Fetishism and the Social Value of Objects - Literature review Example

Introduction Fetishism is the use of non-living objects as a means for sexual gratification, and it is defined by the DSM as using these objects as the exclusive means for sexual gratification (DSM-III 302.81). These objects are not necessarily objects that are used for cross-dressing or objects that are designed to be used for sexual stimulation, such as vibrators (DSM-III 302.81). However, they tend to be articles of clothing or parts of the body, such as hair or nails (Kafka, 2009). The disorder, as defined by the DSM, is one that is suffered almost exclusively by males (Kafka, 2009). These fetishes develop in childhood or early adolescence, and may be in response to sexual abuse (Encyclopedia of Mental Disorders). They are difficult to treat, partially because the individual may not want to give up the fetish, partially because the fetish is becoming more socially acceptable and they do not really harm anybody, and partially because there has not been an adequate treatment created (Encyclopedia of Mental Disorders). However, sexual fetishism is only one type of fetish – the term fetishism can extend to any kind of object that is used for worship, such as religious objects or commodities (Dant, 1996, p. 5). According to Kafka (2009) the DSM-III does not account for individuals who have a fetish with certain body parts that are living, such as feet or hands. The hair and nails are considered to be non-living, which is why they were accorded a part of the DSM diagnosis for sexual fetishes and things like a fetish for hands and feet were not (Kafka, 2009). They were, however, later included in the DSM-III-R as being considered to be part of partialism, which was considered to be Paraphilia Not Otherwise Specified (Kafka, 2009). The DSM-III-R expanded the definition of sexual fetishism from the DSM-III, stating that sexual fetishism is defined as “a) over a period of at least six months, recurrent sexual urges and sexually arousing fantasies involving the use of nonliving objects by themselves; b) the person has acted on these urges, or is markedly distressed by them; and c) the fetishes are not only articles of clothing used in cross-dressing, or devices designed for the purpose of tactile genital stimulation” (DSM-III-R 302.81). However, the DSM-III-R no longer mentioned body parts or products, such as hair and nails, but, rather, common objects such as stockings, bras, women’s underpants, boots, shoes and other wearing apparel. These definitions, including classifying being sexually aroused by body parts such as feet and hands as partialism, or paraphilia not otherwise specified, have persisted in the DSM-IV and the DSM-IV TR (Kafka, 2009). Kafka (2009) discussed whether there should be a separate distinction between partialism and fetishism. Kafka concluded that the definition of fetishism be expanded to include partialism under the rubric of fetishism, as opposed to leaving the definition of partialism as being considered a paraphilia not otherwise specified (Kafka, 2009). One of the reasons why there is a separate category is that there is a necessity, for one to be diagnosed with any type of fetishism, that the individual cannot be sexually aroused unless he or she is in the presence of the particular inanimate object, or that this inanimate object is the primary way that the individual is sexually aroused. If the definition were expanded to include body parts, such as hands and feet, then fetishism loses its very definition, as the majority of people have hands and feet, so it goes without saying that hands and feet will be present in the vast majority of sexual situations(Kafka, 2009). Therefore, fetishism becomes blurred if hands and feet are included in the definition – if a person has a “fetish” with body parts that are present in most people, then that object will almost always be present, so there is no way of telling if the individual would be sexually aroused if the object such as the hands or feet are not present. On the other hand, when speaking of a true fetish, such as women’s underwear or bras, it would be much easier to diagnose somebody with fetishism if these particular items are the object of the fetish, as they are not necessarily present in all sexual situations. A woman may or may not wear underwear or bras, or the man might be a homosexual, therefore a woman’s underwear or bras would not necessarily be a part of a given sexual situation. In this way, there is a “clear-cut displacement phenomenon” (Gebhard, 1965, pp. 415-416). On the other hand, partialism is limited to distinct features of the human body, and is limited as such. Like fetishism, if a man is has partialism, he can only be aroused in the presence of the object of his desire. Such as redheads – a man, if he has partialism with regards to redheaded women, may only be sexually aroused if the woman has red hair (Gebhard, 1965, p. 416). While it is true that an individual may not be diagnosed with having a fetish under the DSM criteria if he or she is fixated upon a body part, it is also true that he or she may not be diagnosed as having a fetish if there is no clinical impairment. Thus, if an individual has what is commonly regarded as a fetish for shoes, if that individual does not suffer from distress or psychosocial role impairment as the result of this fetish, then that individual does not fit the criteria for sexual fetishism under the DSM. For example, men who suffer from sexual fetishism may steal the object of their desire; this would mean that there is an impairment in the psychosocial functioning, as stealing is a crime. Other distress or psychosocial impairment experienced by individuals who fit the diagnostic criteria for sexual fetishism include the feelings of low self-esteem, depression, guilt and shame, loneliness, sexual inadequacy and problems with intimate relationships (Kafka, 2009). Moreover, sexual festishes develop in childhood or early adolescence (Kafka, 2009). Fetishes may not always be present in any given individual – sometimes an individual may only display fetishistic tendencies when he is experiencing a period of stress; however, with others, the fetishistic tendencies are always present, and he cannot be aroused at any time unless he is in the presence of the fetish object (Encyclopedia of Mental Disorders). According to the Encylopedia of Mental Disorders, fetishism has, at its root, the feeling of pleasure that a male feels when he is around the object of his desire. For instance, a man might have a random association with his object, such as panty-hose, and this association might be innocent of sexual content. The man just knows that the tactile and texture of the hose makes him feel pleasurable, without it being sexual. However, the feeling of pleasure is then used in a sexual way, and the man comes to associate the object with sexual gratification, and, in this way, the object is connected to sex. Oftentimes, a man cannot necessarily pinpoint when he began associating the object with sex, which means that he does not necessarily know when the fetish began. Further, the Encyclopedia of Mental Disorders states that the fetish may be associated with sexual abuse (Encyclopedia of Mental Disorders). Sigmund Freud believed, on the other hand, that fetishes were formed because the boy believes that his penis may be cut off, because little girls believe that they do not have penises because theirs were cut off. Consequently, the boy must use fetishistic objects that belong to females as a way of disavowing the female’s “castration” by “creating the image of the woman as fetish – a replacement for her missing phallus” (Keane, p. 3). Therefore, a boy’s fetishes develop because of a fear of castration, and this fear is relinquished by effectively recreating the phallus in the little girl. In this way, the boy may relieve his fear that he will be castrated by seeing that the little girl has not been castrated. As for treatment, approaches are limited and the prognosis is poor. Aversion shock has been attempted, in which an individual receives a mild shock whenever he is in the presence of the object. However, this approach was not successful. Another treatment that has been attempted is orgasmic reorientation, in which the individual is aided in developing sexual responses to items which are culturally appropriate. This approach has only had limited success. Moreover, fetishes do not necessarily harm another person, and they have become more socially acceptable in recent years. Moreover, they usually do not involve non-consenting partners. Because of this, there is less reason for an individual to seek therapy for his fetish (Encyclopedia of Mental Disorders). While the aforementioned are all examples and definitions of sexual fetishes, the term is not limited to objects that are designed to sexual arouse a person. In fact, the term was historically meant for objects which are the target of worship, such as religious objects (Dant, 1996, p. 5). Karl Marx, in fact, literally states that capitalistic individuals worship the almighty dollar, and that this is a kind of fetish, as he referred to private property, capital and money as fetish objects (Marx, 1975, p. 364). Marx also stated that commodities were also fetishistic, as it changes into something transcendent when objects are converted to commodities (Parkins, p. 91). Moreover, some feminist writers have equated other things as fetishes. One such is Laura Mulvey, who states that the air-brushed images of females on the covers of magazines are a kind of fetish, as they intentionally cover up the flaws, or that they “mask the sight of the wound, cover the lack with beauty” (Keane, p. 1). Thus, the female on the cover of a magazine becomes an object of worship, and an unattainable ideal. But it is really an object of fetish, because the image masks the true qualities of the woman, as well as covers up her physical flaws. In this way, the image is separated from the woman as a whole, which is why the image is fetishistic. Conclusion Sexual fetish objects are considered to be fetishes because they are objects, as opposed to being the part of a whole person. Also, these objects are inanimate, and to be considered truly a fetish, must not be a body part. These fetishes have different origins, but it seems as if nobody really knows what causes them. Freud has a theory, involving castration. Others believe that fetishism results from sexual abuse. What is known is that they are difficult to treat, and the individuals who suffer from them do not necessarily want it treated. The end result is that the fetishes usually go untreated. Moreover, one must distinguish between a sexual fetish and a general fetish. The sexual fetish involves sexual arousal; general fetish simply involves worship. Marx believed that commodities and capital were fetishistic because people worship them. Some feminists believe that the perfect female on the magazine cover are fetishistic because they, too, are worshiped. Other times the word fetish may be used in reference to religious objects. The one thing that sexual fetishes and general fetishes have in common, however, is that the object is transcendent, in that the object no longer is just considered to be an everyday object that is not associated with anything, but, rather, the object becomes something that is either worshipful or sexually gratifying. It is associated with the worship or the sexual gratification, and, in this way, it becomes a fetish. Sources Used Dant, T. (1996) Fetishism and the social value of objects. Sociological Review 44(3), 495-516. The Encyclopedia of Mental Disorders. Available at: http://www.minddisorders.com/Del-Fi/Fetishism.html Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders III (1980) New York: American Psychiatric Association. Kafka, M. (2009) The DSM diagnostic criteria for fetishism. Archives of Sexual Behavior. Available at: http://www.dsm5.org/Documents/Sex%20and%20GID%20Lit%20Reviews/Paraphilias/KAFKADSM2.pdf Keane, J. Fragmented fetishes: Monstrosity and desire in women’s contemporary time-based art. Available at: http://www.inter-disciplinary.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/m7-conferencejenny-keane.pdf Marx, K. (1975) Early Writings. Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin Books. Parkins, I. Notes on a relationship: Fetish object, femininity, historian. Available at: http://pi.library.yorku.ca/ojs/index.php /tessera/article/viewFile/25268/23462 Read More