The Deutsche Gesellschaft für Sexualforschung (DGfS) from 1950 to the 1970s. On the relationship of sexology and public discourses about sexuality.

这个研究项目的重点是成立于1950年的德国<s:1>性研究协会（DGfS）的最初几十年。它将研究从20世纪50年代到70年代这个科学组织的形成和建立。该项目将揭示DGfS的主要参与者在德意志联邦共和国早期为性学建立制度基础所做的努力，并将研究DGfS在公共和政治辩论中的作用。在大量资料的基础上，性学与社会和政治的总体发展之间的相互依赖关系将被分析。DGfS作为一种探针，用于追踪性学与有关性的公共和政治话语之间的联系——正如文学作品和当代性学家自己所讨论的那样。该项目还努力展示性学如何影响公众和政治对性“正常”的定义。确定性“正常”不仅是定义性健康和性疾病的问题。关于“健康”和“病态”性行为的问题，DGfS的科学家采取了哪种立场？他们以何种方式参与构建这些定义并使西德社会中某些类型的行为正常化？性学家的地位和角色在社会变革和社会转型时期是否发生了变化——也参考了性学的历史连续性（国家社会主义）？性学家是如何处理DGfS内部的矛盾倾向的？这个科学组织的总体概况是如何从个体成员的目标、希望和想法的相互作用中演变而来的？

This research project focuses on the early decades of the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Sexualforschung (DGfS) which was founded in 1950. It will examine the formation and establishment of this scientific organization from the 1950s to the 1970s. The project will shed light on the efforts of DGfS-protagonists to create an institutional base for sexology in the early Federal Republic of Germany and it will examine the role of the DGfS in public and political debates. Based on a multitude of sources, the interdependencies between sexology and general developments in society and politics shall be analyzed. The DGfS serves as a probe which is used to trace the link between sexology, public and political discourses about sexuality - as discussed in the literature and by contemporary sexologists themselves.The project also strives to show how sexology influenced the public and political attempts to define sexual "normality". Determining sexual "normality" was not least a matter of defining sexual health and sexual disease. Which position was adopted by the scientists of DGfS in reference to questions of "healthy" and "sick" sexuality? In which way did they participate in constructing these definitions and normalizing certain types of behavior in West German society? Did the position and the role of sexologists change during times of social change and transformation of society - also in reference to historical continuities in sexology (National Socialism)? How did the sexologists handle ambivalent tendencies within the DGfS and how did the general profile of this scientific organization evolve from the interaction of aims, hopes and ideas of individual members?