View Single Post
Old April 10th, 2007, 02:58 PM  
DouggyO.o
The Forgotten One
 
DouggyO.o's Forum Picture
 
Name: Doug
Join Date: March 27, 2005
Age: 24
Gender: Male
Blog Entries: 4
Default Re: I have a 'Fetish'

Fetish's are nothing to be ashamed of. everybody has one.

here is an artical written by doctors of how a fetish comes about.

Psychological origins and development

There are many theories about the psychological how, when and why of fetishism, but only few facts. Many fetishists state that they have had fetishistic desires as long as they can remember. Some fetishists can trace back their desire to a specific event. Modern psychology assumes that fetishism either is being conditioned or imprinted or the result of a traumatic experience. But also physical factors like brain construction and heredity are considered possible explanations. In the following, the most important theories are presented in chronological order:
In 1887, psychologist Alfred Binet introduced the term fetishism, suspecting that it was the pathological result of associations. Accidentally simultaneous presentation of a sexual stimulus and an inanimate object, thus his argument, led to the object being permanently connected to sexual arousal. About 1900, sexual psychologist Havelock Ellis brought up the revolutionary idea that already in early childhood erotic feelings emerged and that it was the first experience with its own body that determined a child's sexual orientation. Psychiatrist Richard von Krafft-Ebing consented to Binet's theory in 1912, recognizing that it predicted the observed wide variety of fetishes but unsure why these particular associations persisted over the whole of a lifetime while other associations changed or faded. In his eyes, the only possible explanation was that fetishists suffered from pathological sexual degeneration and hypersensitivity. [2]
Sexologist Magnus Hirschfeld followed another line of thought when he proposed his theory of partial attractiveness in 1920. According to his argumentation, sexual attractiveness never originated in a person as a whole but always was the product of the interaction of individual features. He stated that nearly everyone had special interests and thus suffered from a healthy kind of fetishism, while only detaching and overvaluing of a single feature resulted in pathological fetishism. Today, Hirschfeld's theory is often mentioned in the context of gender role specific behavior: females present sexual stimuli by highlighting body parts, clothes or accessories, males react to them.
Havelock Ellis' theory of erotic symbolism, according to which unusual sexual practice symbolically replaced normal sexual intercourse, and his thoughts about erotic thoughts in children, had laid the foundations for psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud. In 1927, Freud stated that fetishism was the result of a psychological trauma. A boy, longing to see his mother's penis, averts his eyes in horror when he discovers that she has none. To overcome the resulting castration anxiety he clings to the fetish as a substitute for the missing genital. Freud never commented on the idea of female fetishists. [3]
In 1951, Donald Winnicott presented his theory of transitional objects and phenomena, according to which childish actions like thumbsucking and objects like cuddly toys are the source of manifold adult behavior, amongst many others fetishism. [5]
Behaviorism traced fetishism back to classical conditioning and came up with numerous specialized theories. The common theme running through all of them is that sexual stimulus and the fetish object are presented simultaneously causing them to be connected in the learning process. This is similar to Binet's early theory, though it differs in that it specifies association to classical conditioning and leaves out any judgment about pathogeneity. The superstimulus theory stressed that fetishes could be the result of generalization. For example, it may only be shiny skin that arouses a person at first, but in time more common stimuli, such as shiny latex, may have the same effect. The problem with such a theory was that classical conditioning normally needs many repetitions, but this form would require only one. To account for this the preparedness theory was put forward; it stated that reacting to an object with sexual arousal could be the result of an evolutionary process, because such a reaction could prove to be useful for survival. In pointing to how conditioned sexual behavior can persist over time, one may cite how, in 2004, when quails were trained to copulate with a piece of terry cloth, their conditioning was sustained through ongoing repetition. [6]
Because classical conditioning seemed to be unable to explain how the conditioned behavior is kept alive over many years, without any repetition, some behaviorists came up with the theory that fetishism was the result of a special form of conditioning, called imprinting. Such conditioning happens during a specific time in early childhood in which sexual orientation is imprinted into the child's mind and remains there for the rest of his life.
Various neurologists pointed out that fetishism could be the result of neuronal crosslinks between neighboring regions in the human brain. For example, in 2002 Vilaynur S. Ramachandran stated that the region processing sensory input from the feet lies immediately next to the region processing sexual stimulation.
Today, psychodynamics has parted with the idea of proposing one explanation for all fetishes at the same time. Instead, it focuses on one form of fetishism at a time and the patients' individual problems. Over the past decades, various case studies have been published in which fetishism could successfully be linked to emotional problems. Some argue that a lack of parental love leads to a child projecting its affection to inanimate objects, others state in consent with Freud's model of psychosexual development that premature suppression of sexuality could lead to a child getting stuck in a transitory phase.






long read but very interesting.
DouggyO.o is offline