V
Resistance of Homosexuals against Cure and their Pride in their Condition—Acquired vs. Inherited—Insanity and Alcoholism betray the Inner Man—Three Cases by Colla illustrating Behavior during Alcoholic Intoxication—Observations of Numa Praetorius—The case of Hugo Deutsch—Views of Juliusburger—Two Personal Observations—A case by Moll—Views of Fleischmann and Naecke—A Personal Observation—Bloch on Woman Haters.
Die Kranken sind die grösste Gefahr für die Gesunden; nicht von den Stärksten kommt das Unheil für die Starken, sondern von den Schwächsten.
Nietzsche.
V
The sick are the greatest danger to the healthy; the mischief done to the strong comes not from the stronger, but from the weakest.
Nietzsche.
Experience in the course of psychoanalysis has shown us that the recollections as told by the subjects are partial and incomplete.
The repressed memories and all those images which the subjects are unwilling at first to see come to surface only after weeks of analysis. Then the subjects are astonished to discover that they did not really know themselves. The solution of our problem appears to depend on the successful analysis of a large number of homosexuals. Meanwhile there are a number of striking facts which every psychoanalyst can verify and which those who uphold the theory that homosexuality is inborn look upon as proof of their contention that homosexuality is truly hereditary: most homosexuals are apparently well satisfied with their condition and do not particularly care to be cured of it. They call on the analyst only after they come into conflict with the law or if they fear such a conflict. They do not want to have heterosexual feelings, they are proud of their condition and they always insist that social ostracism alone is what makes their status an unhappy one. They belong to those remarkable persons who refuse to appreciate their plight. Hence the customary statement: since I began homosexual relations I am happy. I desire nothing else! Only a small number retain any desire for “wife and child” and for normal relations, but even those fear it as much as the “manly hero,” proud of his homosexuality.
We must not forget that exclusive homosexuality is the end result of a long and tortuous psychic process, a sort of self-healing process in the midst of a quasi-insoluble conflict. The dangerous heterosexual path is apparently blocked altogether, because certain inhibitions stand actively in the way. The removal of the inhibitions renews the acute character of the conflict,—it means changing a state of truce for a state of active warfare. The homosexual finds in his condition a makeshift for peace and quiet. It is a poor peace, to be sure, for the heterosexual inclinations are still powerful enough to generate neurotic symptoms. But it is a safety outlet and anxiety prevents its abandon. Just as the woman seized with fear of open spaces (agoraphobia) finally refuses to leave the house and thus avoids her anxiety only to experience the attacks of anxiety again the moment she endeavors to step out of the circumscribed area of peace,—the moment she endeavors to go beyond the sphere within which her inner voice keeps quiet,—so the homosexual feels once more the full strength of his revulsion whenever he attempts heterosexual activity. His customary attitude towards woman is one of dislike or disgust, she may leave him indifferent, but never will he admit that—he is afraid of woman. He would rather assume the mask of indifference; he may be willing to approach woman but only upon intellectual grounds, he may even appreciate her as a friend, but he flees from her as a possible lover.
The homosexual resembles the fetichist in this regard: he has found his compromise, he has become accustomed to his limitation and willingly puts up with his limitation as being something organic, final, inherited. That is why we usually hear that the homosexual felt his peculiarity already in his childhood, that he was from the first unlike the other children, that he was always “different.”
The pride over his condition, the continually repeated and stressed notion that he is exceptional, the attitude of contrariness towards what is normal, all these things render difficult a subsequent correction of the trouble.[26]
How may the homosexual be cured? If he is made heterosexual he represses his homosexuality and becomes neurotic for that reason; the endeavor to turn him bisexual meets the course of social development. The proper therapic course would be to remove the inhibitions which stand between him and woman, to make him de facto again bisexual and heterosexual for all practical purposes. That is certainly possible and it may be attained through analysis provided the subjects have the patience and perseverance to carry it out. Where the will is lacking no therapist can accomplish anything. Unfortunately in most instances the will is absent.
Analysis has taught us how misleading the first accounts are as obtained from the subjects, how much they recollect their past in a spirit of partizanship. Every person carries out a one-sided choice of remembrances recalling merely what suits a particular occasion. This came to me as a great surprise when I first undertook the analysis of a homosexual especially as at the time my experience was limited and my knowledge of the technique and my understanding of resistance very imperfect. At the time I still believed that the patient wills to get well; I am convinced today that the will to be ill is the strongest force which we must fight against. That first homosexual gave me the usual history,—the development from early childhood of feelings exclusively homosexual. My surprise was great when the subject recalled a large number of heterosexual experiences in the course of the following three weeks, all dating from his childhood. I learned then in one lesson that homosexuality is developmental and not something inborn; an acquired, not an inherited character. I was much impressed with Hirschfeld’s theory of the intermediary stage (Zwischenstufentheorie) but placed no credence in this theory and awaited further proofs. At the First Psychoanalytic Congress, Sadger reported similar experiences based on psychoanalysis. To be sure, Sadger conceived the psychogenesis of homosexuality in rather narrow terms and for a time, I must confess, I too looked upon the repression of the mother Imago, which every woman is alleged to reproduce, as the sole cause of homosexuality.[27]
But my diligent researches extending over a period of years have since convinced me that this problem is very complicated and that there are clearly a number of genetic factors, and that several of them must and do cooperate in every instance to bring about the thwarting of the heterosexual and the enlargement of the homosexual craving.
It occurred to me at first that in many cases the inhibitions may disappear also in the homosexual leading him to become again a heterosexual person. Every one who has had any experience with the homosexual knows that occasionally a genuine homosexual may change and fall in love unexpectedly with a woman or he even marries and after that continues as a normal person. Thus, for instance, Tarnovsky, in his work, “The Morbid Manifestations of the Sexual Instinct,” states:[28] “I know a pederast who maintained relations almost exclusively with young boys; at a relatively advanced age he fell passionately in love with a young girl, whom he married and with whom he had children. He was able to carry out sexual relations with his wife only because her face resembled that of a young man whom he once loved.” A rationalisation of that kind, such a transformation, may be seen here and there. It is quite likely that the young man, whom Tarnovsky’s patient once loved, in turn resembled the homosexual’s sister or some other beloved female person and that the subject took that step to return at last to his first heterosexual ideal. Only a few days ago there called on me a “confirmed” homosexual who had suddenly fallen in love with a cabaret singer whom he wanted to marry. She was the exact image of a sister of his who had died long ago. Before this he did not want to hear of contact with women. Cases of this kind—without any treatment, of course,—are discussed very heatedly in homosexual circles and the news is rapidly spread. The deserter is spoken of as traitor to the holy cause, he is counted out and banished from the circle. Anathema sit! Such cases are not infrequent. But they do not come to the attention of the physician and if they attract the specialist’s attention, the latter invariably declares them instances of “pseudo-homosexuality.” No “genuine” homosexual would do such a thing! Homosexual physicians, unfortunately, only add to the confusion on this subject. They constitute themselves judge and jury at the same time, but claim to be objective in their judgment,—they have tried the experiment in their own case, etc.—Oh, those wonderful psychologists who know all about their own soul! What have I not endured from those enthusiasts who imagine that they have really penetrated the depths of their own psyche! But any one who has opportunity to analyze a psychoanalyst is invariably amazed at the degree of blindness possible where one’s own attitude is concerned. The practice of psychoanalysis on others does not prevent ignorance where self is concerned. I have analyzed dozens of psychoanalysts and found “analytic scotoma” an appropriate designation for their mental state. Every one is blind about those complexes which he has not yet conquered, whether he meets them in himself or in others. The homosexual physician is also blind about his own condition and should never undertake to furnish testimony on the question whether homosexuality is inherited or acquired.
There are occasions when the cover which screens from view our inner attitude, the repressions and transferences, the metamorphoses and changes, is torn aside by more powerful forces and then we obtain a view of the forces which act behind the setting of consciousness. These occasions are the intervals during which our inhibitions are lifted. Insanity permits us occasionally to see truths which reason timidly keeps under cover. But alcohol also tears aside the screen which covers the inner man. Many physicians know of persons apparently heterosexual in every respect and who never think of homosexuality, but who have been guilty while drunk of carrying out homosexual deeds such as are entirely repulsive to them in the sober state. I had under my care a teacher who while intoxicated—the first time in his life—attacked a boy and was guilty of committing a crime. When he came to himself he felt so disconsolate, his remorse was so great, that he wanted to take his life and it was only with the greatest difficulty that he was prevented from turning himself over to the authorities. Later he was denounced by some one. But I was able to squash the inquiry for lack of positive evidence. In his favor stood his exemplary previous life history and the fact that he had always been an admirer of ladies and had never taken any interest in men or boys. I have already remarked before that a large number of those who uphold temperance or abstinence are really afraid of alcohol because it releases inhibitions and permits the aggressive outbreak of repressed sensuousness.
I. E. Colla has reported on “Three instances of homosexual deeds during drunkenness,” in the Vierteljahrschrift für gerichtliche Medizin und öffentliches Sanitätswesen,[29] as follows:
The first case was a 29 year old inebriate who had had a wide experience with women and carousals; after a prolonged period of abstinence he became intoxicated while in a sanitarium, was seduced by a homosexual, and immediately after that, while in an intoxicated state, he attempted to attack a servant. Repetition of similar episodes when under the influence of drink but when sober exclusive breaking forth of heterosexual feelings. A clear proof in favor of my view about the relations of latent homosexuality to satyriasis.
In the second case a controlled homosexual leaning breaks forth overpowering the subject when drunk. A similar picture in the third case: A protestant minister, 37 years of age, drinker, loses his self-control while drunk and by his offensive behavior in a public place attracts the attention of the authorities.
Numa Praetorius, that thorough expert on homosexuality, relates: “In many cases homosexual deeds are committed under the influence of alcohol. Thus, for instance, I know a former police officer, a homosexual, who when drunk attempts homosexual deeds upon heterosexual comrades, who excite him, although he is acquainted with the homosexual circle, is intimate with many homosexuals, and in his sober state he carries out relations only with persons with whom he is safe. On account of these attacks on heterosexual persons during his drunken condition he has lost his position as police officer as well as his later position in a factory.
“Another homosexual, a merchant, thirty years of age, when drunk finds this inclination uncontrollable and has tackled the wrong persons while in that state. There is a great deal of truth in the contention that during the inebriate state man’s true character comes to surface,—at any rate his true sexual character certainly reveals itself in that state, since the customary inhibitions are curtailed. Here ‘in vino veritas’ certainly holds true.” (Jahrbuch f. Sexuelle Zwischenstufen, Vol. VIII.)
These cases, with the exception of the first, show only an increase of an already existing homosexual inclination otherwise under control. But frequently it happens that heterosexual persons carry out their first homosexual aggression during the inebriate state.
Thus Praetorius remarks in another passage: “As is disclosed in various published biographies as well as in certain communications which have reached me orally, there are young persons, otherwise apparently normal in feeling and conduct, who when drunk are attracted to their own sex with a great feeling of pleasure thus disclosing more than a pseudo-homosexual attitude. But their proper heterosexual nature does not appear to be changed materially by these occasional homosexual episodes and emotional sprees.”
Hugo Deutsch[30] has reported a very instructive case, which, although far from unique, as the author believes, may be mentioned in this connection:
“An intelligent workingman, 39 years of age, appeals for advice and information to the clinic for alcoholics. As a child he suffered of rachitis and began walking only at four years of age; excessive masturbation as a small boy and young man; later, occasional intercourse with girls; he married two years ago and is the father of two children. No illness, with the exception of minor complaints. Uses alcohol moderately, drinks now and then one-half to one litre of beer on the occasion of some reunion or meeting. But this always excites his sexual passion; specifically he feels impelled to take advantage of young male persons[31] so as to touch and feel their sexual parts. He has been able to withstand this desire but once while on his way home from a meeting where he had again taken a couple of glasses of beer he met a young boy whom he invited to have a drink with him and while they were sitting at a table in the saloon he touched the boy’s genitals. A customer saw this and denounced him to an officer who arrested him. He was in despair over the occurrence and only the thought of his wife and children prevented him from committing suicide. He has not touched a drop of alcoholic drink since because he recognizes how dangerous even a small amount of drink may be for him. So long as he is sober his libido is directed exclusively to women, in fact he feels only disgust and aversion for any homosexual deeds. When the contrary feeling first arose in connection with drink he cannot recall. There is nothing relevant in this connection in his family history and there is nothing “womanly” in his physical appearance.”
Deutsch believes that this is a case of bisexuality brought to surface because the use of even moderate doses of alcohol suspends the existing inhibitions.
Hirschfeld, too, has also made a few pertinent remarks on this subject (l. c. p. 209). He mentions the case of a government official who attacked a baker’s apprentice after a “heavy celebration” of the Kaiser’s birthday; also the case of an apparently heterosexual high school teacher who during a prolonged carousal attacked a waiter. He also mentions a report he was requested to make about an officer who after a carousal requested his servant boy to help him take an enema and used that opportunity to seduce him. In his report Hirschfeld found this complaint, if it be true, contrary to the defendant’s whole personality, and recommended annulling the complaint because at the time of the alleged misdeed the accused was in a peculiar and morbid mental state. But we must look upon these occurrences as proofs of man’s bisexual nature and as outbreaks of latent homosexuality made possible through the removal of customary inhibitions.
Otto Juliusburger, in his Psychology of Alcoholism,[32] has given us an exhaustive and masterly exposition of this problem. That author reports that he has been able definitely to trace the outbreak of unconscious homosexuality in cases of dipsomania and discusses most instructively the relations between alcohol and homosexuality.
Juliusburger describes the case of a dipsomaniac who during the drink episodes betrayed most clearly his homosexual love for his uncle. During those episodes the subject felt impelled to accost men—and only men—ordering for them anything they wished,—“frankly a symbol, to show his affection.” “One source of the anxiety and unrest which ushers in the so-called dipsomaniac episode or which may entirely replace the attack,” states Juliusburger, “I see in the struggle and the resulting intrapsychic tension between the various psychosexual components of the individual.” I shall have occasion to refer to Juliusburger’s views concerning the relationship of the jealousy episodes of the alcoholics and sadism in the chapter on “Jealousy.”
It is even more interesting in connection with our present subject to find that homosexuals are easily induced to carry on heterosexual deeds while under the influence of alcohol. Of course this is not the case in every instance but the fact is undeniable. Neither do all heterosexuals lend themselves to homosexual acts when drunk. Often the inhibitions are more powerful than the releasing effect of alcohol.
I have made inquiries of about one hundred homosexuals regarding the circumstances under which they indulged in intercourse with women. Many hesitated to answer, but I have found that a high percentage of cases have had the experience. Some answered saying, practically: “I can do this only if I am under the influence of drink;” or, “while I was drunk a girl seduced me.” We must not suppose that homosexuals are impotent with women. There are among them many more bisexually disposed than are willing to recognize this fact, because they prefer as a rule to assume the rôle of innocents before others and for that reason they claim that intercourse with a woman is positively impossible for them. I have had circulated in the Viennese homosexual circle a small questionnaire which contained also a question covering this point. Many confessed dislike for woman, others admitted a platonic attitude, but there were also such answers as: “In my 34 years I have had intercourse with a woman, this I found very pleasurable, but after four months I turned again exclusively homosexual;” or, “now and then I have intercourse with a woman”; further, “after pleasant personal relations lasting for some time I am able to have intercourse with a woman”; another writes: “Once I had intercourse with a woman and it was a very pleasurable experience but never repeated it since that time;”—Others write as follows:
“Have had intercourse previously; do so no longer.”
“No intercourse; presumably would be impotent with woman.”
“Intercourse previously pleasurable; sudden disappearance of feeling now makes intercourse impossible.”
Another writes laconically: “bisexual.”
At least one-fourth of my overt homosexuals are really bisexual with subsequent modifications of their bisexuality brought about through causes which will be discussed in a subsequent chapter of this work.[33]
We now turn our attention to the next case. It shows clearly that heterosexual tendencies arise in the homosexual under the influence of alcohol and it also proves that under the pressure of danger the homosexual craving by drawing on the greater libido turns into the heterosexual channel:
D. S., a clerk, 35 years of age, has been homosexual for the past fifteen years. His father died when he was 7 years of age. He hardly remembers his father. His mother was always very severe, and very energetic as well as exceedingly nervous,—she had to go frequently to sanitaria to recuperate. He admits having had feelings predominatingly homosexual ever since childhood. He interested himself only in boys and his mother brought him up in girlish ways. He began masturbating at an early age and already at the age of 12 he carried on mutual pederasty with his comrades. At 17 years of age he attempted intercourse with girls. That was not easy, his potentia had to be roused by them first through manual stimulation, then he felt some pleasure, which was curbed partly because he could not help thinking of the possible danger of venereal disease, of which he had seen some illustrations in a museum of wax figures. He was also thinking about his mother reflecting, what would she say if she knew what he was doing! From that time on and until he was about 21 years of age he had intercourse with women regularly about every month. Then he fell in love with his office chief, who was an extraordinarily attractive man. (He gives a romantic description of his first ideal. This account, of course, is not trustworthy. In fact the photo of his latest ideal, also praised by him as an Adonis, shows the stolid, expressionless, rather common face of a very ordinary man, a soldier in the artillery branch of the army).
His chief was a homosexual who easily seduced him and brought him into the homosexual circle. Then he became aware of his condition and maintained relations only with adult and well educated men. He had a delicate taste and not every man could please him (here he shows me the photo of the soldier, mentioned above). Unfortunately he had the misfortune to be caught in a park in the act of taking hold of the membrum virile of a driver. His case is now pending in the court. He would be happy if he could return to his former mode of gratification. When asked if he had had no intercourse with women during the whole period from the 22nd to the 35th year he becomes uneasy and confesses that this has happened a few times but when he did so he was always under the influence of drink. While he kept sober it never happened. And every time after intercourse with a woman he had such a terrible after-effect that his own mother to whom he always confessed everything had advised him to seek intercourse with men, because she noticed that he was always feeling fresh after doing so, while if he went with women he was always depressed for days. Experienced psychoanalysts need not be reminded that the mother used this means to keep her son from contact with other women because she was jealous of them and therefore she drove him to men. She was never jealous of men. That was something else.
This occurrence is far from rare. The mother of a homosexual once told me: “I am never jealous when O. finds a new friend, although he falls romantically in love with them. But the thought of his giving himself up to a woman is something I cannot bear....”
D. S. listened to his mother’s advice. He says: “I gave up drink after that and became a fanatic homosexual.”
As the subject, a high governmental employee, could easily lose his position, I advised him to have intercourse only with women and in view of his desire to free himself of the trouble through psychoanalysis I was able to wrestle him out of the clutches of the law. He attempted contact with women, always after partaking of small quantities of drink, and he gradually improved so that he finally married, his wife being, in fact, a woman 20 years older than he. That woman was a locum tenens for his mother! Further observations on the psychology of similar cases will be recorded in subsequent pages. Here I propose to draw attention merely to the influence of alcohol. Drink enabled him to adopt the heterosexual path.
In the last case the heterosexual act was possible only after neutralizing the inhibitions. Similar influences are responsible for the well-known morning erections of those who are psychically impotent. Homosexuals, too, have heterosexual dreams before awakening in the morning but they cannot—or will not—remember those dreams. I need mention here merely that every night the dream operates in the sense of lifting the inhibitions and that the inhibitions are fully suspended only towards morning. During the first sleep hours the dreams are full of inhibitions appearing as “warnings,” but towards morning the dreams are relatively free of these inhibitions. That is why we often hear that “genuine” homosexuals are able to have intercourse with women, if at all, only towards morning. At that time most inhibitions which stand between them and woman have been overcome in the dream! This obvious fact is given a different interpretation by Hirschfeld who states:
“The erection of the membrum with which many men wake up during the early morning hours has nothing to do with the sexual instinct, but is due solely to the mechanical effect of pressure by the full bladder. Some time ago I was consulted by a homosexual, married, father of six children and expecting the arrival of a seventh. I asked him how that was possible. ‘That is very simple,’ he answered, not without a certain feeling of self-consciousness, ‘I always took advantage of my morning erections.’ Thus the children owe their existence not to the father’s sexual instinct, but to the operation of his full bladder. The much-praised aphrodisiacs, are probably also nothing more than diuretics; in other words it may well be that the renown which certain remedies and articles of diet have acquired as stimulants of the potentia coeundi may well be due to their stimulating effect upon the bladder function and its genital reflex.
“Alcoholic drinks, when taken in small quantities have a similar effect and rouse the sexual function. Excesses in Baccho and venereal excesses have always been looked upon as belonging together. This is so because alcohol has the effect of lowering the inhibitions and at the same time it appears to weaken the mental acuity. We may thus see why occasionally heterosexuals confess that they have taken up with some man under the influence of drink, and homosexuals that, when intoxicated, they can have intercourse with women.” (Hirschfeld, l.c., p. 189.)
But the fact that homosexuals are capable of heterosexual activity under the influence of drink is for me a proof of their bisexuality, a proof that that they have repressed the heterosexual component of their sexual instinct.
The hypothesis that the morning erections are due to a full bladder will be discussed more fully in my work on Male Impotence. I do not believe that erection is due to reflex action from the bladder.[34] But it is an incontestable fact that the dream operates until the existing psychic inhibitions are overcome. Hirschfeld’s patient is able to have sexual intercourse with his wife only mornings, because through the day and evenings he is under the domination of inhibitions which make him impotent with women.
That the impotence in such cases does not always denote weakness is illustrated by the following case:
C. H., a homosexual physician, tells me that he abstains from touching all drinks because he fears he might commit criminal acts. He is homosexual since childhood and had never felt any inclination towards women. Masturbation began at 9 years of age. It began when his uncle once lifted him upon the shoulder. That gave him a strong pleasurable feeling and soon after that he began rubbing his genitals and while doing so he always fancied that his uncle or some other man was carrying him. He had never felt any desire to be carried similarly by a woman. Such a thing would strike him as degrading and vulgar. His experience in houses of prostitution, from 19 to 24 years of age, filled him with disgust for all women who can be hired. Perhaps he might have been able to have intercourse with a girl of better class but a certain timidity prevented him from ever approaching such a girl. Emancipated women fill him with horror. He maintained relations with a certain colleague for some time. Coitus inter femora. At 28 years of age, after a carousal, he met a girl whom he took to a hotel. Powerful erection and prompt coitus. But with the onset of the orgasm he felt an overwhelming inclination to strangle the girl. Suddenly a tremendous hatred mounted in his soul against the poor creature. He hurried away from the scene as rapidly as possible. He thought he wanted to revenge himself because through the act of coitus she degraded him.
Here we see a sadistic attitude towards woman under the cover of timidity. He really feared himself, his criminal tendencies. Problems rising out of the struggle between the sexes (specifically, out of man’s instinctive sex hatred of woman) play a certain role in this case. The significance of this attitude will be explained fully later. This case shows the outbreak of a heterosexual-sadistic instinct under the influence of alcoholic drink. Alcohol seems to dissolve here the defences raised by consciousness against the sadistic tendencies.
Very interesting is the case reported by Moll in his work on The Contrary Sexual Feeling (3rd edition). I give here the case in brief extracts from its history, as it contains points of significance in connection with our present subject:
Miss X. is 26 years of age. Her father she describes as a healthy but very irritable man. Already at the age of 5 she had carried on certain sexual plays with a small boy. She admits having attempted intercourse at the time with the boy who was four years of age. The intercourse consisted of mutual cunnilingus. At six years of age she was sent to school and here she soon began intimate relations with small girls. With a number of them she carried on mutual cunnilingus as she had done with the boy. From the time when she first began this with the girls her heterosexual inclination disappeared completely; after that she never again went through a similar experience with a boy. We shall see that later she did allow herself to be used occasionally by men; but we must note in that connection that the heterosexual acts took place without the cooperation of sexual feelings on her part. At 12 years of age she began to menstruate. At that time she had as playmates the children of a neighborly family who had a governess with whom she soon entered into close intimacy. The governess prevailed upon her to carry on sexual acts, particularly cunnilingus, and the active part was taken now by each in turn from time to time. In the course of these relations she experienced for the first time sexual gratification, so far as she is able to recall. Their intimacy lasted for some time. Miss X. differs from other women of her type in that she is not averse to other forms of gratification. Soon she sought also anus feminarum amatarum lambere, in addition to the genitals. The thought of carrying out such an act with a man was repulsive to her. Just as we know that occasionally perverse men want urinam feminæ dilectæ in os proprium immittere so we see that Miss X. likes to have the same thing done to her by other girls. For a number of years already Miss X. has been in the habit of allowing fæces amicæ in os proprium iniciire; the act produces in her gratification and orgasm. She had first indulged in these acts during her intercourse with the governess above mentioned, which lasted several years. Miss X. is also tremendously roused when she sanguinem menstruationis amicæ lambit et devorat; but, she explains that she is able to carry out these disgusting acts only when there is complete mutual confidence and only if the relationship has endured for some time. She declares further that she is sexually roused also when she is struck with a whip. When asked how she came to acquire this habit she answered that she knew a man who required to be thus treated by a former sweetheart. But, to secure her any sexual excitement the whiplashes must fall upon her from the hands of a woman. She has allowed herself very often to be flagellated by her friend with whom she has also been carrying on the disgusting acts mentioned above. It may be mentioned also that when they kiss each other Miss X. wants to be bitten by her friend, preferably upon the ear lobe. This may be carried so far as to actually cause pain and swelling of the ear.
It is necessary to delineate more clearly the attitude of Miss X. towards the male sex. She does not remember having ever felt any attraction towards the male. But during a celebration where much drinking was had a man prevailed upon her to spend the night with him. She had always wondered why she never felt any attraction towards the male sex and the desire to find out definitely about this as well as the don’t-care-attitude brought on by drink induced her to spend that night with the man. Coitus brought her no satisfaction. Some time later another man became interested in her and fell in love with her but she did not reciprocate his feeling in the least. Nevertheless she wanted to try once more whether she could learn to care for a man’s embrace. She therefore permitted herself to be induced by that man to have intercourse a few times; again she found that ordinary coitus did not rouse the least sexual feeling in her. She requested the man to carry on cunnilingus with her. This roused her sexually and thereupon she experienced gratification; but, without being asked specifically about it, she declares at the same time, that it was necessary for her to imagine that the person performing cunnilingus on her was a woman; otherwise even cunnilingus would have yielded her no satisfaction. The thought of carrying on any of the disgusting acts mentioned above with a man, Miss X. found in the highest degree repulsive. (Moll, l.c, p. 565.)
This case appears to me very noteworthy. It supports my contentions regarding the influence of alcohol upon the homosexual. Miss X. beclouds the fact and thinks she was actuated by the desire to find out definitely whether man had any attraction for her. Absence of orgasm during her intercourse with the first man shows clearly that even indulgence in alcohol was unable that time to release the inhibitions. But she allows herself the experience a second time and this time cunnilingus by the man yields her gratification. It is interesting that her first experience of this kind was with a boy. This corresponds exactly with my observations. In other ways, too, man plays in her condition a greater role than she is willing to recognize. Flagellation she adopts because she knew a man who was treated that way by his previous sweetheart. The relationship of this paraphilia to the strong, irritable father is fairly obvious. Her misophilic acts with women show that she does not want to belittle herself before man, but that she looks upon subjecting herself to woman as a manner of paying homage to her sex. In my study on Masochism I go further into this subject. The other acts indicate a sexual infantilism, rarely seen in a more discreet polymorph-perverse form.
Fleischmann[35] also records a few cases showing homosexual seduction carried out during a state of intoxication. He relates also the case of a homosexual who when intoxicated was able to have intercourse with women. “At 28 years of age,” relates the author about this subject, “he visited a house of prostitution for the first time and, animated by drink, he was able to carry out coitus once with a woman; when sober a twenty-horse team could not drag him into such a place,” according to the urning. But after drinking he was always able to have coitus.
We see that the incentive to drink is obviously due to an ungratified craving. Psychoanalytic experience reiterates again and again that almost every craving to become drunk or otherwise to lose one’s senses betrays an ungratified sexuality. Among the inebriates, the morphine and cocaine addicts, we always find pronounced paraphiliacs and bisexuals who have repressed a portion of their sexual instinct. In the same way every unprejudiced investigator will find a similar condition true of homosexuals who, according to my experience, are bisexuals who have repressed the heterosexual component of their instinct. I cannot agree with Naecke,[36] who contends that urning as such is a moderate drinker and seldom inebriate. Nor do I believe that in homosexual circles moderation in drink is the rule. Of course, I do know a number of temperate homosexuals, but the data under my observation as a whole and the material supplied through the objective accounts of physicians, reveal an entirely different situation.
A great deal of what takes place during states of intoxication never comes to the attention of those not immediately concerned. Possibly infantile experiences with drunken parents may have a greater role in the psychogenesis of homosexuality than we are aware of at the present time.
Now and then it happens that parents, drunken or otherwise debauched, attack their own children. I have had occasion to observe that some very curious habits are still prevalent in the nursery, here and there. One subject related to me that his mother had the habit of playing with his penis until he was six years of age. His wife also found this a convenient way to lull their child to sleep. He thought it was as harmless a practice as it seemed efficacious in quieting the child.
H. T., a homosexual chemist by profession, who has a theoretic interest in psychoanalysis, writes me: “The contribution that I am able to make may be of some use to you. I have often tried to think whether dreams have had any influence upon the development of my sexual life. But I could recall no experience which I could correlate to my condition. I have felt early an interest in the membrum virile and this interest abides with me to this day. The sight of the penis in a state of erection is enough to rouse in me the strongest feelings of pleasure. While walking on the street I always try to observe the respective region in passers-by and I try to estimate the size of the organ by outward appearances,—my fancies are full of such reflections. I have always masturbated in front of the mirror watching my penis during the act. But it took a very long time for me to overcome my shyness enough to find companions for these acts.
A few days ago I had a dream in which I saw my father who has been dead for ten years. He was the best man in the world, but unfortunately a periodic drinker. When in the inebriate state he treated mother very roughly. I dreamed a scene which scared me so that I awoke. I saw my father give me in hand his membrum erectum. And suddenly there flashed through my mind the recollection that he had done repeatedly this very thing when he was drunk. But with every fibre of my being I cling to my mother who is for me the ideal of womanhood such as I shall never again find the equal of in all this world! Beyond that my love is directed only to the male and specifically I am attracted to common men. Can you explain my riddle? I feel myself attracted to ordinary drivers, men of vulgar tastes such as one finds in the dram shops. Only once was I able to have intercourse with a girl. I was so “soused” at the time that I then did something which I could never carry out while in my ordinary senses....”
I emphasize once more: The outbreak of heterosexual excitations after indulgence in alcohol proves the presence of that tendency and shows that under ordinary conditions the heterosexual tendency, though continually present, is subjected to suppression. The tendency is preserved in some closed-in compartment of the soul, the door to which may gape open under certain circumstances. Occasionally alcohol acts as a master key which opens up every enclosure.
It is interesting also to observe the sublimation which the heterosexual love undergoes among homosexuals. They endeavor to de-sexualize the other sex, at the same time have recourse to heterosexual friendships by preference. I know quite a number of homosexuals of this class, men who maintain motherly, sisterly, or even grandmotherly friendships and to whom these friendships are positively indispensable. We psychoanalysts are in a position to appreciate the source of these sexual attachments. They are due to repression and are also the result of an inhibition which extends merely over sexuality but allows the sublimated eroticism to manifest itself. Among the homosexuals there are many women haters (misogynists).
They often hate all women with but one exception: their mother. Occasionally some sister, aunt, or some friend of their mother’s is also exempted. They never fail to emphasize: this is an exception! But the law of bipolarity teaches us that alongside this tremendous hatred there exists an equally powerful love. Occasionally the dislike is hidden and the homosexuals pose as completely indifferent towards the other sex. A little close analysis shows that this attitude is an artefact, that the assumed indifference really covers the fear that the true attitude will be betrayed otherwise. Beyond the apparent indifference stands the fear of woman and back of that fear there may be hidden, in its turn, a sadistic attitude towards woman. It is thus that the homosexual learns to cover his feelings with one another, to change them, or else he transforms, substitutes, overstresses here and assumes indifference there, until his actual state of feelings is completely hidden from view. Superficial observers merely remark of some man: he hates women!...
What stands back of such a dislike has been pointed out by Bloch (l.c.) with considerable insight. He mentions the famous misogynist of Classical Greece, Euripides, and in that connection makes a very appropriate observation. He states:
“The strongest invectives against the female sex are found in Ion, Hippolytos, Hekate, and Kyklops of Euripides. (Verses 602-637, 650-655.) (Here he introduces the actual quotation.)
“These verses contain the whole quintessence of modern misogyny. But Euripides also discloses the ultimate background for this attitude: ‘The most wanton creature,’ he says in a fragment, ‘is woman.’ Hinc illæ lacrimæ! Only men who are not accustomed to woman, men who cannot endure to have her act with them as a free personality, and who are so little certain of themselves that they fear an inroad into their own personality, some irreparable damage or possibly complete annihilation, only such men are genuine women haters.” (Bloch, l.c., p. 533.)
Here Bloch has come close to a solution of the problem having plainly adopted the view developed later by Adler, who traces homosexuality to the fear of the sexual partner. Unfortunately he has failed to draw the further inferences which this excellent observation is capable of yielding.
Hate, fear, disgust and shame are the inhibitions which keep the homosexual away from the sexual partner.
Let us examine first the feeling of disgust. How does the feeling arise? In my study of Anxiety States I have explained this matter more fully. But there is a form of disgust whose action is positive. Disgust need not always be necessarily repressed desire. If I should see today a woman covered all over with furuncles it may inspire me with disgust to hear that she is an old aunt whom I must greet with a kiss. In a case of this kind only the super-analyst in his folly might be able to discover suppressed components of the libido.
But we do know that occasionally homosexuality may be aroused through episodes which enlist the negative reactions (hate, fear, disgust, shame). These revulsive effects then protect the individual against their own positive tendencies. Disgust covers craving, hate covers love, fear covers longing; and shame—boldness.
But indulgence in alcohol is capable of turning revulsive effects into positive. Disgust is turned into desire, hate into love, fear into longing and shame turns into daring. If the fearful, repressed sadism is also added to this transformation of the negative into positive affects, when it cannot be sublimated into lasting love, the moral man is turned into a criminal who represents but a stage in the development of the human race.