You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
On December 10, 2024, a Scientific Program was held at the New York Psychoanalytic Society and Institute entitled “Gayness and Psychoanalysis: Bias, Change.” The speaker was Lawrence Hartmann, M.D. and the discussant was Mark Smaller, Ph.D. Prior to the start of the meeting, I noted that some thirty-nine years before the American Psychiatric Association took “homosexuality” out of the DSM where it was said to be a “sociopathic personality disorder,” Freud responded to a woman in the U.S. who had written to him about the possibility of his treating her son. In his letter, Freud wrote the following: “Homosexuality […] is nothing to be ashamed of, no vice, no degradation, it cannot be classified as an illness […].” He then went on to say, “Many highly respectable individuals of ancient and modern times have been homosexuals, several of the greatest men among them (Plato, Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, etc.). It is a great injustice to persecute homosexuality as a crime, and cruelty too.”1 Similarly, when Ernest Jones wrote the Committee about a question from the Dutch Psychoanalytical Society regarding an application for training of a homosexual psychiatrist, and he asked if advising against such acceptance, as Jones had already done, should be “a safe general maxim to act on,” Freud replied in a letter cosigned by Otto Rank, “As regards your query, dear Ernest, concerning prospective membership of homosexuals, we cannot agree with you. That is, we cannot exclude such persons in principle, for the same reasons that we also cannot condone their legal prosecution. We believe that a decision in such cases should depend on an individual examination of the other qualities of the candidate.”2 What many have long felt particularly intriguing is that pathologizing homosexuality became the norm in the American psychoanalytic establishment when Freud himself had such a different view. As intriguing are the questions of how and why change ultimately occurred. The presentation b