Dying for it: Bizarre autoerotic deaths (Part 2)

In my previous blog I examined some of the most bizarre autoerotic deaths reported in the medical forensic literature. Here are another five.

Case 1: Autoerotic death by aerosol propellant

Source: Medicine, Science and the Law. Personal details:  32-year old white US man. Single. Computer programmer.

• Bizarre death event: Found dead in bed with cassette recorder next to him. He was wearing headphones which playing “snorting” horse sounds. There was also a can of aerosol propellant. At the end of the bed was a large painting of a male strapped to the hind legs of a horse who was being anally penetrating by the horse. The horse was ridden by a leather-clad woman. He was also wearing some kind if homemade masturbatory device. His death was recorded as cardio-respiratory failure consistent with aerosol propellant abuse (death by misadventure). Self-administration of the chemical agent to modify the sensations of masturbation. He was covered in dry semen stains.

Case 2: Autoerotic death by clothing

Source: Medicine, Science and the Law. Personal details:  25-year old Japanese male. Single.

• Bizarre death event: Man found dead in his bed one morning. naked except for clothing wrapping his head and underpants which were pulled down. He was covered in dry semen stains. He had put a black skirt on his face and then pulled a second skirt upside down over his head and turned down the bottom of it. He then put a plastic bag over these two garments followed by a pair of tights. The legs of the tights were used to tie a knot around the bottom of the skirts. He then wrapped a third skirt around all of this. Death was due to suffocation.

Case 3: Autoerotic death by hanging (female)

Source: Handbook of Forensic Pathology. Personal details:  19-year old white female. Single. College student.

• Bizarre death event: Woman was found dead in her bedroom hanging from the hinge of her closet door dressed as an Oriental “harem girl”. A window sash cord was tied around her body in a complicated fashion and she was also wearing a blindfold and mouth gag (made from the belt of her dressing gown). Next to her lay an underground magazine (this was folded out and showed a bizarre dance involving a clock – the minute hand being a nude male who would make love with the other figure on the hour), a paperback Hitchcock book which explained her fantasy. The paperback contained the story about an Oriental harem master. In this story the harem master provides girls to his lord who stored them by hanging them around his walls on hooks

Case 4: Autoerotic death by vacuum cleaner

Source: American Journal of Forensic Medicine and Pathology. Personal details: 57-year old white US male. Single. History of heart disease and chronic pancreatitis

• Bizarre death event: Man was found naked slumped over his vacuum cleaner after a neighbour wondered why the vacuum cleaner had been on continuously for a long time. The man was found leaning against the dining table with his testicles, buttocks and thighs tightly bound with women’s tights. Near the table was a jar of urine, jars of lubricant and a wooden table leg covered in fecal excrement. The man was covered in burns from the vacuum cleaner. No defect was found in the vacuum cleaner. The man basically had a heart attack while engaged in autoerotic activity. The wooden table leg had been used in an attempt to stimulate orgasm via anal penetration. His wife had caught him masturbating with the vacuum cleaner before (they hadn’t had sex for five years). The death was classed as natural rather than accidental.

Case 5: Autoerotic death by hydraulic tractor shovel

Source: Journal of Forensic Sciences. Personal details:  62 year-old US white male. Married. Farmer.

• Bizarre death event: Found dead in a barn lying on his front pinned under the hydraulic shovel of his tractor. His body was covered with semen stains and there was evidence of masochistic sexual bondage. His clothes were folded neatly away nearby. He was found naked except for a pair of women’s red shoes (with 8 inch heels), knee high stockings and tape duct wrapped around his ankles. Ropes led from his feet to the tractor which when raised would lift his inverted body causing complete suspension. It is not known exactly what happened but it is likely that the engine stalled and he was crushed underneath the tractor shovel. He died of positional asphyxiation by chest compression. This was an atypical autoerotic fatality because he did not purposely use asphyxiation but it did cause his death.

Dr. Mark Griffiths, Professor of Behavioural Addiction, 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.

Byard, R. W. (1994). Autoerotic death—characteristic features and diagnostic difficulties. Journal of Clinical Forensic Medicine, 1(2), 71-78

Cordner, S.M. (1983). An unusual case of sudden death associated with masturbation. Medicine, Science and the Law, 23(1), 54-56

Dietz, P. E., & O’Halloran, R.L. (1993). Autoerotic fatalities with power hydraulics. Journal of Forensic Science, 38(2), 359-364.

Ikeda, N., Harada, A., Umetsu, K., & Suzuki, T. (1988). A case of fatal suffocation during an unusual auto-erotic practice. Medicine, Science and the Law, 28(2), 131-134.

Imami, R. H., & Kemal, M. (1988). Vacuum cleaner use in autoerotic death. American Journal of Forensic Medicine and Pathology, 9(3), 246-248.

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

Sauvageau, A., & Racette, S. (2006). Autoerotic deaths in the literature from 1954 to 2004: A review. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 51(1), 140-146.

Dying for it: Bizarre autoerotic deaths (Part 1)

In previous blogs I have examined many different sexual paraphilias that have ended up in death for individuals engaged in such practices. Many of these are from autoerotic asphyxiation but also from other sexual practices such as electrophilia and anaesthesiophilia. Today’s blog takes a brief look at some of the most bizarre autoerotic deaths reported in the medical forensic literature.

Case 1: Autoerotic death by car

Source: Journal of Forensic Sciences. Personal details: 40-year old white US male airline pilot. Married and father of two children.

• Bizarre death event: A man left his home at 6am in the morning and told his wife that he was going shooting in the country. He was found naked except for a large-link 10-foot chain harness secured around his body. (The harness was tied around the man’s neck in a moderately tight loop and bolted. The chain then went down his chest and was tied into another loop around his waist. This was tied to the bumper of the car) at 7.30am in the morning in a remote area crushed against the left fender of his car (equivalent of a VW beetle). The engine was still running, ignition was on and the driver’s door was still open. The steering wheel was tied so that it would go round in anti-clockwise circles. His clothes were in the boot of the car. Reconstruction of the events leading to his death showed that he was either being dragged round by the car or following the car producing feelings of asphyxia. When he had finished his sexual turn-on he had tried to approach the car door but had forgotten to undo the chain from the bumper. The chain had got tangled up in the car’s axle and the man was found strangled to death by the chain.

Case 2: Autoerotic death by hanging (male)

Source: American Journal of Forensic Medicine and Pathology. Personal details: 57-year old white US male. Single.

• Bizarre death event: Early one winter’s morning, two joggers found a partially clothed man hanging from a tree five inches from the ground. He was hanging from a rope tied round his neck but also had two other loops of rope harness around his thighs which also encircled his chest. His neatly folded clothes lay two feet away along with lipstick and a jar of Vaseline. He was wearing a woman’s brown wig and a stuffed white bra. He also wore a pair of men’s red underpants, a pair of tights and a pair of high-heeled women’s shoes. He was also found to have a carrot protruding from his anus. Basically his seat harness slipped and he asphyxiated himself on the ropes.

Case 3: Autoerotic death by blankets

Source: American Journal of Forensic Medicine and Pathology. Personal details: 60-year old white US male. Single. Diagnosed schizophrenic and had various sexual compulsions. Well educated former teacher.

• Bizarre death event: After being reported missing from work by his employer, a man was found dead rolled up in 14 different blankets which had been sewn together (the two outermost layers were found fixed with adhesive tape in various places which raised the possibility of murder). Inside the blankets he was dressed in two pairs of hotpants, a pair of long johns and a vest. The body was wet and his hands and arms were outstretched above his head. They found a plastic bag over his penis into which he had ejaculated. He was masturbating while inside the blankets but he had become too hypoxic and died. He was immobilized inside the blankets and was unable to free himself. Over the last few years he had bought an astonishing number of blankets by mail order (over 60 found in his apartment most of which seemed to have some ritual or obsessive meaning by the way were laid out. No pornography was found in the place.

Case 4: Autoerotic death by dental anaesthetic

Source: American Journal of Forensic Medicine and Pathology. Personal details: 59-year old white US male. Single. Antiques dealer

• Bizarre death event: Found dead in his locked apartment. He was seated in front of a dental anaesthetic machine with the anaesthetic face-mask over his face. He was sucking on a rubber teat similar (but much bigger) than a baby’s feeding bottle. There were other anaesthetic machines around the apartment as well as a lot of sexual literature (magazines, photographs, paintings, manuscripts all concerned with his elaborate fetish some of which included photographs of himself in these situations). He was wearing a rubber type apron, three woollen cardigans, a woman’s blouse and two pairs of women’s trousers and a pair of women’s bloomers.

Case 5: Autoerotic death by electrocution

Source: Medicine, Science and the Law. Personal details: 36-year old UK male. Gay (with partner). Unemployed ex-television engineer

• Bizarre death event: Man found dead with a wire cradle applied to his scrotum with another loop of wire (end folded over) inserted into his Vaseline-lubricated anus. The wires were connected to the two terminals that supplied the loudspeaker within the television. When switched on, these wires carried a current of 0.6 amps at 2.2 volts (a quarter of the current needed to light a small torch). The body had two significant injuries. One on the right side of his face (entrance mark of the current), and the other over the left side of his scrotum (where the loop of the wire had been). Unfortunately, one of the wires had broken off resulting in a cessation of the stimulating activity. The man looked inside the back of the open TV set and his face came into contact with an exposed metal cap which zapped 2500 volts through him. The metal cap was the only live part of the television set and it was this that killed him.

(Part 2 can be found here).

Dr. Mark Griffiths, Professor of Behavioural Addiction, 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.

Eriksson, A., Gezelius, C., & Bring, G. (1987). Rolled up to death: An unusual autoerotic fatality. American Journal of Forensic Medicine and Pathology, 8(3), 263-265.

Hazelwood, R. R., Burgess, A. W., & Groth, A. N. (1981). Death during dangerous autoerotic practice. Social Science & Medicine. Part E: Medical Psychology, 15(2), 129-133.

Hiss, J., Rosenberg, S. B., & Adelson, L. (1985). ” Swinging in the park”: An investigation of an autoerotic death. American Journal of Forensic Medicine and Pathology, 6(3), 250-255.

Klintschar, M., Grabuschnigg, P., & Beham, A. (1998). Death from electrocution during autoerotic practice: case report and review of the literature. American Journal of Forensic Medicine and Pathology, 19(2), 190-193.

Leadbeatter, S. (1988). Dental anesthetic death: An unusual autoerotic episode. American Journal of Forensic Medicine and Pathology, 9(1), 60-63.

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

Minyard, F. (1985). Wrapped to death. Unusual autoerotic death. The American Journal of Forensic Medicine and Pathology, 6(2), 151-152

Rupp, J. C. (1973). The love bug. Journal of Forensic Science, 18(3), 259-262.

Sauvageau, A., & Racette, S. (2006). Autoerotic deaths in the literature from 1954 to 2004: A review. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 51(1), 140-146.

The cycle of love: Another look at objectum sexuality

In previous blogs I have examined (a) whether in some individuals excessive cycling can be addictive, and (b) some individuals who have sexual relationships with inanimate objects – so-called objectum sexuality, that also appears to have various sub-types such as mechanophilia (individuals who derive sexual pleasure from computers, cars, robots or androids, domestic appliances, etc.) and robot fetishism (individuals who derive sexual pleasure and arousal arising from humanoid or non-humanoid robots). Today’s blog is arguably an intersection of these previous blogs takes a look at one individual that I was made aware of when I was interviewed about him for the television series Forbidden (broadcast on the Discovery Channel). The case involves Dutchmen Kees van Voorst (KVV) has “a special love for bikes”. He claims to be in love and have sexual relationships with thirty bicycles.

Compared with other objectum sexuals, KVV is not unique. For instance, in previous blogs I recounted the cases of American man Edward Smith who has who has had sex with over a 1000 cars, and the British man Robert Stewart who ended up in court after being caught having sex with a bicycle. I also made reference to a paper published in 2000 by Dr. Steven Thompson in the journal Technology and Culture. Thompson argued that some types of cycles (i.e., motorcycles) are often portrayed as sexualized fetish objects by their owners.

The television documentary about KVV films him in his hometown of Lunteren. The story shows not only how much KVV loves riding bicycles but also shows how much he is romantically and sexually in love with bicycles. He appears ecstatic as he rides his favourite bicycles. He introduces the documentary makers to each bicycle by name. The production notes for the television programme highlighted that:

“His favourite [bicycle] is Aunt Ann who he sleeps with at night. He shows us how he dotes on them daily, oiling their chains, pumping up their tyres and polishing their shafts. He reads bike magazines as if they were adult magazines, Kees really does love bikes. In the film we follow Kees as he introduces a new member to his bike family. But his house is so packed full already, he’ll have to sell one of his bikes to make room for the new member, an emotional moment. He still doesn’t know which bike will go. Once he’s decided, he’ll say goodbye and then sell his bike to a local person who has answered an ad in the local paper…We’ll see him walk through gigantic bike parking lots with literally thousands of bikes – he’ll say hello to them as he walks past. He’ll then enter a massive bike store and be weak at the knees with the sexy selection of bike babes hanging from the ceiling. He’ll then choose his new love and take her home to meet her new family. After introducing the new bike to her new bike brothers and cycling sisters – the moment of truth, the first ride on the new bike – how will they get on? Will she be as good a ride as she looks? Will he take her off road straight away or build up to it? The film will end with Kees and his feelings about his new bike”.

There is little doubt that KVV is one of the world’s few genuine objectum sexuals. KVV wasn’t aware that his sexual love of bicycles had a name but confirmed that the scientific description of the condition matched his own feelings and experiences (i.e., strong feelings of love, commitment and attraction to inanimate items). He was quoted in the documentary as saying “I see my love as the same as men and women but with bikes…I tried to love women but they just don’t love me back like a bike can”. Of the 30 bicycles KVV owns, eight of them have names and his true love is a bicycle he named ‘Aunt Ann’. He currently cycles around 10,000 kilometres a year on his various bicycles. His “special desire” for bicycles began when he was 12 years old.

“His neighbour was visiting with her bike and [KVV] was fixated on it, he pleaded with her to be able to borrow the bike but she wouldn’t let him. He was heart broken. But it wasn’t till he was 16 [years old] that he had his first real love. it was then that he really could grasp that his love for bikes went far beyond what could be considered normal – but for [KVV] this is exactly what it was, absolutely normal. He did try to have relationships with women, he has had two so far in his life but both failed miserably”.

To KVV, ‘Aunt Ann’ is “his everything”. This particular bicycle sleeps in his bedroom, gets kissed good night, and is the bicycle that KVV wants to take with him to his grave. KVV claims that he cannot imagine a life without his beloved bicycles. The sensation of riding them is unlike anything else he has experienced. He says:

“When I am on one of my bikes and I’m thinking only about that bike, that is when I feel real love”.

KVV’s appearance in the Forbidden documentary isn’t the first television programme that he has appeared in. A local Dutch programme profiled KVV and his bicycle love after which he gained a level of notoriety that did not endear him to the Dutch public. Local residents claim he has brought shame to his hometown of Lunteren. Outside of his bicycles, KVV has only one human friend who didn’t want to be filmed in the documentary. The only other human that KVV has any kind of regular contact with is a local photographer who takes photos of KVV with his bicycle lovers.

As I noted in my previous blog on OS, it is only recently that academics have started to carry out research. In a 2010 issue of the Internet Journal of Human Sexuality, Dr. Amy Marsh described what she claims is the first ever research study conducted on a group of 40 ‘objectophiles’. On US television, Marsh revealed that she supported OS as a legitimate sexual orientation and said that her research doesn’t appear to indicate childhood trauma being a factor in the development of the condition. KVV’s story highlights that while rare, objectum sexuality (OS) exists and that some human beings can (and do) have loving sexual relationships with inanimate objects.

Dr Mark Griffiths, Professor of Behavioural Addiction, 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.

Browne, R.B. (1982). Objects of Special Devotion: Fetishism in Popular Culture. Popular Press.

Ceilán, C. (2008). Weirdly Beloved: Tales of Strange Bedfellows, Odd Couplings, and Love Gone Bad. The Lyons Press.

De Silva, P. & Pernet, A. (1992). Pollution in ‘Metroland’: An unusual paraphilia in a shy young man. Sexual and Marital Therapy, 7, 301-306.

Marsh, A. (2010). Love among the objectum sexuals. Electronic Journal of Human Sexuality, 13, March 1. Located at: http://www.ejhs.org/volume13/ObjSexuals.htm

Nelson, S. (2012). Fetish spotlight: Mechanophilia. Located at: http://www.thehoneybunnys.com/fetish-spotlight-mechanophilia/

Schlessinger (2003). Mechaphilia: Sexual Attraction to Machines. Please Press.

Thompson, S.L. (2000). The arts of the motorcycle: Biology, culture, and aesthetics in technological choice. Technology and Culture, 41, 99-115.

Wikipedia (2012). Mechanophilia. Located at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanophilia

Hoovers and shakers: Another look at vacuum cleaner sex

In a previous blog I briefly looked at the medical literature relating to penile injuries arising from autoerotic interactions from vacuum cleaners. While researching that blog I also came across other literature that had examined vacuum cleaners being used for sexual purposes that I thought I would make another interesting blog. A number of references in the psychological literature make reference to particular types of people using vacuum cleaners as a source of sexual stimulation for masturbatory purposes. For instance, in a 2005 chapter by Lynne Moxon about sexuality and Asperger Syndrome (i.e., an autism spectrum disorder typically characterized by major difficulties in social interaction and non-verbal communication) noted that among Asperger’s sufferers:

“Lack of awareness of the use of the imagination for sexual fantasy can lead to the use of more physical forms of stimulation, such as the vibration of washing machines or public transport, or the use of vacuum cleaner pipes, holes in chair backs, socks, bottles and more unusual items, such as TV remote controls and golf clubs. Females unaware of the use of sex toys have used deodorant cans, scissors, keys and candles”.

In a 2013 study by Dr. Remigiusz Kijak published in the journal Sexuality and Disability, 133 people (mainly older age teenagers with ages ranging from 17 to 25 years) with mild intellectual disability were surveyed about their sexuality and sexual practices. Dr. Kijak reported that:

“During the studies it has also been determined that 7 % of the studied teenagers stimulate themselves in an untypical manner. The teenagers studied admitted to masturbating with tools, certain objects or to masturbating in a way other than a natural one. The study subjects masturbate using grease, food, furniture and even vacuum cleaners. Such masturbation can be determined as dangerous, mainly due to the fact that it fixes a certain, repeatable chain of strange rituals, often impossible to use in a partner relationship, and may result in a pleasure decrease”. 

As noted in my previous blog on the use of vacuum cleaners as a masturbatory aid, most writings on the topic concern penile injuries that have come to the attention of medics when things go wrong. However, there are a couple of case studies in the forensic literature that have featured vacuum cleaners in autoerotic deaths. In 1988, Dr. R.H. Imami and Dr. M. Kemal published a paper in the American Journal of Forensic Medicine and Pathology about a 57-year old white American male with a history of heart disease and chronic pancreatitis. The man was found naked slumped over his vacuum cleaner after a neighbour wondered why the vacuum cleaner had been on continuously for a long time. The man was found leaning against the dining table with his testicles, buttocks and thighs tightly bound with women’s tights. Near the table was a jar of urine, jars of lubricant and a wooden table leg covered in faecal excrement. The man was covered in burns from the vacuum cleaner. No defect was found in the vacuum cleaner. The autopsy revealed that the man had a heart attack while engaged in the autoerotic activity. The wooden table leg had been used in an attempt to stimulate orgasm via anal penetration. His wife had caught him masturbating with the vacuum cleaner before (and they hadn’t had sex for five years). The death was classes as natural rather than accidental.

In 1994, Dr. Clive Cooke, Dr. Gerard Cadden and Dr. Karin Margolius published a paper concerning four “unusual fatalities where death occurred during autoerotic practice”. Three of the four accidental deaths (electrocution, hanging, and courgette inhalation) involved young to middle-aged men. However, it is the fourth case that is of interest here. This involved an elderly man that (like the previous case) had heart disease. The authors reported that:

“The naked body of this 77[-year] old widower was found in the bathroom of his home…Adjacent to the body, and switched on and working, were a vacuum cleaner and a hair dryer. A pair of men’s underpants was impacted in the hose of the vacuum cleaner. Autopsy examination showed the body of an elderly man of normal build. There was no evident injury; in particular there were no apparent marks of electrical injury. Internal examination showed enlargement of the heart with extensive ischemic fibrous scarring of the thickened left ventricular myocardium. Extensive calcified coronary arteriosclerosis was present, with no thrombosis. There was no significant valvular disease. The lungs were mildly congested and there was benign hypertensive nephrosclerosis. Toxicological analysis was unremarkable. The vacuum cleaner and hair dryer, together with the electric circuitry of the house, were assessed by an electrical inspector and cleared of malfunction. The cause of death was therefore believed to be combined arteriosclerotic and hypertensive heart disease. The scene examination suggested the likelihood that the electrical appliances were being used autoerotically”.

In their discussion of this particular case, Cooke and colleagues noted that sudden autoerotic deaths due to a natural disease process (e.g., heart disease) have seldom been reported in the forensic literature. To their knowledge, only two previous case reports had been published prior to their own study – both males who after autopsy:

“…showed significant arteriosclerotic cardiovascular disease. One was the case of a 61 [-year] old man who died whilst bound with chain restraints; a vibrator was nearby [Hazelwood, Dietz & Burgess, 1981]. The second case was of a 57 [-year] old man whose body was found naked alongside a running vacuum cleaner; the testicles, thighs and buttocks were tightly bound with pantyhose [Imami & Kemal, 1988]. Such deaths are probably less frequent than sudden natural death associated with heterosexual or homosexual activity, particularly if with a novel partner [Malik, 1979]”.

Finally, the only other vacuum cleaner-related autoerotic death I located in the forensic literature was a 2005 case study report by Dr. Andrew Hitchcock and Dr. Roger Start in the Journal of Clinical Forensic Medicine. This was actually a case of hypoxyphilia where the device built to cut off the oxygen supply involved a vacuum cleaner. More specifically, the paper reported:

“A case is reported of a 36-year-old man who died following occlusive entrapment within a device for the purpose of hypoxyphilic gratification. The device was constructed in his own home using instructions found on his home computer down-loaded from the Internet. The device comprised a tough plastic cocoon large enough to accommodate an adult human and incorporating a system of plastic piping connected to a household vacuum cleaner for the evacuation of air within the cocoon. The mechanism of death was thought to be traumatic asphyxia after examination of the deceased and re-construction of the apparatus with the body in situ”.

The prevalence of autoerotic acts involving the use of vacuum cleaners is unknown as only those cases that result in serious genital injury and/or death come to the attention of medics and/or forensic scientists. As noted in my previous blog, the number of cases that are being reported is on the decrease but this may be because the topic is less novel than it used to be and may not be seen by journal editors as worthy of publication.

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

Further reading

Benson, R. (1985). Vacuum cleaner injury to penis: A common urologic problem? Urology, 25(1), 41-44.

Citron, N.D., & Wade, P.J. (1980). Penile injuries from vacuum cleaners. British Medical Journal, 281(6232), 26.

Cooke, C.T., Cadden, G.A., & Margolius, K.A. (1994). Autoerotic deaths: Four cases. Pathology, 26(3), 276-280.

Hazelwood, R.R., Dietz, P. E., & Burgess, A.W. (1981). The investigation of autoerotic fatalities. Journal of Police Science & Administration, 9, 404-411.

Hitchcock, A., & Start, R.D. (2005). Fatal traumatic asphyxia in a middle-aged man in association with entrapment associated hypoxyphilia. Journal of Clinical Forensic Medicine, 12, 320-325.

Imami, R. H., & Kemal, M. (1988). Vacuum cleaner use in autoerotic death. American Journal of Forensic Medicine and Pathology, 9, 246-248.

Kijak, R. (2013). The sexuality of adults with intellectual disability in Poland. Sexuality and Disability, 31(2), 109-123.

Klintschar, M., Grabuschnigg, P., & Beham, A. (1998). Death from electrocution during autoerotic practice: Case report and review of the literature. American Journal of Forensic Medicine and Pathology, 19, 190-193.

Malik, M. O. (1979). Sudden coronary deaths associated with sexual activity. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 24, 216-220.

Moxon, L. (2005). Diagnosis, disclosure and self-confidence in sexuality and relationships. In D. Murray (Ed.), Coming out Asperger: Diagnosis, Disclosure and Self-Confidence (pp. 214-229). London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

Rossi, M., Cascini, F., & Torcigliani, S. (1991). [Penile injuries caused by masturbation with a vacuum cleaner. Description of a case and review of the literature]. Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica, 44(1), 43-45.

Hoover damn! A brief look at sexual injury by vacuum cleaners

While researching an article on bizarre sexual injuries, I recently came across a paper on penile skin loss in a 2014 issue of Surgical Science by a group of plastic surgeons led by Dr. Adel Tolba. In the paper, the authors noted that penile skin loss “can result from traction by mechanical devices, such as farm or industrial machinery, or by suction devices, such as vacuum cleaners”. This got me wondering to what extent sexual injuries caused by vacuum cleaners had been reported in the medical literature. The earliest paper that I could on the topic was published in a 1960 issue of the British Medical Journal by Dr. Miles Fox and Dr. E.L. Barrett, and simply entitled ‘Vacuum cleaner injury of the penis’. They reported three cases of similar looking penile injuries caused by three British men seeking sexual stimulation from a vacuum cleaner.

• Case 1: “A widower aged 57 attended hospital…because of penile lacerations…Returning from having a few drinks in a public-house and seeking erotic satisfaction, he introduced his penis into the end of a vacuum cleaner tube and switched on the machine. However, pain soon caused him to stop, and then he found his penis was congested and bleeding. On examination the glans penis was extensively lacerated, the lacerations appearing almost ‘explosive’ in nature. The urethra was not involved. The lacerations were sutured with catgut, and a soft rubber catheter was introduced for several days. Recovery was uneventful”.
• Case 2: “A 28-year-old bachelor attended hospital…with similar extensive lacerations of the glans penis extending into the external urethral meatus. The prepuce was also lacerated. He had produced the injuries in exactly the same manner as the [patient in Case 1 above]. Circumcision was performed, the lacerations of the glans were sutured with catgut, and a self-retaining urethral catheter was introduced. Healing was satisfactory without any sign of stricture”.
• Case 3: “A widower aged 75 [years] attended hospital…in great mental distress and complaining of pain, swelling, and laceration of the penis. He stated that while cleaning the stairs his penis had accidentally slipped into the end of a Hoover ‘Dustette’ vacuum cleaner. However he then attempted to obtain erotic stimulation by switching the motor on and off…The lacerations were not extensive enough to warrant suture or circumcision, and healed satisfactorily in two weeks”

Fox and Barrett described the use of masturbation via a vacuum cleaner as “rather ingenious but had disastrous results”. They concluded that no previous cases of penile injury by vacuum cleaner had ever previously been reported in the medical literature.

In 1973, Dr. Robert Zufall published a letter in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) describing a penile laceration caused by a vacuum cleaner. Dr. Zufall did not mention any sexual motive for the injury but a follow-up letter in the JAMA by Dr. Rodney Mannion responded that:

“[Dr. Zufall] appears to regard these injuries as possibly accidental. We in urology tend to believe that they occur as a form of masturbation. I have had a patient with this injury who admits to this practice, and a number of urologists also have had similar cases as we discovered at a meeting of the New England Section of the American Urologists Association in October 1972. Many of the urologists present knew of this injury”.

In 1980, another four case studies of penile sexual injuries caused by vacuum cleaners were published in the British Medical Journal by Dr. N. Citron and Dr. P. Wade:

• Case 1: “A 60-year-old man said that he was changing the plug of his 
Hoover Dustette vacuum cleaner in the nude while his wife was out shopping. 
It ‘turned itself on’ and caught his penis, causing tears around the external 
meatus and deeply lacerating the side of the glans. The external meatus was 
reconstructed and the multiple lacerations of the glans repaired with catgut. 
The final result was some scarring of the glans, but the foreskin moved easily 
over it”.
• Case 2: “A 65-year-old railway signalman was in his signal box when he 
bent down to pick up his tools and ‘caught his penis in a Hoover Dustette, 
which happened to be switched on’. He suffered extensive lacerations to the 
glans, which were repaired with catgut with a good result”.
• Case 3: “A 49-year-old man was vacuuming his friend’s staircase in a loose-fitting dressing gown, when, intending to switch the machine off, he 
leaned across to reach the plug: ‘at that moment his dressing gown became 
undone and his penis was sucked into the vacuum cleaner’. Because he had a 
phimosis [a condition in males where the foreskin cannot be fully retracted over the glans penis] he suffered multiple lacerations to the foreskin as well as 
lacerations to the distal part of the shaft of the penis, including the 
external meatus. His wounds were repaired with catgut and the phimosis 
reduced with a dorsal slit”.
• Case 4: “This patient was aged 68 [years], and no history was available except 
that the injury was caused by a vacuum cleaner. The injury extended through 
the corpora cavernosa and the corpus spongiosum and caused complete division 
of the urethra proximal to the corona. A two-stage urethroplasty was 
performed, and the final result was satisfactory”.

Citron and Wade then noted that (apart from the patient with phimosis) that the injuries were predominantly lacerations to the [penile] glans, “presumably because the 
foreskin was retracted at the time”. The final case was the most serious and required significant surgery to repair the damage. It was also noted that 
at least two of the penile injuries were caused by a Hoover Dustette (as was one in the 1960 paper), which 
the authors noted had fan blades of about six inches from the inlet. They concluded that the “patients may 
well have thought that the penis would be clear of the fan but were driven to 
new lengths by the novelty of the experience and came to grief”. In response to this paper, Dr. J.T. Hill wrote a letter to the British Medical Journal and noted that:

“In a series of 57 penile injuries reported at the annual meeting of the British Association of Urological Surgeons in June 1980, I reported three patients with this condition. Their ages were, typically, 66, 55, and 60 years. They had suffered degloving injuries and two patients required suturing of multiple lacerations and one required split skin grafting. All three patients underwent urethral catheterization for urinary retention”.

In a 1979 issue of European Urology, Dr. U. Wenderoth and Dr. U. Jonas examined 48 masturbation injuries. Of these, they reported that 12 comprised ‘foreign bodies’ introduced into the urethra and urinary bladder while the other 36 cases comprised ‘vacuum cleaner injuries’ to the penis. In 1984, Dr. Jack McAninch and his colleagues published a paper in the Journal of Trauma-Injury Infection and Critical Care that examined major injuries to the testicles, penis, and genital skin from trauma in 62 of their patients over a six-year period (1977 to 1983). They reported seven suction-end vacuum cleaner injuries in their sample.

In 1985, Dr. Ralph Benson wrote a paper in the journal Urology asking whether vacuum cleaner injuries to the penis were a common urologic problem. He presented five cases studies of such penile injuries (including a case of a man that had lost the glans of his penis). He concluded that “contrary to apparent public appreciation, injury due to this form of autostimulation may not be unusual”.

An Italian paper Rossi et al in a 1991 issue of Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica reported the case of penile injury caused by masturbating using a vacuum cleaner. The vacuum cleaner caused skin lesions and urethral lacerations (but were successfully treated). The authors stressed “the extreme rarity of the case”. Since then academic papers in the topic appear to have dried up somewhat.

In 1998, a news story made worldwide headlines when a 51-year-old man from Long Branch (New Jersey, USA) cut off half an inch of his penis (and nearly bled to death) after masturbating with a
vacuum cleaner. He first told legal and medical authorities that he had been stabbed in his penis by someone as he slept. However, it later became apparent that he was trying to gain sexual pleasure from the vacuum cleaner’s suction. However, he hadn’t realised there was a blade that pushed dust into the vacuum cleaner’s bag. Fortunately, medics at Monmouth Medical Center stopped the bleeding (saving the man’s life) but
were unable to reattach the severed part of his penis. As far as I am aware, this case was never reported in the medical literature and only in the popular press.

The most recent (possible) case that I have come across was a 2005 case study published in a German journal by Dr. J. Falk and his colleagues. They reported the case of a 61-year-old man that was admitted to hospital with a partially severed penis. The authors reported:

“The head of the penis (glans) had been completely severed, and the skin of the shaft and the corpora cavernosa had been ripped open. In the hospital the patient reported that his penis got caught in the hose attachment of an old Kobold vacuum cleaner that he was using to inflate an air mattress. He later made contradictory statements in his report to the insurance company, so we were asked to reconstruct the circumstances of the accident. The literature available to us only makes clinical observations about similar accidents, always with the assumption that the vacuum cleaner was used during masturbation or in order to achieve an erection. According to our reconstruction of the accident and an investigation of the vacuum cleaner attachment, however, we could not rule out the possibility of a household accident as described by the patient”.

The lack of more recent (and definitive) reports about masturbatory penile injuries caused by vacuum cleaners in the medical literature suggests they are either less commonplace than they used to be and/or there are as many as there have ever have been over the last few decades but are not as journal-worthy (as they are no longer novel).

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

Further reading

Benson, R. (1985). Vacuum cleaner injury to penis: A common urologic problem? Urology, 25(1), 41-44.

Citron, N.D., & Wade, P.J. (1980). Penile injuries from vacuum cleaners. British Medical Journal, 281(6232), 26.

Falk, J., Riepert, T., & Rothschild, M. A. (2005). [Traumatic partial amputation of a penis – A reconstruction of the circumstances of the accident]. Versicherungsmedizin/herausgegeben von Verband der Lebensversicherungs-Unternehmen eV und Verband der Privaten Krankenversicherung eV, 57(1), 17-19

Fox, M., & Barrett, E.L. (1960). ‘Vacuum cleaner injury’ of the penis. British Medical Journal, 1(5190),1942.

Hill, J. T. (1980). Penile injuries from vacuum cleaners. British Medical Journal, 281(6238), 519.

Mannion, R.A. (1973). Penile Laceration. Journal of the American Medical Association, 224, 1763-1763

McAninch, J.W., Kahn, R.I., Jeffrey, R.B., Laing, F.C., & Krieger, M.J. (1984). Major traumatic and septic genital injuries. Journal of Trauma-Injury, Infection, and Critical Care, 24, 291-298.

Morey, A.F., & Rozanski, T. A. (2007). Genital and lower urinary tract trauma. Campbell-Walsh Urology, 3, 49-50.

Nolan, J. (1998). Love story with a cutting edge. Philly.com, may 14. Located at: http://articles.philly.com/1998-05-14/news/25742370_1_vacuum-love-story-unidentified-man

Pryor, J. P., Hill, J. T., Packham, D. A., & Yates‐Bell, A. J. (1981). Penile injuries with particular reference to injury to the erectile tissue. British Journal of Urology, 53(1), 42-46.

Rossi, M., Cascini, F., & Torcigliani, S. (1991). [Penile injuries caused by masturbation with a vacuum cleaner. Description of a case and review of the literature]. Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica, 44(1), 43-45.

Tolba, A. M., Azab, A. A. H., Nasr, M. A., & Salah, E. (2014). Dartos fascio-myo-cutaneous flap for penile skin loss: A simple flap with an immense potential. Surgical Science, 5, 6-9.

Wenderoth, U., & Jonas, U. (1979). Curiosity in urology? Masturbation injuries. European Urology, 6, 312-313.

Zufall, R. (1973). Laceration of penis from hand vacuum cleaner. Journal of the American Medical Association, 224, 630.

A touch too much? A brief look at hyphephilia

In a previous blog I briefly examined frotteurism (in which a person derives sexual pleasure or gratification from rubbing, especially the genitals, against another non-consensual person, typically in a public place such as a crowded train, or in crowded places such as malls, elevators, on busy sidewalks, and on public transportation vehicles). This behaviour is closely related to (or a sub-type) of ‘toucherism’ depending upon which source you read. Some descriptions of toucherism claim that the individual touches or fondles other people (rather than rubbing) to gain sexual arousal. For instance, the online Psychology Dictionary define toucherism as “carnal interest and stimulation gathered from touching a stranger on an erotic area of their body, especially the buttocks, breasts, or genitalia. This is frequently done as an alleged in tight spaces”. Similarly, the Wikipedia entry says that:

“Toucherism refers to sexual arousal based on grabbing or rubbing one’s hands against an unexpecting (and non-consenting) person. It usually involves touching breasts, buttocks or genital areas, often while quickly walking across the victim’s path…[The late Czech-Canadian] sexologist Kurt Freund described toucherism as a courtship disorder”

In fact, Freund wrote numerous papers claiming that behaviours such as toucherism, frotteurism, and exhibitionism are caused by ‘courtship disorders’. According to Freund, normal courtship comprises four phases: (i) location of a partner, (ii) pre-tactile interactions, (iii) tactile interactions, and (iv) genital union. Freund proposed that toucherism is a disturbance of the third phase of the courtship disorder. Similarly, Professor John Money proposed the ‘‘lovemap’’ theory (in his 1986 Lovemaps book) suggesting that paraphiliac behaviour occurs when an abnormal lovemap develops which interferes with the ability to participate in loving sexual intercourse.

The reason why I began this article by briefly re-visiting frotteurism and toucherism is that there is a tactile fetishistic behaviour called ‘hyphephilia’ that I would argue is a sub-type of toucherism but not necessarily a sub-type of frotteurism (suggesting that toucherism and frotteurism may be two separate sexual paraphilias). In his 2009 book Forensic and Medico-legal Aspects of Sexual Crimes and Unusual Sexual Practices, Dr. Anil Aggrawal defines hyphephilia as a paraphilia in which individuals derive sexual arousal from touching skin, hair, leather, or fur (although these could be very specific paraphilias – such as trichophilia that describes those individuals that derive sexual arousal from human hair). This is similar (but not the same) to the online English Encyclopedia that notes:

“In psychiatry, [hyphephilia is] a sexual perversion in which sexual arousal and orgasm depend upon touching or rubbing the partner`s skin or hair, or upon the sensations related to feeling fur, leather, fabric, or other substances in association with sexual activity with the partner”.

The Right Diagnosis medical website adds an arguably zoophilic element by claiming that the symptoms of hyphephilia are a (i) sexual interest in the feel and smell of animal skin, fur or leather, (ii) recurring intense sexual fantasies involving the feel and smell of animal skin, fur or leather, (iii) recurring intense sexual urges involving the feel and smell of animal skin, fur or leather, and/or sexual preference for the feel and smell of animal skin, fur or leather. Finally, Dr. George Pranzarone in his 2000 Dictionary of Sexology is a little more technical and says that:

“Hyphephilia [is] one of a group of paraphilias of the fetishistic/talismanic type in which the sexuoerotic stimulus is associated with the touching, rubbing, or the feel of skin, hair, leather, fur, and fabric, especially if worn in proximity to erotically significant parts of the body”.

Dr. Eric Hickey (in his book Serial Murderers and Their Victims) notes that paraphilic behaviour is very common among those that commit sexual crimes but that the two activities (sex offending and paraphilias) may be two independent constructs and that one does not necessarily affect the other. Hickey asserts that hyphephilia is one of the so-called ‘preparatory paraphilias’ (as opposed to the ‘attack paraphilias’). Attack paraphilias are described by Hickey as being sexually violent (towards other individuals including children in extreme circumstances). Preparatory paraphilias are defined by Hickey as those “that have been found as part of the lust killer’s sexual fantasies and activities”. However, Hickey notes that individuals that engage in preparatory paraphilias do not necessarily go on to become serial killers.

Like many paraphilic and fetishistic behaviours, there is no scientific agreement concerning the cause of hyphephilia. This probably depends on the person rather than a single characteristic factor. Most experts would no doubt attribute hyphephilic behaviour to an initially random or accidental touching of the specific item that the individual subsequently finds sexually arousing. Through processes such as classical and operant conditioning, successive repetitions of the associative pairings of the behaviour would then reinforce the behaviour and result in the behaviour being repeated.

One of the few references I came across that mentioned hyphephilia is an interesting paper by Dr. Stephen J. Gould in a 1991 volume of Advances in Consumer Research. He claimed the field of sex research had been overlooked by consumer research, and that John Money’s concept of ‘lovemaps’ could be applied. More specifically, he asserted:

“I want to suggest that there exist what we can call consumer lovemaps. This concept represents an adaptation of Money’s (1984) lovemap theory. He defines a lovemap as that which ‘carries the program of a person’s erotic fantasies and their corresponding practices’. Based on the lovemap concept, Money has developed a typology of paraphilias (perversions) each with their own lovemap (e.g. autonepiophilia – diaperism; hyphephilia – lover of fabrics). Each also follows certain strategies of sexual response – the two examples of autonepiophilia and hyphephilia, for instance, represent a fetishistic sexual strategy. In this context, we may define a consumer lovemap as including those aspects of the more general lovemap which involve consumption, i.e. the purchase and use of products in the process of attracting a mate, engaging in sexual activity, and developing and maintaining sexual-love relationships”.

Here, hyphephilia is simply defined as someone that derives sexual arousal from the touching of fabrics. This is not uncommon as a number of online articles also simply define hyphephilia as such. For instance, an article (‘A passion for fabrics’) by Sylvie Marot began by noting:

“[French psychiatrist Gaëtan Gatian de Clérambault wrote] ‘We love to run our hand across fur; we would like silk to slide itself across the back of our hand. Fur calls for an active caress in its form: silk caresses with a uniform sweetness a skin that becomes passive; then it reveals, so to speak, a nervousness in its breaks and cries’. To classify this specific research on the aphrodisiac virtues of silk, two neologisms appeared necessary to him: hyphephilia – the erotics of fabric – and aptophilia – ecstasy of the touch. The man (the fetishist?), who loved dearly ‘the cry of silk’, was able to identify with a maniacal precision the different points of a hem – ‘scallop, buttonhole, flange, blanket stick, tab, etc.’. Like some of his patients, seamstresses by profession, he was not content to merely enjoy fabrics, conceiving for himself draped figures manufactured at his request according to his own drawings”.

Although hyphephilia is unlikely to be problematic for many, those that want therapy are likely to receive the same types of therapeutic intervention that are recommended for frotteurism (behaviour therapy, reality therapy, cognitive-behavioural therapy, etc.) – although the most critical thing is that the person that seeks such treatment must want to actively change such behaviour. The Right Diagnosis website claims that:

“Treatment [for hyphephilia] is generally not sought unless the condition becomes problematic for the person in some way and they feel compelled to address their condition. The majority of people simply learn to accept their fetish and manage to achieve gratification in an appropriate manner”

In his 1998 book Gay, Straight, and In-Between, Professor John Money described hyphephilia as a “touchy-feely paraphilia”. The case that Money described was arguably extreme and doesn’t quite fit the definitions I outlined above. He reported:

“In a particular case [a female hyphephilac] entailed the feel of…small dogs placed between the legs and rubbed against the genitals. The way of attaining orgasm surpassed that of ordinary sexual intercourse, which was so aversive that it was discontinued in the marriage. The paraphilic activity had its onset in a dismal history of illegitimacy and childhood neglect and traumatic abuse. In adolescence, there was a history of noncopulatory sexual activity with a middle-aged male relative. In the manner typical for paraphilia, the feel of rubbing a small live creature between the legs was a stratagem for preserving lust as a commodity separate from love, which, in her life experiences, had always been either unattainable or warped. The moral struggle to be rid of the paraphilia was intense and not successful”.

My own reading of this case is that it is more a case of zoophilic frotteurism than hyphephilia (although the criterion of ‘touching of fur’ for sexual arousal is arguably met). In other papers, Professor Money also described formicophilia (i.e., being sexually aroused by insects crawling and/or nibbling on an individual’s genitals) as a ‘touchy-feely’ paraphilia that belongs in the “hyphephilic subgroup of fetishistic paraphilias”. Personally, I wouldn’t class formicophilia as a form of hyphephilia on the basis of any definition that I have come across.

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.

Cantor, J. M., Blanchard, R., & Barbaree, H. E. (2009). Sexual disorders. In P. H. Blaney & T. Millon (Eds.), Oxford Textbook of Psychopathology (2nd ed.) (pp. 527–548). New York: Oxford University Press.

Dewaraja, R. & Money, J. (1986). Transcultural sexology: Formicophilia, a newly named paraphilia in a young Buddhist male. Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 12, 139-145.

Freund, K. (1990). Courtship disorders: Toward a biosocial understanding of voyeurism, exhibitionism, toucherism, and the preferential rape pattern. In. L. Ellis & H. Hoffman (Eds.), Crime in biological, social, and moral contexts (pp. 100–114). New York: Praeger.

Freund, K., Seto, M. C., & Kuban, M. (1997). Frotteurism and the theory of courtship disorder. In D. R. Laws & W. T. O’Donohue (Eds.), Sexual Deviance: Theory, Assessment, and Treatment (pp. 111-130). New York: Guilford Press.

Gould, S. J. (1991). Toward a theory of sexuality and consumption: Consumer Lovemaps. In R.H. Holman & M.R. Solomon (Eds.), Advances in Consumer Research Volume 18 (pp. 381-383). Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research.

Hickey, E. W. (2010). Serial Murderers and Their Victims (Fifth Edition). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

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

Money, J. (1998). Gay, Straight, and In-Between: The Sexology of Erotic Orientation. New York: Oxford University Press.

Pranzarone, G.F. (2000). The Dictionary of Sexology. Located at: http://ebookee.org/Dictionary-of-Sexology-EN_997360.html

Psychology Dictionary (2014). What is toucherism? Located at: http://psychologydictionary.org/toucherism/

Wikipedia (2014). Toucherism. Located at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toucherism

Feline purrversions: A beginner’s guide to aelurophilia

In a previous blog on a hoax form of zoophilia (emysphilia – sexual arousal from turtles), I briefly mentioned other various specific sub-types of zoophilia including aelurophilia. In 2006, Dr. Lisa Shaffer and Dr. Julie Penn developed a comprehensive paraphilia classification system and published it as a book chapter in Dr. William Hickey’s book Sex Crimes and Paraphilia. In that chapter they defined aelurophilia deriving sexual gratification from cats. The same definition was also provided by Dr. Anil Aggrawal in his new 2011 classification of zoophilia in the Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine. Before I take a closer academic look at the clinical literature on aelurophilia, I’d like to share this story reported in the Russian newspaper Pravda from March 2004:

 “Two women attempted to experience sexual pleasure from an intimate contact with a cat. The weird endeavor ended rather sad for one of the women [Svetlana]: she was hospitalized with severe genital injuries. Doctors arrived to hospitalize a woman, who had suffered from unexpected bleeding…They saw a woman lying on the sofa. …Streaks of blood could be seen on her legs. The woman’s friend was speechless to explain what happened. The woman was taken to the gynecological department of the local hospital, where doctors determined the unusual character of the genital injuries…When the woman recovered, she confessed that she had been injured during her love act with a cat…Svetlana was bored and she decided to visit her friend, Vera. The two women had some wine and started talking about intimate matters. Vera was the first, who suggested trying something totally unusual…Vera brought in a cat [called Timka]…Vera took her clothes off, put the light out and played an adult movie on the video recorder. She lied down, took a bottle of valerian and poured some on her most intimate body part. When the cat smelled valerian, he started licking it away, putting Vera in the state of ecstasy. Vera told Svetlana…there is nothing better than the cat’s little tongue. When the cat started licking valerian off from Svetlana, something happened to the animal. Timka probably took too much of the medication: he started licking the liquid away but all of a sudden he seized the genitals of the poor woman with his claws and teeth. Svetlana screamed and tried to push the fierce pet lover away from her, but the cat wouldn’t let go. Vera hurried to help her friend: she emptied a bucket of water on the cat and threw the animal out of the house. When she saw that Svetlana was bleeding, she called an ambulance. Boris [Svetlana’s husband] could not take the fact that his wife preferred having oral sex with a cat [and] kicked Svetlana out of the house…It is noteworthy that lonely women often use their pets (cats or dogs, regardless of sex) to satisfy their sexual needs. Such pet adventures often lead to lamentable consequences – not for pets, but for orgasm-craving women, as a rule. An overdose of valerian can make the loveliest cat become a fierce and aggressive animal”.

I did an academic literature search on aelurophilia and thought I had found an article in the Journal of Feline Medicine and Surgery but the editorial by Margie Scherk used the term ‘aelurophilia’ in it most literal sense to refer to introduce a special issue of the journal that had brought together the “aelurophilic veterinary community” (i.e., vets who love cats but not in any sexual sense). I also thought I had located a relevant conference paper by Dr. A Franklin about people who go looking for big wild cats in the country. He noted that:

“For some reason it appears that people now believe [wild cats] to be there but more than that, they want them to be there, they have become the focus for a new form of aelurophilia, or the love of (wild) cats”.

Again, like the editorial in the Journal of Feline Medicine and Surgery, the term ‘aelurophilia’ is used in its’ most literal sense. Thankfully, there are a few references in the more general zoophilia literature to people who have had sexual relationships with cats (although none of these authors mention the word ‘aelurophilia’). For instance, the Kinsey Reports (of 1948 and 1953) reported that 8% of males and 4% females had at least one sexual experience with an animal. The most frequent sexual acts engaged in with animals comprised calves, sheep, donkeys, large fowl (ducks, geese), dogs and cats. It probably won’t surprise you to learn that the internet has plenty of websites where people have confessed sexual relationships with cats such as those at the Is It Normal?, Zoklet, Zoo Destiny and Tribal War websites. There are also a number of dedicated websites with advice on engaging in human-cat sex such as the Beast Forum’s ‘The ultimate guide: How to make love to big cats’ and Zoophile.Net’s “How to make love to felines’.

In a 2001 issue of the Journal of Small Animal Practice, Dr. H. Munro and Dr. M. Thrusfield (2001) reported that they had collected data on animal abuse from over 400 British vets. They reported that 6% of their cases involved sexual abuse based on their observations of injuries in the animals’ genital and anal areas. Of these, 21 cases referred to dogs and three to cats.

Dr Andrea Beetz carried out a study comprising 32 male zoophiles. She reported that sex had occurred with dogs (78%), horses (53%), cats (13%) and farm animals (19%). She also reported that many of the zoophiles (including the cat lovers) had a very close emotional attachment to their animals and reported that they love their animal partner as others love their human partner (and are devastated when their animal partner dies). In a later paper in a 2004 issue of the Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, she also wrote:

“Besides the whole range of sexual practices with more or less common mammals of a suitable size and anatomy, including deer, tapirs, antelopes, and camels (Massen, 1994), sexual contacts with more unusual species were mentioned in the literature. Insertion of fish – eels seem to be preferred – and snakes into the vagina and sexual stimulation through the movements of the animal (Dekkers, 1994), masturbation of male or female cats and letting cats lick the human genitalia or eat food from the penis or the vagina (Miletski, 2002) are further practices”.

Dr. Hani Miletski (2002) conducted one of the largest studies in this area examining 93 zoophiles (82 men and 11 women). Her study found that most of her sample had sexual contact with dogs (90%). However, she also reported that 19.5% of her participants admitted to having had sexual contact with female felines (large cats or domestic cats) and 17% with male felines (large cats or domestic cats).

Although there are only a few studies that have examined aelurophilia, the data quite clearly show that minorities of both men and women have engaged in human-feline sex although compared to other animals that people have had sex with cats are much lower in the zoophilic preference league.

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

Further reading

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

Beetz, A.M. (2000, June). Human sexual contact with animals: New insights from current research. Paper presented at the 5th Congress of the European Federation of Sexology, Berlin.

Beetz, A. (2004): Bestiality/zoophilia: A scarcely investigated phenomenon between crime, paraphilia, and love. Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 4(2), 1-36.

Dekkers, M. (1994). Dearest pet: On bestiality. New York: Verso.

Franklin, A, (2011, November). Imagined big cats in the English countryside. Proceedings of 2011 TASA Conference: Local Lives/Global Networks. Newcastle, Australia.

Kinsey, A. C., Pomeroy, W. B., Martin, C.E., Gebhard, P.H. (1953). Sexual Behavior in the Human Female. Philadelphia, PA: W.B. Saunders Company.

Kinsey, A. C., Pomeroy, W. B., Martin, C.E., (1948). Sexual Behavior in the Human Male. Philadelphia, PA: W.B. Saunders Company.

Massen, J. (1994). Zoophilie. Die sexuelle Liebe zu Tieren. Koln: Pinto Press.

Miletski, H. (2002). Understanding bestiality-zoophilia. Bethesda, MD: Author.

Munro, H.M.C., & Thrusfield, M.V. (2001). “Battered pets”: Sexual abuse. Journal of Small Animal Practice, 42, 333-337.

Pravda (2004). Cat rapes woman after performing oral sex on her. November 10. Located at: http://english.pravda.ru/news/society/sex/10-11-2004/60215-0/

Shaffer L, & Penn J. A comprehensive paraphilia classification system. In: E.W. Hickey (Editor). Sex crimes and paraphilia. New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.

Scherk, M.A. (2009). FIP – A disease full of curiosities. Journal of Feline Medicine and Surgery, 11, 223.

Token gestures: A brief look at ‘sexual trophy collecting’

Back in 2002, I had a little piece published on excessive collecting behaviour in the Guardian newspaper (‘Addicted to hoarding’). In it I wrote:

“I have always been interested in why we have what seems like an innate ability to collect. I would almost go as far as to say that we are ‘natural born hoarders’. Furthermore, there has been surprisingly little research in this area and Freud’s theories on the topic are unfortunately almost empirically untestable. I would also add that for some people, collecting is at the pathological end of the behavioural continuum. There are some that are (for want of a better word) ‘addicted’ to collecting and there are some with obsessive-compulsive disorders who simply cannot throw away anything”.

Since then I’ve published a few articles on the psychology of collecting in this blog and is probably one of the reasons that I have had a few approaches over the last couple months from journalists asking me about the psychology behind various forms of collecting. (In fact, I’ve also been approached to write an academic chapter on the phenomenon too). Two of the most recent media requests included journalists writing articles on why people collect retro video games (which I hope to write about in a future blog) and another on why people collect ‘sexual trophies’.

I have to admit that I am no expert on sexual trophies so I did a little reading on the topic. According to one definition I came across, a sexual trophy is “any item or piece of clothing gained from a sexual encounter as proof of a successful sexual conquest”. To tie in with the release of US comedy I Just Want My Pants Back, MTV conducted a [non-academic] survey and reported that one in three young British people (aged between 18 and 34 years) admitted to owning some sort of sex trophy with one in six of them (16%) claiming they had two or more sex-based trophies (a group that MTV termed ‘Sexual Magpies’).

However, when it comes to the collecting ‘sexual trophies’, I would argue that most academic research that I have come across on the topic relates to more criminal sexual deviance rather than day-to-day sexual encounters. For instance, in the 2010 book Serial Murderers and Their Victims, Dr. Eric Hickey described the case of man – who was a voyeur – from Georgia (US) that used to break into houses and steal women’s underwear. On his eventual arrest they found over 400 pairs of knickers that he had stolen. More disturbing are cases such as this excerpt from a story in the Daily Telegraph. This is arguably more typical of what I perceive to be sexual trophy hunters:

“A company manager and ‘pillar of the community’ has been exposed after 20 years as a serial sex attacker known as the Shoe Rapist. James Lloyd, 49, a long-standing Freemason who took the footwear of his victims as trophies, was finally caught through advances in DNA techniques. Police later found more than 100 pairs of stiletto shoes hidden behind a trap door at the printing works where he was employed… As well as taking their shoes, he often stole jewellery from the women, mainly in their teens and early 20s, between 1983 and 1986” (Daily Telegraph, July 18, 2006).

However, Dr. Hickey’s book describes even worse acts of sexual trophy collecting. He noted that many serial killers are “known for their habits of collecting trophies or souvenirs. Others have collected lingerie, shoes, hats, and other apparel”. A sizeable section of the book concentrates on the types of serial killers that are popular in the media (such as those that commit ‘lust murders‘) and are the subject of many Hollywood films such as the series of films with (my favourite fictional psychopath) Hannibal Lecter. As Hickey notes:

“These are the rapists who enjoy killing and, often, indulging in acts of sadism and perversion. These are the men who have engaged in necrophilia, cannibalism, and the drinking of victims’ blood. Some like to bite their victims; others enjoy trophy collecting – shoes, underwear, and body parts, such as hair clippings, feet, heads, fingers, breasts, and sexual organs…[and] evoke our disgust, horror, and fascination”.

One of the cases discussed is 1950s US serial killer Harvey Glatman (known in the media as ‘The Lonely Hearts Killer’) who used to take photographs of the women he murdered. Citing the work of Dr. Robert Keppel (another expert in serial murder cases and author of Serial Murder: Future Implications for Police Investigations), Dr. Hickey wrote:

“His photos were more than souvenirs, because in Glatman’s mind, they actually carried the power of his need for bondage and control. They showed the women in various poses: sitting up or lying down, hands always bound behind their backs, innocent looks on their faces, but with eyes wide with terror because they had guessed what was to come”.

Other murderers described by Dr. Hickey included a man that liked to surgically remove (and keep) the eyeballs from his sexual victims (most probably 1990s’ serial killer Charles Allbright) and another that skinned his victims and made lampshades, eating utensils, and clothing. In his overview of necrophilic homicide (i.e., those individuals that kill others in order to engage in sexual activity), Hickey also mentions that such necrosadistic murderers often engage in other paraphilias related to necrophilia “including partialism or the desire to collect specific body parts that the offenders finds sexually arousing. This may include feet, hands, hair, and heads, among others”. Hickey also noted that:

“Another important characteristic of these lust killers was the ‘perversion factor’. This subgroup was often prone to carry out bizarre sexual acts. These acts most commonly included necrophilia and trophy collection. Jerry Brudos severed the breasts of some of his victims and made epoxy molds. Brudos, like others, also photographed his victims in various poses, dressed and disrobed. The photos served as trophies and a stimulus to act out again”.

Later in the book, Dr. Hickey examines the case of Jerry Brudos in more detail (please be warned that some of the things written here may offend those of a sensitive nature):

“At an early age, Jerry Brudos developed a particular interest in women’s shoes, especially black, spike-heeled shoes. As he matured, his shoe fetish increasingly provided sexual arousal. At 17, he used a knife to assault a girl and force her to disrobe while he took pictures of her. For his crime he was incarcerated in a mental hospital for 9 months. His therapy uncovered his sexual fantasy for revenge against women, fantasies that included placing kidnapped girls into freezers so he could later arrange their stiff bodies in sexually explicit poses. He was evaluated as possessing a personality disorder but was not considered to be psychotic…He continued to collect women’s undergarments and shoes. Prior to his first murder, he had already assaulted four women and raped one of them. At age 28, Jerry was ready to start killing…He took [his first victim] to his garage, where he smashed her skull with a two-by-four. Before disposing of the body in a nearby river, he severed her left foot and placed it in his freezer. He often would amuse himself by dressing the foot in a spiked-heel shoe. His fantasy for greater sexual pleasure led him…to strangle [another victim] with a postal strap. After killing her, he had sexual intercourse with the corpse, then cut off the right breast and made an epoxy mold of the organ. Before dumping her body in the river, he took pictures of the corpse. Unable to satisfy his sexual fantasies and still in the grasp of violent urges, he found his third victim…After sexually assaulting her, he strangled her in his garage, amputated both breasts, again took pictures, and tossed her body into the river”.

Arguably the most infamous ‘sexual trophy collector’ was 1980s US serial killer Jeffrey Dahmer, the so-called ‘Milwaukee Cannibal’. In Dr. Hickey’s account he noted that:

“Restraining Dahmer, the officers looked around the apartment and counted at least 11 skulls (7 of them carefully boiled and cleaned) and a collection of bones, decomposed hands, and genitals. Three of the cleaned skulls had been spray-painted black and silver. These were to be part of the shrine fantasized by Dahmer. A complete skeleton suspended from a shower spigot and three skulls with holes drilled into them were found throughout the apartment…Chemicals, including muriatic acid, ethyl alcohol, chloroform, and formaldehyde, were also discovered, along with several Polaroid photographs of recently dismembered young men. A complete human head sat in the refrigerator”.

Another infamous case from the early 1970s (that I admit I had never heard of until I read Dr. Hickey’s book) was Ed Kemper, a cannibalistic killer who also collected human trophies and keepsakes of his victims. Citing the book Hunting Humans by Dr. Elliot Leyton, it was reported that:

“At the age of 23, Ed started killing again, a task that would last nearly a year and entail eight more victims. He shot, stabbed, and strangled them. All were strangers to him, and all were hitchhikers. He cannibalized at least two of his victims, slicing off parts of their legs and cooking the flesh in a macaroni casserole. He decapitated all of his victims and dissected most of them, saving body parts for sexual pleasure, sometimes storing heads in the refrigerator. Ed collected ‘keepsakes’ including teeth, skin, and hair from the victims. After killing a victim, he often engaged in sex with the corpse, even after it had been decapitated. In his confession Kemper stated five different reasons for his crimes. His themes centered on sexual urges, wanting to possess his victims, trophy hunting, a hatred for his mother, and revenge against an unjust society (Leyton, 1986)”.

The most obvious question related to these depraved acts is why such people do it in the first place. Writing in the Encyclopedia of Murder and Violent Crime, Nicole Mott provides an answer:

“A trophy is in essence a souvenir. In the context of violent behavior or murder, keeping a part of the victim as a trophy represents power over that individual. When the offender keeps this kind of souvenir, it serves as a way to preserve the memory of the victim and the experience of his or her death. The most common trophies for violent offenders are body parts but also include photographs of the crime scene and jewelry or clothing from the victim. Offenders use the trophies as memorabilia, but also to reenact their fantasies. They often masturbate or use the trophies as props in sexual acts. Their exaggerated fear of rejection is quelled in front of inanimate trophies. Ritualistic trophy taking, as is found with serial offenders, acts as a signature. A signature is similar to a modus operandi (a similar act ritualistically performed in virtually all crimes of one offender), yet it is an act that is not necessary to complete the crime”

In one of my previous blogs on the psychology of collecting more generally, I referred to a paper by Dr. Ruth Formanek in the Journal of Social Behavior and Personality. She suggested five common motivations for collecting: (i) extension of the self (e.g., acquiring knowledge, or in controlling one’s collection); (ii) social (finding, relating to, and sharing with, like-minded others); (iii) preserving history and creating a sense of continuity; (iv) financial investment; and (v), an addiction or compulsion. She also claimed that the commonality to all motivations to collect was a passion for the particular things collected. Personally, I think that the acquisition of sexual trophies – even in the most deranged individuals – can be placed within this motivational typology in that such individuals clearly have a passion for what they do and I would argue that the behaviour is an extension of the self that to some individuals may be a compulsion or addiction.

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

Further reading

Branagh, N. (2012). Third of UK owns sex trophy. March 26. Located at: http://www.studentbeans.com/mag/en/sex-relationships/third-of-uk-owns-sex-trophy

Du Clos, B. (1993). Fair Game. New York: St. Martin’s Paperbacks.

Griffiths, M.D. (2002). Addicted to hoarding. The Guardian (Review Section), August 10, p.19.

Formanek, R. (1991). Why they collect: Collectors reveal their motivations. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 6(6), 275-286.

Hickey, E. W. (Ed.). (2003). Encyclopedia of Murder and Violent Crime. London: Sage Publications

Hickey, E. W. (2010). Serial Murderers and Their Victims (Fifth Edition). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Keppel, R. D. (1989). Serial Murder: Future Implications for Police Investigations. Cincinnati, OH: Anderson.

Leyton, E. (1986a). Hunting Humans. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart.

Leyton, E. (1986b). Compulsive Killers: The Story of Modern Multiple Murder. New York: New York University Press.

A step too far: Crush fetishism and ‘animal torture porn’ (revisited)

In previous blogs, I have examined both crush fetishism and zoosadism. A crush fetish is a sexual fetish in which an individual derives sexual arousal from watching (or fantasizing about) someone of the opposite sex crushing items (e.g., toys, cigarettes, mobile phones, laptops), food (e.g., fruit), and (in extreme cases) small animals and insects, and/or being stepped on, sat upon, and/or crushed on by a person. Zoosadism refers to the pleasure – often sexual – that individuals attain by causing sadistic cruelty to animals. These bizarre and (in some cases) depraved behaviours recently made the headlines in America following the arrests of women for appearing in an ‘animal torture porn’ video.

In the first case, 28-year old Sara Zamora, a woman from Florida (USA) was arrested following her appearance in a zoosadistic fetish video entitled ‘SOS Barn’. According to various newspaper reports, Zamora is seen engaged in various sexual acts while crushing and killing rabbits (including ‘karate’ chopping their legs) and decapitating chickens. According to a report in the Miami Herald Newspaper the video was made purely for the “sexual gratification of its viewers”. The Herald report alleges that:

“In one clip of ‘SOS Barn’, Miami-Dade police say, Zamora gropes a man’s genitals with her left hand while ‘repeatedly cutting a chicken’s neck using hedge clippers with her right.’ In others, she posed ‘in a sexy outfit’ after hacking off the head of another screaming bird, or she beat chickens to death with a wooden stick…’It’s certainly horrifying. I mean these are sadistic people inflicting gruesome suffering on innocent and vulnerable and helpless animals’ said [People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals’] Cruelty Casework Director Stephanie Bell…So-called ‘crush’ animal torture videos aren’t new and have been the target of past legal crackdowns. In 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a law that outlawed depictions of animals being ‘intentionally maimed, mutilated, tortured, wounded, or killed’, saying it was too broad and violated the right to free speech”.

The film was made at the house of (and presumably by) Adam Redford. Unfortunately, no-one knows exactly when the video was made and therefore “the statute of limitations may have expired”.

Not long after the arrest of Zamora, a second American woman – 29-year old Stephanie Hird from Arkansas (performing under her stage name ‘Megan Jones’) – was also arrested for her role in the ‘SOS Barn’ video. Described by the New York Daily Times as an “animal snuff film starlet”, Hird allegedly shot animals with an air rifle while tied down or being crushed (at least according to court documents that the newspaper had managed to get hold of. According to her social media profiles, Hird’s sexual fetishes also including foot tickling and bondage, as well as being interested in various aspects of macrophilia and microphilia (which I have covered in previous blogs). The New York Daily News story also reported that:

“Hird also appeared in the [The Learning Channel] show ‘Strange Sex’ to help a man realize his dream of being with a giant woman. The episode uses special effects to make the woman appear as if she were several-hundred-feet tall and towering over cities before manhandling her victim. ‘I love being considered a giantess and a goddess’ a smiling Hird tells the camera behind the scenes of the show. ‘Guys love being overpowered. They like being controlled. They like, you know, a woman being in charge – like she should be”.

As I noted in my previous blogs, there has been little empirical research on either crush fetishism or zoosadism, and most academically published papers are case reports. Since I published my blog on crush fetishism, some of my readers will be aware of the case study I published on a man (that I gave the pseudonym of ‘Brad’) with eproctophilia (i.e., sexual arousal to flatulence) in the Archives of Sexual Behavior. The reason I mention this is that one of the other sexual fetishes that Brad also had was crush fetishism. Brad claimed he had this fetish “since birth” and went on to explain further:

“[I have another fetish that] am not proud of, but it exists and may help your study. I have a crush fetish, which is essentially arousal from seeing people step on objects or insects. This particular one has had a lot of bad publicity. As for this one, I can’t tell you where it originated. I remember rubbing myself in my crib as a baby to such thoughts, leading me to believe I may have literally been born with it. I could have been no older than 2½ years old. Keep in mind, these are very primal memories which are mostly a blur. All I recall is that around the time of those memories, I would also rub myself to the thought of someone stepping on an insect, or sometimes a machine made to crush up children like myself. Come to think of it, that last one may have been caused by seeing an apple cider press as a toddler. I also seem to recall that, and being afraid of it because of how it ‘hurt’ the apples”.

I also asked Brad if he thought there was any connection between his crush fetish and his eproctophilia. He responded that if there was any connection, it concerned “the idea of the duality” in that he would not expect to see a woman fart in front of him and similarly, he would not expect a woman to kill an insect in front of him for no real reason. In relation to his crush fetish, he also reported:

“It’s my oldest fetish with no known origin, and I like it for about the same reason as eproctophilia. Maybe that I also disliked seeing people kill bugs as a kid, while also finding it arousing. I was quite the pacifist. Also, when I first discovered ejaculation, I made the connection that ejaculating was somewhat like when a bug is stepped on. I thought about a bug squirting under pressure and then I would do the same. May or may not be relevant, but it was a connection I made as a kid”.

While this is only a small insight into the mind of a crush fetishist, the scientific value of case studies includes their utility in highlighting rare phenomena as well as their role in the generation of new research questions and hypotheses (observations made by Dr. Terry Vasey and Dr. Paul Vasey in a case study of feederism in 2011 issue of the Archives of Sexual Behavior [ASB]). The case I presented in my own ASB paper hopefully fulfils these values. Clearly, this is just one case study and Brad is unlikely to be representative of the entire eproctophile and/or crush fetish community. Further research is needed to assess the extent to which the case study I reported is representative of eproctophiles and/or crush fetishists more generally, and whether the etiological and developmental pathways are more complex than I initially described in my case study account. I also noted at the end of my paper that Brad “highlights the need for further research into crush fetishism as there are no empirical data on this type of fetish”.

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.

Biles, J. (2004). I, insect, or Bataille and the crush freaks. Janus Head: Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies in Literature, Continental Philosophy, Phenomenological Psychology and the Arts, 7(1), 115-131.

Huffington Post (2014). Woman tortured, killed animals while filming Brutal Fetish Sex Video: Cops. April 4. Located at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/06/woman-tortured-animals-fetish-video_n_5100535.html

Griffiths, M.D. (2013). Eproctophilia in a young adult male: A case study. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 42, 1383-1386.

Intentious (2011). Rabbit crushing outrage – Animal snuff film offends. December 9. Located at: http://intentious.com/2011/12/09/rabbit-crushing-outrage-animal-snuff-film-offends/

Kemp, J. (2014). Second fetish model busted in Miami for role in sickening animal torture porn video. New York Daily News, April 17. Located at: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/fetish-model-busted-miami-role-animal-torture-porn-article-1.1759487

Miami Herald (2014). Miami woman charged with role in animal torture sex fetish porn video. April 4. Located at: http://www.miamiherald.com/2014/04/04/4040007/miami-woman-charged-with-role.html

Terry, L.L. & Vasey, P.L. (2011). Feederism in a woman. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 40, 639-645.

What a carry on: A brief look at piggy-back fetishes

Over the last couple of years, I have watched a lot of Korean films in the Tartan Asian Extreme range. One of the things I noticed was that a number of scenes in the films I watched seemed to feature adults giving piggy-back rides to other adults. I actually Googled this observation and was surprised to find quite a few online essays examining this phenomenon. One of the more interesting ones I read was on the Drama Beans website that examined the cultural meaning of piggy-back rides in Korean films. One thing that became abundantly clear is that in Korea, piggy-back rides appear to have romantic and arguably sexual undertones. The article I read noted that in Korea, there are many references to ‘skinship” which is a made-up Korean-English word meaning “levels of physical intimacy, or more simply, touching”. The article then goes on to say that:

“Skinship can range from handholding to kissing, to sex…The most common piggyback scenario is the classic ‘I’m-too-drunk-so-will-you-be-my-knight-in-shining-armor-and-carry-me-home’. Every drama has it, and every romantic comedy hero earns his stripes this way…The piggyback is, in essence, an excuse for skinship, seemingly of the most harmless kind. Because it’s wrapped in a pretty bow of manly honor and a display of alpha male strength, it earns extra points for making women round the world swoon, thinking why can’t my boyfriend do that?…piggybacks are a direct callback to a little girl’s relationship with her father. Don’t worry, I’m not going to go all Freudian on you. I don’t mean it in an icky way. But don’t think that fiction in a patriarchal society doesn’t reflect the values that are deemed to be right in that culture. Piggyback rides in essence infantilize women to equate them with little girls, and paternalize men, to equate them with fathers”.

I then (through sheer curiosity) Googled ‘piggy-back fetishes’ and was surprised to find a number of news articles on the topic. Back in 2009, Kieron Bobbette, a 43-year-old man from Brighton (UK) admitted sexually assaulting five teenage girls (aged 13 to 17 years) while he was being given a piggy-back by them after by pretending that he had a bad leg and an ache in his groin (sand in some cases paying the girls to do so). The story was reported at length in the local newspaper (The Argus). On one occasion he simply jumped onto a young girl’s back without any warning as she walked along the street. The offences took place over a four-year period (2004-2008). One of Bobette’s victims said she had been forced to give him a piggy-back and that when he was being carried he asked her to do squat bends with him on her back. Bobbette pleaded guilty but told the judge: “Can somebody commit sexual assault without knowing they are doing this because I don’t feel I have?” According to a later report in Regency magazine, Bobbette, was given a Sexual Offences Prevention Order that banned him from jumping onto the backs of young ladies and demanding a piggyback ride. Bobbette was also added to the Sex Offenders Register for five years.

This doesn’t appear to be an isolated case as in 2010, Leigh Yeo, an 18-year old teenager from Exeter (UK) sexually assaulted two teenage girls (aged 16 and 18 years) after jumping on their backs for a piggy back ride. It was reported in a BBC news story that one of Yeo’s victims was physically sick following the attack, and later suffered chronic panic attacks. The second victim was left feeling scared and upset. Yeo was jailed for 15 months and was put on the Sex Offenders Register for ten years.

It would also appear that sexual piggy-back offences occur in other countries too. In 2009 in the US, a then 25-year old man, Sherwin Shayegan from Bonney Lake (Washington), was arrested for fourth-degree sexual assault following piggy-back assaults on male student high school athletes. According to one newspaper report:

“The student noticed that Shayegan was behaving strangely, and attempted to leave. At that point, Shayegan is accused of jumping on the student’s back and demanding a piggy-back ride.It’s not the first time that Shayegan has done this, apparently. According to police, he’s done this to students in Ellensburg, Bellingham and Centralia. His usual MO is to approach a high-school student athlete, saying he wants to interview them for a school paper. When they agree, Sahyegan asks them bizarre questions such as ‘Have you crapped your pants?’ or ‘Looked at other boys in the shower?’ When the students, understandably freaked out, try to leave, he will then offer cash, before shouting that it is ‘time for a piggy back ride!’ and attempting to jump on the student’s back”

For Shayegan, the sexual piggy-backs did not stop and he was banned from attending sporting events in two US states (Washington and Oregon). In 2012 he was re-arrested for the same offence.

In a 2009 article by Alex Cipriano entitled ‘Five ridiculous [safe-for-work] fetishes’ at the Cracked website briefly examined the “fetishists who just plain get off on riding the shoulders of other people”. He interviewed some piggy-back fetishists for his article and one of them was quoted as saying:

“A month ago, when intoxicated, I asked another male friend from Canada to piggyback me. Although the entire session only lasted a minute or two, my sexual drive (not specifically for him) suddenly sparked, more than alcohol can ever do. Halfway through the piggyback, I maneuvered myself to hold on his front, dangling there like a koala”.

Cipriano first speculated that that piggy-back fetishes are based in trust and security. However, after researching the article, he came to the conclusion that piggy-back fetishists find themselves trapped in a sexually arousing power struggle. Although “the piggybackee can offer suggestions on speed and direction…it’s ultimately up to the piggybacker to control the situation”. One of his interviewees for the article said that he liked it “very much to ride on older men. I can sit on the old man of about four minutes and bouncing on his shoulders”. Cipriano also quoted from people posting their piggy-back videos on YouTube. One of the viewers of a specific piggy-back video said:

“Love your videos! I like to ride on, sit on and trample folk. I’m 6′ and 231 lbs (105kg) and live in south UK. If any of you guys want to be ridden hard, sat on or trampled under my feet and/or enjoy a good beasting, contact me!”

In another of the few articles I have come across specifically about piggy-back fetishes, the female author and dominatrix Nic Buxom wrote about piggy-back fetishes in her ‘Featured Fetish’ column. Based on her own personal experiences she claimed:

“Piggy-Backing! Yes, this is a real fetish. And actually, as I’ve encountered it, usually the guys want us, the ladies, to give them the piggy-back ride. I just thought it’d be cuter to have a chick riding a guy. Unfortunately…this came out creepier than I expected…Piggy-Back fetishists are some of the kindest souls I’ve had the pleasure of playing with. They’re always very sweet and playful. Not all girls do piggy-back sessions because they’re quite difficult. Being a bigger, stronger lady I love taking them! Piggy-backers tend to be smallish. If a huge guy wanted this I don’t know that we’d have anyone capable but they tend to be petite or at least slim. Also, they’re always very considerate about letting me have short breaks. Piggy-backers keep at least their boxers on, they don’t get a free chance to rub [themselves] against my back or anything like that. Most of them discovered their fetish sometime in high school or at a young age when a friend of theirs playfully gave them a piggy-ride. You can find piggy-back videos all over the net, or so the excitedly tell me”.

In the name of scientific research I went in search of piggy-back fetishes online but was unable to locate a single dedicated online forum and only came across a handful of people who claimed they had (or knew someone who had) a piggy-back fetish. For instance:

• Extract 1: “First off, I AM NOT A TROLL. I’m being dead serious. I’m 5’2.5″ and weigh about 130 pounds. So I’m not a large person. I love it when people give me piggy-back rides. It totally turns me on when a man can carry me on his back. Male strength is sexy! I only let guys I’m interested in carry me around. Is this normal?”
• Extract 2: “Does “piggyback fetish” exist? I once was aroused when I hopped onto a bigger and taller guy’s back and he ran around, and I once had a sexual fantasy about that, so I was wondering…I mean regular piggyback, like when you’re standing up. And trust me, Google is my best friend, but all I saw on Google was this article about a guy that paid teenagers so they can give him piggyback rides”
• Extract 3: “A few weeks ago someone mentioned a guy that liked to ride piggyback on men as a fetish and this got me wondering – what is the strangest or just most “random” request anyone’s asked you as something that gets them off?”
• Extract 4: “My boyfriend recently told me that he has what is referred to as a lift/carry fetish. Specifically, he fantasizes about me giving him piggy-back rides. I would love to be able to satisfy his desires. He tends to be pretty reserved and undemanding, so I was ECSTATIC that he was able to tell me about this. But our size difference makes the idea a little terrifying (me: 5’5″, 160 lb; him: 6’2″, 200 lb)”
• Extract 5: “When I was still in the army there was this tall boy in my regiment. He was a bully [called Flappy] because he had big sticking out ears…Flappy always singled me out for his own bullying…As a warm-up exercise, the corporal told us to jump on one another’s back. I immediately jumped on Flappy’s back and I put my thumbs behind his ears and pushed, so that his ears folded forward like the ears of a pig…After a while, I didn’t even have to speak, I steered him with his ears, he had become my submissive horse! And then it happened – my first ever orgasm on the back of a man. I was still riding on his back and holding his flapping ears, and I came big time…After that exercise he never teased me again. I had broken him!…And that’s how my fetish for protruding ears and piggyback riding started!”

From a psychological perspective, only the final extract was interesting as this gives a good etiological explanation of how the fetish developed and can be explained by basic learning theory (i.e., classical conditioning and associative pairing). The lack of detail in the other examples I found merely demonstrates that the fetish may exist without providing reasons as to why it might exist.

Arguably the most famous piggy-back fetishist in the world is the American cartoonist Robert Crumb. In the documentary film of his life’s work (simply titled Crumb), it features Crumb getting piggyback rides from several women with powerful legs that were clearly substitutes for sex. In the film, one of Crumb’s ex-girlfriends claimed the cartoonist liked to receive piggy-backs in lieu of sex. As Simon Hattenstone noted in a 2005 article in The Guardian:

“In the 1990s [Robert Crumb] became famous for a second time when the director Terry Zwigoff made a documentary about his life, Crumb. The film put Crumb’s life in context – yes, his foot fetish, his piggyback fixations, and his urge to dominate big, dominant women (in a pretty submissive way)”.

I’ll leave you with the conclusion reached by Girl Friday in her article on the cultural importance of piggy-backs in Korea:

“Whether you see piggyback rides as your ultimate fantasy or a nefarious plot to take over the world is up to you. While riding piggyback doesn’t really appeal to me personally, I do see why it’s a staple in dramas. It’s a simple gesture, but loaded with romantic ideals and warm paternal associations. It eliminates the need to say to your audience: this is a caring, sweet, warm man, underneath the gruff exterior. The piggyback does it all, with some skinship to boot”.

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

Further reading

BBC News (2010). Drunk Exter ‘piggy back’ sex attacker, 18, jailed. BBC Devon News, July 1. Located at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10477831

Buxom, N. (2010). Featured fetish: Piggy-backing. February 7. Located at: http://nicbuxom.blogspot.co.uk/2010/02/featured-fetish-piggy-backing.html

Cipriano, A. (2009). 5 ridiculous [safe for work] fetishes. Cracked, March 17. Located at: http://www.cracked.com/article_17149_5-ridiculous-safe-work-fetishes.html

Cridland, A. (2009). Piggy-back sex pest admits Brighton and Hove offences. The Argus, August 22. Located at: http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/4559740.Piggy_back_sex_pest_admits_Brighton_and_Hove_offences/

Girl Friday (2010). Pop culture: Piggyback rides. Drama Beans, July 11. Located at: http://www.dramabeans.com/2010/07/pop-culture-piggyback-rides/

Hattenstone, S. (2005). ‘When I was four, I knew I was weird’. The Guardian, March 7. Located at: http://www.theguardian.com/books/2005/mar/07/robertcrumb.comics