Why is it so easy for humans to psychologically wash their hands of another person, or group of people? How do they make themselves approving (in terms of attitude) of their behavior? This is an active process.
And, then, what is fairness? We all have that sense of fairness built in: it’s a sense bequeathed to us as primates, if it doesn’t go even further back in evolutionary history.
It’s elementary. Children have an innate sense of fairness; this does not need to be instilled. Now, the instinct can be conditioned out of the child, either through abuse or neglect, or by creating the idea of inherent unfairness as a tenet (this is an override).
If unfairness is made to seem natural, despite our deepest instincts, then necessarily one’s worldview would be tilted, distorted and warped. It’s going against one of the cardinal senses inborn. The absolute repression needed to keep up this point of view! The mental games and strategies one would have to play and put into practice, just to make what is clearly and continuously one-sided to appear arbitrary! To not violate a law of averages. The effort needed to continue to pretend that all of that unbalanced fortune were duty-bound by nature (that is, by dint of birth). So much psychic/psychological energy into maintaining that masquerade, that fabrication! And the permanence of such a skew.
It’s not brain damage. It’s reality abuse.
Without an accurate sense of fairness, a child would grow up without any real way of interpreting the interactions and consequences of social situations. Anything to do with human affairs would inherently bewilder the person, except as they always have the bias—the controlling idea—of self-consideration first. That way, the skew seems right—it matches one’s view of the world with one’s orientation.
So these are self-lovers, first and foremost.
To skip ahead to what small familiarity I have with Wilhelm Reich’s ideas,1 these would be self-lovers who, for religious reasons, cannot permit themselves to self-love, physically? This would create a gigantic mental conflict! One could never align one’s orientation to one’s core lived idea of overwhelming pleasure.
So let’s put aside whether masturbation in this ethos would be a triumphant celebration of the self. What this means is that the self-oriented self-pleasure denier would be discordant in the most fundamental way. They’re never allowed to attune.
1 “Man’s authoritarian structure—this must be clearly established—is basically produced by the embedding of sexual inhibitions and fear in the living substance of sexual impulses.” The Mass Psychology of Fascism, p. 30.