Perversion

It is necessary to distinguish the perversion defined by psychiatry, which is rather the result of perversity, i.e. of a satisfaction to cause others to suffer, and the perversion as understood by psychoanalysis.

For Freud, it is ultimately only the effect of a too weak Surmoi, which lets the subject realize his impulses regardless of the prohibitions imposed by culture. The Self finds it very well, and the only complications that it brings are social. It is difficult to see a relationship between this psychic configuration and hatred or indifference to nature. On the contrary, one could theoretically expect: the rejection of certain social norms that participate in consumerism…

The destruction of the environment seems rather in relation to perversity: to leave a corner of forest or beach that breathed the beauty littered with rubbish that will unravel it for years, is to both harm nature and harm others. This is not done without a certain bad conscience, and it can only be rejected if one feels a certain satisfaction: a form of revenge, of indifference displayed, of expression of an evil being, to which is associated an unhealthy pleasure. This is the very definition of perversity.

It can also intervene in inter-individual relations and contribute to the dependence of consumerism. The individual who feels assaulted in his working environment, sometimes in his family, tends to seek compensation. Harassment is ubiquitous, and is based on perversity: to do harm and to enjoy the suffering of the other. One of the compensations is a legal action, but the social phenomenon is usually too loose to allow conscious action. The leak remains in the next caddy, with its promises of gourmets and gadgets, and its counterpart of pollution.

Perversion therefore offers an additional field of exploration if one wants to review all possible psychological causes of the ecological spiral…