Sauerteig Lutz D H
Centre for the History of Medicine and Disease, Wolfson Research Institute, Queen's Campus, Durham University, Stockton-on-Tees TS17 6BH, UK.
Med Hist. 2012 Apr;56(2):156-83. doi: 10.1017/mdh.2011.31.
This paper analyses how, prior to the work of Sigmund Freud, an understanding of infant and childhood sexuality emerged during the nineteenth century. Key contributors to the debate were Albert Moll, Max Dessoir and others, as fin-de-siècle artists and writers celebrated a sexualised image of the child. By the beginning of the twentieth century, most paediatricians, sexologists, psychologists, psychiatrists, psychoanalysts and pedagogues agreed that sexuality formed part of a child's 'normal' development. This paper argues that the main disagreements in discourses about childhood sexuality related to different interpretations of children's sexual experiences. On the one hand stood an explanation that argued for a homology between children's and adults' sexual experiences, on the other hand was an understanding that suggested that adults and children had distinct and different experiences. Whereas the homological interpretation was favoured by the majority of commentators, including Moll, Freud, and to some extent also by C.G. Jung, the heterological interpretation was supported by a minority, including childhood psychologist Charlotte Bühler.
本文分析了在西格蒙德·弗洛伊德开展其工作之前，19世纪是如何出现对婴儿期和童年期性行为的理解的。这场辩论的主要贡献者包括阿尔伯特·莫尔、马克斯·德索伊尔等人，因为世纪末的艺术家和作家推崇儿童的性感形象。到20世纪初，大多数儿科医生、性学家、心理学家、精神科医生、精神分析学家和教育家都认为性是儿童“正常”发育的一部分。本文认为，关于童年期性行为的论述中的主要分歧与对儿童性经历的不同解读有关。一方面是一种解释，主张儿童和成人的性经历具有同源性；另一方面是一种理解，认为成人和儿童有不同且各异的经历。虽然包括莫尔、弗洛伊德以及在一定程度上卡尔·古斯塔夫·荣格在内的大多数评论家都倾向于同源性解释，但包括儿童心理学家夏洛特·比勒在内的少数人支持异源性解释。
