Chastity belts, metal cages and clitoridectomy. How far did people go in the war against masturbation?
People, of course, were masturbating long before the activity came to be known by its current name. However, attitudes across different cultures were far from uniform. At various times, for example, the belief arose that semen represented a kind of concentrated life force which a man should not waste unnecessarily. It was precisely the idea that its loss could physically weaken a man that later became one of the cornerstones of the European campaign against masturbation.
For a long time, however, it was primarily a matter of religion and morality, rather than medicine. One of the best-known terms became ‘onanism’, derived from the biblical figure Onan. Yet it was precisely here that a misunderstanding arose, one which has persisted throughout the history of sexuality for centuries. In the biblical story, Onan does not, in fact, masturbate. He is supposed to father a child with Tamar, the widow of his deceased brother; however, during sexual intercourse, he ejaculates outside her body because he does not want the child to be regarded as his brother’s offspring. Nevertheless, his name gradually became associated precisely with masturbation and the ‘wasting of semen’.
The real turning point came at the beginning of the 18th century. Around 1710, an anonymous treatise entitled *Onania: or, the Heinous Sin of Self-Pollution* began to be published. A surviving copy is now held, for example, by the Wellcome Collection. The text no longer condemned masturbation merely as a moral transgression, but also linked it to alleged physical consequences. What had previously been regarded primarily as a sin was beginning to be seen as a medical condition. And it was precisely this shift that proved crucial for the following two centuries.
A single lost drop of semen and the body was said to collapse
The Swiss physician Samuel-Auguste Tissot, who in the 18th century published a treatise on the alleged diseases caused by masturbation, had an enormous influence on the thinking of the time. Unlike religious moralists, he sought to present his warnings as a rational medical theory.
Tissot based his views on the notion that semen is an exceptionally valuable fluid for the body and that its loss weakens a person. Furthermore, he regarded masturbation as a particularly harmful way of losing this vital force. Among other things, he linked it to impotence and a wide variety of physical ailments. His treatise thus helped to lend the old moral fear something it had previously lacked – the appearance of scientific legitimacy.
This is perhaps the most significant aspect of the whole story. People were no longer supposed to reject masturbation simply because someone had told them it was sinful. They were now supposed to fear it because it was allegedly unhealthy.
In the 19th century, this fear grew to remarkable proportions. Medical texts linked masturbation to fatigue, general weakness, disorders of the nervous system, impotence, epilepsy and mental disorders. A diagnosis known as ‘spermatorrhoea’ also emerged – the notion of a pathological and debilitating loss of semen, for example during nocturnal emissions. According to its proponents, the loss of semen was said to gradually undermine a person’s physical and mental health.
To today’s reader, such theories may seem absurd. At the time, however, they were not merely voiced from the pulpit; they were also put forward by respected doctors.
When banning touching was not enough, metal came into play
If masturbation was regarded as an illness, it naturally needed to be ‘treated’. And it is precisely here that the history of sexual medicine begins to turn into a catalogue of objects that today seem more like props from a horror film.
All manner of belts, covers, cages and other devices were devised to physically prevent a person from stimulating their genitals. Some designs were fitted with metal protrusions or spikes and were intended to prevent erections or contact with the penis. Such devices were used, amongst other places, in psychiatric institutions, but sometimes also in private homes.
Much of the panic at the time was fuelled by the masturbation of young people. Parents and carers were convinced that a child’s secret sexual habits could irreparably damage both their health and character. The control of sexuality thus became part of upbringing – and in some cases took on a very literal, physical form.
And what about the famous chastity belts? The Middle Ages probably used them differently than we imagine
The legendary chastity belts are also often included in this narrative – metal ‘panties’ with a lock, which a medieval knight was said to have placed on his wife before setting off on a crusade, so that she would remain faithful to him during his absence.
It’s a brilliant story. However, the historical evidence doesn’t quite support it. We do indeed know of depictions of objects resembling chastity belts dating back to around the 15th century. Evidence of their actual use in Renaissance Europe is largely anecdotal or derived from satirical and burlesque texts. A large proportion of the surviving examples were apparently not created until the 18th and 19th centuries as curiosities or novelty items.
The idea of a woman locked into a metal contraption for months or years on end is, moreover, problematic even from a purely practical point of view. Wearing such a device for long periods would entail enormous hygiene problems, injuries and the risk of infection.
That does not, however, mean that metal belts and sexual restraints have no place in history at all. It is simply that their true story often unfolded much later than popular legend would have us believe. In the 19th century, for example, there is evidence that devices designed specifically to prevent masturbation were manufactured.
Men faced the threat of metal traps. Women were sometimes subjected to a scalpel
Although much of the contemporary thinking centred on the supposedly dangerous loss of male semen, female masturbation was not spared from these fears either. And it was precisely in the case of women that some ‘therapeutic’ procedures took an exceptionally drastic form.
In the 19th century, female sexuality was judged according to very narrow notions of what was still considered proper and acceptable. Sexual desire, masturbation or behaviour that did not conform to the expectations of the time could be interpreted as signs of a mental or nervous disorder.
One of the best-known proponents of this approach was the British gynaecologist Isaac Baker Brown. He claimed that genital stimulation and masturbation could be responsible for a range of so-called nervous disorders. In his 1866 book, he described an alleged chain of problems that could begin with hysteria and, according to his theory, progress through seizures or mental disorders to death. His solution in some cases was clitoridectomy, that is, the surgical removal of the clitoris.
Brown’s methods eventually caused a scandal and his professional career collapsed. However, the very idea that female genitalia and sexual desire could be the source of mental problems was by no means alien to the medical community of the time. Historical studies point out that similar attitudes persisted even outside Brown’s practice.
This is one of the darkest aspects of this story and, at the same time, a reminder of an uncomfortable truth – labelling certain behaviour as an illness is not a neutral act. Once society establishes a diagnosis, it also begins to seek a treatment – and sometimes the treatment can be incomparably more dangerous than the alleged problem.
Even cornflakes are not entirely innocent in this story
One of the most famous opponents of masturbation was the American doctor and lifestyle reformer John Harvey Kellogg, whose surname is today known to most people primarily from breakfast cereals.
Kellogg was convinced that human sexuality is also influenced by diet and lifestyle. He advocated a simple, predominantly plant-based diet and warned against foods he considered too stimulating. He regarded masturbation as a serious vice. This is also the origin of the well-known internet anecdote claiming that cornflakes were invented to stop people from masturbating. The reality is somewhat more complex. Kellogg’s vision of a bland, cereal-based and vegetarian diet was indeed linked to his beliefs in abstinence and the suppression of sexual urges. The cereals themselves, however, were developed within the broader context of his interest in digestion and a healthy lifestyle. As described by Smithsonian Magazine, John Harvey Kellogg and his brother developed easily digestible cereal dishes for patients at his sanatorium, and their experiments initially resulted in wheat flakes and later maize flakes.
It would therefore be an exaggeration to say that cornflakes were created solely as a weapon against masturbation. However, it would also be inaccurate to claim that their history is entirely unrelated to the obsession with sexual abstinence prevalent at the time.
When did masturbation finally cease to be regarded as an illness?
The change did not happen overnight. Gradually, however, one rather fundamental problem began to become increasingly apparent – a huge number of people were masturbating without going blind, going mad or dying as a result.
During the 20th century, the medical and psychological view of human sexuality began to change significantly. Research by Alfred Kinsey and, later, William Masters and Virginia Johnson helped to show that masturbation is not an exotic practice of a few ‘sick’ individuals, but a very widespread part of human sexual behaviour. Old notions of destructive ‘self-defilement’ gradually lost their medical credibility.
Today’s approach is almost entirely at odds with Victorian theories. The World Health Organisation, for example, explicitly states that sexual education may include dispelling the misconception that masturbation is harmful to health. At the same time, the WHO emphasises the importance of scientifically accurate information about the body and sexuality, rather than shame and misinformation.
This does not, of course, mean that no sexual behaviour can become problematic. If masturbation significantly disrupts a person’s daily functioning or relationships, or if it results in injury, it may be appropriate to address the issue. However, this is entirely different from the former belief that ejaculation itself drains a man’s vital energy or that female sexual desire requires surgical intervention.
Myths have outlived medicine
Perhaps the most remarkable aspect of the whole story is how long some beliefs have outlived their supposedly scientific explanations. Even generations of people growing up in the 20th century were told that masturbation could cause them to go blind, develop acne, grow hair on their palms or eventually become impotent.
Yet these scare tactics did not arise in a vacuum. They are the distant legacy of several centuries during which religious prohibitions, notions of wasting vital energy, medical theories and a simple fear of human sexuality gradually accumulated around the subject of masturbation.
And that is precisely why its history is so fascinating. It does not merely show how our view of one of the most common sexual practices has changed. It also illustrates how, over time, the boundaries between what society labels as sin, illness and normal human behaviour shift.
Metal rings and cages designed to prevent masturbation, the so-called medieval chastity belts, or surgical ‘treatments’ for female desire seem grotesque or terrifying today. For the people who manufactured, prescribed and used them, however, they represented a perfectly serious response to a problem that many were convinced existed.
