Is Pornography Considered a Paraphilia?
That just depends. Paraphilias are characterized by persistent socially deviant sexual
arousal. If pornography contains pedophilic images and someone views or
collects these images repetitively ( more than 6 months), they likely meet criteria for pedophilia ( see Mike Seto's work on that topic) . If someone collects and is sexually aroused by sadomasochistic images (and masturbates to these images), they do not inherently meet criteria for sexual sadism or sexual masochism ( as I understand the DSM) unless they have enacted repetitive sadistic or masochistic sexual acts onthemselves or others. So merely the passive visual and sexual interest in the child realm qualifies for the pedophilia diagnosis. This has important legal and treatment implications.
Pornography dependence is an example of a variety of sexual disorder that are NOT always characterized by sexually deviant sexual arousal. Most people who view pornography are looking at sexually arousing heterosexual or homosexual images.That is not deviant sexual arousal. It is just that a subgroup cannot adequately control the amount of time and develop other other adverse consequences related to their persistent viewing of pornography. Some investigators have used terms such as "nonparaphilic sexual addictions" or "compulsive sexual behaviors" to describe these conditions.
I have used the term "paraphilia-related disorder" (PRDS) to describe these non-paraphilic ( normophilic) disinhibited or excessive sexual behaviors. Other common PRDs can include compulsive masturbation,
protracted promiscuity, cybersex dependence, telephone sex dependence and severe sexual desire incompatibility. (For more on PRDs, you can google "paraphilia-related disorder").
These "disorders" are quite prevalent amongst sexual offenders but are often overlooked. Technically, they would be most accurately coded as Sexual Disorder Not Otherwise Specified (302.9) in the current DSM nosology.
Thanks to Dr. Kafka at Harvard for this distinction in the diagnostic nomenclature.
arousal. If pornography contains pedophilic images and someone views or
collects these images repetitively ( more than 6 months), they likely meet criteria for pedophilia ( see Mike Seto's work on that topic) . If someone collects and is sexually aroused by sadomasochistic images (and masturbates to these images), they do not inherently meet criteria for sexual sadism or sexual masochism ( as I understand the DSM) unless they have enacted repetitive sadistic or masochistic sexual acts onthemselves or others. So merely the passive visual and sexual interest in the child realm qualifies for the pedophilia diagnosis. This has important legal and treatment implications.
Pornography dependence is an example of a variety of sexual disorder that are NOT always characterized by sexually deviant sexual arousal. Most people who view pornography are looking at sexually arousing heterosexual or homosexual images.That is not deviant sexual arousal. It is just that a subgroup cannot adequately control the amount of time and develop other other adverse consequences related to their persistent viewing of pornography. Some investigators have used terms such as "nonparaphilic sexual addictions" or "compulsive sexual behaviors" to describe these conditions.
I have used the term "paraphilia-related disorder" (PRDS) to describe these non-paraphilic ( normophilic) disinhibited or excessive sexual behaviors. Other common PRDs can include compulsive masturbation,
protracted promiscuity, cybersex dependence, telephone sex dependence and severe sexual desire incompatibility. (For more on PRDs, you can google "paraphilia-related disorder").
These "disorders" are quite prevalent amongst sexual offenders but are often overlooked. Technically, they would be most accurately coded as Sexual Disorder Not Otherwise Specified (302.9) in the current DSM nosology.
Thanks to Dr. Kafka at Harvard for this distinction in the diagnostic nomenclature.
4/16/2008 5:58:37 AM
Written by Bruce W. Cameron, LPC-S, LSOTP-S
Counselor and Psychotherapist in Dallas and Southlake Texas. Offers sex addicton counseling, substance abuse, and depression; Practice provides services for addiction, compulsive and disruptive behaviors.
View Full Profile
Comments
http://www.wellness.com/blog/20453/is-pornography-considered-a-paraphilia/bruce-w-cameron-lpc-s-lsotp-s
"If pornography contains pedophilic images and someone views or
collects these images repetitively ( more than 6 months), they likely meet criteria for pedophilia ( see Mike Seto's work on that topic) . If someone collects and is sexually aroused by sadomasochistic images (and masturbates to these images), they do not inherently meet criteria for sexual sadism or sexual masochism ( as I understand the DSM) unless they have enacted repetitive sadistic or masochistic sexual acts onthemselves or others. "
To me, it appears there are double standards with the DSM. Here we have two individuals who share common issue (e.g. porn addiction/compulsion), but only one individual gets the stigmatizing label (based only on the content of their thoughts), yet the underlying causes to the behaviours may otherwise be identical. It's almost as though a select few "paraphilias" are singled out as disorders to segregate and stigmatise the individual (probably for legal convenience), whereas other paraphilias are seen as completely normal (albeit odd) fantasies. What if all so-called paraphilias shared the exact same root causes? What if the topic of the obsession/paraphilia itself was irrelevant? I think psychiatry and psychology may be pigeon-holing people into stigmatized little boxes that don't really exist in nature - and it is highly dangerous and detrimental. The other thing overlooked too is the "morphing" of sexual interests being reported with heavy porn users. It appears tastes in porn can change over time through novelty-seeking. Of course, the traditional "paraphilia" labels are too rigid to allow for this, but they are being used to diagnose. Psychiatry dismisses it as people with multiple paraphilias, but that idea is at odds with the concept of a "primary sexual attraction" - a fundamental concept of paraphilia. Would a genuine pedophile be just as interested in transgender adults and animals in their porn use? After all, this is what is being seen with pornography taste morphing amongst porn addicts. The issue seems to be the craving for a high through novelty. I don't know, it just appears that the traditionally used labels are thrown around and are adapted to fit these behaviours based on pre-conceived stereotypes, agendas, community expectations and legal frameworks rather than genuinely aligning with causal mechanisms behind the behaviours. Mass internet (and mass porn consumption) is only 20 years old... Psychiatry/psychology I don't think has caught up yet. My 2 cents anyway...
Posted by Glenn
collects these images repetitively ( more than 6 months), they likely meet criteria for pedophilia ( see Mike Seto's work on that topic) . If someone collects and is sexually aroused by sadomasochistic images (and masturbates to these images), they do not inherently meet criteria for sexual sadism or sexual masochism ( as I understand the DSM) unless they have enacted repetitive sadistic or masochistic sexual acts onthemselves or others. "
To me, it appears there are double standards with the DSM. Here we have two individuals who share common issue (e.g. porn addiction/compulsion), but only one individual gets the stigmatizing label (based only on the content of their thoughts), yet the underlying causes to the behaviours may otherwise be identical. It's almost as though a select few "paraphilias" are singled out as disorders to segregate and stigmatise the individual (probably for legal convenience), whereas other paraphilias are seen as completely normal (albeit odd) fantasies. What if all so-called paraphilias shared the exact same root causes? What if the topic of the obsession/paraphilia itself was irrelevant? I think psychiatry and psychology may be pigeon-holing people into stigmatized little boxes that don't really exist in nature - and it is highly dangerous and detrimental. The other thing overlooked too is the "morphing" of sexual interests being reported with heavy porn users. It appears tastes in porn can change over time through novelty-seeking. Of course, the traditional "paraphilia" labels are too rigid to allow for this, but they are being used to diagnose. Psychiatry dismisses it as people with multiple paraphilias, but that idea is at odds with the concept of a "primary sexual attraction" - a fundamental concept of paraphilia. Would a genuine pedophile be just as interested in transgender adults and animals in their porn use? After all, this is what is being seen with pornography taste morphing amongst porn addicts. The issue seems to be the craving for a high through novelty. I don't know, it just appears that the traditionally used labels are thrown around and are adapted to fit these behaviours based on pre-conceived stereotypes, agendas, community expectations and legal frameworks rather than genuinely aligning with causal mechanisms behind the behaviours. Mass internet (and mass porn consumption) is only 20 years old... Psychiatry/psychology I don't think has caught up yet. My 2 cents anyway...
When Body Odor Is a Sign of Illness
Wellness Editor
Foods That Fight Back Pain
Wellness Editor
Conquer Your Fears: 3 Effective Strategies for Managing Medical Screening Anxiety
Stephanie McLeod-Estevez, LCPC
What Exactly Is Wrong With Commercial Beef?
Jenn Ryan
Can You Have Too Much Wellness?
Loretta Breuning
Calm from Within: 3 Simple Ways to Reduce Your Stress
Avery Neal, PhD
2 Ways to Boost Your Mood with Self-Compassion
Jen Johnson
5 Tips to Keep a Positive Attitude and Endure
Sherrie Campbell
