Masturbatory insanity: the rise and fall of an idea

The history of medicine is replete with theories that reflect religious beliefs rather than scientific facts. One of the most interesting, and most instructive examples of this phenomenon is the claim that masturbation causes insanity.
Masturbatory insanity pre-occupied medical professionals for almost 250 years. It arose apparently de novo in Europe in the early eighteenth century, and was not finally put to rest until the middle of the twentieth century. Its history of the idea is recounted exhaustively in the scientific paper Masturbatory Insanity: The History of an Idea by E.H. Hare published in the Journal of Mental Science in January, 1962.
Classical medical professionals made no reference to any harmful effects of masturbation. It was not until the early eighteenth century that the idea gained currency upon publication of the book Onania, or the Heinous Sin of Self-Pollution. The author is believed to have been a "clergyman turned quack" and not a reputable medical professional. Like most quacks he advertised an extremely expensive secret remedy.
The assertions gained wide popularity, though. Voltaire, writing in his Dictionnaire Philosophiqe in 1764 reports that the book was then in its 80th edition.
The idea passed into the realm of official medical thought with Tissot's Onania, or a Treatise upon the Disorders produced by Masturbation in 1758. According to Tissot:
...[L]oss of semen ... occasions general debility and so opens the way to consumption, deterioration of eyesight, disorders of digestion, impotence, and so on…[T]he more serious effects are on the nervous system and this is due to the sexual act causing an increased flow of blood to the brain. "This increase of blood explains how these excesses produce insanity. The quantity of blood distending the nerves weakens them; and they are less able to resist impressions, whereby they are enfeebled."During the following years anatomical and pathological study revealed that disease was caused by structural abnormality or derangement, and the claim that masturbation could cause "deterioration of the eyesight, disorders of digestion, etc." lost currency. But medical professionals refused to give up the idea that masturbation was harmful and the locus of harm became mental health.
According to Esquirol, writing in 1838:
... it (masturbation) may be a forerunner of mania, of dementia and even of senile dementia; it leads to melancholy and suicide; … it is a grave obstacle to cure in those of the insane who frequently resort to it during their illnessThe view that masturbation causes insanity was refined over time to a specific form of insanity. In his classification of mental disorders written in 1863, Skae asserts:
The third natural family I would assign to the masturbators… I think it cannot be denied that that vice produces a group of symptoms which are quite characteristic and easily recognized, and give to the cases a special natural history: the peculiar imbecility and shy habits of the very youthful victim; the suspicion and fear and dread and suicidal impulses and scared look and feeble body of the older offenders, passing gradually into Dementia or Fatuity.This theory was elaborated by Spitzka (1887):
... the typical age of onset of masturbatic insanity is between 13 and 20 years; it is at least five times as common in males as in females because of the greater rarity of masturbation in females; in the majority of cases there is a rapid decline into agitated dementia, but where deterioration is less rapid "the obtrusive selfishness, cunning, deception, maliciousness and cruelty of such patients" is such that "the [doctor] may find it impossible to reconcile himself to regarding them as anything else than repulsive eye-sores and a source of contamination to other patients, physically and morally."In retrospect, Spitzka and others were describing schizophrenia. As Hare explains how masturbation came to be associated with a specific form of insanity:
Nor is it difficult, from our present standpoint, to see how this came about. Masturbation is most commonly and most frequently practised during adolescence and therefore most likely to be observed when mental disease insidiously deprives an adolescent of his normal social inhibitions.As the field of psychiatry developed, it was recognized that excessive or public masturbation was a symptom of serious psychiatric illness, not its cause. Even then, the psychiatric profession only gradually gave up the notion of masturbation as harmful, downgrading it from psychosis to neurosis and ultimately acknowledging it as normal behavior.
The story of masturbatory insanity is a cautionary tale. It reflects the injection of religion into medicine, characterizing a behavior as harmful because religion says it is harmful, rather than relying on scientific evidence. We may imagine that, in our purported sophistication, we would never fall prey to such ludicrous theories. But, in fact, similar efforts are ongoing, with religious conservatives trying to persuade the public that homosexuality is deviant behavior and that abortion is physically harmful.
The story of masturbatory insanity should remind us to be aware of the intersection of religion and culture with contemporary medicine. Great harm can occur when religion is confused with medicine and medicine is harnessed for religious ends.


Salon.com
Comments
Thanks for the welcome. I've been writing all along at a personal blog.
Is that supposed to be witty?
you tell me, you're the doctor.
It's difficult to believe there's anything wrong with my post, since you immediately tried to leverage it to get readers for yourself.
but I would call it boring as hell copy and paste drivel with
no entertainment value, no medical or health advice and in
general not a single thing of interest. In classic Dr. Amy style
it has a sensationalist title and I suppose your need for attention,
even though 99% (apparently LeMichel is a fervent masturbating "Dr" Amy fan) of the attention is negative commentary, is
as pathetic as ever.
This is a sad day indeed for me... for us, the OS community. You
"Dr" Amy (get your license back yet?) are a hack. You were
exposed previously as just that and I'll never forget the OS celebration when you "went to explore other horizons" or whatever
you said for your reason for leaving.
Please, please go back to wherever you were. Go back to Med School. Something, anything... just go.
Yes, it's very frightening. The efforts to demonize homosexuality, abortion, and even the teaching of evolution are just the contemporary equivalents of the effort to demonize masturabation. It's all about foisting religious beliefs on others by pretending they are "science."
Fantastic. That's a beautiful window into how your narcissistic little mind works. You really think he was using you to get readers to his own blog? Like no one reads his blog unless he can lure them in with some Dr. Amy bait? Riiiight. Keep thinking that. That must be what it was, because how could anyone possibly object to anything you write?
It must be bright and sunny where you sit, what with you shittin' sunshine all the time.
(I, for one, welcome the return of Dr. Amy as a stabilizing force on OS. I was having a hard time following all the nuances of the recent catfights 'round these parts. Now we have a centralized location for it!)
"A penny saved is a penny earned." Abe Lincoln
I now am a PhD of History. I shall denote it.
Welcome back,
Your dreams were your ticket out.
Welcome back,
To that same old place that you laughed about.
Well the names have all changed since you hung around,
But those dreams have remained and they're turned around.
Who'd have thought they'd lead ya (Who'd have thought they'd lead ya)
Here where we need ya (Here where we need ya)
Yeah we tease you a lot cause we've got you on the spot, welcome back,
Welcome back, welcome back, welcome back...
I had really hoped you were gone for good.
Please reconsider.
Let's face it, that's really all you needed to say. ;)
BTW, welcome back. I rarely had time to jump from here to your personal blog. For those of you who don't want you here, they can go .............. masturbate............ themselves.
I think these pseudo scientist advanced the idea of any sexual expression or desire was signs of a weaker mind. Graham advanced the idea that a special vegetarian diet (Graham was the father of the vegetarian society of America and inventor of the Graham cracker) would help keep a person from giving into their carnal desires and polluting themselves. Kellogg and his followers advanced these ideas as "scientific" facts which found their way into the religious community.
During the Clinton Administration, the Surgeon General was fired for mentioning masturbation in a public memorandum about recommendations re: sex education . Right wingers were outraged that a doctor would talk about masturbation, the thinking seeming to be, to mention it to teens would be to promote teen promiscuity. When people lose their jobs and young people are forbidden education in the name of religion co-opting medical issues as moral ones, it affects us all.
I'm in awe big K (and that's a term of endearment... seriously) and just wonder if you could explain once and for all to US the contributors what constitutes a post worthy of the OS cover.
This?
Really?
People are leaving right and left around here. Karin Rego, gone. Designanator gone. Emma Peel has one foot out the door and the other hanging by the little toe. It's depressing Kerry to people that really really try to write important or funny or otherwise worthwhile things (and believe me I DO NOT count myself amongst those... mine is more like an online diary, and I DO appreciate having a place to post it, and some readers to read and comment) to see the obvious favoritism here on YOUR opensalon. I know it's your ball and you can take it home and not let anyone play any more anytime you want. We just want to understand.
Amy (sorry, I do not recognize the "M.D." part) I apologize for my previous comment, but please understand the frustration of the people who spend hours and hours here daily... people that take this place seriously (read above in these comments. I do not belive I am the only one that feels this way).
Anyways, welcome back Amy, every so often I use to catch an article or two you wrote and I actually loved seeing some of your humor coming out on one of your new articles.
Same goes for Zerry.
I suspect that people will put them in the same category as masturbatory insanity. They will note that these are just additional efforts to pretend that religion is "science."
You had EP and Cover the minute you posted this article, I seen it come up. You had only one or two commenters. Which I think you and a couple others on here getting automatic EP and Covers is a cock of shit. When there are so many other great writers on here that take their time to research, put depth and emotions into their pieces and they get over looked by the editors. You come back on here and you get it automatically.
What are you blowing Kerry or one of the other editors. Damn shame because I bet I could blow them better then you.. lmao..
You specifically decry bullies, in both your posts and comments. In fact, I would venture to say that you would like to be known for that single cause if you had to be associated with just one. I simply Do. Not. Understand. how you can be so blind when it comes to your reaction to Amy Tuteur. What she does is Not. Relevant. It's your own behavior that counts. If every single person resolved not to bully another, then we wouldn't have bullying, cyber or otherwise. Just. Stop.
(I think you all know how I feel about that stupid word. period. word thing, which shows how upsetting I find this. I had to leave OS for a while because of it, and I'll be damned if I'm going anywhere again.)
(I'm sorry to refer to you in the third person, Amy. As a general rule I try to avoid that.)
well done amy - again i'm so happy you're back.
So far today there have been four posts about me or inspired by me. You can't pay for publicity like that, and I'm getting it for free.
They say they hate me, but I'm beginning to wonder if they secretly love me.
Here is "Love Doctor" which has been a big hit in the U.K. this year: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9y3qZb6nJfU
Enjoy!
I do not bully anyone. Especially not the good Amy Tuteur.
From my original post "I'm going to say what MANY have said to ME via PM (and I promise to never break confidence), and I also have no ill will or feelings toward Dr. Amy either. This isn't about her, it's about this place."
On here I will quote myself:
"wow"
"Is your title supposed to be witty? Is the photo of an actor in a straight jacket supposed to be funny? Let us ask you some questions once and expect an answer without receiving a question in return. What are you an echo?"
I found the photo to be offensive. The doctor is making fun of mental illness? Is that professional? It was not written as satire.
"Why does Screech look like he's taking a dump? Just sayin...
"A penny saved is a penny earned." Abe Lincoln
I now am a PhD of History. I shall denote it."
The good doctor is no longer a doctor yet flies the MD banner. Just calling it like I see it.
And yet, she never answers a question from me. I am the bully?
"When DO you find time for your patients?"
A legitimate question, perhaps? Never answered either.
How is this bullying?
As for the other self-righteous defenders below, good for you. You have a right to judge me, but I dare question Editorial performance on here and I'm the bad guy. It further enforces my feelings about certain people and the fact that I am spot on.
Sorry you feel this way Lainey. I guess it's all about perception. I defend helpless kids who get tormented at school. I was aware that Dr. Amy was being bullied. At least not by me. Knee jerk reactions occur. There have been many today, but mine was not. Many approached me this weekend and said via PM, "Dr. Amy is back, Monday morning by 9:00 am she'll be on the cover with some sub-par piece." Turns out they were right. It's the truth.
Sometimes the truth hurts.
I learned from this post.
I know what the fuss is about - automatic EP's- and also understand that you're not responsible.
I enjoyed, if that's the right word (!!) this post.
The picture is a little over the top, but...
I will give you this, you suffer the slings and arrows with a lot of grace.
Patricia K, you bring up an interesting point. I rarely see Dr, Amy comment on others posts. I don;t think that she has ever commented on one of mine, but I might be wrong.
As far as the post goes, the collision of religion and science is interesting, but this post isn't.
Lastly, it's not Dr. Amy's fault that she usually makes the cover. So do Jocelyn Testes-Harder, Saturn Smith, The Squirrel, David Sirota, Scott Mendelson, Mary T Kelly. Most of the people I just listed deserve their cover spots. A couple of them are crashing bores.
Amy: "I'm beginning to wonder if they secretly love me."
You gotta' be kidding, right?
Ummm, I think I'll leave the rating of this post to others.
I'm here to get readers and I couldn't buy the publicity they give me. Why would they be helping me so much if they didn't secretly care?
A couple of comments of mostly an editorial nature.
First, you nor anyone else seems to have control over OS Cover or Editor Picks so, for me, trying to hold you responsible for that is a non-issue as far as I am concerned. Sex sells..any kind of sex sells ...so 'nuff said about that.
Second being a rather old and retired member of the medical profession I am long familiar with the notion of attaching insanity to masturbation as well as religious prohibitions about same.
Third: Your essay (it does not seem to be a research paper proper if that is what you intended ) could be stronger. If I were your editor I'd cut and paste the last large paragraph to the top of the piece. The intro is weak with just your statement as the lead. Also I'd like to see almost equal emphasis on religious personages who have promoted the masturbation is evil theme for each of your time periods.
Fourthly, one cannot assume that everyone knows who you are referring to when you only provide a last name; e.g. Spitzka (sp?) A first name would help. I realize that blog writing is different but I refuse to throw out all the good things that serve as directionals in writing and which, hopefully, clarify understanding.
Fifth: I think your cautionary tale of injecting religion into science is an important theme but I think an additional question is why, despite all evidence to the contrary, that religion has often taken the lead and seems to be more of a comfort to people than scientific medicine. Is the health profession just not that good at 'selling itself'? It's going to be interesting to see 50 years from now what the internet has wrought in terms of information retrieval on the parts of patients and just where religion and medicine fit into all that.
I do believe that when people are worried and scared they run to the comfort they know best and if our young doctors and other health care professionals are going to be able to effectively serve these patients, they are going to have to go to school another year and become better educated with culture and people. (That's for another and interesting topic however) My point is that people seem to have a primordial fear of doctors and hospitals still, so they will go to that they know for comfort and that may be located in religion or science. Pseudo-science has been with us forever and has been cloaked in religiosity...some more times, other fewer times. I have the very very conservative members of my family who quote me paragraph etc about the dangers to family values of homosexuality (tho masturbation seems not to bother them too much or at least enough to discuss with their sister!) and when you peel the layers off in discussion you get down to:
"Who's going to keep the human race going, huh? If queers just mate with one another, then were kids gonna come from?
If these comments came only from my crazy family I"d just dismiss it and thank G-D I don't live closer to the old homestead, but it does not and has not, tho sometimes you might need a decoder ring to figure it out.
Anyhow sorry for the length but OS is supposed to be a place for writers to meet and critique work and I don't know you well enough to sling mud at you:) so hope these suggestions help.
1. Those that masturbate
and
2. Those that lie
Your post really is of no consequence to me and from some of the comments not much in the way of positive reception....
Kerry, on the other hand is an exception....His palpable excitement at your return is an affront and an insult to those of us who have labored long and hard to reach ever wider audiences with our attempts at written and pictoral expression......
If you are being paid to post here you and he should say so.
If you were sought out and invited back with any kind of inducement or enticement you should say so....
If you honestly believe that your work is superior, if this post is an indicator of that, despite what Kerry might have told you, it is not...
In fact in many ways it is sub-par......
If you are one of the beta editor's pets or a member of the beta clique you already know that you can post a three word description of a door knob and Kerry will award you an EP before you can finish proof reading the published item...
If you are one of those who will get one EP after another merely because of who you are not what you have to say or how well you say it, I, for one, will have little or no use for you.....and less in the way of regard and respect...
Because if you could truly write as well as all that, you should be writing where you would be properly and adequately compensated for your work. In these difficul economic times who couldn't use a little extra remuneration....
Don't be concerned about me and an EP. Kerry has made it absolutely clear, by his actions and inactions, that I will not be given such honors at OS...I post much of my work elsewhere where it is given the fair and objective consideration it deserves and the occassional highlighted "front page and recommened reading" treatment, so I treat Kerry's "editorial decisions" like the joke that they are.
Oh, and by the way, welcome back.....