This paper explores resistances to the work of mourning regarding homosexuality and homophobia within the history of psychoanalysis. I expand on the view that thorough, self-critical reflections on earlier historical views of homosexuality within psychoanalysis are still critically needed (Kotkavirta, 2015). I offer three perspectives to understand the persistence of pathologizing views of homosexuality within psychoanalysis. Firstly, from a literary theoretical perspective, using metaphor theory and speech act theory, I discuss the effects of tone in a pathologizing text from the mid- 20th century, Edmund Bergler's psychoanalytical book Homosexuality. Disease or Way of Life? (1956). My second perspective relates to historical limitations withing psychoanalytic scientific discourse. I make the claim that historically one central problem has been the mixing up of clinical and extra-clinical research methods. This includes generalizing the subjectivity of individual patients. Thirdly, the incomplete or delayed mourning of the effects of pathologizing theories is considered within a context offered by Prince (2009): the painful history of psychoanalysis itself as a survivor of persecution and exile in WW2. I end by discussing the public apology offered by Eija Repo, the former president of the Finnish Psychoanalytical Society, in July 2022.