self-confessions. I have no idea whether the ones I have selected are representative, and I deliberately included the third one because the individual concerned had clearly done their own research on the topic:

• Extract 1: “Is it weird to be turned on by the smell of the opposite sex’s sweat? It sounds strange but I find the smell of my girlfriend’s sweat (underarms) really arousing and especially her feet too on a hot day. I accept I have a foot fetish but I’m guessing I must be turned on by the pheromones or something”
  
• Extract 2: “I do not want to be judged, but honestly, for some reason I’m attracted to sweat. It turns me on…just the smell of it can make me get very aroused. I love to caress anything that has sweat glands on the human body with my mouth. Is there truly anything wrong with me?”
  
• Extract 3: “I have one fetish I’ve recently discovered that caught me off guard: sweat. Sweat is arousing, under the right conditions. Not all sweat gets me excited, but, under the right circumstances, a body wet with sweat can be mind-blowing…I’m sure some of you are probably thinking that the idea is disgusting, and a few months ago, I would have agreed with you, but keep an open mind…all guys are not created equal. Each has their own, unique smell when they sweat…Androstenol is a hormone excreted by fresh male sweat, and is said to be arousing. Androstenone is the hormone emitted once that sweat becomes exposed to oxygen, and is said to be an unpleasant smell, but can still be arousing for some. The former, androstenol, is short-lived, (about 10 minutes after fresh sweat is produced,) and then becomes androstenone, which generally does not elicit a chemical reaction of arousal in a majority of people. So, basically, if you’ve just finished an exertive physical activity, you have 10 minutes of good sweat, before it becomes stale, malodorous sweat. This is why when some sweat, it smells unpleasant and strong, and when others sweat, it’s not so noticeable, or they smell good; it’s how you perceive their odor, and how old the sweat is” .
  

Research on osmphilia is sparse and we know nothing about the incidence, prevalence or etiology of such behaviour. The first two extracts above appear to suggest that they feel their sexual preference is unusual and are searching for validating support. However, for most osmphiles that are sexually attracted to human sweat, it is something that is simply not problematic in their lives (based on the anecdotal evidence I have collated from online forums). There is (of course) a whole separate research literature on human pheromones, and maybe I’ll cover that in a future blog. This blog was purely about the sexual attraction of sweat as a fetish and/or paraphilia.

Dr Mark Griffiths, Professor of Gambling Studies, International Gaming Research Unit, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, UK

Further reading

Aggrawal A. (2009). Forensic and Medico-legal Aspects of Sexual Crimes and Unusual Sexual Practices. Boca Raton: CRC Press.

Campbell, R.J. (2009). Campbell’s Psychiatric Dictionary (9th Edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Friedman, P. (1959). Some observations on the sense of smell. Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 28, 307-329.

Japan Today (2008). Arrested uniform thief says he has sweat fetish. September 2. Located at: http://www.japantoday.com/category/crime/view/arrested-uniform-thief-says-he-has-sweat-fetish

Love, B. (2001). Encyclopedia of Unusual Sex Practices. London: Greenwich Editions.

Sergeant, M., Davies, M.N.O., Dickins, T.E. & Griffiths, M.D. (2005). The self-reported importance of olfaction during human mate choice. Sexualities, Evolution and Gender, 7, 199-213.

Sergeant, M.J.T., Dickins, T.E., Davies, M.N.O. &Griffiths, M.D. (2007). Hedonic ratings by women of body odor in men are related to sexual orientation, Archives of Sexual Behavior, 36, 395-401.

Scorolli, C., Ghirlanda, S., Enquist, M., Zattoni, S. & Jannini, E.A. (2007). Relative prevalence of different fetishes. International Journal of Impotence Research, 19, 432-437.

Mating glances: A brief look at faunoiphilia

According to Dr. Anil Aggrawal’s 2009 book Forensic and Medico-legal Aspects of Sexual Crimes and Unusual Sexual Practices, faunoiphilia is a sexual paraphilia in which individuals derive sexual pleasure and arousal from watching animals mate. Dr. Aggrawal notes that faunoiphilia is therefore a form of zoophilic voyeurism and can also be referred to as mixoscopic zoophilia. At the end of 2011, Dr Aggrawal published a new zoophilia typology in the Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine (and which I examined in a previous blog). In this typology, Aggrawal classed zoophiles into one of ten different types (Class I to Class X).

In this typology, faunoiphiles come under Class III and comprises individuals that Aggrawal describes as zoophilic fantasizers. Aggrawal claims these people fantasize about having sexual intercourse with animals but do not actually have sex with animals. He claims that this type of zoophile may masturbate in the presence of animals, and that both zoophilic voyeurs and zoophilic exhibitionists are subsumed within this particular zoophilic type. Prior to this paper, R.E.L. Masters in his 1962 book Forbidden Sexual Behavior and Morality also noted that interest in and sexual excitement at watching animals mate may be an indicator of latent zoophilia.

There is clearly a difference between being interested in and watching animals mate, and being sexually aroused by such behaviour. For instance, while researching a blog on arachnophilia (individuals who derive sexual pleasure and arousal from spiders), I came across the fact that the orb spider has a detachable penis. I mention this because in the same article it mentioned that the Argonaut octopus also has a detachable penis that actually separates and swims over to the female. I would certainly like to see this – but obviously not for sexual pleasure. While researching my blog on delphinophilia (individuals who derive sexual pleasure and arousal from dolphins), I read that dolphins’ penises are major sense organs, used to feel out objects. Again, this is something I would like to see but not for sexual pleasure. (If you’re really interested in the world’s weirdest animal penises then check out the online article published in an October issue of The Week).

Almost all online references to faunoiphilia simply mention a one-line definition without any further discussion. There are also some websites that provide a paragraph or two on the morality of the behaviour and/or the author’s own personal view without reference to any ‘fact’ or reference to anything published in the clinical or academic literature (such as the short article on Maddy’s Mansion website). In fact, this paragraph I am writing now would be classed along with those I am complaining about as being essentially ‘content free’! However, there are a few exceptions. The online Urban Dictionary also describes faunoiphilia, as a sexual paraphilia and a type of zoophilic voyeurism. It has a more detailed definition than most other academic definitions I have come across and notes:

“[Faunoiphilia] is sexual arousal from watching animals copulate. Arousal from faunoiphilia may be intensified if the animals mating are different in size, age, species, or a combination of the three. It may also be intensified if the sexual organs of one or both animals can be seen. Animals of faunoiphilia interest include, but are not limited to horses, dogs, dolphins, and various rodents”

Given the distinct lack of empirical evidence on faunoiphilia, I am unsure as to where the claims made have come from although I cannot refute any of the assertions made. Similarly, the online Nation Master encyclopedia also describes a variety of different types of faunoiphile behaviours but has no entries in the ‘references’ section to support any of the material in the entry. It claims that faunoiphiles “may” (my emphasis) engage in one or more of the following behaviours:

• May or may not be involved in bestiality
• May have little or no interest in human sexuality
• May purchase animals from pet stores or breeders for the sole purpose of watching them mate
• May write stories about animals mating
• May draw pictures of animals mating
• May masturbate while watching or thinking about animals mating
• May take photographs of animals mating
• May download pictures of animals mating from the internet

Most of the evidence for faunoiphilia existing comes from case studies. In 1991, Dr. Richard McNally and Dr. Brian Lukach published a paper in the Journal of Behavioral Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry. Their case study involved a white 33-year old “mildly mentally retarded man” (who they called ‘Mr. Z’) who was the only child of separated parents – an alcoholic father and a schizophrenic mother who also suffered from epilepsy (and who died when he was 12 years old). Mr. Z had engaged in a series of “satisfactory sexual relationships with women” (and also had a three-year marriage but had ended).

Mr. Z’s preferred sexual behaviour was to expose himself and masturbate in front of large dogs of either sex, and who also liked to rub his penis on large dogs. However, Mr. Z also engaged in zoophilic voyeurism (which in Mr. Z’s case involved sexual arousal from watching dogs engage in sexual behaviour but also was sexually aroused just watching dogs). Various publications have noted situations where people may have voyeuristic fantasies about sexual contact with animals without actually wanting to have sex with them. Nancy Friday in her book My Secret Garden, included 190 fantasies from different women (of which 23 involved zoophilic activity). Friday argues that zoophilic fantasies have the capacity to provide an escape from cultural expectations, restrictions, and judgments in relation to sex.

Given the scarcity of academic literature on faunoiphilia, we know nothing about the incidence, prevalence, or etiology of the behaviour. Maybe it is initiated after watching wildlife documentaries on television or maybe a chance sighting of animals copulating in the wild is enough to spark a sexual interest. We simply do not know. It could just be that faunoiphilia precedes zoophilia and is a stage that zoophiles go through before having actual sex with animals. However, very few of the zoophilic case studies I have read explicitly mention this (although the researchers may simply not have asked). This is certainly an area that should be researched more fully as part of the wider study of zoophilia.

Dr Mark Griffiths, Professor of Gambling Studies, International Gaming Research Unit, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, UK

Further reading

Aggrawal A. (2009). Forensic and Medico-legal Aspects of Sexual Crimes and Unusual Sexual Practices. Boca Raton: CRC Press.

Aggrawal, A. (2011). A new classification of zoophilia. Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine, 18, 73-78.

Friday, N. (1973). My Secret Garden. New York, NY; Simon & Schuster

Masters, R.E.L. (1962). Forbidden Sexual behavior and Morality. New York, NY: Lancer Books.

McNally, R.J. & Lukach, B.M. (1991). Behavioral treatment of zoophilic exhibitionism. Journal of Behavioral Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 22, 281-284.

Nation Master (2012). Faunoiphilia. Located at: http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/

To pee or not to pee: A beginner’s guide to omorashi

In two previous blogs on the sexual paraphilias of salirophilia (i.e., deriving sexual arousal from soiling or disheveling the object of their desire) and urophilia (i.e., deriving sexual arousal from the sight or thought of either the act of urination or the urine itself) I briefly made reference to omorashi (i.e., deriving sexual pleasure from having a full bladder). Dr. Anil Aggrawal in his 2009 book Forensic and Medico-legal Aspects of Sexual Crimes and Unusual Sexual Practices defines omorashi more specifically as being sexually aroused “from having a full bladder or a sexual attraction to someone else experiencing the discomfort of a full bladder” and also notes that it is “a fetish subculture predominantly seen in Japan”. Frances Twinn’s 2007 book, Miscellany of Sex also notes:

“[Omorashi is] mainly Japanese phenomenon, where a full bladder and wetting oneself in public causes arousal. Game shows and sex trade workers in Japan cater in large numbers to this fetish. Followers can also turn to Wet Set Magazine, an Australian-based publication aimed mainly at western practitioners”

In an online article at Listverse about the ‘top ten’ most bizarre fetishes, omorashi made an appearance in the number 10 spot and claimed (using information lifted from the Wikipedia entry on omorashi) that:

“For [omorashi] fetishists, climax usually coincides with the moment of relief and embarrassment experienced when the desperate individual loses bladder control. Though there is a small community devoted to such fetishism outside of Japan, it is usually overshadowed by the more hardcore fetishes, urolagnia and urophagia. Most omorashi videos are among the most softcore of erotica, featuring innocent young women, fully clothed, who have gotten themselves into an embarrassing bathroom situation. Commonly featured are schoolgirls, female working professionals, and other women attempting to look dignified before succumbing to the urge to childishly wet themselves”.

The Wikipedia entry is a little more detailed and claims that:

“Outside of Japan, it is not usually distinguished from urolagnia (urine fetish), though they are different things. Westerners who do make the distinction commonly use phrases such as ‘bladder desperation’ or ‘panty wetting’. The Japanese language term from which the subculture’s name is derived means ‘to wet oneself’ literally translated, ‘leaking’. The word is also occasionally romanized as ‘omorasi’ in the Kunrei-shiki romanization system”.

In researching this blog I came across a dedicated omorashi website (Omorashi.org) that describes itself as a softcore fetishist community that focuses on omorashi practices as well as other urophilic activities and claims to host over 525GB worth of videos and images. Another dedicated website is the ‘And The Worst Thing Is All That Juice I Drank’ run by a self-confessed omorashi fetishist, and features lots of omorashi fan fiction and fan art. The website owner says:

“My omorashi fetish is rather specific. I generally prefer desperation with accidental wetting (basically, just unintentional), clothed, male rather than female, nonsexual for the victim, and I really like seeing their mortification during and afterwards. So my posts will probably be biased toward that kind of thing. This is really just a place for me to indulge, but you are more than welcome to come along for the ride if you happen to enjoy it!”

The Wikipedia article also makes the point that:

“Most fetish activities concerning the use of bodily waste are considered by the general public as ‘hardcore’, taboo, or edgeplay. However, because the object of the fetish is clothed incontinence, omorashi videos do not feature direct sexual contact. The focus on clothed rather than overtly sexual images makes garment fetishism a prominent feature in most omorashi erotica: commonly featured outfits include those worn by schoolgirls, female working professionals, and other women attempting to look dignified before succumbing to the need to urinate”.

In Japanese subculture, there are a number of different ways by which the omorashi fetish can be practiced including ‘yagai’ and nappies (i.e., diapers). According to Wikipedia, ‘omorashi yagai’ translates as “to wet oneself outdoors (or publicly)”. Another variation of this is ‘yagai honyo’ that refers to outdoor (i.e., public) urination where the person removes their clothes in public to urinate. The Wikipedia article also claims that the practitioners of yagai honyo are similar to graffiti artists in that they engage in a public act without being caught. The practice of urinating in public while wearing a nappy (instead of underpants or knickers) is known as ‘oshime omorashi’ (as the literal translation is “to wet oneself in a diaper”). The article also claims that:

“Diapers may be favorable for public wetting because they render it more discreet and eliminate mess, and their use is not limited specifically to those with a diaper fetish. However, omorashi fetishists specifically interested in this aspect of the subculture could be considered a Japanese variation of the diaper lover community”.

An online article on omorashi at the Nation Master website also notes:

Depending on one’s role in an omorashi scenario (as the wetter or the watcher) these acts could be variously considered a form of sadism, masochism, sadomasochism, or erotic humiliation. It is worth noting that these scenarios almost invariably feature female wetters over males, and that the focus generally falls on the wetter’s tendency toward the irrepressible submissive qualities commonly associated with feminine weakness. In Japan, these attitudes are recognized as belonging to the wider archetyp of moe (pronounced “mo-eh”) fetishism. From this perspective, the incontinence serves as the essential, obvious sympathetic weakness that moe characters work hard to correct but never really succeed at getting rid of”.

To Excluding research on orgasm during urinary incontinence (see ‘further reading’ below for a couple of academic papers on the topic), I’ve come across very little that’s been written academically about omorashi. Dr. Christy Gibbs carried out her PhD on transgressing sexualities in Japanese animation and mentioned omorashi in passing but only as a type of Japanese sexual practice while talking about other Japanese-oriented animated pornography such as ‘tentacle rape’. Another academic paper that mentioned omorashi in passing was by Dr. Clarissa Smith in a 2009 issue of the journal Sexualities (in a paper exploring sexual cultures in the classroom), but again there was nothing of substance about omorashi itself. Maybe there’s more written in Japanese that I’ve been unable to access and/or understand. There’s certainly little written in English, even anecdotally.

Dr Mark Griffiths, Professor of Gambling Studies, International Gaming Research Unit, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, UK

Further reading

Aggrawal A. (2009). Forensic and Medico-legal Aspects of Sexual Crimes and Unusual Sexual Practices. Boca Raton: CRC Press.

Gibbs, C. (2012). Transgressing sexualities in Japanese animation. University of Waikato, PhD. Located at: http://researchcommons.waikato.ac.nz/bitstream/handle/10289/6746/thesis.pdf?sequence=3

Hilton, P. (1988). Urinary incontinence during sexual intercourse: a common, but rarely volunteered, symptom. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 95, 377-381.

Khan, Z., Bhola A., & Starer P. (1988). Urinary incontinence during orgasm. Urology, 31, 279-282.

Listverse (2007). Top 10 bizarre fetishes. September 24. Located at: http://listverse.com/2007/09/24/top-10-bizarre-fetishes/

Nation Master (2013). Omorashi. Located at: http://www.statemaster.com/encyclopedia/Omorashi

Smith, C. (2009). Pleasure and distance: Exploring sexual cultures in the classroom. Sexualities, 12, 568-585.

Twinn, F. (2007). The Miscellany of Sex: Tantalizing Travels Through Love, Lust and Libido. London: Arcturus.

Wikipedia (2013). Omorashi. Located at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omorashi

Surf emancipation: Using the internet to study zoophilia

I have just had a paper published in the latest issue of the Journal of Behavioral Addictions that outlines the advantages, disadvantages, and other implications of using the Internet to collect data from those people displaying sexually paraphilic behaviour. Up until around 2000, paraphilic behaviour had been relatively little studied outside of published case studies. However, in my new paper I have argued that the internet has provided a new arena in which researchers can collect data from people in much easier ways than prior to the introduction of online technologies. Probably the most used online data collection method for studying paraphilic behaviour is the online questionnaire. Typically in these types of study, online questionnaires are publicized and placed at online paraphilia forums. These forums are a convenient way to communicate information between paraphiliacs.

I argued in my latest paper that the one particular paraphilia where researchers have arguably made the most use of the internet for both recruitment and data collection is that of zoophilia. As Dr. Christopher Earls and Dr. Martin Lalumiere noted in a 2009 issue of the Archives of Sexual Behavior, almost all data on zoophiles since 2000 have come from online recruitment. There have been three notable quantitative studies of zoophilia among non-clinical (i.e., community) samples. This includes studies by Dr. Andrea Beetz (in 2004 with 32 zoophiles), Dr. Colin Williams and Dr. Martin Weinberg (2003; 114 zoophiles), and Dr. Hani Miletski (2004; 93 zoophiles). It could be argued that none of these data sets would have been possible without the advent of the internet, and the internet sites devoted to bestiality and zoophilia. Research into zoophilia via online data collection demonstrated that online samples provided different results to previously reported case studies. Unlike the relatively few published case accounts, online zoophilic studies suggested that there were both men and women who had clear preferences for zoophilic activities and that the behaviour was not a substitute for the absence of other humans in the locality. Online zoophilic studies also showed that far from suffering any kind of mental abnormality or psychiatric condition, that many zoophiles lived both happy and productive lives.

The Internet can also be a rich and complex resource of textual material. As such, it can be invaluable to those researchers interested in specific experiences of particular individuals such as zoophilia. Included in the lived experiences of zoophiles are perceptions, beliefs and feelings, all of which are made sense of by the individual through the process of meaning making. Online forums are often the first port of call for zoophiles to contact and meet other like-minded people. However extreme the sexual behaviour is, the internet arguably provides the best medium in which to facilitate people’s sexual desires. Some of the most interactive and textually rich parts of the Internet are numerous zoophilic forums. Zoophilic forums typically comprise interactive sites where messages can be left or particular topics discussed in real time. These sorts of data are naturalistic and can be collected without identifying oneself as a researcher or even acknowledging a researcher’s presence

In order to understand the nature of the bestiality subculture online, Dr. Robert Jenkins and Dr. Alexander Thomas in their 2004 book Deviance Online: Portrayals of Bestiality on the Internet studied 100 forum websites dedicated to the portrayal of bestiality. The authors claimed that the advent of the internet had facilitated the networking among and marketing to a subculture of participants across time and space. All 100 websites were selected and coded and fell into three main types. These were ‘pornography’ (i.e., sites oriented toward those who enjoyed viewing or participating in bestiality; 80% of the sites), ‘community building’ (i.e., sites oriented toward providing news or encouraging communication among fellow bestiality practitioners and sympathizers; 7%), and ‘exhibitionism’ (sites oriented to showing bestiality for exhibitionist purposes, either as moral judgment or for humour; 9%). The remaining sites were hybrid sites. The authors hypothesized that women would be disproportionately represented on bestiality websites. The study found only one of the 100 websites featured a (human) male in a bestial act (a man receiving fellatio from a goat). They also reported that it was difficult to describe the depictions of women as anything but degrading. They also claim that the:

“The Internet fulfills a similar function as bohemian neighborhoods and red light districts have fulfilled for other (larger) deviant subcultures in the past. By creating a commons for individuals with similar interests and concerns, it is not surprising that a subculture devoted to bestiality has developed”.

Despite the clear advantages of using online forum data to study zoophilic populations (e.g., ease of data collection, cost-efficiency), the collection of zoophilic data by ‘lurking’ (i.e., observing without making presence known) raises some interesting ethical issues. In online research, the lines have become blurred between ‘public’ and ‘private’ spaces. On some level, cyberspace is always a public domain unless specifically designated as private. However, respecting a person’s right to privacy is viewed as a basic ethical requirement of any social science study. Some may argue that it is the perceptions of the participant that defines the domain as public or private, rather than the physicality of the situation. The issue of privacy may become more complicated if the researcher is involved in online participant observation.

Another online methodology that can be utilized to collect data on paraphilic behaviours is online interviewing. Such a methodology is particularly useful for case study research involving paraphiliacs. Online interviewing of zoophiles is advantageous. As with collecting zoophilic data via online questionnaires, online interviewing of zoophiles involves a considerable saving in time for both researchers and participants as there is no travelling involved for either party. Online interviews can also be carried out synchronously (via an instant messenger system) or asynchronously (via email). Asynchronous online interviews may be attractive and convenient for zoophiles allowing them to respond at their own pace and in their own time. Such detailed accounts can also be used to publish case studies that may have not been highlighted in the literature

One of the main advantages with the collection of case study data onlineis that those being interviewed may be very different from those who seek out medical and professional help for their zoophilic behaviour. As with data collected via online surveys, zoophiles divulging information online may be less psychologically disturbed about their behaviour and may be happy and have incorporated their zoophilic behaviour into their day-to-day lives.

Another informative paper in a 2009 issue of the Archives of Sexual Behavior was by Dr. Christopher Earls and Dr. Martin Lalumiere (2009) whose recruitment of a zoophile via the internet allowed them to establish the veracity of some of their respondents who contacted them online. For instance, one letter from “Possum” was long and detailed. Earls and Lalumiere noted that embedded within the email was a name. By cross-referencing the name with a number of different data banks (e.g., the Social Sciences Citation Index, Google, and Yahoo), they were able to verify several important demographic aspects of the person who sent the email. Possum soon realized he had inadvertently divulged his identity. Earls and Lalumiere were thus satisfied that the information supplied in the initial email was true and (with the person’s permission) published the case in the Archives of Sexual Behavior.

The utilization of a variety of online research methods can be a useful and practical way of examining many different aspects of zoophilic behaviour. As Earls and Lalumiere correctly noted, paraphiliacs recruited via medical treatment centres will tend to show more general pathology. Paraphiliacs recruited from prison samples will tend to have greater criminal histories, and paraphiliacs recruited online will tend to show better adjustment and perhaps better intellectual skills. Basically, compared to psychiatric patients and inmates, those recruited online would be expected to be computer sophisticated and more open to discussing their sexuality.

Zoophiles’ familiarity with Internet technology – particularly as being online is often the best way to meet and communicate with other like-minded people – along with the anonymity of the media, may facilitate and enhance such studies being undertaken. The main disadvantages of online methodologies (such as self-selecting samples, issues concerning reliability and validity) are no different to those encountered in more conventional offline research methodologies.

Dr Mark Griffiths, Professor of Gambling Studies, International Gaming Research Unit, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, UK

Further reading

Beetz, A. M. (2004). Bestiality/zoophilia: A scarcely investigated phenomenon between crime, paraphilia, and love. Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 4, 1-36.

Earls, C.M. & Lalumiere, M.L. (2009). A case study of preferential bestiality Archives of Sexual Behavior, 38, 605-609.

Griffiths, M. D. (2010). The use of online methodologies in data collection for gambling and gaming addictions. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 8, 8-20.

Griffiths, M.D. (2012). The use of online methodologies in studying paraphilia: A review. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 1, 143-150.

Jenkins, R.E. & Thomas, A.R. (2004). Deviance Online: Portrayals of Bestiality on the Internet. New York: Center for Social Science Research.

Kim, P., & Bailey, M. (1997). Sidestreets on the information superhighway: Paraphilias and sexual variations on the Internet. Journal of Sex Education and Therapy, 22, 35-43.

Mangan, M. A. & Reips, U. (2007). Sleep, sex, and the Web: Surveying the difficult-to-reach clinical population suffering from sexsomnia. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 233-236.

Miletski, H. (2000). Bestiality/zoophilia: An exploratory study. Scandinavian Journal of Sexology, 3, 149-150.

Miletski, H. (2005). Is zoophilia a sexual orientation? A study. In A. M. Beetz & A. L. Podberscek (Eds.), Bestiality and zoophilia: Sexual relations with animals (pp. 82–97). Ashland, IN: Purdue University Press.

Mustanski, B.S. (2001). Getting wired: Exploiting the Internet for the collection of sexually valid data. Journal of Sex Research, 38, 292–301.

Williams, C. J., & Weinberg, M. S. (2003). Zoophilia in men: A study of sexual interests in animals. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 32, 523–535.

Wood, R. T. A., & Griffiths, M. D. (2007). Online data collection from gamblers: Methodological issues. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 5, 151–163.

You’re killing me: A brief psychological and ethical consideration of autassassinophilia

Autassassinophilia is a paraphilia in which an individual derives sexual pleasure and arousal by the thought and/or risk of being killed. The paraphilia may on occasion overlap with other paraphilias such as autoerotic asphyxiation (i.e., sexual suffocation) where there is a risk to their life. In some instances, the autassassinophile may also derive sexual pleasure and arousal from planning their own death. Given these facts, it is clear that autassassinophilia is exceedingly rare and very dangerous. The condition was first written about in a clinical (and academic) context by Professor John Money in his 1986 book Lovemaps. He wrote that:

“Autassassinophilia [is] a paraphilia of the sacrificial/exploratory type in which sexuerotic arousal and facilitation or attainment of orgasm are responsive to, and dependent upon stage-managing the possibility if one’s own masochistic death by murder. The reciprocal paraphilic condition is lust murder or erotophonophilia…Erotophonophilia [is] a paraphilia of the sacrificial/exploratory type in which sexuerotic arousal and facilitation or attainment of orgasm are responsive to, and dependent upon stage-managing and carrying out the murder of an unsuspecting sexual partner. The erotophonophiliac’s orgasm coincides with the expiration of the partner. The reciprocal paraphilic condition is autassassinophilia”

Brenda Love cites one of Money’s own cases in her Encyclopedia of Unusual Sex Practices:

“The masochistic drama of erotic death and atonement may be enacted not as an autoerotic monologue, but as a dialogue with a co-opted partner in collusion. The partner is not necessarily a paraphilic sadist, but rather a daredevil hustler or mercenary given to trying almost anything for kicks, or for profit. This was not the type of hustler whom a young man with a paraphilia of homosexual masochism would pick up, one or more at a time, on the waterfront. With his beguiling brand of macho, he would cue the hustlers into their roles in his masochistic drama. First he would supply them with squeeze bottles of mustard or ketchup and a spray can of shaving cream to squirt on him as he lay naked, masturbating. Then he would direct them to bind him up with rope, urinate on him, degrade and abuse him verbally, hit hum, and kick him harder with heavy boots, harder and harder, until he would ejaculate, not knowing whether a blow on the head would wound him or kill him”.

A paper on the phenomenology of autassassinophilia by Dr. Lisa Downing in a 2004 issue of Sexuality and Culture questioned the definitions provided by Money and argued that the reciprocal conditions outlined by Money were fundamentally flawed. Downing made the interesting observation that:

“The autassassinophiliac, for Money, is more interested in his orgasm than in his death, resulting in a compulsion to ‘stage manage the possibility’ rather than the actuality of his end at the hands of another person. The erotophonophiliac, on the other hand, is driven by the actualization of the other’s death and – crucially – this other must be unaware of the killer’s intentions. These difinitions, then, effectively preclude reciprocity”.

Some of you reading this might think that autoassassinophile is more of a theoretical (rather than an actual) paraphilia, but there are a number of documented cases of two lovers in a consensual ‘murder pact’. The most high profile heterosexual case is that of Sharon Lopatka and Robert Glass. Lopatka (from Maryland, US) was strangled and killed consensually by Glass who she met online at an “extreme fantasy” website. Over a number of months in 1996, they exchanged 1000s of emails (found by the police after she was found dead) fantasizing about – and planning – her own murder. Glass eventually pleaded guilty to manslaughter claiming he had never actually intended to kill her.

The most high profile homosexual case was that of the German men Armin Meiwes and Jürgen Brandes – a case that I examined in relation to a previous blogs on vorarephilia (i.e., a sexual paraphilia in which people are sexually aroused by the idea of being eaten, eating another person, or observing this process for sexual gratification) and autosarcophagy (i.e., self-cannibalism). Meiwes, a computer technician, gained worldwide media attention as the ‘Rotenburg Cannibal’ for killing and eating a fellow German male victim (also a computer technician). The one aspect that shocked most people was not the fact that Meiwes ate a lot of Brande’s body but that Brande appeared to consent to being eaten. Email exchanges between Meiwes and Brandes were later shared in the court case:

Brandes: “Thanks for your mail. You really turn me on…Winter with the temperature at around 5 to 15 degrees below freezing is good weather for slaughter. Great to be naked and tied in weather like that and to be driven to the slaughter. Where you then stun me and I collapse. You then hang me up, jerking, and cut my carotid artery. Warm blood flows. Everything goes routinely. I don’t have any chance to escape my slaughter at the last moment. It’s a real turn-on, the feeling of being at your mercy being in your possession. Having to give up my flesh”

Meiwes: “It’ll be awesome, anyway. Your tasty body on show like that. Spicing it…Tying you up will be no problem, I’ve got rope and some cuffs for your hands and feet. I’ll really enjoy the bit with the needles. I’ll see if I can get hold of some really long ones. I can’t wait for you to be here”

In court, Brande’s consent to being killed was accepted by the jury and Meiwes was given an eight and a half year prison sentence for manslaughter. These (and other) cases raise some interesting and controversial ethical questions. These were discussed at length in Dr. Downing’s excellent and thought provoking phenomenological paper on autassassinophilia. She clearly makes the point that being killed for sexual pleasure “problematizes commonplace assumptions about the legitimacy to consent”. When it comes to sexual behaviour, I would describe my views as liberal and are in line with the liberal sex tenets outlined by Robert Solomon that (i) the essential aim of sex is enjoyment, (ii) sex is an essentially private activity, and (ii) any sexual activity is as valid as any other. However, like Downing, I think the idea of consensual lust murder appears to exceed “acceptable” limits of sexual behaviour. However, that doesn’t mean I believe totally in the commandment “thou shalt not kill”. I am pro-euthanasia and have much sympathy with those who have carried out so-called ‘mercy killings’ when a person is in intolerable pain and is unable to end their own life (and a loved one is asked by the suffering person to kill them as humanely as possible).

Downing makes reference to the work of Alan Soble who has written widely of the philosophy of sex. Soble’s 1996 book Sexual Investigations makes the following observation:

“If persons of sound mind and adequate foreknowledge consent to engage in sex together, and do only the acts that both agree to, and do not wrongfully affect third parties, how could their acts be morally wrong? [However], one person’s harming another – and perhaps a person’s allowing himself to be harmed – is wrong even when both parties enter into the act voluntarily”.

Downing considers the last sentence here as “moral absolutism” overriding the liberal standpoint. In fact she says that: “this interventionist and infantilizing approach assumes a class of person (professionals, and theorists) who just know better than the people who consent to certain types of activity”. Given that some sections (like myself) are socially tolerant of euthanasia, it’s more a case of having “a problem with the idea of validating the right to consent to a sexually pleasurable death”. I have to be honest and say that although I am a sexual liberal, I find it hard to accept consensual sex killing and think it is morally wrong.

Dr Mark Griffiths, Professor of Gambling Studies, International Gaming Research Unit, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, UK

Further reading

Beier, K. (2008). Comment on Pfafflin’s (2008) “Good enough to eat”. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 38, 164-165

Downing, L. (2004). On the limits of sexual ethics: The phenomenology of autassassinophilia. Sexuality and Culture, 8, 3–17.

Love, B. (1992). Encyclopedia of Unusual Sex Practices. Fort Lee, NJ: Barricade Books

Money, J. (1986). Lovemaps: Clinical concepts of sexual/erotic health and pathology, paraphilia, and gender transposition in childhood, adolescence, and maturity. New York: Irvington.

Pfafflin, F. (2008). Good enough to eat. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 37, 286-293.

Pfafflin, F. (2009). Reply to Beier (2009). Archives of Sexual Behavior, 38, 166-167.

Soble, A. (1996). Sexual Investigations. New York: New York University Press.

Solomon, R. (1997). Sexual paradigms. In A. Soble (Ed.), The Philosophy of Sex: Contemporary Readings (Third Edition, pp.21-29). Oxford: Rowman and Little.