That is, briefly, the philologist’s account, who also states that during the pre-Doric period (Homer, for instance) the custom of boy love had as yet no roots as an Institution.
[50]. Zur Psychologie der Vita Sexualis, Allg. Zeitschr. f. Psychol., 1894.
[51]. I am unable to corroborate the contention of Ferenczi in his Zur Nosologie der männlichen Homosexualität (Homoerotik), published in Zeitschrift f. ärztl. Psychoanalyse, Vol. II, 189, 1914. He assumes two forms of homosexuality: 1. the passive subject-homoerotic, who represents an inborn state and stands for an intermediary type in Hirschfeld’s sense and is incurable and 2. the active object-homoerotic, a type he describes as a special form of compulsion neurosis. The passive type never consults the physician for his trouble,—he is a genuine homosexual; the active type is unhappy over his condition, he shows the typical symptoms. Both share in common the peculiarity that their own sex is an essential condition for the attainment of their love-object and remains so throughout life.
I have seen many homosexuals who are interchangeably active or passive. On the other hand I have seen active homosexuals who were very much troubled over their condition and passive homosexuals who have been cured. Incidentally I may mention that Ferenczi borrows thoughts from my essay on Masken der Homosexualität, without indicating the source. Since Freud has decreed against me his anathema, the narrower Freudian school looks upon my work as common property to be appropriated at will by any one.
[52]. Handbuch der Sexualwissenschaften, p. 664.
[53]. A new orientation in matters of sexual morality is on the way in spite of tremendous opposition. I refer those interested to Eulenburg’s excellent work, Moral und Sexualität (Verlag, Marcus & Webster, Bonn, 1916).
TRANSCRIBER’S NOTES
- Silently corrected obvious typographical errors and variations in spelling.
- Retained archaic, non-standard, and uncertain spellings as printed.