Surreal illustration of Freud and Lacan playing chess, symbolizing psychoanalytic concepts.

Freud vs. Lacan: Unraveling the Complexities of Perversion in Modern Psychology

Soraya Malik in Mind & Education August 2025 • 4 min read.

"Explore how Freud's early theories of sexuality and perversion contrast with Lacan's structural approach, influencing contemporary views on sexual identity and psychoanalysis."

Psychoanalysis, since its inception, has faced criticism for its perceived 'normalizing' and 'conservative' stance, particularly concerning sexuality. Feminist scholars and queer theorists have challenged what they term the 'heteronormative' assumptions embedded within psychoanalytic metapsychology. Central to these discussions is the concept of sexual perversions, a topic that Freud initially brought to the forefront.

Freud's early work sought to integrate perversions into the psychoanalytic framework, viewing them through the lens of hysteria research. Subsequently, each psychoanalytic theorist has grappled with the 'problems' presented by these conditions. But is it truly appropriate to label these conditions as 'pathologies'? Are there individuals who can be diagnosed? This debate brings up important questions about what it means to have a desire, what is considered law, and ultimately the essence of sexuality.

This article aims to dissect the contrasting views of Freud and Lacan on perversion. We will explore the original paradigm presented in Freud's 'Three Essays on Sexuality,' which differs significantly from later psychoanalytic interpretations, particularly Lacan's structural approach. By contrasting these perspectives, we hope to shed light on the ongoing debates surrounding sexual ethics, identity, and the evolving landscape of psychoanalytic theory.

The Divergent Views: Freud's Polymorphous Perversity vs. Lacan's Structural Framework

Surreal illustration of Freud and Lacan playing chess, symbolizing psychoanalytic concepts.

Freud's 'Three Essays,' particularly the initial 1905 edition, offers a groundbreaking analysis of perversions, drawing from the work of Krafft-Ebing but diverging significantly in its conclusions. Krafft-Ebing distinguished between 'perversities,' seen as abnormal behaviors of sound-minded individuals, and 'perversion,' a disease affecting the personality. Freud, however, challenges the notion that perversion is inherently linked to non-procreative sex.

The 1905 version of 'Three Essays' is crucial because it predates Freud's later emphasis on the Oedipus complex and developmental stages. This earlier text focuses on the concept of infantile sexuality, characterized by a pursuit of pleasure through various erogenous zones, without a predetermined object. Perversions, in this context, are viewed as amplifications of these partial drives, fundamentally rooted in the pursuit of pleasure rather than deviation from a norm.

Autoeroticism: Infantile sexuality is radically autoerotic, where the object serves merely to stimulate an erogenous zone.
Rejection of Hierarchy: Freud implicitly questions any inherent hierarchy between erogenous zones, challenging traditional views.
Critique of Teleology: Freud initially rejects the teleological view that the purpose of sexuality is procreation.

In contrast, Lacan's structural approach to perversion, influenced by his interpretation of fetishism, posits perversion as a structural position relative to the 'law of castration.' Lacan views perversion not merely as a means of obtaining pleasure but as a way of relating to the symbolic order and the law of the father. This perspective shifts the focus from individual behaviors to an underlying structure that defines the subject's relationship to the symbolic realm.

The Enduring Relevance of the Debate

The debate between Freud and Lacan on perversion remains relevant today, informing discussions on sexual diversity, gender identity, and the role of psychoanalysis in understanding the complexities of human desire. While Freud's early work emphasized the polymorphous and pleasure-seeking nature of infantile sexuality, Lacan's structural approach highlighted the role of the symbolic order and the law of the father in shaping perverse structures. By understanding these contrasting perspectives, we can gain a deeper appreciation of the ongoing evolution of psychoanalytic theory and its implications for contemporary society.

About this Article -

This article was crafted using a human-AI hybrid and collaborative approach. AI assisted our team with initial drafting, research insights, identifying key questions, and image generation. Our human editors guided topic selection, defined the angle, structured the content, ensured factual accuracy and relevance, refined the tone, and conducted thorough editing to deliver helpful, high-quality information.See our About page for more information.

This article is based on research published under:

DOI-LINK: 10.3917/cm.095.0059, Alternate LINK

Title: Lacan Héritier De Freud ? Quelques Réflexions Sur La Perversion Chez Freud Et Lacan

Subject: Psychiatry and Mental health

Journal: Cliniques méditerranéennes

Publisher: CAIRN

Authors: Philippe Van Haute

Published: 2017-03-16

Everything You Need To Know

How did Freud's understanding of perversion evolve, especially before his focus on the Oedipus complex?

Initially, Freud viewed perversions as amplifications of partial drives rooted in the pursuit of pleasure through various erogenous zones, characterizing infantile sexuality as radically autoerotic. This early perspective, outlined in the 1905 version of 'Three Essays on Sexuality', predates his emphasis on the Oedipus complex and developmental stages, challenging the teleological view that the purpose of sexuality is procreation and questioning any inherent hierarchy between erogenous zones. His work diverged from Krafft-Ebing's distinction between 'perversities' and 'perversion,' challenging the idea that perversion is inherently linked to non-procreative sex. Later psychoanalytic interpretations shift from this original paradigm.

In what fundamental way does Lacan's structural approach differ from Freud's perspective on perversion?

Lacan's structural approach views perversion not merely as a means of obtaining pleasure, as Freud initially suggested, but as a structural position relative to the 'law of castration.' Lacan focuses on how perversion relates to the symbolic order and the law of the father, emphasizing an underlying structure that defines the subject's relationship to the symbolic realm. This contrasts with Freud's earlier emphasis on the polymorphous and pleasure-seeking nature of infantile sexuality.

How did Freud's 'Three Essays on Sexuality' challenge conventional views on sexuality and perversion?

Freud's 'Three Essays,' particularly the 1905 edition, presented a groundbreaking analysis by challenging the notion that perversion is inherently linked to non-procreative sex. He introduced the concept of infantile sexuality, characterized by autoeroticism and the pursuit of pleasure through various erogenous zones, rejecting the teleological view that sexuality's sole purpose is procreation. This perspective diverged significantly from Krafft-Ebing's distinction between 'perversities' and 'perversion,' paving the way for a more nuanced understanding of sexual diversity.

Why is the debate between Freud and Lacan on perversion still considered relevant in contemporary society?

The contrasting perspectives of Freud and Lacan inform ongoing discussions on sexual diversity, gender identity, and the role of psychoanalysis in understanding human desire. Freud's emphasis on the polymorphous and pleasure-seeking nature of infantile sexuality contrasts with Lacan's focus on the symbolic order and the law of the father in shaping perverse structures. Understanding these differing viewpoints provides a deeper appreciation of the evolution of psychoanalytic theory and its implications for contemporary society's understanding of sexuality.

What is the significance of Freud's concept of 'polymorphous perversity' in understanding infantile sexuality, and how does it relate to later psychoanalytic interpretations of perversion?

Freud's concept of 'polymorphous perversity' suggests that infants are capable of deriving pleasure from various erogenous zones without a predetermined object, highlighting the pleasure-seeking nature of infantile sexuality. This view, emphasized in the early version of 'Three Essays,' contrasts with later psychoanalytic interpretations, such as Lacan's structural approach, which focuses on the role of the symbolic order and the 'law of castration' in shaping perverse structures. The initial idea of 'polymorphous perversity' emphasizes a lack of inherent hierarchy between erogenous zones and a rejection of the teleological view that sexuality is solely for procreation.