Neosexual revolution

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The term neosexual revolution describes a rather unspectacular but profound cultural change in sexual relations and sexual morality in the countries of the “ western world ”, which began after the sexual revolution of the 1968 movement and is still ongoing.

Origins - Volkmar Sigusch

The term neosexual revolution comes from the Frankfurt sex researcher, doctor and sociologist Volkmar Sigusch . He used them for the first time in 1996 in an essay in Der Spiegel and in an essay in Die Zeit . In 1998 he scientifically justified his theses in detail in the journal Archives of Sexual Behavior and in the psychoanalytical journal Psyche , as well as in 2001 in Sexuality & Culture and finally in 2005 in his book Neosexualitäten .

Contents of the neosexual revolution

Sigusch argues that current cultural sexual, intimate and gender forms, which he calls neosexualities, neo alliances or neo genders, evade old prejudices and theories as well as old fears and lusts. In principle, the high symbolic importance that sexuality had at the end of the sixties has been reduced again in the last few decades. Today, sexuality is no longer endowed with a power that, according to the ideas of the theorists of the time, could have overturned an entire society. Today the sexual is no longer the great metaphor of intoxication and happiness. Today there is no longer any question of these promises. Today sexuality is as banal as mobility. Their permanent and exaggerated cultural staging evidently dispels desire more effectively than all suppressions.

The Neosexual Revolution opened up new spaces, but at the same time it installed new constraints. According to Sigusch, the open spaces have never been so large and varied. The paradox about it, however, is: the more brutally turbo and casino capitalism abolishes economic security and social justice, i.e. it produces imperfections, the greater the sexual and gender free spaces would be. Obviously, what individuals do remains completely external to the mechanisms of the profit economy, as long as they only pluralize their sexual orientations, their gendered behavior, and their small worlds in general. In particular, people who, even after the sexual revolutions of the 20th century, were viewed as abnormal, sick, perverse and morally depraved benefited from this exemption.

But even heterosexuals today can choose very different forms of relationships without falling out of the ordinary. The neosexual revolution led to a historical renaissance of female sexuality as an independent sexual form , which largely eliminated the old disregard and pathologization over generations. Now gender differences are being deconstructed and reconstructed if the younger generations predominantly have a woman-man relationship in which the sexes are morally equal and, for example, no longer financially dependent on one another. Love relationships could be ended at any time by both sides. According to empirical studies, masturbation has risen to an independent, no longer frowned upon sexual form in both sexes.

Generally binding and enforced moral precepts no longer existed. The couples would have to decide for themselves what is also acceptable from a sexual point of view. Gunter Schmidt speaks of a new negotiating ethic , Volkmar Sigusch of a new consensus ethic .

If today men have become a little more "feminine" and women a little more "masculine", so that the two great sexes come closer together, this refers, according to Sigusch, to the pioneering role of homosexual men in the last third of the 20th century in the form of the gay movement . It is not an exaggeration to say that heterosexuality has been homosexualized to some extent. In any case, many heterosexual men today have a different body feeling that is no longer compatible with permanent rib underpants every 14 days and with a potbelly. In addition, the homosexuals had successfully modeled a modification of old loyalty orders, so that the “compatibility of love for relationships and urges” is no longer excluded. After all, part of this structural change is the loss of cultural significance that the spheres of reproduction and family of origin have experienced.

The new, recognized forms included, for example, bisexuality , sadomasochism and various forms of fetish. For recognition also various new forms of fighting Internet sexuality that Sigusch e-sex calls, as well as behaviors such as polyamory , Objektophilie what or Sigusch Neozoophilie calls. In terms of gender, transgender or transsexualism are now recognized by the highest courts in several countries. In contrast, intersex people would still have to fight for their cultural status. Among the neo-alliances, the registered, i.e. state-recognized civil partnership ( registered partnership ) stands out at the moment .

Revolution is spoken of because it is now known that upheavals can be dramatic or undramatic, sudden or creeping and that they do not necessarily lead to a realm of freedom. Above all, however, this designation was chosen because the sexual revolution associated with the revolt of 1968 was inevitably taken as a measure as soon as upheavals in sexual culture were described. After all, this sexual revolution is a real myth in our recent history.

Three sexual revolutions

Sigusch distinguishes three sexual revolutions that have taken place in Europe and North America since the end of the 19th century. All three still have an effect on people today. That is why it is wrong to assume that all people react in a “neosexual” way today. Rather, there are at the same time very different time resp. Structural layers of sexuality and gender. At present, three structural layers of the general forms are particularly important, which can combine and overlap one another:

  1. the stratum that was characteristic of the first sexual revolution at the beginning of the 20th century, a stratum with which Sigmund Freud (1905) was confronted while drafting his theory of sex;
  2. the class typical of the second, partly commercial-anti-authoritarian, partly governmental-social-liberal revolution of the sixties and early seventies, and
  3. the class that belongs to the third or neosexual revolution, which has been happening rather quietly and creepingly since the late 1970s. These time or structure layers could be assigned to generations in general, but not to individuals.

Neosexualities

According to Sigusch, the old sexuality, which he calls paleosexuality , consisted primarily of drive, lust, orgasm and the heterosexual couple. Neosexualities, on the other hand, consist primarily of pleasure and self-love , thrills (such as on Love Parades ) and prostheses (such as Viagra ). They did not revolve around reproduction and its prevention, but around gender differences and their exploration, around self-optimized sovereignty.

The new self-practices, for example fetishistic and object-sexual ones, which are staged as a matter of course, are typical neosexualities according to Sigusch insofar as the sexual instinct in the old sense is no longer in the foreground. They are sexual and nonsexual at the same time, because self-esteem, homeostasis and satisfaction are not only drawn from the mystification of instinctual love and the phantasm of orgasmic fusion during intercourse, but also or to a greater extent from the thrill that accompanies nonsexual self-disclosure and narcissistic self-invention. And finally, they oscillated between solid and liquid, identical and non-identical and are often much more transient than their fixed predecessors.

Sigusch also calls the sexual form characteristic of the previous neosexual revolution Lean Sexuality or self-sex , the new gender form self- gender .

The only seemingly unchangeable unity of sexuality was once again smashed and reassembled by the neosexual revolution . So it is about processes of autodestruction and autopoiesis , which are characteristic of our social formation. They resulted from the general and enormous dynamic of change that our way of doing business initiates, needs or allows. Because dispositives and imperatives are at the center of the constitution of the system, meaning and consciousness - Sigusch avowedly speaks of objectives in his theory - which force every individuality into an eccentric position, the individual generalities are burdened and unburdened at the same time. Because what individuals do and think is increasingly irrelevant for the course of society, sexual orientations, behaviors and life worlds could pluralize, provided that discursive overhangs from past times or transverse dispositions that continue to stabilize sexism and patriarchalism, for example, do not stand in the way.

When analyzing the neosexual process, Sigusch is less interested in classical empirical data on coitus frequencies, etc. He rather asks the question of how desire and passion are recoded and where they are shifted - into dead objects such as objectophilia, into old or new sexual self-references For example, in public sexual stagings, in secret internet sex addictions, in nonsexual thrills or in aggressive actions, so that forms of violence may be placed next to the sexual forms or culturally replace them because the intended arousal, which could then no longer be called sexual, from Growing groups of people are reached not through libido and love, but through destrudo and hatred.

Sigusch assesses the public presence of asexuals as particularly drastic. For the first time in straightforward history, heterosexual men and women are likely to publicly express their continued disinterest in sexual desires without being laughed at or even despised. At the height of the "sexual age", this liberation was unthinkable.

These changes are only possible because sexuality is no longer the great opportunity of happiness of the past century. The more incessantly and obtrusively the sexual is publicly advertised and commercialized, the more it loses its explosiveness and appeal. At the moment it seems to Sigusch as if the explosive power migrates from the sexual to the aggressive sphere, from the old libido to a new destrudo, when it comes to the sexual abuse of children by adults, to the countless sexist acts of violence by men against women or, already clearly de-sexualized, the excesses of violence of so-called football fans and their respective discursive processes are thought of.

The three "D processes"

As a sociologist, Sigusch identifies several interlinked processes that produce neosexualities. He mentions dissociation, dispersion and diversification as the three most important.

dissociation

The dissociation of the sexual sphere primarily refers to the discursive separation of the sexual from the sexual sphere, so that the starting point is no longer the instinctual fate, as with Freud, but the gender difference. This separation is connected with a differentiation of the gender sphere itself in terms of sex, gender role, gender identity, gender blending, transgender, etc. In addition, there is a dissociation of the sphere of sexual experience from that of the sexual body, in particular through simulation and virtualization processes and the The advance of medical body therapies, which Sigusch describes in detail as a doctor. Finally, in the course of the neosexual revolution, the discursive separation of the libidinal from the destructive sphere took place under the keywords sexual violence and sexual abuse. At the same time, the old dissociation of the sexual from the reproductive sphere progressed, up to and including the technological overcoming of the sexuality of reproduction, which was previously regarded as inevitable, through cloning, which Sigusch discusses in his theory of hylomacy .

Dispersion

Dispersion describes the dispersal of sexual fragments and ways of life. It takes place primarily through commercialization and medialization. The key words are: sex in advertising, the aesthetic exploitation of the erotic and the sex industry - from flirting schools, personals, dating agencies, etc. to sexography on television and “brown” prostitution, sex tourism, children and the embryo trade. This dispersion uproots, fragments and anonymizes individuals; but at the same time they are networked, entertainingly dispersed and diversified by this mechanism.

Diversification

The key words for the diversification or deregulation of intimate relationships are: loss of meaning of the family of origin, shrinking of the nuclear family to a “small family” (Sigusch), in which an individual is his own family, multiplication of relationships and forms of life, idealization of disperse lifestyles, differentiation of the old Hetero- and homosexuality, self-definition and pluralization of former perversions as neosexualities, appearance of old potentialities as new kinds of sexual and gender modes, compulsion to diversity and intimization, exclusion of parent-child and man-woman relationships in the sense of "relationship relationships" (Sigusch) , new standards of shame, disgust, desensitization and rejection, etc. Deregulation results just as much from social coercion as from individual ones: because the democratically draped dispositifs that Sigusch calls “objectives” are as seductive as “like limbs, so effective, open and equally valid ". All in all: the conventional family has lost a lot of its importance for individuals. Non-relational relationships and friendship groups are more important to many people than the family today.

Youth and Neosexual Revolution

The disintegration of the old sexual sphere is absorbed by the majority of the young generation in a “cultural masterpiece” after everything that sex research has empirically determined for decades: Today, young people oscillated quite confidently between undramatic fidelity in love relationships and dramatic thrill-producing events.

Love parades and raver parties are the epitome of neosexuality for Sigusch. On weekdays, it works cleanly and correctly, but on weekends, with the help of designer drugs that dissociate the body from the soul and allow out of body experiences , a million techno-pig is driven through the Berlin zoo, only remotely aware of the promises and Risks of the Garden of Earthly Delights by Hieronymus Bosch .

The neosexuality of young people is more playful pleasure than instinctual pleasure. She is self-optimizing and self-disciplined, and could also be called self-sex because of her high proportion of egoisms. This goes hand in hand with the enormous social and emotional appreciation of masturbation in recent decades. As the only sexual practice in the course of the 20th century, it not only changed from a frowned upon and persecuted one to one valued by men and women, but also gained in importance in quantitative terms.

But above everything is love . It is "a unique treasure even when fetishized" (Sigusch), because it cannot be produced and cannot be bought. It is more stable than all sexual forms, largely resists the compulsion to diversity in the neosexual process, proves that it is not just about change, but also about continuity. At the bottom of love, however, lies the old polymorphic perverse, without which love would be a wasteland. For this reason, and because cultural transformations have made it increasingly uncertain what is still "perverse" at all, Sigusch has analyzed the perversions in addition to the neosexualities in a book in detail: as an indissoluble part of normal sexuality, as an exaggeration of the normal, as a projection field for so-called experts, as depathologized and demystified self-technology, as an artistic way of existence and - and here it is again a question of continuity - as delinquency and pathological sexual addiction in need of treatment.

Quotes

“The upheaval that occurred in the 1980s and 1990s is perhaps even more drastic than the one that accompanied the sexual revolution. Overall, there seems to be a rapid revaluation and rewriting of sexuality today. The high symbolic importance that sexuality had at the turn of the century [from the 19th to the 20th century], in the twenties and at the end of the sixties seems to be reduced again if we only think of the promises of the last revolt . At that time, sexuality was endowed with such power that some were convinced that by unleashing it could overthrow the whole of society, as Wilhelm Reich had promised (1936). [...] The propagandists did not want to admit that the 'liberation' was accompanied by considerable external and self-constraints, new problems and old fears. "

- Volkmar Sigusch

reception

Affirmation

The theses are now being discussed with approval not only in Europe and America, but also in Asia. In 2000, for example, well-known sexologists, psychoanalysts, cultural scientists and philosophers such as Isabelle Azoulay , Rüdiger Lautmann , Martin Dannecker , Margret Hauch , Gunter Schmidt , Wolfgang Berner , Stavros Mentzos , Michael Lukas Moeller , Katherine Strozcan, Hans- Ludwig Kröber and Wolfgang Fritz Haug deal with the theses. The English sociologist Zygmunt Bauman , the American historian Dagmar Herzog , the German philosopher Wolfgang Fritz Haug, the Swiss psychoanalyst Emilio Modena, the Austrian art historian Peter Gorsen and the German sociologist Silja Matthiesen built the theorem of the neosexual revolution into their works. The psychoanalyst and sociologist Ilka Quindeau justified her attempt to reformulate Freud's theory of sex with the changes brought about by the neosexual revolution .

In 2004, German Medical Science presented Sigusch's treatise On cultural transformations of sexuality and gender in recent decades as an internationally relevant highlight of German research on the Internet. In 2005 the philosophical journal Das Argument published the main volume Materials on the Neosexual Revolution (No. 260).

criticism

The sociologist Sven Lewandowski has dealt with the theorem of the neosexual revolution several times. After much praise for Sigusch's “Psyche” essay from 1998 - he was “a modern classic of socio-theoretical sexual sociology”, which was “deservedly broadly received” and to which “largely agreed” in terms of content - he subjects Sigusch's position to a fundamental criticism . It was built on the wrong basis, namely the "so-called" critical theory and the critique of political economy . But the real reason is the system theory of Niklas Luhmann .

The psychoanalyst and sociologist Reimut Reiche doubts that there have been such tremendous upheavals as Sigusch describes. He himself describes with many examples significant "transformation phenomena" that he otherwise denies - from the pension reform in 1957, through which the children were financially removed from the intergenerational contract, to the introduction of the so-called Pampers in 1970, which was tough Ended cleanliness training in childhood and enabled “the movement towards a 'soft' modulation in the development of the body-self-cathexis”, up to and including the disappearance of the “old family”, which was destroyed by society itself, which represented the “universality of the Oedipus complex and thus the Structural formula of sexuality ”. On the other hand, Reiche insists on the continued existence of original structures and insatiable conflicts. Apparently he is of the opinion that the sex theory devised more than a hundred years ago by Sigmund Freud is still valid today, despite neosexualities, neoalliances and neo-sexes, which is, however, increasingly doubted by psychoanalysts.

Reiche has since revised his view. He now thinks Sigusch together with Norbert Elias, Zygmunt Bauman, Anthony Giddens, Christopher Lasch and Richard Sennett. Now morality is “reflexive” for him, he confirms Sigusch's concept of “consensus morality”, breaking old Judeo-Christian sexual taboos such as “virginity, masturbation and homosexuality”, he accuses himself of a “somewhat dogmatic attitude”. Finally Reiche said: "The limits of what is allowed, desired, arousing, offensive or forbidden as sexual are historically and culturally in constant motion".

Daniela Klimke and Rüdiger Lautmann asked why Sigusch did not speak of neoliberalism in his book "Neosexualities" because of a misunderstanding . Sigusch replied that he could not have thought the neosexual revolution without neoliberalism. Even in the first essay on the neosexual revolution , the justification for the choice of words included not only neophytes, who Klimke and Lautmann vividly recall, but also neoplasms, neocolonialism and neoliberalism. In addition, critical sexology, for which he stands, cannot be presented without a critique of capitalism or neoliberalism. The birth of our form of sexuality and our way of loving from the spirit of capitalism cannot seriously be denied. And finally Sigusch confesses his fear of being taken for a dogmatist who looks into the world in a tube and considers a certain social theory to be the all-explanatory. - But that is not the case with him.

See also

literature

  • Zygmunt Bauman: Liquid love. On the frailty of human bonds. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press 2003
  • Martin Dannecker and Reimut Reiche: Sexuality and Society. Festschrift for Volkmar Sigusch. Frankfurt / Main, New York: Campus Verlag 2000
  • Sigmund Freud: Three essays on the theory of sex. Vienna: Deuticke 1905
  • Peter Gorsen: The afterlife of Viennese actionism. Klagenfurt u. a .: Knight 2009
  • Wolfgang Fritz Haug: The new subjects of the sexual. Volkmar Sigusch on neoliberalism and neosexuality (s). In: Dannecker and Reiche 2000, pp. 232-251
  • Wolfgang Fritz Haug: Sexual-changing functional consequences of high-tech capitalism. In: Das Argument - magazine for philosophy and social sciences. 47 (260): 206-211, 2005
  • Rüdiger Lautmann: Sociology of Sexuality. Erotic body, intimate action, sexual culture. Weinheim, Munich: Juventa 2002
  • Lewandowski, Sven: The neosexual revolution and the functionally differentiated society. One answer to Volkmar Sigusch. In: Journal for Sexual Research. 20, 69-76, 2007
  • Silja Matthiesen: Change of love relationships and sexuality. Giessen: Psychosozial-Verlag 2007
  • Ilka Quindeau: Seduction and Desire. Freud's psychoanalytic sex theory. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta 2008
  • Volkmar Sigusch: The neosexual revolution. About social transformations of sexuality in the last decades. In: Psyche - Journal for Psychoanalysis. 52, 1192-1234,1998
  • Volkmar Sigusch: The neosexual revolution. In: Archives of Sexual Behavior. 27, 331-359, 1998
  • Volkmar Sigusch: From King Sex to Self Sex. About current transformations in cultural gender and sexual forms. In: Christiane Schmerl, Stefanie Soine, Marlene Stein-Hilbers and Birgitta Wrede (eds.): Sexual scenes. Staging of gender and sexuality in modern societies. Opladen 2000; Pp. 227-249
  • Volkmar Sigusch: Lean sexuality: On cultural transformations of sexuality and gender in recent decades. In: Sexuality & Culture. 5, 23–56, 2001 (reprinted in: Zeitschrift für Sexualforschung. 15, 120–141, 2002)
  • Volkmar Sigusch: Neosexualities. About the cultural change of love and perversion. Frankfurt / M., New York: Campus 2005 - ISBN 3-593-37724-1
  • Volkmar Sigusch: What does neosexuality mean? In: Andreas Hill, Peer Briken and Wolfgang Berner (eds.): Lust - full of pain. Sadomasochistic Perspectives. Contributions to Sexualforschung , Vol. 90. Gießen: Psychosozial-Verlag 2008; Pp. 59-78 - ISBN 978-3-89806-843-7
  • Volkmar Sigusch: In search of sexual freedom . Frankfurt / M. and New York, Campus-Verlag 2011, ISBN 978-3-593-39430-5

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Volkmar Sigusch: The dispersion of Eros . In: Der Spiegel . No. 23 , 1996, pp. 126-130 ( Online - June 3, 1996 ).
  2. ^ Volkmar Sigusch: The rubble of the sexual revolution. Die Zeit, Volume 51, No. 41 of October 4, 1996, pp. 33-34.
  3. ↑ Volkmar Sigusch: The neosexual revolution. In: Archives of Sexual Behavior 27, 331–359, 1998
  4. ↑ Volkmar Sigusch: The neosexuelle revolution. About social transformations of sexuality in the last decades. Psyche - Journal for Psychoanalysis 52, 1192-1234, 1998
  5. ↑ Volkmar Sigusch: Lean sexuality: On cultural transformations of sexuality and gender in recent decades. In: Sexuality & Culture 5, 23-56, 2001 (reprint of a German version in: Zeitschrift für Sexualforschung 15, 120-141, 2002)
  6. ↑ Volkmar Sigusch: "A cultural masterpiece". About the Love Parade. KulturSPIEGEL, issue 7, pages 10–15, July 2000
  7. ↑ Volkmar Sigusch: Sildenafil (Viagra) and other phosphodiesterase inhibitors. In the S. (Ed.): Sexual disorders and their treatment. Stuttgart, New York: Thieme Verlag 2007, pp. 208-227
  8. ↑ a b “Objective” is what Sigusch calls a social installation in which material-discursive cultural techniques, symbols, living practices, economic and knowledge forms are networked in a way that creates a historically new construction of reality. Since these installations, once established, were generated by themselves, they were more impressive than everyday sociological constraints that nothing effective could be countered, and in more everyday psychological and ethical-legal considerations they appeared as normality and normativity, the only one in the They are able to guarantee order, peace and security.
  9. ^ Volkmar Sigusch: Sexual disorders and their treatment. Stuttgart, New York: Thieme Verlag 2007
  10. ^ Volkmar Sigusch: Metamorphoses of life and death. Outlook on a theory of hylomacy. Psyche - Journal for Psychoanalysis 51, 835-874, 1997
  11. ^ Volkmar Sigusch and Gunter Schmidt: Jugendsexualität. Documentation of an investigation. Stuttgart: Enke Verlag 1973; Gunter Schmidt (ed.): Youth sexuality. Social change, group differences, areas of conflict. Stuttgart: Enke Verlag 1993
  12. ↑ Volkmar Sigusch: "A cultural masterpiece". About the Love Parade. KulturSPIEGEL, issue 7, pages 10–15, July 2000
  13. ^ Volkmar Sigusch: Neosexualities. About the cultural change of love and perversion. Frankfurt / M., New York: Campus 2005
  14. ^ Volkmar Sigusch: Neosexualities. About the change of love and perversion. Campus Verlag, 2005.
  15. ↑ Martin Dannecker and Reimut Reiche, Reimut: Sexuality and Society. Festschrift for Volkmar Sigusch. Frankfurt / M., New York: Campus Verlag 2000
  16. ↑ Zygmunt Bauman: Liquid love. On the frailty of human bonds. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press 2003
  17. ↑ Dagmar Herzog: Sex was yesterday. Cicero, January 2006 issue, pp. 124-128
  18. ^ Wolfgang Fritz Haug: Sexual-changing functional consequences of high-tech capitalism. The Argument - Journal of Philosophy and Social Sciences 47 (260), 206-211, 2005
  19. ↑ Emilio Modena: Love in Capitalism and the Attachment Theory. A deconstruction. Lecture, Zurich 2005
  20. ^ Peter Gorsen: The afterlife of Viennese actionism. Klagenfurt u. a .: Knight 2009
  21. ↑ Silja Matthiesen: Change of love relationships and sexuality. Giessen: Psychosozial-Verlag 2007
  22. ↑ Ilka Quindeau: Seduction and Desire. Freud's psychoanalytic sex theory. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta 2008
  23. ↑ Volkmar Sigusch: On cultural transformations of sexuality and gender in recent decades. German Medical Science 2, 1-31, 2004
  24. ^ Sven Lewandowski: Sexuality in the times of functional differentiation. A systems theory analysis. transcript. Bielefeld 2004; Ders .: "I can't get no satisfaction"? On the current state of a sociology of sexuality. Sociological Revue 29, 15-25, 2006; Ders .: The neosexual revolution and the functionally differentiated society. One answer to Volkmar Sigusch. Journal of Sexual Research 20, 69-76, 2007.
  25. ↑ Sven Lewandowski: The neosexuelle revolution and the functionally differentiated society. One answer to Volkmar Sigusch. Zeitschrift für Sexualforschung 20, 2007, p. 69.
  26. ↑ Reimut Reiche: "... deny us full satisfaction" (Sigmund Freud). A sex-scientific diagnosis of contemporary culture. Journal for psychoanalytic theory and practice 15, 10-36, 2000, here pp. 14 and 29.
  27. ↑ Reimut Reiche: "... deny us full satisfaction" (Sigmund Freud). A sex-scientific diagnosis of contemporary culture. Journal for psychoanalytic theory and practice 15, 10-36, 2000, pp. 16, 18 f. and 30.
  28. ↑ Cf. Ilka Quindeau and Volkmar Sigusch (eds.): Freud and the sexual. New psychoanalytic and sex science perspectives. Frankfurt / M., New York: Campus Verlag 2005.
  29. ^ Reiche, R .: Adorno and the psychoanalysis. In: Gruschka, A. and U. Oevermann (eds.): The vitality of critical social theory. Wetzlar: Büchse der Pandora 2004, pp. 253-254, here p. 251 ff)
  30. ^ Reiche, R .: The figuration of the sexual limit. Lecture given at the Freud Institute Zurich on September 14, 2012; expanded published in: Psyche - Z. Psychoanal., Jg. 1967, pp. 359–378, 2013; here p. 9).
  31. ↑ Daniela Klimke and Rüdiger Lautmann: The neoliberal ethics and the spirit of sexual criminal law. Journal of Sexual Research 19, 97-117, 2006
  32. ^ Sigusch, Volkmar: Can the neosexual revolution be thought of without neoliberalism? An answer to Daniela Klimke and Rüdiger Lautmann. Journal for Sexual Research 19, 234-240, 2006