When considering medicalisation in society, it is also important to discuss the process of demedicalisation. This occurs when ‘a problem is no longer defined in medical terms and the involvement of medical personnel is no longer deemed appropriate’ (Conrad, 2007; p98). Masturbation is one of the few examples of complete demedicalisation.
Masturbation can be defined by ‘any kind of manual stimulation of the genitals, including those of a partner. Most commonly, the term is reserved for autoerotic (self arousing) behaviour’ (Levay and Valente, 2006; p254)
Masturbation as a sin
Masturbation was first defined as a sin, the sin of Onan, or Onaninism. This was done through the use of a footnote in the bible (Genesis 39:9). The confraternity bible states “Onan committed the sin of contraception which takes its name from him: Onanism (Ritter,2006)
Masturbation as an illness
During the Victorian era, masturbation became defined as an illness (Conrad, 2007).
To cure this masturbatory illness, both doctors and parents would use various chemical therapies, corrective surgery, and mechanical devices; treatments described by Lesley Hall (1992, in Fout 1992) as brutal to the extreme. Masturbation during this period was considered ‘disgusting’ and ‘unhealthy’ and was referred to by loaded terms such as ‘self-pollution’ (Levay and Valente, 2006; p255).
According to authorities at the time, masturbation led to ‘degeneracy’, a condition of physical, mental and moral decay that affected not just the masturbator but also any offspring that he or she may have (Hare, 1962 cited by ibid). At the time, reasons for the desire to masturbate included the consumption of rich and highly flavoured foods, thus, to discourage masturbation, bland foods were encouraged and Kellogg’s Corn Flakes (that are still available for purchase today) were introduced in the hope of reducing sexual arousal and subsequently masturbation.
Illich’s (1976) Medical Imperialism
Illich (1976) identified how drugs and other medical technologies remove personal responsibility for suffering and create a dependence on health care. This is important to the discussion of masturbation, since at the time in which it was being defined as an illness was a time in which doctors were establishing themselves. Since masturbation was said to be common amongst the young, it served as an “all-purpose culprit for a medical profession that could not provide answers to grieving parents” (Gilbert, 1975: 217).
This theory also suggests that medicine is more largely focused on the means of social control as opposed to the criminal justice system or the church (Zola, 1972) and could be argued to have been a method of controlling patients. It is argued that doctors during this period were sadists who took pleasure in painful operations and causing physical as well as psychological harm (Szasz, 1988). Thus, in reference to Illich’s (1976) contributions, causing harm at a clinical level due to ineffective treatment and side effects from therapies used to ‘treat’ masturbation as an illness.
Medical Imperialism: A Modernist View of Masturbation
In the modern day, masturbation is ‘a very common form of sexual expression’ (Levay and Valente,2006; p254) which is ‘a part of human sexuality and is part of something that perhaps should be taught’ (Elders, 1994 cited by ibid). This much more liberal view of the expression of female sexuality is largely due to the feminist movement and the rise of women’s magazines such as cosmopolitan which encourages women to openly discuss their sex lives.
However, this also reinforces ideas suggested by Illich (1976). Although that masturbation is no longer an illness nor a disease, ideas about how much sex/masturbation is ‘normal’ are reinforced through the media and the availability of Viagra to increase libido in both men and women by securing a growing market through the sex industry, which may cause individuals to question if they are medically ‘normal’ If they do not meet the standards presented to the media.
REFERENCES
Conrad, P (2007). The Medicalization of Society. The United States of America: The John Hopkins University Press
Fout, J (1992). forbidden history the state society and the regulation of sexuality. Chicago: University of Chicago press
Gilbert, A. N. ‘Doctor, Patient, and Onanist Diseases in the Nineteenth Century’, Journal of the History of Medicine, Vol. 30, No. 3 (July 1975) pp. 217 – 234
Illich, I. (1976). Medical Nemesis. Pantheon: New York.
Levay, S and Valente, S (2006). Human Sexuality. 2nd ed. Massachusetts: Sinauer Associates.
Ritter, F (2006). Sex, Lies and the Bible. California: Candid Press.
Szasz, T (1988). Psychiatric Justice. New York: Syracuse University press
Zola, I. (1972). Medicine as an institution of social control. The Sociological Review. 20 (4), 487-504.
Medical Imperialism: Women's Bodies 