A chapter from ‘The Human Aspects of Sexual Deviation’ by Dr Eustace Chesser that will surely appeal to many of our members is ‘Voyeurism and Exhibitionism'.

In the introduction Dr. Chesser writes:

Most deviations have their roots in our biological nature. The impulses from which they derive are entirely normal. For example, most men are sexually stimulated by merely looking at female nudity. Usually a scantily clad woman is found to be more exciting because of the tremendous part played by fantasy in sexual relations. The fan dancer and strip-tease artiste understand this very well and exploit it. If they appeared on the stage completely naked and made no movement – as the Lord Chamberlain used to insist – they would have only slight appeal.

A young man related his first visit to a prostitute and the impotence that assailed him when she lay down on the bed and waited passively for him to begin. She seemed to him like a corpse on a slab, mere naked, uninviting flesh, devoid of the slightest illusion. There was no element of make-believe, no play of fantasy. The boredom that corrodes do many marriages is due to the same reason. Everything is too easy.

Visual stimuli play an important part in animal courtship. The brilliant plumage of birds is accompanied by an elaborate ritual display before mating can take place. With animals this is a necessary preliminary. It leads to sexual climax and is never an end in itself unless there are unwanted obstacles. With some human beings, however, no such climax is sought or even desired. The voyeur is satisfied with merely looking. He may or may not ejaculate, or he may masturbate, but there is no culmination in intercourse. This may seem strange, but it is no more so than the behaviour of the fetishist for whom a physical object – a shoe or a handkerchief – is a substitute for a real woman.

It would be absurd to call the pleasure of indulging in fantasy at the sight of the sexual object a deviation, unless the instinctive biological drive is diverted into cul-de-sac. When this occurs there is an emotional blockage somewhere. And it would not matter so much to the individual himself if it did not get him into serious trouble. The social consequences may be tragic.

A typical example is that of a clergyman, aged forty-six, who was caught spying on a nudist colony through binoculars. He was assaulted by one of the indignant sun-bathers, otherwise no one would have known of the incident as there was no question of a prosecution. He was a married man with two teenage children and even if the incident had been kept a close family secret the shame he felt was unbearable. Actually, rumours spread throughout the parish and he was challenged to make a public denial. He had a painful interview with his bishop, who urged him to have psychiatric treatment, which was tantamount to an open acknowledgement of guilt. In despair he attempted suicide. It might have been kinder to let him succeed. He left the Church and found employment in an East End hostel, but although he made heroic efforts to live down the scandal his family relationships were irretrievably ruined. Little emerged about his background except that his wife was sexually frigid.

It seems incredible that these catastrophic consequences should flow from such a trivial cause, yet we see it happening time and again. To find pleasure in the sight of nudity is an eccentricity, but not a perversion. Nobody is harmed, least of all people who make a virtue of nudity. Admittedly there is a difference in mental attitude between the fully-clothed observer and the un-selfconscious nudist. The latter does not go to a camp for sexual titillation. Nothing is kept hidden and there is little incitement to fantasy. If the onlooker himself had been nude he would not have been stimulated. But he was the victim of severe inhibitions. His religious beliefs told him that sex was sinful, that the fascination he felt was wicked. The sense of guilt gave an edge to the thrill.

We may not feel much sympathy in the case of a hotel employee who drilled a spy hole in a bedroom and watched the occupants undress and engage in intercourse. When he fell from his perch in an adjacent cupboard the truth came out and he was sacked. There was evidence that while spying he masturbated. He was unmarried and his few visits to prostitutes were abortive because of premature ejaculation while they were undressing.

It is impossible to condone the violation of the privacy which is everyone’s right. The Peeping Tom, however, only raises a marginal moral issue. He does not choose this type of gratification. He is nearly always a frustrated man. He will be found lurking in the vicinity of public swimming pools and haunting parks at night. If he is a homosexual he has a unique opportunity in Turkish baths.

Voyeurism (scoptophilia) has the same bi-polar connection with exhibitionism as sadism has with masochism, though they are usually distinct in practice. According to Karpman: ‘The exhibitionist says, in effect, “I want to show you what I’ve got”; the voyeur, “ I want to see what you’ve got”. The very nature of their respective activities is suggestive of psycho-sexual infantilism. Both exhibitionism and voyeurism are frequently, one might say universally, accompanied or followed by masturbation. They are what we might term nuisance offences. The prevailing notion that either one implies a threat of assault is wholly without foundation. The superficial appearance of aggressiveness on the part of the exhibitionist leads the ignorant observer to the erroneous conclusion that he is a dangerous individual, whereas, as a matter of fact, passivity is probably the outstanding element in his personality make-up, this passivity growing out of an extreme narcissism, stupidly encouraged or even engendered in childhood by the excessive love and admiration of foolish mothers. The voyeur, when detected is sometimes mistaken for a potential burglar or for someone contemplating sexual assault; but this, too, is a mistaken notion, for he only wants to see. His sex is all in his eyes, as it were.’ (The Sexual Offender and His Offences, Benjamin Karpman, 1954.)

One case admitted to St. Elizabeth’s Hospital, Washington D.C., illustrates the blending of voyeurism and exhibitionism, with occasional excursions into other deviations. The man, aged twenty-nine, had a poor heredity with disturbed home environment. His mother was domineering and alcoholic, the father weak and highly strung. When arrested for indecent exposure he confessed to some two hundred similar episodes. He had also indulged in voyeurism and was a persistent masturbator. He had a sense of inferiority with women and his few experiences with prostitutes only heightened his frustration. Under the influence of drink he attempted a technical rape which was actually forced passive fellatio.

The most distressing feature in this distressing case is the marked feeling of inferiority for which alcoholism offered a temporary escape. He was incapable of mature sexual relationship and his exhibitionism was a compensation – an attempt to demonstrate that he was a potent male. When he displayed his penis he had an illusory feeling of superiority. It was associated – together with his preference for fellatio, both with male and female partners – with narcissism, or the love of his own body fostered in childhood by an over-protective mother.

Another case of an extremely disordered personality is a thirty-three-year-old man who had been brought up in a strictly Catholic atmosphere which resulted in a morbid sense of guilt. He said that as a child he feared his mother and never had a real mother’s love. He did badly at school and was forced to take menial jobs which increased his sense of defeat. Sex and alcoholism were compensatory. He seems to have run through the whole gamut of what are regarded as deviant practices, including exhibitionism, voyeurism, pederasty, cunnilingus and masochism. In an interval of religious remorse he tried to circumcise himself with a trowel. This was an exaggerated form of religious penance which he imposed upon himself during masochistic fantasies.

Such extreme manifestations are certainly not typical of the average exhibitionist, though they may spring from the same deep-rooted inferiority and immaturity. Whereas the seeds are laid in childhood there is often a traumatic experience which brings into play the defence mechanisms. In many cases the precipitating factor can be traced to athe death of the mother, a broken engagement, a failed marriage. Many mothers of exhibitionists are masculine in behaviour, strong-willed, married to rather ineffectual men and prudish about sex. The unconscious motive for self-exposure is an attempt to break the tie which leads the mother to identify fully with her son. He wishes to assert his separateness, to be taken for a fully masculine individual.

All children have exhibitionist tendencies until the Oedipal situation is reached. These are accentuated if the mother makes a habit of excessively fondling the naked child. Until puberty these tendencies are repressed, but in certain circumstances they surface again. They are shown in the mildly homosexual play which is normal among adolescents. If development to maturity goes smoothly this phase is outgrown. Otherwise there may be a reversion to an earlier stage of which exhibitionism and voyeurism are among a number of possibilities.

An engineer, aged thirty-nine, was arrested for exhibiting himself to a girl of ten. He maintained that he had never had relations with women and never masturbated. Brought up in a strictly religious home he was inseparable from his mother. When she died the artificially rigid structure of his psychic life crumbled. The shock precipitated the first exposure incident. It was repeated – as so often happens – at the same place and time and the police were waiting for him. He could offer no explanation and was not un-cooperative under treatment. Obviously his sexual desires were below average and the compulsion to expose himself again was probably an unconscious wish to be a child again – hence his choice of a child victim.

Another case in which the mother’s death was traumatic concerned a married man who did not lack sex experience. He was arrested for exposing himself to an older woman in the cemetery. It can hardly be doubted that he identified her with his mother. He was placed on probation only to repeat his offence. He declared that he had a mental black-out and didn’t know what he was doing. In a dazed condition he fancied he heard his mother’s voice. During these attacks he perspired and breathed rapidly, but he was not conscious of an erection and did not masturbate afterwards. He admitted that as a child he frequently peeped on his mother when she undressed. Through a keyhole he had witnessed his parents having intercourse. But he had never indulged in voyeurism as an adult. The nearest approach was to purchase pornographic photographs.

The underlying factor in cases of this sort – and there are many – in an unconscious desire for incest. The fixation on the mother was repressed and could only be tolerated in a disguised form. Hence the absence of any desire for physical sex and the choice of older women before whom he exposes himself.

Although exhibitionism is more complex than might be supposed it is possible to build up a picture of its average manifestations.

(1) The exposure takes place in daylight in a spot where passers-by are to be expected. Sometimes the man stands in an open space and waits until a woman appears in the street. A favourite place is a public park, preferably, but not invariably, secluded. A railway carriage or the top of a bus is another common choice. There is even an instance of a man exposing himself on a crowded escalator. What is less easy to understand is that the exhibitionist usually returns to the scene of his offence. Whereas most offenders try to avoid detection, the exhibitionist positively invites it.

(2) Before exposure there is a feeling of restlessness, vague excitement and anxiety. Sometimes consciousness is clouded and the exhibitionist seems to be in a day-dream as he unbuttons his trousers and points his penis at a passer-by. He rarely speaks. There is no question of physical assault or rape. The sole gratification lies in the act of exposure for the genuine exhibitionist. He expects to shock the witness and is disappointed if he makes only a slight impression. He needs this reassurance that he is fully masculine because of his basic sexual insecurity.

(3) Exposure is followed by a great relief of tension but this is often complicated by a sense of shame. Although the exhibitionist may resolve never to repeat such folly he knows that the compulsion is likely to return. It invariably does so. He is driven by unconscious forces he is powerless to control.

These forces originate in childhood and the frequency with which the exposure is made in front of children suggests a craving to return to those bygone days. He becomes a child again, re-enacting the phallic play that was innocent enough at that stage. Psycho-analysts believe that infantile fears of castration may also be a factor. Fenichel writes: ‘Reassurance against castration can be attained by unconsciously saying to the audience: “Reassure me that I have a penis by reacting to the sight of it”, or “Reassure me that you are afraid of my penis, then I do not need to be afraid myself”, or “I show you what I wish you could show me.”’ (‘The Psychoanalytic Theory of Neurosis’ by Otto Fenichel, 1945.)

Whether the exhibitionist does any real harm is doubtful. The adult who is disgusted may be the victim of a false attitude to sex implanted by a prudish upbringing. Children who have been allowed to see the bodies of their parents will not be shocked unless they fear molestation. The compulsive exhibitionist is an imbalanced man who should be regarded with sympathy instead of horror. To say he is retreating from the demands of adult sexual life is a partial truth. The fact is that for reasons beyond his control he is unable to meet those demands.

Frustration takes many forms. There are cases in which it is due to a frigid wife, to moral inhibitions, to premature ejaculation, to unconscious incest wishes, to rejection by the mother. Sperling found revenge on women was a motive in the case of a professional man, age twenty-nine, who was arrested for exposure on a train. He attempted suicide and the sentence was suspended. He continued to expose himself once a week and was again arrested. Psycho-analytical treatment revealed that the roots of the compulsion sprang from early identification with the mother. He was the oldest of four children and he watched with resentment one after the other take his place at the breast. As a child he wanted to jump out of the window to punish his parents. His sister induced him to masturbate in front of her and then reported it. His first intercourse at twenty-five was a failure. He married but preferred intercourse between the breasts. He reacted to frustration by exhibitionism. By showing the penis he symbolically denied castration and at the same time denied his earliest frustration – the weaning trauma. (‘The Analysis of an Exhibitionist’, Int. Journal Psycho-analysis, 1947.)

We have progressed a long way in our understanding of exhibitionism from the crude division of Norman East in 1924 into ‘psychopathic and depraved’. Nothing whatever is gained by sending the exhibitionist to prison. Few authorities today think that Karpman exaggerated when he stated of all sexual offenders: ‘Every one of the comes out of prison as bad as he went in, if not worse, except in the comparatively few cases where the prison is equipped to offer psycho-therapeutic treatment – and how many prisons are so equipped? The law which offers as an excuse for its attitude the protection of society fails to accomplish the very thing with which it professes to be most concerned; for society is not protected, except temporarily, so long as the offender carries within himself the same emotional reactions that were the cause of his arrest, and which, upon his release, will continue to operate precisely as they did before… From a psychiatric point of view, there is no more sense in sending him to prison for tuberculosis. In both cases the man is sick, and one is just as sick as the other.’

Unlike Peeping Tom, who is at pains to be hidden, the exhibitionist is seldom satisfied unless his actions are plainly visible and make a strong impression. If the girl to whom he exposes his penis is shocked, this can be taken as a compliment to his virility. He feels he has such a striking-looking penis that the girl is frightened at the sight of such aggressive masculinity. He may even hope that she may be sexually aroused. If so, he is the victim of the popular fallacy that what stimulates a man will also stimulate a woman.

Many husbands in the intimacies of marriage make the same mistake. It would be an exaggeration to call them exhibitionists, but they display their nakedness to their wives under the false impression that since they are excited by looking at a woman in the nude, their wives should react in a similar way to male exposure. When this does not happen they are baffled and possibly annoyed.

Wives who have had a strict upbringing may become disturbed if any eager interest in shown in their nakedness. I know of a marriage that was seriously disrupted because the husband not only insisted in keeping the lights on during intercourse but also fixed a mirror above the bed so that he could watch every movement. His wife accused him of unnatural tendencies, though there was nothing unnatural about his behaviour from a masculine point of view. He frankly admitted that the sight of a woman’s vulva so fascinated him that he could stare at it for hours.

This concentration on genital sex is an essentially male characteristic. It is responsible for the clumsiness and failure of so much love-making. The ardent lover is impatient of preliminary play. He makes a dive for the vagina before his partner is ready. He does not appreciate that most women like to be wooded, not brusquely mounted. With women sex is more diffused throughout the body than with men. It is as though at this critical time the man and the woman speak a different language.

The difference is too fundamental to be explained by acquired inhibitions. It accounts for the fact that there are no female equivalents of the Peeping Tom. The market for pornographic photographs is also predominantly male. Pornographic books – even those about lesbianism – are mostly written by men. Women do not gloat over pictures of female nudes as men do. They are not specially interested in the handsome bodies of males that abound in homosexual magazines. With men the main sexual object is genital, whether they are heterosexual or homosexual.

The number of women who have a craving to watch sexual intercourse is also far too small to interest those who provide such entertainments for profit or otherwise. This is almost exclusively a male interest. There are cases of husbands who encourage their wives to have affairs on condition they can be present. Clifford Allen reports a middle-aged clergyman who incited his wife to commit adultery and secretly spied on her. His normal sex urge was weak, as might be expected. Another man induced his grown–up daughter to bring men home so that he could watch them having intercourse. (‘A Textbook of Psychosexual Disorders’ by Clifford Allen, 1962.)

There is nothing deviant in enjoying the sight of a beautiful body, but we are in a different region when a man’s chief – and sometimes only – means of gratification is watching other people have intercourse. If the woman happens to be his own wife or daughter we have passed beyond normal voyeurism to masochism. For this is precisely the dubious pleasure in which Sacher-Masoch himself indulged. It is one of the various ways in which the childish excitement of watching the parents having intercourse is recaptured.

Sometimes a blend of voyeurism and exhibitionism takes a curiously disguised form. What are we to make of the man who telephones strange women and makes obscene overtures? In so far as he enjoys shocking them he is like the man who exposes himself publicly. There is no essential difference between achieving this result verbally and doing so visually. Although he cannot literally see the effect with his eyes he can do so with his imagination. A variation is to send anonymous letters, sometimes containing the grossest obscenities and drawings.

Unable to make contact with a real woman such a man lives in a fantasy world. He has no confidence in his own sexuality. He has the desire but fears to put it into practice. Quite likely he has attempted to do so only to meet with miserable failure. And so he commits vicariously a kind of sexual assault. Freud claimed that even to tell a woman a ‘smutty’ joke was a masked assault. This puts it rather strongly. There is no humour in the anonymous letter-writer. If only he could laugh at himself he would be saved. He remains in deadly earnest.

Sometimes the anonymous writer is a woman. As both voyeurism and exhibitionism are rarely found in women, the common ground with the male writer is frustration. The spinster who writes poison-pen letters is starved of love and envies the luckier women who enjoy what she has been denied. Generally speaking she does not indulge in obscenities. She informs a happily married woman that her husband is unfaithful. She has a sadistic streak and gets a sexual satisfaction – without recognising it – from the havoc she creates.

It may seem surprising to state that women are seldom exhibitionists. In one sense they delight to exhibit themselves. They go to endless trouble to make men look at them. The hairdresser, the beauty specialist, the dress designer thrive on this longing of women to look attractive. What else is the mini-skirt, the topless dress, the see-through blouse, but exhibitionism? Yet there is no real contradiction. The pathological exhibitionism of the kind we have been considering is a sick outgrowth, both in men and women, of the normal, biological function of display which is part of courtship. When there is no courtship, when display or viewing become a substitute instead of healthy love-play, there is a personality disorder.

The infantile character of this behaviour is seen by its frequent connection with narcissism. Thus instead of exposing himself in the flesh this type of exhibitionist shows his own photograph. He may send a photograph of the phallus through the post. It is enough for him to feel that his phallus is on view, feared or admired. He is too timid to approach a woman in person. He does not want literal contact with a woman or a man because he is self-sufficient in his narcissistic fantasies.

Our childhood did not die when we grew older. It is still an integral part of our psychic life. We return to it involuntarily when we dream and quite deliberately in daytime reveries. Many psychologists speak of regressing to infancy as though it were a weakness of which we should be ashamed. But ‘regression’ need not always be used in this pejorative sense. The pleasures of sight and self-display are a natural part of sexual arousal. To caress and be fondled, to explore the beloved body, to seek the comforting softness of the breast are impulses that arose in infancy, but are none the worse for that. When they become fused with adult sexuality they acquire a richer content. The games that lovers play are a continuation of childish games with new qualities added. They are all rooted in an appeal for love, and that is what the exhibitionist is really asking for because he is starved of love.

When a particular form of appeal takes precedence over all else and becomes an over-riding compulsion the personality is unbalanced. But if this is a kind of sickness we should reflect that is it also a sickness of civilisation. Primitive people who go about their daily tasks naked would not understand what is meant by voyeurism and exhibitionism. The missionaries who arrive with clothing to cover such shocking sights are the sick ones.

Acts that are anti-social are another matter. We have no right to disregard the feelings of others, even though we believe they are making a fuss about nothing of consequence. Persistent nuisances must be restrained, for their own sakes also. They go to infinite trouble and take appalling risks to obtain what ordinary people can get without effort. They lead lonely, frustrated lives either tormented by guilt or miserably aware that they are misfits in society. They need to be given a greater awareness of themselves, not punishment; sympathetic understanding, not ostracism.

The end