||It is requested that an image or photograph be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.
Does Freud think of sex merely in terms of "socially" normative behavior?
I'm no expert here, I admit.
But "normative" means conforming to a standard.
Of course all societies have such norms.
But many educated Westerners, especially in the past, thought in terms of natural norms, specifically, that penile-vaginal sex was "normal" because they thought it conforming to nature, that is, a natural rather than socially determined norm.
Just because young children allegedly pass through phases of pyschosexual development that didn't focus eroticism on the natural norms need not lead one to question the naturalness of adult sexuality, just as the fact that butterflies pass through a wormlike stage is no reason to think that it's natural for the adult to have a completely different form.
My question is, how did Freud think about this in regard to his theory of polymorphous perversity? I suspect that he thought that heterosexual penile-vaginal intercourse was normal in an absolute sense rather than as merely being the social of norm of this or that society, as it is, of course, for the vast majority of human cultures.
To say that such a view is mistaken, that there is no such natural sexual norms, is a matter of opinion rather than of fact.
We should frame Wikipedia articles from the point of view of the persons being reported on, after all.
So I repeat, how did Freud think about it?
12:56, 19 December 2013 (UTC) Michael Christian