Unmastered Masturbation Conflict
<< Children Eroticized by Incest >>
Alayne Yats, M.D.<sup>1

1</sup> Health Sciences Center and Department of Psychiatry, College of Medicine, University of Arizona

American Journal of Psychiatry [Vol. 139 (4), pp. 482-85. April, 1982. Received Nov. 12, 1980; revised March 17, 1981]

The assumption that children involved in incest are passive, unwilling victims is an oversimplification of a complex situation. Young children may find such relationships gratifying and, when exposed over time to intense genital and extragenital stimulation, they often become highly erotic. This hypermature responsiveness may be viewed as learned behavior; the behavior is self-reinforcing and may be difficult to modify. The author describes three children to illustrate their arousal, inability to differentiate sensual from affectionate touch, early gender discrimination, and stereotyped role modeling. Foster homes are neither trained nor supported in caring for these children, so serial placements are common.


INTRODUCTION

A common assumption is that children involved in incest, who are necessarily victims, are also invariably the unwilling, passive recipients of a sexual assault. It is believed that the selfish, powerful adult extracts pleasure from the terrified, helpless child and that if the incest persists the victim will continue to react with fear and revulsion. This view is an oversimplification that prevents an objective approach to a relatively common problem.

Both legally and morally, there is no question that in instances of incest prepubescent children are always the victims. They are the victims because they have neither the responsibility nor the capacity to participate in the initial decision-making process. Even in the unusual case of the experienced, seductive child who approaches an inexperienced, reluctant adult, it is the adult’s responsibility to decline the invitation. This, however, introduces a new concept: the child may be not only the victim but a participant. This concept is of even greater significance when we examine long-term incestuous relationships, in which the majority of youngsters have become not only victims but participants. This is a conclusion I have reached not only on the basis of my evaluation of more than 40 of these children but also from the facts that 90% of incest cases are unreported (1) and that the average duration of the incestuous union in reported cases is 3 years (2). By current estimates (3, 4), 5%-10% of adult women have had an earlier incestuous experience with an adult. Therefore, one would expect that there have been many “missed” opportunities to blow the whistle and thus terminate the incest. Reluctance to report the incest is due in part to the child’s shame, guilt, and fear of reprisal; however, it is also related to the gratification that the incest provides for the child. Although we often assume that incest is committed by a callous, belt-wielding male sociopath, this is commonly not the case: young children are most often approached through a seductive, affectionate interchange that does not progress to penetration (5). To the child it may seem to be a pleasant game of touching and cuddling that finally extends to washing and fondling the genitals. As time progresses, children do come to realize that there is something bad or different about these games, but by then many other sources of gratification may be involved. They may appreciate the power of being a favorite or special child; the parent buys them gifts, pays more attention to them, and disciplines them less. The child may express anger at one parent by claiming favors from the other. The incestuous union may be the only available source of nurturance in an emotionally barren family (6-8). These gratifications seem reasonable once we appreciate that incest is not simply an event or a series of events but a stable state perpetuated over time. In my experience, many incestuous children are uncommonly erotic. They are easily aroused, highly motivated, and readily orgasmic. The degree of eroticization seems closely related to the intensity and duration of the incestuous union. The original mode (e.g., heterosexual or homosexual, oral-genital, extragenital) remains highly cathected. These observations are consistent with the observation that sexual responsiveness is learned behavior (9-11). The process of eroticization can occur at any age, as illustrated by the following cases.


CASE REPORTS

Case 1. Bart (not his real name) was 2½ years old when his foster mother brought him for psychiatric evaluation. Before his conception, his natural mother had run away from home and eloped from several residential treatment centers. Later she followed a motorcycle gang and worked briefly as a waitress. At age 16 she became pregnant with Bart, subsequently suffered a “nervous breakdown,” and was hospitalized for several months. After an uncomplicated delivery, she and Bart lived in a one-room walk-up apartment. She had no friends and was supported by welfare payments. When Bart was 18 months old, he was removed from his mother’s custody because it was discovered that he and his mother had engaged in cunnilingus and fellatio since shortly after his birth.

Once in foster placement, Bart’s eroticism became evident. The foster mother was “shocked, to say the least” but “hoped it would go away.” She brought Bart for psychiatric evaluation because, even after a year, she could not lie down on the bed while he was awake, as he would crawl on top of her and attempt to burrow under her clothes. When a couple would visit the house, Bart would disregard the man and immediately approach the woman; he would sit on her lap, wrap his arms about her neck, and deliver sensuous kisses. Then he would attempt to open her blouse or lift her skirt. Although in other respects the foster mother enjoyed Bart, she was upset at this persistent behavior and was considering relinquishing him.

Case 2. Brandy, age 3½ years, and Venus, age 6, were removed from their parents’ custody after neighbors complained that the children were dirty , had head lice, and ate dog food. The family, which included two younger boys, lived in a 12-foot trailer that had no cooking or toilet facilities. On closer examination, it was discovered that the unemployed father had had repeated oral, anal, and genital intercourse with all four children; however, Venus was his favorite. The mother was mentally retarded and neither participated nor intervened.

All four children were placed in the same foster home. After 2½ years, the foster mother, Ms. B, accepted Jim, a shy, depressed 17-year-old boy, into her home. When Brandy, Venus, and Jim were alone watching television, Venus, then age 8, reached up under Jim’s shorts and finally pulled them down. During the next week, the three children performed cunnilingus and fellatio on one another. When Ms. B became aware of this, she reported the case; Jim was placed in juvenile hall and the two girls were brought for psychiatric evaluation and treatment, Ms. B described Venus as the more sexually active of the girls. She would masturbate for 2½ or 3 hours, until the bed would come apart. Ms. B was making Venus repair the bed herself. The school complained that Venus needed constant supervision in class because she liked to teach the boys “nasties.” There was scant supervision on the school bus, so Venus would crouch beneath the seats in back, moving from boy to boy. This behavior had persisted in spite of punishments, derision by peers, and a behavior modification program (a nickel for a week’s good conduct). Mr. B avoided playing games with Venus because any physical touch would stimulate her. She had unzipped his trousers on several occasions.

During the psychiatric examination, Venus was pert and well dressed and enjoyed speaking with the examiner. She could think of nothing more pleasurable or attractive than doing her “nasties,” and she was always aroused by playground activities. She preferred boys to girls but would do “nasties” with girls if boys were not available. She had just been punished for playing with her 3-year-old brother’s penis. She was trying to stop doing “nasties” because “you can get put in jail for doing that stuff.” She did not think that “nasties” had anything to do with having babies and assumed that babies were born through a cut in the mother's abdomen.

During the evaluation, both Brandy and Venus played as the mothers of doll babies in ways appropriate for their ages. They did not allow “husbands” to wash or care for infants. Near the close of the session, Venus clutched a large stuffed monkey and danced about the playroom. She became increasingly aroused and thrusted against the monkey’s torso.


DISCUSSION

These children had several features which seem to me characteristic of eroticized preschool children. Such children are easily aroused by a variety of circumstances and most often cannot discriminate erotic from nonerotic relationships. They are readily orgasmic and also can maintain a high level of arousal without orgasm. Sexual activity is eminently pleasurable, which differentiates these children from compulsive masturbators. In fact, erotic expression may be so gratifying that it is difficult to find comparable rewards to reinforce socially acceptable behavior. In addition to the specifically erotic component, these youngsters seem to discriminate male from female earlier than do other children.

My sample is consistent with samples in other studies (2, 12-14) in that most but not all children demonstrate problems such as anxiety, depression, underachievement, somatic complaints, and self-defeating behavior patterns. However, almost all the youngsters in these studies were identified by the court, thus constituting a small but visible fraction of the total population (1). In addition, families identified by the court are marked by alcoholism, divorce, mental disorder, and other social problems (14-16); the children have often been neglected or physically abused. It seems probable that families with fewer problems are less likely to be identified. Thus a causal relationship between sexual misuse and emotional damage cannot automatically be assumed. Incest is such a highly charged, value-laden issue that objectivity and perspective are difficult to maintain. However, the consensus among child psychiatrists is that factors related to the makeup of the incestuous family rather than the sexual behavior are the most pathogenic (17). I believe that the eroticization process is independent of the emotional disturbances commonly noted in samples of incestuous children identified by the court.

The degree of eroticization present in preschool children seems directly related to the intensity and duration of the sexual experience. Mild to moderate eroticization may not be associated with secondary damage, but secondary damage is common in very young intensely eroticized youngsters. The highly cathected focus on sexual learning seems to detract from social learning and a more even distribution of libido. Initially, the child may pay scant attention to nonsexual relationships. Erotic activity often seems to assume the soothing, comforting function of a transitional phenomenon (18). As such, it has adaptive or maladaptive potential, depending on the child’s flexibility and appreciation of reality: some eroticized children in foster placement will calm themselves by masturbating in the bedroom, whereas others continue to make inappropriate advances, the consequences of which increase their distress. An additional source of difficulty is the blurring of boundaries and definitions inherent in the incestuous family. Affectionate and sexual relationships may not be differentiated, so that the child continues to be aroused by physical or psychological closeness. In the culture at large, inappropriate arousal invites rejection; the child’s only resource may be to maintain physical and emotional distance. Extreme eroticization also affects psychosexual development and character formation; further research in these areas is essential.

It is important to remember that all children undergo eroticization; we can never consider children truly innocent if we equate innocence with erotic unresponsiveness. From research and clinical observations we know that penile erections and vaginal lubrication occur periodically from birth. An infant, age 5 months, will chortle gleefully in anticipation of the diaper change. Galenson and Roiphe (19), in a longitudinal study, found that virtually all the nontraumatized infants in the sample had begun to masturbate within the first 2 years of life. Both Spitz (20) and Galenson and Roiphe (19) agree that masturbation signifies healthy development and is rarely found among poorly parented or deprived youngsters. Games such as “mommy and daddy” or “doctor” are common by age 4, and one-half of all preschool children are involved in some form of erotic activity (21, 22). Although there is a drop in sexual activity as school begins, this is followed by a steady increase throughout the years we have termed “latency” (23). The eroticization of incestuous youngsters may be viewed as an exaggeration of the learning process to which all children are exposed. Intensive learning produces, in these children, a state of hypertrophied responsiveness which may in itself be a problem.

If we assume that early experiences and appreciations contribute significantly to adult erotic responsiveness, then we must also consider the adequacy of the learning process for the average youngster. In a 1978 survey of 100 well-educated and happily married couples, Frank and associates (24) found that 40% of the men and 50% of the women reported a sexual dysfunction and that 50% of the men and 77% of the women complained of lesser problems, such as lack of interest or inability to relax. Are these findings evidence of a deficiency in the learning process by which the average child begins to acquire erotic competence? Further investigation could provide clues to the primary prevention of adult sexual dysfunction.

Social Consequences

The foster parent who accepts an incestuous child into his or her home usually expects to receive and nourish a victim emotionally crippled by an atrocity. When the child’s carnal bent becomes an inescapable reality, the parent first denies any active intent: the child is a puppet, manipulated in absentia by the evil parent. He or she “can’t get out of the habit,” is still infected by the earlier experience. Eventually, this denial must crumble if initial interventions fail. Then the child becomes an alien, a tainted being not like the foster family and therefore not belonging in their home. Insult is added to injury as one foster placement follows another.

The incestuous child in foster placement comes to understand that acceptance depends on conforming to the role of the victim. This is heavily reinforced by court proceedings and the attitudes of helpful adults, including social workers, foster parents, and therapists. Erotic responsiveness is scarcely the prerogative of a victim. To be honest with others is to brook rejection; to be honest with one’s self is to nurture a depression. If these youngsters are to be adequately served in foster placement, we need to identify and train certain foster parents as specialists. A fully trained and supported foster parent should be able to say to a child, “Of course it felt good—it would to most children—but that does not make you responsible for what happened.”


REFERENCES

   1.    Franklin R: Incest in the middle class differs from that processed by the police. Clinical Psychiatry News, March, 1974
   2.    Tormes YM: Child Victims of Incest. Denver, American Human Association, 1968
   3.    Gagnon J; Female child victims of sex offenses. Social Problems 13:176-192, 1965
   4.    Landis JX: Experience of 500 children with adult sexual devi> ation. Psychiatric Quarterly 30:91-109, 1956
   5.    Sorenson R: Adolescent Sexuality in Contemporary America. New York, World Publishing, 1973
   6.    Finch SM; The effect of adult sexual seduction on children. Medical Aspects of Human Sexuality 7:170-187, 1973
   7.    Sarles R: Incest. Pediatr Clin North Am 22(3), 1975
   8.    Yorukoglu A, Kemph J: Children not severely damaged by incest with a parent. J Am Acad Child Psychiatry 5:111-124, 1966
   9.    Masters W, Johnson V: Human Sexual Inadequacy. Boston, Little, Brown and Co, 1970
   10.    Kaplan HS: The New Sex Therapy. New York, Brunner/Mazel, 1974
   11.    Yates A: Sex Without Shame: Encouraging the Child’s Healthy Sexual Development. New York, William Morrow and Co, 1978
   12.    Kaufman I, Peck AL, Taquiri CK: The family constellation and overt incestuous relations between father and daughter. Am J Orthopsychiatry 24:266-279, 1954
   13.    Lewis M, Sarrel P: Some psychological aspects of seduction, incest, and rape in childhood. J Am Acad Child Psychiatry 8:606-619, 1969
   14.    Rosenfeld A, Nadelson C, Kreiger M, et al: Incest and sexual abuse of children. J Am Acad Child Psychiatry 16:327-339, 1977
   15.    Browning DH, Boatman B: Incest: children at risk. Am J Psychiatry 134:69-72, 1977
   16.    Lustig N, Dresser JW, Spellman SW, et al: Incest: a family group survival pattern. Arch Gen Psychiatry 14:31-39, 1966
   17.    LaBarbera JD, Martin JE, Dozier JE: Child psychiatrist’s view of father-daughter incest. Child Abuse and Neglect 4:147-151, 1980
   18.    Winnicott DW: Transitional objects and transitional phenomena. Int J Psychoanal 34:89-97, 1953
   19.    Galenson E, Roiphe H: The development of sexual identity: discoveries and implications, in On Sexuality. Edited by Karasu TB, Socarides CW. New York, International Universities Press, 1979
   20.    Spitz RA: Autoeroticism revisited: the role of early sexual behavior patterns in personality formation. Psychoanal Study Child 17:283-315, 1962
   21.    Newson J, Newson E: Four Years Old in An Urban Community. London, Allen and Unwin, 1968
   22.    Sears R, Macoby E, Levin A: Patterns of Child Rearing. New York, Harper & Row, 1957
   23.    Ramsey CV: The sexual development of boys. Am J Psychol 56:217-233, 1943
   24.    Frank MS, Anderson C, Rubenstein D: Frequency of sexual dysfunction in “normal” couples. N Engl J Med 299:111-115, 1978

>>