Here's an interesting perspective from Professor John Money:

Lust, Love and Paraphilia

p. 133:


Paraphilia is defined as a condition occurring in men and women of being compulsively responsive to, for optimal initiation and maintenance of sexuoerotic arousal and the facilitation or attainment of orgasm, obligatively fixated and dependent on an unusual, personally or socially unacceptable stimulus either perceived directly, or in the imagery or ideation of fantasy (from Greek, para-, beyond, amiss, and by implication altered + philia, love). The antonym is normophilia. Synonyms are, in the law, perversion; in the vernacular, kinky sex.


The complete scientific story of how a lovemap develops so as to beocme a paraphilic lovemap has not yet been ascertained. It is likely that there is a vulnerability factor such that, other things being equal, some individuals more than others have a brain that has become predisposed to elaborate a paraphilic lovemap during the early developmental period of childhood sexual rehearsal play. ...

p. 134:

Developmentally, a paraphilia is a devious and circuitous strategem by which lust is rescured from extinction, and preserved in the lovemap, by the subterfuge of making it the antithesis of love. The lovemap is warped by this antithesis, which declares love to be saintly and God-fearing, and lust to be sinful and of the devil. Love is pure, clean, and wholesome, whereas lust is impure, dirty and unwholesome, Love is lyrical, romantic, and spiritual. Lust is epic animal, and carnal. Love is above the belt, tender, affectionate, and permitted in public. Lust is below the belt, brutual, pornographic, and prohibited in public. Love is grooming and erotic. Lust is copulative and orgasmic. Love is long-term commitment and fidelity. Lust is short-term exploitation and promiscuity. Insidiously, and far-reaching in its cross-gender implications, love is feminine and refined, and lust is masculine and crude.

The antithetical attributes of love and lust permeate the lovemaps not only of paraphiles, but of everyone, in variable degree, for they are part of the sexual philosophy or sexosophy of the heritage or our entire society. The difference between the paraphilic and nonparaphilic lovemap lies in the degree of developmental traumatization to which it has been subjected by reason of the antithesis between love and lust, saint and sinner, madonna and whore, provider and playboy. ...

p. 136:


There are more than forty entries in the list of the paraphilias (Money, 1986a; see also Section 15, this chapter, and Glossary). The number varies according to the specificity with which subtypes are separated and named.

    Each paraphilia has its own lovemap, and each paraphilic lovemap incorporates a strategem for saving lust from extinction by cleaving it from love. The term stratagem is used, rather than strategy, because a strategem has the quality of trickery. It deceives and circumvents the enemies of lust, regardless of costs, which may be exorbitant. Each specific stratagem can be subsumed under one of the six grand stratagems: sacrificial/expiatory, marauding/predatory, mercantile/venal, fetishistic/talismanic, stigmatic/eligibilic, and solicitational/allurative.

    Each grand stratagem represents a way of wresting triumph from the jaws of tragedy. Developmentally, the jaws of tragedy are the threat that sinful lust will be exterminated from the lovemap and become extinct, which is precisely what does happen in extreme cases of hypophilia. The triumph over tragedy is that sinful lust is rescued and retains a place in the lovemap. Becuase it is sinful, lust irrevocable defiles saintly love. Therefore, its retention in the lovemap is contingent upon not defiling saintly love but being separated from it. Each of the six grand paraphilic stratagems is a formula that satisfies the conditions of keepin the defilement of sinful lust away from saintly love - of keeping lust for the whore or the playboy separate from ove for hte madonna or the provider. Lust and love together cannont converge on the person of either the saint or the sinner.

    The six grand stratagems for cleaving lust from love in the lovemaps of the paraphilias are as follows.

The sacrificial/expiatory
stratagem requires reparation or atonement for the sin of lust by way of penance and sacrifice. The extreme sacrifice is lust murder: ertophonphilia when the partner is sacrified, and autassassinophilia when a person stage-manages the sacrifice of the self. Excluding death, there are varying degrees, from major to minor, of sasomasochistic sacrifice and penance for the sin of lust.

The marauding/predatory
stratagem requires that, insofar as saintly lovers do not consent to the sin of lust, a partner in lust must be stolen, abducted, or coerced by force. The extreme case of this stratagem is the syndrome of assaultive and violent paraphilic rape (raptophilia or biastophilia). The spectrum of coercion ranges from major to minor. In statutory rape there may be no coercion, but a consensual and pairbonded lover affair, one of the partners being below the legal age of consent.

mercantile/venal stratagem requires that sinful lust be traded, bartered, or purchased and paid for, insofar as saingtly lovers do not engage consensually in its free exchange. The very existence of this stratagem gets masked by reason of its place in the orgasm trade. Nonetheless, there are some hustlers and prostitutes, as well as their customers, whose paraphilia is chtematistophilia, marketing and purchasing sex. Some chrematistophiles, not in the commercial orgasm trade, pretend with play money, or have the partner impersonate a whore or a hustler with a third person. Some set themselves up to be victims of blackmail or robbery, and some are blackmailers or robbers. The popular military and judicial dogma that homoseuals are more vulnerable to blackmailers, paraphilic or otherwise, applices equally well to heterosexauls caught in clandestine adultery, and to paraphiles of any type whose paraphilia is exerised clandestinely. Homosexuals who have come out of the proverbial closet and have nothering to hide may be subject to discrimination, but not to blackmail.

fetishistic/talismanic stratagem spares the saintly lover from the sin of lust by substituting a token, fetish, or talisman instead. Fetishes are predominantly either smelly (olfactophilic) or touchy-feely (hyphephilic), and both are derived from the smell and feel of parts of the human body. Devotion to the fetish may be all-consuming or minor.

stigmatic/eligibilic stratagem requires the parnter in lust be, metaphorically, a pagan infidel, disparate in religion, race, color, nationality, social class, or age, from teh saintly lovers of one's own social group. Morphophilic disparity pertains to disparity in the appearance of the body, and chronophilic disparity to age disparity. An exceptional example of morphophilia is acrotomophilia, in which the partner must have an amputation stump. The extremes of chronophilia are pedophilia, in which only juveniles (or babies, in nepiophilia) are eligible as lust partners, and gerontophilia in which the eligible partners are of parental or grandparental age. Age eligibility limits the duration of a partnership. In pedophilia, for example, the pedophile's own sexuoerotic age reminas permanently juvenile and out of synchrony with his or her advancing chronological age. Correspondingly, the partner's eligibility is abolished by the odors and maturaltional changes of puberty. There is a corresponding limitation on the duration of relationships in, not only epherbophilia (attraction to adolescents) and gerontophilia, but also in what might be called "twentophilia," "thirtiophilia," and so on. These latter underlie the broken relationships, homosexual as well as heterosexual, and the divorces of many couples in the decades of middle adulthood.

solicitational/allurative stratagems protect the saint by displacing lust from the act of copulation in the acceptive phase, to an invitational gesture or overture of the proceptive phase. This might be called in the vernacular the paraphilia of the cockteaser or, in gay argot, of the loving queen. Among primates, exhibiting the genitals and inspecting them are prototypic invitations to copulate. In paraphilic exhibitionism of the penis (peodeiktophilia) and voyeurism (being a Peeping Tom), the preliminary
p. 138
overture displaces the main act in lustful importance. Displacement in this stratagem is the counterpart of inclusing of something in the other five stratagems. Paraphilic female exhibitionists who expose their genitalia to men almost never get reported to the police, so that their prevalence is unknown. Genital exposure under licit circumstances, as in a nudist resort, is not sexuoerotically arousing to exhibitionists and voyers. Their arousal is contingent on the illicitness of their paraphilic actions. Narratives and pictures also may feature as invitational stratagems.

    One shared feature of all six grand strategems is that they are not exclusive to the paraphilias but have much broader significance in the cultural heritage in warfare, mercantilism and venality in commerce, fetishes and talismans in magiv, and stigmata and eligibility in kinship.

    Another shared feature of the
six grand strategems is that each paraphilia subsumed under them is able to exist in members of the human species not only because of their personal developmental histories, but also because there is a phyletic basis from which personal development originates. To illustrate: pedophilia has its phyletic origins in parentalism. What happens developmentally is that perentalism becomes paraphilically diverted into the service of lust. Parent-child pairbonding and lover-lover pairbonding become merged together, as do parental love and erotic love. The neurobiology of the merger still remains unascertained, as do most of the necessary and sufficient causes in the social biography. The complete range of phyletic mechanisms that may become entrained in the serivce of paraphilia is examined in Lovemaps (Money, 1986a).

By John Money, pp. 133-138, in Gay, Straight and In-Between: The Sexology of Erotic Orientation. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. 1988.

John Money Concepts Of Determinism

John Money Lovemaps

John Money Lust Love Paraphilia

John Money Paraphilia Hypophilia Hyperphilia

John Money Single Term Sexology