episode, and he has many other and important interests; for a woman, on

the other hand, love is the principal thing in life, and, until the birth of children, always her first interest. After this it is still often her first thought, but always, at least, takes the second place. But, what is still more important, the man ruled by this impulse easily satisfies it in embraces for which he finds unlimited opportunities. A woman in the upper classes of society, if she have a husband, is bound to him alone; and even in the lower classes there are still great obstacles to polyandry. Therefore, _a woman’s husband means for her the whole sex_, and his importance to her becomes very great. It must also be considered that the normal relation established by law and custom between husband and wife is far from being one of equality. In itself it expresses a sufficient predominance of woman’s dependence. The concessions she makes to her lover, to retain the love which it would be almost impossible for her to replace, only plunge her deeper in bondage; and this increases the insatiable demands of husbands resolved to use their advantage and traffic in woman’s readiness to sacrifice herself. Here may be placed the fortune-hunter, who for money allows himself to be enveloped in the easily created illusions of a maiden; the seducer, and the man who compromises wives, calculating on blackmail; the gilded army officer and the musician with the lion’s mane, who know so well how to stammer “Thee or death!” as a means to pay debts and provide a life of ease. Here, too, belong the kitchen-soldier, whose love the cook returns with love plus means to satisfy a different appetite; the drinker, who consumes the savings of the mistress he marries; and the man who with blows compels the prostitute on whom he lives to earn a certain sum for him daily. These are only a few of the innumerable forms of bondage into which woman is forced by her greater need of love and the difficulties of her position. The subject of “sexual bondage” must here receive brief consideration; for in it may be clearly seen the soil from which the main root of masochism springs. The relationship of these two phenomena of psychical sexual life is immediately apparent. Bondage and masochism both consist of the unconditional subjection of the individual affected with the abnormality to a person of the opposite sex, and of domination of the former by the latter.[82] The two phenomena, however, must be strictly differentiated; they are not different in degree, but in quality. Sexual bondage is not a perversion and not pathological; the elements from which it arises—love and weakness of will—are not perverse; it is only their simultaneous activity that produces the abnormal result which is so opposed to self-interest, and often to custom and law. The motive, in obedience to which the subordinated individual acts and endures tyranny, is the normal instinct toward woman (or man); the satisfaction of which is the price of bondage. The acts of the person in subjection, by means of which the bondage is expressed, are performed at the command of the ruling individual, to satisfy selfishness, etc. For the subordinated individual they have no independent purpose; they are only the means to an end,—to obtain or retain possession of the ruling individual. Finally, bondage is a result of love for a particular person; it first appears when this love is awakened. In masochism, which is decidedly abnormal and a perversion, this is all very different. The motive of the acts and suffering of the person in subjection is here the charm afforded by the tyranny in itself. There may, at the same time, be a desire for coitus with the dominant person; but the impulse is directed to the acts which serve to express the tyranny, as the immediate objects of gratification. These acts in which masochism is expressed are, for the individual in subjection, not means to an end, as in bondage, but the end in themselves. Finally, in masochism the longing for subjection occurs _a priori_, before the occurrence of an inclination to any particular object of love. The connection between bondage and masochism may be assumed by reason of the correspondence of the two phenomena in the objective condition of dependence, notwithstanding the difference in their motives; and the transformation of the abnormality into the perversion probably takes place in the following manner: Any one living for a long time in sexual bondage becomes disposed to acquire a slight degree of masochism. Love that willingly bears the tyranny of the loved one then becomes an immediate love of tyranny. _When the idea of being tyrannized over is long closely associated with the lustful thought of the beloved person, the lustful emotion is finally connected with the tyranny itself, and the transformation to perversion is completed._ This is the manner in which masochism may be acquired by cultivation.[83] Thus a mild degree of masochism may arise from “bondage,”—become acquired; but genuine, complete, deep-rooted masochism, with its feverish longing for subjection from the time of earliest youth, is congenital. The explanation of the origin of the infrequent perversion of fully developed masochism is most probably to be found in the assumption that it arises from the very frequent abnormality of “sexual bondage”; in that now and then _this abnormality is hereditarily transferred to a psychopathic individual in such a way that it becomes transformed into a perversion_. It has been previously shown how a slight displacement of the psychical element under consideration may effect this transition. This transformation of the abnormality into the perversion, through hereditary transference, would take place very easily where the psychopathic constitution of the descendant presented the other factor of masochism,—_i.e._, what has been previously called its main root,—the tendency of sexually hyperæsthetic natures to assimilate all impressions coming from the beloved person with the sexual impression. From these two elements,—from “sexual bondage” on the one hand, and from the above-mentioned disposition to sexual ecstasy, which apperceives even maltreatment with lustful emotion, on the other,—the roots of which may be traced back to the field of physiological facts, masochism arises on the basis of psychopathic predisposition; in that its sexual hyperæsthesia intensifies first all the physiological accessories of the vita sexualis and, finally, only its abnormal accompaniments, to the pathological degree of perversion.[84] At any rate, masochism, as a congenital sexual perversion, constitutes a functional sign of degeneration in (almost exclusively) hereditary taint; and this clinical deduction is confirmed in my cases of masochism and sadism. It is easy to demonstrate that the peculiar, psychically-anomalous direction of the vita sexualis which masochism represents, is an original abnormality, and not, so to speak, cultivated in a predisposed individual by passive flagellation, through association of ideas, as Rousseau and Binet suppose. This is shown by the numerous cases of masochism—in fact, the majority—in which flagellation never appears; in which the perverse impulse is directed exclusively to purely symbolic acts expressing subjection without any actual infliction of pain. This is demonstrated by the whole series of cases, from Case 53, given here. The same result—namely, that passive flagellation is not the nucleus around which all the rest is gathered—is reached when closer study is given to the cases in which passive flagellation plays a _rôle_, as in Case 44 and Case 50. Case 51 is particularly instructive in relation to this; for in this instance there can be no thought of a sexually-stimulating effect of punishment received in youth. Moreover, in this case, connection with an early experience is not possible; for the situation constituting the object of principal sexual interest is absolutely incapable of being carried out by a child. Finally, the origin of masochism in purely psychical elements, on confronting it with sadism (_v. infra_), is convincingly demonstrated. That passive flagellation occurs so frequently in masochism is explained simply by the fact that it is the most extreme means of expressing the relation of subjection. I repeat that the decisive points, in the differentiation of simple passive flagellation from flagellation dependent upon masochistic desire, are that, in the former, the act is a means to make coitus, or at least ejaculation, possible; and that, in the latter, it is a means of gratification of masochistic desires. As we have already seen, masochists subject themselves to all other kinds of maltreatment and suffering in which there can be no question of reflex excitation of lust. Since such cases are numerous, in such acts (and in flagellation in masochists, having like significance) we must seek to ascertain in what relation pain and lust stand to each other. From the statement of a masochist it is as follows:— The relation is not of such a nature that that which causes physical pain is here simply perceived as physical pleasure; but the person in a state of masochistic ecstasy feels no pain; either because, by reason of his emotional state (like that of the soldier in battle), the physical effect on his cutaneous nerves is not apperceived; or because (as with religious martyrs and enthusiasts), with the preoccupation of consciousness with lustful emotion, the idea of maltreatment remains merely a symbol, without its quality of pain. To a certain extent there is over-compensation of physical pain in psychical pleasure; and only the excess remains in consciousness as psychical lust. This also undergoes an increase; since, either through reflex spinal influence or through a peculiar coloring in the sensorium of sensory impressions, a kind of hallucination of bodily pleasure takes place, with a vague localization of the objectively projected sensation. In the self-torture of religious enthusiasts (fakirs, howling dervishes, religious flagellants) there is an analogous state, only with a difference in the quality of pleasurable feeling. Here the conception of martyrdom is also apperceived without its pain; for consciousness is filled with the pleasurably colored idea of serving God, atoning for sins, deserving heaven, etc., through martyrdom. MASOCHISM AND SADISM. The perfect counterpart of masochism is sadism. While in the former there is a desire to suffer and be subjected to violence, in the latter the wish is to inflict pain and use violence. The parallelism is perfect. All the acts and situations used by the sadist in the active _rôle_ become the object of the desire of the masochist in the passive _rôle_. In both perversions these acts advance from purely symbolic acts to severe maltreatment. Even murder, in which sadism reaches its acme, finds, as is shown by Case 54,—of course, only in fancy,—its passive counterpart. Under favoring conditions, both perversions may occur with a normal vita sexualis; in both, the acts in which they express themselves are preparatory for coitus or substitutes for it.[85] But the analogy does not exist simply in external manifestation; it also extends to the subjective character of both perversions. Both are to be regarded as original psychopathies in mentally abnormal individuals, who, in particular, are affected with psychical hyperæsthesia sexualis, and, as a rule, also with other abnormalities; and for each of these perversions two constituent elements may be demonstrated, which have their roots in psychical facts lying within physiological limits. For masochism, as shown above, these elements lie in the fact (1) that in the state of sexual emotion every impression produced by the consort, independently of the manner of its production, is, _per se_, attended with lustful pleasure, which, where there is hyperæsthesia sexualis, may go so far as to over-compensate all painful sensation; and in the fact (2) that “sexual bondage,” dependent on mental factors that are in themselves not perverse, may, under pathological conditions, become a perverse, pleasurable desire for subjection to the opposite sex, which—even if it be quite unnecessary to assume its inheritance from the female side—represents a pathological degeneration of the character belonging to woman,—of the instinct of subordination, physiological in woman. In harmony with this, there are, likewise, two constituent elements explanatory of sadism, the origin of which may also be traced back within physiological limits. These are: the fact (1) that in sexual emotion, to a certain extent, as an accompanying psychical excitation, an impulse may arise to influence the object of desire in every possible way and with the greatest possible intensity, which, in individuals sexually hyperæsthetic, may become an impulse to inflict pain; and the fact (2) that, under pathological conditions, the man’s active _rôle_ of winning woman may become an unlimited desire for subjugation. Thus masochism and sadism represent perfect counterparts. It is also in harmony with this that the individuals affected with these perversions regard the opposite perversion in the other sex as their ideal, as shown by Case 44 and Case 50, and also by “Rousseau’s Confessions.” But the contrast of masochism and sadism may also be used to invalidate the assumption that the former has its origin in the reflex effect of passive flagellation; and that all the rest is the product of associations of related ideas, as Binet, in explanation of Rousseau’s case, thinks, and as Rousseau himself believed. In the active maltreatment forming the object of the sadist’s sexual desire there is, in fact, no irritation of his own sensory nerves by the act of maltreatment; so that there can be no doubt of the purely psychical character of the origin of this perversion. Sadism and masochism, however, are so related to each other, and so correspond in all points with each other, that the one allows, by analogy, a conclusion for the other; and this is alone sufficient to establish the purely psychical character of masochism. According to the above-detailed contrast of all the elements and phenomena of masochism and sadism, and as a _résumé_ of all observed cases, lust in the infliction of pain and lust in inflicted pain appear but as two different sides of the same psychical process, of which the primary and essential thing is the consciousness of active or passive subjection, in which the combination of cruelty and lustful pleasure has only a secondary psychological significance. Acts of cruelty serve to express this subjection; first, because they are the most extreme means for the expression of this relation; and, again, because they represent the most intense effect that one person, either with or without coitus, can exert on another. The cases in which sadism and masochism occur simultaneously in one individual are interesting, but they present some difficulties of explanation. Cases 49, 50, 58, etc., are of this kind, and also particularly Case 30. From the latter it is evident that it is especially the idea of subjection that, both actively and passively, forms the nucleus of the perverse desires. Traces of the same thing are also to be observed, with more or less clearness, in many other cases. At any rate, one of the two perversions is always markedly predominant. Owing to this marked predominance of one perversion, and the later appearance of the other, in such cases it may well be assumed that the predominating perversion is _original_, and that the other has been _acquired_ in the course of time. The ideas of subjection and maltreatment, colored with lustful pleasure, either in an active or passive sense, have become deeply impressed in such an individual. Occasionally the imagination is tempted to try the same ideas in an inverted _rôle_. There may even be realization of this inversion. Such attempts in imagination and in acts, however, are usually soon abandoned as inadequate for the original inclination. Masochism and sadism also occur in combination with contrary sexual instinct, and, too, in association with all forms and degrees of this perversion. The individual of contrary sexuality may be a sadist as well as masochist (comp. Cases 48 and 49 and numerous cases in the following series of cases of contrary sexual instinct). Wherever a sexual perversion has developed on the basis of a neuropathic individuality, sexual hyperæsthesia, which may always be assumed to be present, may induce the phenomena of masochism and sadism—now of the one, now of both combined, one arising from the other. Thus masochism and sadism appear as the fundamental forms of psycho-sexual perversion, which may make their appearance at any point in the domain of sexual aberration.[86]