Studies in the Psychology of Sex (Vol. 1-6). Havelock Ellis
statements dates from a period when the homosexual were very little known, and it was supposed that their moral character generally was fairly represented by a small section among them which attracted more attention than the rest by reason of discreditable conduct. But, in reality, as we now know, there are all sorts of people, with all varieties of moral character, to be found among inverts, just as among normal people. Sadger (Archiv für Kriminal-Anthropologie, 1913, p. 199) complains of the "great insincerity of inverts in not acknowledging their inversion;" but, as Sadger himself admits, we cannot be surprised at this so long as inversion is counted a crime. The most normal persons, under similar conditions, would be similarly insincere. If the homosexual differ in any respect, under this aspect, from the heterosexual, it is by exhibiting a more frequent tendency to be slightly neuropathic, nervously sensitive, and femininely emotional. These tendencies, while on the one hand they are liable to induce a very easily detectable vanity, may also lead to an unusual self-subordination to veracity. On the whole, it may be said, in my own experience, that the best histories written by the homosexual compare favorably for frankness, intelligence, and power of self-analysis with those written by the heterosexual.
The ancient allegation that inverts have written their own histories on the model, or under the suggestion, of those published in Krafft-Ebing's Psychopathia Sexualis can scarcely have much force now that the published histories are so extremely varied and numerous that they cannot possibly produce any uniform impression on the most sensitively receptive mind. As a matter of fact, there is no doubt that inverts have frequently been stimulated to set down the narrative of their own experiences through reading those written by others. But the stimulation has, as often as not, lain in the fact that their own experiences have seemed different, not that they have seemed identical. The histories that they read only serve as models in the sense that they indicate the points on which information is desired. I have often been able to verify this influence, which would in any case seem to be fairly obvious.
Psycho-analysis is, in theory, an ideal method of exploring many psychic conditions, such as hysteria and obsessions, which are obscure and largely concealed beneath the psychic surface. In most homosexual cases the main facts are, with the patient's good-will and the investigator's tact, not difficult to ascertain. Any difficulties which psychoanalysis may help to elucidate mainly concern the early history of the case in childhood, and, regarding these, psychoanalysis may sometimes raise questions which it cannot definitely settle. Psycho-analysis reveals an immense mass of small details, any of which may or may not possess significance, and in determining which are significant the individuality of the psychoanalyst cannot fail to come into play. He will necessarily tend to arrange them according to a system. If, for instance, he regards infantile incestuous emotions or early Narcissism as an essential feature of the mechanism of homosexuality, a conscientious investigator will not rest until he has discovered traces of them, as he very probably will. (See, e.g., Sadger, "Fragment der Psychoanalyse eines Homosexuellen," Jahrbuch für sexuelle Zwischenstufen, Bd. ix, 1908; and cf. Hirschfeld, Die Homosexualität, p. 164). But the exact weight and significance of these traces may still be doubtful, and, even if considerable in one case, may be inconsiderable in another. Freud, who sets forth one type of homosexual mechanism, admits that there may be others. Moreover, it must be added that the psychoanalytic method by no means excludes unconscious deception by the subject, as Freud found, and so was compelled to admit the patient's tendency to "fantasy," as Adler has to "fictions," as a fundamental psychic tendency of the "unconscious."
The force of these considerations is now beginning to be generally recognized. Thus Moll (art. "Homosexualität," in 4th ed. of Eulenburg's Realencyclopädie der gesamten Heilkunde, 1909, p. 611) rightly says that while the invert may occasionally embroider his story, "the expert can usually distinguish between the truth and the poetry, though it is unnecessary to add that complete confidence on the patient's part is necessary," Näcke, again (Sexual-Probleme, September, 1911, p. 619), after quoting with approval the remark of one of the chief German authorities, Dr. Numa Praetorius, that "a great number of inverts' histories are at the least as trustworthy as the attempts of psychoanalysts, especially when they come from persons skillful in self-analysis," adds that "even Freudian analysis gives no absolute guarantee for truth. A healthy skepticism is justifiable—but not an unhealthy skepticism!" Hirschfeld, also (Die Homosexualität, p. 164), whose knowledge of such histories is unrivalled, remarks that while we may now and then meet with a case of pseudo-logia fantastica in connection with psychic debility on the basis of a psychopathic constitution, "taken all in all any generalized assertion of the falsehood of inverts is an empty fiction, and is merely a sign that the physicians who make it have not been able to win the trust of the men and women who consult them." My own experience has fully convinced me of the truth of this, statement. I am assured that many of the inverts I have met not only possess a rare power of intellectual self-analysis (stimulated by the constant and inevitable contrast between their own feelings and those of the world around them), but an unsparing sincerity in that self-analysis not so very often attained by normal people.
The histories which follow have been obtained in various ways, and are of varying degrees of value. Some are of persons whom I have known very well for very long periods, and concerning whom I can speak very positively. A few are from complete strangers whose good faith, however, I judge from internal evidence that I am able to accept. Two or three were written by persons who—though educated, in one case a journalist—had never heard of inversion, and imagined that their own homosexual feelings were absolutely unique in the world. A fair number were written by persons whom I do not myself know, but who are well known to others in whose judgment I feel confidence. Perhaps the largest number are concerned with individuals who wrote to me spontaneously in the first place, and whom I have at intervals seen or heard from since, in some cases during a very long period, so that I have slowly been able to fill in their histories, although the narratives, as finally completed, may have the air of being written down at a single sitting. I have not admitted any narrative which I do not feel that I am entitled to regard as a substantially accurate statement of the facts, although allowance must occasionally be made for the emotional coloring of these facts, the invert sometimes cherishing too high an opinion, and sometimes too low an opinion, of his own personality.
HISTORY I.—Both parents healthy; father of unusually fine physique. He is himself a manual worker and also of exceptionally fine physique. He is, however, of nervous temperament. He is mentally bright, though not highly educated, a keen sportsman, and in general a good example of an all-around healthy Englishman.
While very affectionate, his sexual desires are not strongly developed on the physical side, and seem never to have been so. He sometimes masturbated about the age of puberty, but never afterward. He does not appear to have well-marked erotic dreams. There used to be some attraction toward women, though it was never strong. At the age of 26 he was seduced by a woman and had connection with her once. Afterward he had reason to think she had played him false in various ways. This induced the strongest antipathy, not only to this woman, but to all marriageable women. A year after this episode homosexual feeling first became clear and defined. He is now 33, and feels the same antipathy to women; he hates even to speak of marriage.
There has only been one really strong attraction, toward a man of about the same age, but of different social class, and somewhat a contrast to him, both physically and mentally. So far as the physical act is concerned this relationship is not definitely sexual, but it is of the most intimate possible kind, and the absence of the physical act is probably largely due to circumstances. At the same time there is no conscious desire for the act for its own sake, and the existing harmony and satisfaction are described as very complete. There is no repulsion to the physical side, and he regards the whole relationship as quite natural.
HISTORY II.—B. O., English, aged 35, missionary abroad. A brother is more definitely inverted. B. O. has never had any definitely homosexual relationships, although he has always been devoted to boys; nor has he had any relationships with women. "As regards women," he says, "I feel I have not the patience to try and understand them; they are petulant and changeable," etc. He objects to being called "abnormal," and thinks that people like himself are "extremely common."
"I have never wanted to kiss boys," he writes, "nor to handle them in