Sex byPrescription

References: Szasz, T.(1980) Sex by Prescription. Anchor Press/Doubleday. New York.

Without Further adue here is the review of Sex by Prescription. The post will be broken down according to the sections of the book. The text is split into to categories: Sexual Medicine and Sexual Education. From each category, there are subcategories that go into specifics from sex as disease to sex as treatment-in theory and in practice; as well as other categories that explore sex education for doctors, for children and through religion.

The text is a very quick read, it consists of a little over 150 pages but the literature is very dense and requires a great deal of looking through the notes section to discover where the quote is from. I found that the text was full of a lot of references to things that I did not know about prior. However, I found it very informative. So each section was full of a lot of information so I will try to summarize the sections and than give a reaction.

The section Sexual Medicine looks at different aspects of sexual therapy and how sexual therapy has been practiced and how it is practiced. The first portion of the section is spent talking about sexual dysfunction and the 'cures' for theses problems in the past and how they are dealt with currently (during the period of the text, not in today's world). Szasz starts off by saying that "instead of regarding sexual dysfunctions as disease, we could more profitably regard them as the solutions of certain life tasks" (pg. 9). Basically Szasz wants sexual dysfunction to be considered a life-style choice and not a pathology. Szasz says that sex was regarded as a disease from which all people are afflicted and should thus be purged from life. Szasz goes through mythologies to cure sexual dysfunction in theory and in practice. A big portion of this section regards that of Masters and Johnson who were renound sex therapists. Masters and Johnson used the aid of surrogates  in their studies of sexual dysfunction Other times, they used the partners of the subjects. In the text Szasz criticizes the methods of Masters and Johnson as a form of prostitution. He also says that there is a relationship between "old fashioned prostitution and new-fashioned sex therapy" (pg 58). He also is very critical of the work that Masters and Johnson did regarding homosexuality as normal sexual behavior. He says that what Masters and Johnson did was try to normalize homosexual practice by relying on the assumption that homosexuals, like heterosexuals, are the same. He says that by doing this, they fail to let the minority community share their differences and be accepted for them. He is a subtle way says that they, (Masters and Johnson) are not really advocates for homosexuals because they do not accept homosexuals for who they are but rather overemphasize qualities that the majority group has but place the good characteristics on the minority group (eg homosexuals). Szasz also criticizes the teaching of masturbation as therapy saying that in the same argument is being used by those who are pro-masturbation from the anti-masturbation camp but in reverse terms. Masturbation, according to Szasz is a 'matter of private, personal conduct' (pg. 69).  Szasz also spends some time criticizing The last chapter of the Sexual Medication section is on sexual surgery. This section talked in great length about what precautions were taken in the past to prevent sexual expression. Such events as castration, hysterectomy and circumcision. Szasz also talks a bit anout sex reassignment surgery and sex gimmicks.

The  second section of the book was dedicated to Sexual Education. This section focused on different aspects of sexual education and the sources from which the education was taught. The section looked at sexual education from religion, for doctors, for children, and from the state. Szasz in this section of the text does a great job of breaking down how sex is portrayed and what steps must be taken when educating a population about sex. Szasz speaks about the hypocrisy of sex education for children and says blatantly that sex education for children cannot truly be unbiased and factual because all education is run by the state and popular opinion, as to what to 'teach' children. He says that 'there can be no sex education so long as it is called sex education' (pg. 125) and goes on to say that sex education does not impart information about the anatomy and physiology but rather attempts to impart influence on the sexual 'health' of youth. I found this to be the most interesting aspect of this section. Later Szasz goes on to speak about sexual education for doctors, which he describes as doctors watching pornography as a means of understanding sexual 'health'. Szasz says that doctors are not being taught about sex. In relation to the state Szasz says that "[sex educators] claim to be value-free scientists when, in fact, they are value-laden moralists." (pg 152).  The takeaway message of the book is basically that " sex education is a fraudulent and mischievous enterprise" (pg 159). Szasz basically argues that sex educators and sex therapy takes cultural convictions and moral representations and coin them as fact.

The overall book was a very interesting. I do not per-se agree with all of Szasz's politics about sex and sexuality but I do believe that sex education especially in a moralistic and patriarchal society cannot be taught if we are basing it on the popular ideals. Having a factual non-biased look at sex is to difficult. Speaking to the biological functions of our genitals and cause and effect is easy; whereas talking about human sexuality is complex and is based very much on cultural norms and customs. I find it very interesting to think about sexual medicine and pathologies of the not so distant past and how not so long ago homosexuality was a pathology and as transsexuality becomes a bit more normalized and mainstream, if that will be removed from the realm of sexual pathology and disorder?  Also, to think about the role of masturbation in sexual development for children and how it is perceived.

presentation and critics

Resources: 
Robbins,B PhD (2009) Szasz Hates Laing retrieved at:http://societyforhumanisticpsychology.blogspot.com/2009/02/szasz-hates-laing.html The Society for Humanistic Psychiatry.  
GUTHEIL, T. M.D (2001) Letter in response to Szasz Under fire. Retrieved at: http://www.szasz.com/critics.htm. 
Shalev, A. (2001) Flawed Argument. Retrieved at: http://www.szasz.com/critics.htm.

When I said I would do a review of 'Sex by Pescription' I meant that I have to sit down and do it. It'll be done. But first I wanted to share some of the criticisms that I read about Szasz as well as my presentation on Tuesday. 

Lets start with the ladder and go from there. 

The presentation was on the life and basic doings of Thomas Szasz. I spent a good portion of the class talking about a lot of his theories and how they are seen today. Went o Szasz.com and I found something aptly named Critics Corner. It gives some pretty recent critics on Szasz as well as some feedback on the literature. A few of the critics were letters, but some were articles (or blog posts). So In no Particular order, I'll go through what some said and my reactions (I'll try to provide a bit of information on each person: 

Thomas G. Gutheil, MD. Says of Szasz that he and I quote "is simply no longer worth it." in reaction to a request to be a part of the book Szasz Under Fire. The book is  a look at some of Szaszian theories and responses/reactions form some noted individuals in the fields of Psychology and Psychiatry. 

Arieh Y. Shalev, M.D., Professor of Psychiatry said of Szasz that "Frankly, I find the Szasz argument flawed, superficial, demagogic and immoral." He goes on to explain that Szasz " assumes a yes/know type of biomedical knowledge, whereas the truth is that most knowledge is relative". Each paragraph explains why he finds the Szaszian argument flawed.

"Szasz Hates Laing"  Is an article written by Brent Robbins, PhD. The article is a criticism of a recent article by Szasz called Debunking Antipsychiatry: Laing, Law, and Largactil (2008) the full text is available online, just click the link. I'll post a review of it in the coming days. The Robbins piece goes on to say that "Szasz's article in Existential Analysis can be read as nothing other than a full-frontal assault on R.D. Laing's character and, by implication, his credibility as a clinician and scholar. He paints him to be an irresponsible, reckless and power-hungry monster." The piece in my mind is not exceptionally biased because it also takes a critical look at Laing and it's application and rejection of the term anti-psychiatry. The article is short but sweet, so take a look.

Below is my presentation, please feel free to go through it, read the notes. What I liked about the critiques was that it was opposition of theory and not just a means of slandering a person. I think that all of the critics made some very interesting points; of the points, the fact that a lot of new technologies have debunked a few of Szaszs' earlier works. I do think that Szasz is right about the separation of state and psychiatry. I feel that many people are so quick to give children medication without letting them work out their problems firsthand or looking at other factors that might cause the behavior. A shift in environment could be just the thing that some people need to reduce their symptoms of  disorders.




So next time we will take a look at the world of Sexology and it's implementations in the past and how it's used today.

The Great Debate

Mental Illness- Fact or Myth?- A Debate Between Albert Ellis and Thomas Szasz (1977).  (video)
Abrams, M., Abrams, L., Ellis, A. (2007) A Brief Biography of Dr. Albert Ellis 1913-2007. Exerpts retrieved at: http://www.rebt.ws/albertellisbiography.html
Albert Ellis(psychologist) (2009).  Retrieved at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Ellis_%28psychologist%29

National Association of Cognitive-Behavioral Therapists (2009) What is Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy?  Retrieved at: http://www.nacbt.org/whatiscbt.htm.

So a few weeks ago i took an evening and decided to watch a debate Between Albert Ellis and Thomas Szasz called Mental Illness- Fact or Myth?. This video was from the 1970's. I think the most interesting thing about the debate was the format. The forward in the video gave a brief synopsis of the forum. Basically, Ellis and Szasz met for this debate, which was hours long. After careful (in their words, not mine) editing, the debate was made into a one hour battle royal between Dr. Ellis and Dr. Szasz. I did a bit of research on Dr. Ellis and this is what I discovered.
Albert Ellis was an American born Clinical Psychologist from Pittsburgh. Although he was a trained psychoanalyst, he refuted a great deal of the beliefs that Pyschoanalysis holds. He believed that although the theory is fascinating it is not based in scientific thought or reasoning. Ellis practice in New Jersey as a clinician for years and wrote many books. Ellis has been said to be one of the originators of what is today know in the field of psychology as Cognitive behavioral Therapy or CBT. CBT is a form of chemotherapeutic practice that combines cognitive therapy with behavioral therapy. During the time that Ellis introduced CBT, many individuals in the field were not interested in this methodology as effective. However, today, CBT is more widely used in the field of Psychology and many would argue that it is a very efficient and effective way or helping people with specific disorders ranging form mood disorders to anxiety disorders. In addition to his contribution to the development of CBT in the field; Ellis also played a role in sexual psychology (or sexology). His theories about sex were at the time very liberal and Albert played a very permissive role in the notions of human sexuality. Ellis is most famous for his book Sex without Guilt which was republished in 2001. Throughout his career, he maintained his belief that psychoanalysis is a comonation of spiritualism and mysticism and not real science.  One could thus assume that because of his beliefs about the validity of such treatments as CBT that Ellis found Thomas Szasz to be detramental to the potential 'cure' of mental illness.

The debate between Szasz and Ellis was a combat of two opposing schools of thought in some respects. Although, they did find things they both agreed on, they held vastly different views on mental illness. From the actual debate a few key points were discussed that i found the most interesting. One being that although Ellis believes that the term mental illness has been abused he still does not refute the notion that there are mentally ill individuals. From the perspective of Szasz, he says that although he doesn't disbelieve  that mental illness exists per-se, he does feel hat the term and thus the pathology that it implies has negative social affinities. Szasz goes on to explain the detriment of labeling individuals as mentally ill. He also goes on to explain that unlike physical ailments, mental illness holds no weight in the physical world, e.g., that mental illness does not have physical component to it. Ellis makes his rebuttal by saying that he does believe that mental illness has physical components. He (Ellis) also states that the use of labels are important because it provides guidelines for how certain disorders can be combated in the lives of individuals.

Overall the sound quality of the video is horrible and makes it difficult at times to sit through. However, the debaters made the topic very interesting and had some great insight into their opinions.  For highlights from the debate go here. They also poked a bit of fun at one another which i found the must interesting of the whole experience. As of now, i am almost done reading the book Sex by Perscription and so I'll have an entry for that in the next few days. Til then, question everything.