touching or rubbing against nonconsenting individuals on separate occasions but who
contest any urges or fantasies concerning such  sexual behavior. Such individuals may re-
port that identified episodes of touching or rubbing against an unwilling individual were
all unintentional and nonsexual. Others may disc lose past episodes of touching or rubbing
against nonconsenting individuals but contest any major or persistent  sexual interest in
this. Since these individuals deny having fant asies or impulses about touching or rubbing,
they would consequently reject feeling dist ressed or psychosocially impaired by such
impulses. Despite their nondisclosing position, such individuals may be diagnosed with
frotteuristic disorder. Recurrent  frotteuristic behavior constitutes satisfactory support for
frotteurism (by fulfilling Criterion A) and co ncurrently demonstrates that this paraphili-
cally motivated behavior is causing harm  to others (by fulfilling Criterion B).
“Recurrent” touching or rubbing against a no nconsenting individual (i.e., multiple vic-
tims, each on a separate occasion) may, as a ge neral rule, be interpreted as three or more vic-
tims on separate occasions. Fewer victims can be interpreted as satisfying this criterion if
there were multiple occasions of touching or rubbing agains t the same unwilling individ-
ual, or corroborating evidence of a strong or preferential interest in touching or rubbing
against nonconsenting individuals. Note that mu ltiple victims are a sufficient but not a nec-
essary condition for diagnosis; criteria may also be met if the individual acknowledges in-
tense frotteuristic sexual inte rest with clinically significant distress and/or impairment. 
The Criterion A time frame, indicating that si gns or symptoms of frotteurism must persist
for at least 6 months, should also  be interpreted as a general guid eline, not a strict threshold, to