ABSTRACT
Before anything useful can be said about perversion, the authors must first clear up a lot of misconceptions—particularly if it is the perverse structure that is at issue. As the reader see it, there are three main problems. One, the ubiquitous, and in most cases explicit moral judgment attending perversion. Two, the omnipresence of the masculine gaze, meaning in most cases a phallic gaze that hinders most studies of perversion. Three, the problem of the differential diagnosis of the quintessentially human polymorphously perverse sexuality on the one hand, and perversion as a subjective structure alongside psychotic and neurotic structures on the other. "Perversion adds a recuperation of the that would scarcely appear original if it didn't interest the Other as such in a very particular way. From a psychoanalytic perspective, the specifically traumatic element has to do precisely with the impossibility of normally verbalizing the experience.
