Writing the preface to this book makes me feel a strong sense of responsibility with regard to the great research work and stubborn struggle that the authors had to face, the long theoretical discussions and also the criticism from various psychopathologists and epistemologists of the Gestalt psychotherapy (GP). I have also participated in these discussions, but in my case, and I hope also in the case of the colleagues who shared the opportunity of confronting Mariano Pizzimenti, I am supported by a strong sense of appreciation and recognition for having taken risks in this forgotten field of GP. I cite, for instance, the theoretical discussion between Antonio Sichera, Giovanni Salonia, Mariano Pizzimenti and myself published in Figure Emergenti (Pizzimenti and La Rosa, 2016).

Sexuality in itself, as other topics, did not arouse a deep interest on the part of the authors who followed Laura and Fritz Perls. And the fact of associating aggression with sexuality, moving away from the concept of dental aggression (Perls, 1942), forces us to look at Sigmund Freud’s sexual theory with new eyes (see Freud, 1905).

This was what Perls wanted, an enrichment of a way of thinking limited purely to the sex drive in order to move towards an integrative, anthropological and realistic view where sexuality forms part of the human developmental process together with or as an inseparable part of the growth process towards the environment. For so many years, a theoretical vacuum in the field of sexuality has accompanied us: we Gestaltists, who drag a long struggle for survival, have neglected this fundamental aspect of the clinic. It was Mariano Pizzimenti who took the risk of theorising in this field and who had the spiritual greatness to publish in the journal of his institute even those criticisms that compromised, at least on the surface, his theoretical criterion. With Barbara Bellini, they are now taking up the topic again: risks are always part of the theoretical game and all the better when this risk is shared with someone with the right expertise.

Nowadays, talking about eros in this post-modern, technological and desensitised society, where there is more genitality than sexuality, again seems like an adventure and a risk. These concepts, which undermined any attempt at a mutual understanding between Freud and Jung, deserve to be developed in our present. There is no room for superficiality if the fullness of our patients, and our own, is at stake.

Several passages in the book have hit me: the first, which is strongly in line with the new research of the University of Salamanca in Spain thanks to Carmen Delgado, of Sassari in Italy thanks to Alessandra Nivoli, and of Mexico with Nexum University where I also have the good fortune to collaborate with Maria Trinidad Cárdenas, concerns the overcoming of the patriarchal society. A thought strongly supported by the Judeo-Christian society and which still accompanies us today…

Another aspect that struck me, perhaps because I find it really akin from a theoretical point of view, is the one concerning ‘the sexual self’ as something where we see innovative aspects to read our basic epistemology differently. Barbara Bellini is part of the same theoretical matrix which is very close to my heart, and now, thanks to her thinking, we are approaching the world of a richer and more logical, more complete and versatile self, a surprise that has been long overdue.

Lastly, I have to say that the contact criteria seen from this point of view and the clinical aspects represented by the understanding of sexual disorders make me think that Gestalt psychotherapists will now have fundamental hermeneutic tools for clinical intervention.

Now I wonder if we are already able to develop our own, original and coherent sexual theory; I think it will take a little more effort on the part of the authors to create a full-fledged school of clinical and theoretical thought in this field. The foundations are solid and serious, the future looks prosperous and promising to me, we just have to wake up our colleagues, home is always the place where you find the first obstacles.

The hope of having our own, consistent sexual theory will also depend on the unequivocal fact that, as we listen to our patients, we will all increasingly need hermeneutically sound clinical tools. The responsible need of the clinic will be the necessary backdrop to strengthen this clear, straightforward and long-needed theory.

Sergio La Rosa