|
Abstract
|
Torture has been an evolutionary human tool. Throughout history, philosophies, and mythologies, rulers, judges, and holy men have propagated or revoked practices of torture. Although mostly physical, targeted at inflicting bodily distress or discomfort, torture can be passive, emotional, psychological, or financial, all carrying the same aim: to perpetuate distress and pain in the individual. It has been mostly used as means of punishment or to extract valuable sources of information from the resources; however, also in intimidation, oppression, othering, and discrimination of the vulnerable for political, religious, social, or personal purposes. Psychologically, torture serves the narcissistic need of superiority and helps in denial of the perceived weakness and flaws of an individual, striving to prove one’s viewpoint as the most perfect one.1
Based on social attribution and learning theories, torture or infliction of bodily pain/distress can be a highly learnt behavior, one that can be easily modeled. The classical “frustration-aggression hypothesis” states that any form of emotional distress or frustration leads to a psychological void and a “need to respond by blocking it.”2 This need leads to aggression and violence; torture being one of its manifestations. Besides being considered to be an offence if performed beyond the legal purview, various forms of tortures also have pervaded our daily lives through intimate partner violence and sexual deviant actions (in their extreme form). Although the genesis of these 2 is conceptually different, the “grey lines” are often blurred when a consensual act of sexual deviation involving hierarchical force channels into aggression and eventually into domestic violence. The perceptions of these acts and the expression as well as intent of both the partners are equally important in both the medico-legal and psychological understanding of these terms. It is vital to understand here that repeated patterns of aggression or torture between 2 individuals often form the defining feature of their relationship, which is damaging for both the morality and psyche of the victim and the perpetrator.3 Considering various sexual deviations such as sadism, masochism, and autoeroticism involve “aggression” in various forms, the intersections between sexuality and torture are prominent and nuanced, yet debatable. The dynamics differ from a consensual act of bondage, discipline, sadism, masochism to the graver fetishes of necrophilia and finally the heinous acts of “sex criminality.” Theories of criminology posit that “sexual sadists and killers” have a young-onset pattern of linking sexuality and torture for their own gratification or masking of their inferiority.4 The types, intensities, and frequencies of the sexually aggressive acts vary over time based on the personality traits and environment. However, contrary to the popular belief, a sexually violent person is not always born. Turn of events and context of trauma are often the important factors that cause the transition from “timid to torturous” behavior. A large body of research is dedicated to what leads to an apparently timid person to take up “tortures” as an adaptive act in his or her daily life, including relationship with his or her partner. The understanding is still evolving. Keeping this in the background, this editorial will highlight these subtle intersections between certain sexual practices and torture...
Language: en |