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.
Male Homosexuality: A Contemporary Psychoanalytic Perspective by Richard C. Friedman received much advance praise from eminent clinicians. It has been called a “truly commanding overview of male homosexuality.” And, indeed, it pulls together research from differing fields in an attempt to correlate biopsychosocial research with some clinical findings of psychoanalysis. It offers many clinical vignettes and some rather incomplete case studies. Nevertheless, reading this book leads to puzzlement. What is its aim? Is it pointing out the lapses of logic or lack of conceptualization in psychoanalysis or investigation of the etiology and possible psychopathology of homosexuality? After reviewing the better-known research on hormone levels, neuroendocrine influences on sexual orientation, aggressive behavior in some boys, prenatal stress syndrome, and the role of genetics, Friedman recapitulates what the original researchers stated — namely, that the outcome of the majority of these studies was inconclusive. He does, however, suggest that the studies indicate that there might be a link between childhood gender identity/gender role disturbances and later homosexuality. Effeminacy is given a prominent place as a potential precursor of later homosexuality. But since this is not seen in the light of an identification with the mother, it seems to come as a surprise that homosexuality effeminacy exists. Unmasculinity, that is, not behaving like the other boys, is also seen as an indicator of childhood gender identity disorders and, according to Friedman, the only correlate between homosexuality and psychopathology. The influential research by psychoanalysts like Bieber et al. (1962) and by those who oppose the view that certain types of familial interactions might lead to homosexuality are cited. Friedman then takes researchers to task because their data derive from patients in treatment! He also states that psychoanalytic research “is subject to the potentially distorting effec