Citation

Bourke J. Womens Hist. Rev. 2023; 32(7): 960-976.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2023, Informa - Taylor and Francis Group)

DOI

10.1080/09612025.2023.2197792

PMID

38013781

PMCID

PMC10615223

Abstract

This article explores arguments within American psychiatry from the 1950s around whether rapists were mentally ill. It analyses debates in the lead-up to the various editions of the American Psychiatric Association's (APA's) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) from 1952 to the latest version in 2013, focussing particularly on a diagnostic category called 'Paraphilic Coercive Disorder' (PCD). Since the first DSM, American psychiatrists had routinely considered people who committed certain forms of sexual violence to be suffering from mental disorders. For example, 'Paedophilia' and 'Sexual Sadism' had always been considered valid diagnoses. However, the APA refused to pathologise non-sadistic sexual violence committed against adults. Opposition can be classified into four overlapping arguments: uncertainty about 'normal' male sexual aggression, feminist worries about 'excusing' harmful sexual behaviours, concerns about the misuse of psychiatry in courts, and the need to defend the psychiatric profession from encroachments on their 'territory' by non-medically trained psychologists, social workers, and anti-psychiatric activists.

Language: en

Keywords

Sexual violence; psychiatry; rape; diagnostic statistical manual (DSM); paedophilia; paraphilia; paraphilic coercive disorder; sexual sadism; violent predator