Archive for Sexology
Courses in Sexology
Condition or Label?
In the absence of negative training, psychological pressure, and social sanctions, a great many human beings are capable of sexual responses toward members of both sexes. People whose erotic interest is restricted to one sex are, to a great extent, products of cultural conditioning. As a matter of fact, one might say that men and women who are completely unaware of their homosexual leanings are just as much creatures of their education as those who are totally incapable of responding to heterosexual partners. Obviously, this does not mean that, in an ideal world, everybody would lead a bisexual life. Strong sexual preferences and, indeed, a certain exclusivity of sexual interests are likely to develop in any case. Furthermore, as historical and ethnological studies have shown again and again, in most men and women these interests can be expected to become predominantly heterosexual. Thus, one can safely assume that the human race as a whole has a great propensity toward being erotically attracted by the other sex. There is no valid reason why this should be deplored. What must be deplored, however, is the fact that many people become oblivious to their own neglected or underdeveloped capacities and then set themselves up as models or norms for their fellow human beings. Deplorable are the narrow-mindedness and intolerance with which such "one-sided" individuals treat everyone else who is different.
Yet we know that in our own culture there are many exclusive "heterosexuals" and "homosexuals" who view each other with open hostility. The former are, as a rule, proud of their exclusive sexual orientation. They may even boast of it or, in some cases, insist on it with such desperate determination as to invite the ridicule of their opponents. These, the exclusive homosexuals, on the other hand, are usually expected to be downcast and apologetic. After all, as sinful, criminal, or sick "deviants", they are routinely treated as second-class citizens. It is hardly surprising, therefore, that, in the past, they have often had a low opinion of themselves. It is only recently that many of them have developed a positive self-image. Calling themselves "gay and proud", they now challenge the official value system and claim their long denied civil rights. This latter development is, of course, in many respects healthy and good. Still, necessary as it may be, it also has a disturbing side because it tends to accentuate the existing unfortunate division of people into two camps: "gay" and "straight". An increasingly militant "gay" (i.e., homosexual) world may eventually win concessions from the "straight" (i.e., heterosexual) world, and thus both worlds may arrive at a state of "peaceful coexistence", but, by the same token, they may also learn to forget that the divisions between them are, and have always been, artificial. In actual fact, both "gays" and "straights" are part of only one world, and without this realization they will continue to misunderstand themselves and each other.
|
Famous "Homosexuals" As Alfred C. Kinsey has pointed out, it is problematical to use the word "homosexual" to describe a person. Such labeling is often arbitrary and over-broad. Many people today have unrealistic ideas about what "homosexuals" are and how they behave. However, throughout history a great number of men and women (many of them quite famous) have felt sexually attracted to members of their own sex either occasionally or frequently or even exclusively. Some acted upon this feeling and were openly proud of it, others suppressed it and led very unhappy lives. Many were even persecuted by their contemporaries and came to a tragic end. The portraits below show some historical personalities who are know to have strong homosexual leanings, although not all of them acted them out. Obviously, the list is not meant to prove that such leanings make people in any way superior. Still, it can perhaps counteract certain false stereotypes. |
||
|
|
|
|
Gaius Julius Caesar (100-44 B.C.) Roman general and statesman |
Leonardo da Vinci (1452-1519) Italian artist and scientist |
Michelangelo Bounarroti (1475-1564) Italian artist and poet |
|
|
|
|
Prince Eugene of Savoy (1663-1736) "The Noble Knight", Austrian general |
Alexander von Humboldt (1769-1859) German naturalist and explorer |
Nikolai Gogol (1809-1852) Russian writer |
|
|
|
|
Peter I. Tchaikovsky (1840-1893) Russian composer |
André Gide (1869-1951) French writer |
W. Somerset Maugham (1874-1965) English writer |
|
|
|
|
Gertrude Stein (1874-1946) American writer |
John Maynard Keynes (1883-1946) English economist |
Federico Garcia Lorca (1898-1936) Spanish writer |
Nevertheless, in the case of "homosexuals" such self-identification may come about very slowly. While someone who has been officially branded as homosexual (perhaps after the discovery of some minor homosexual episode) may have no choice but to accept the label quickly, the "hidden" individual with homosexual interests may take many years before he can see himself as "gay". At first, he may not attach much significance to his inclinations and may be reluctant to consider himself different from his "straight" friends. Indeed, as we have seen, this reluctance is well justified. It does not spring from his lack of insight, but rather from his natural revulsion against being pigeonholed or stereotyped. This revulsion may even turn into outrage if he is shown certain ''typical" homosexuals with whom, as he knows, he has nothing in common. The process of "coming out" may therefore be rather complex and involved, with many psychological detours, dead ends, false starts, and reversals. Actually, as we have noted earlier, most people with homosexual inclinations never "come out" at all. Some simply renounce all sexual contact, some cultivate such modest heterosexual interests as they may have, others carry on both heterosexual and homosexual relationships, but define themselves as basically straight, and still others engage exclusively in homosexual intercourse while telling themselves that they do so only for nonsexual, "legitimate" reasons (such as earning some money as male prostitutes).
In present-day Western countries, many of those who end up defined as homosexuals (either by themselves or by others) adopt a "gay lifestyle", i.e., they become part of a gay subculture which offers them various ready-made role models, ideologies, tastes, fashions, and patterns of social interaction. This lifestyle, in turn, becomes synonymous with "homosexuality" for the society at large. However, in view of everything we have said before, it should have become clear by now that the issue cannot really be understood on these superficial terms. Instead, if we want to discover the truth about the "homosexuals" in our midst, we have to look at ourselves and our culture in its totality.
Finally, it remains to be stated that in many countries the social, legal, and psychological problems are quite different for male and female homosexuals. It is for this reason that many female homosexuals now prefer the name "lesbians" (after the island of Lesbos, home of the homosexual ancient Greek poetess Sappho). Words like "lesbian" and "lesbianism" are meant to show that homosexual females do not necessarily identify with every concern of homosexual males and that, in many respects, their situation is unique.
Today we know that the basic assumption behind the two mutually exclusive categories "heterosexual" and "homosexual" is false. Other-sex and same-sex erotic preferences are matters of degree, and they are not mutually exclusive. "Homosexuals" do not suffer from an intrinsic condition, but play a particular social role. Not all societies recognize such a role, and even in our society same-sex behavior is not restricted to "homosexuals". In other words, real life is too varied for these simplistic divisions. There are countless gradations between the extremes, and many people are attracted to both sexes. Those who are singled out as "homosexuals" may have little in common besides this label. Thus, "homosexuality" is not an objective characteristic of certain persons, but rather a deviant status that is conferred upon them by others. By definition, this kind of deviance is possible only in cultures which perceive same-sex behavior as problematic. Unfortunately, we continue to live in such a culture, and thus the obsolete Victorian label is also still with us.
Actually, in Victorian times, the term "homosexual" still competed with several others for attention and was by no means as popular as it is today. Even the forerunners of "gay activism" mostly preferred to speak of the "third sex" or "sexual intermediates", especially in Germany and England. Both the German Magnus Hirschfeld and the Englishman Edward Carpenter, for example, used this kind of terminology in demanding "gay rights". More or less at the same time, and prompted by the Oscar Wilde trial, Hirschfeld and Carpenter wrote apologies for same-sex contact. In the English-speaking world, the well-educated social and sexual reformer Carpenter had a surprisingly positive impact. He had visited the American poet Walt Whitman twice and shared his democratic ideals. He also knew the sexological pioneer Havelock Ellis and the classical scholar John Addington Symonds quite well, who had written another plea for sexual tolerance. Carpenter also knew the novelist E. M. Forster, who, albeit indirectly, immortalized Carpenter's happy love life in his (then unpublished) novel "Maurice". The middle-aged Carpenter had indeed retired with a working-class lover to a farm, where he lived with him happily for the rest of his long life. Thus, whether by design or not, Carpenter became a role model for many "homosexual" men.
|
|
|
An English Forerunner of "Gay Liberation" The social and sexual reformer Edward Carpenter (1844-1929) was one of the first English authors to demand social recognition of same-sex relationships. As early as 1896, he addressed this then still controversial topic in his book "Love's Coming of Age". His collection of essays "The Intermediate Sex" (1908), shown on the left, is obviously influenced by the writings of German sexologists. The portrait on the right shows Carpenter at the age of 43. |
|
In recent decades there even has been a polarization between "gay" males and females. Until well into modern times, the same-sex behavior of women never attracted much religious, legal, or medical attention, and there was no special term for such behavior, except the word "tribadism" (from Greek tribein: to rub), which referred to mutual bodily friction or manual intercourse (masturbation) between women. Then, in the 19th century, oral intercourse (cunnilingus) between women was described with two new special terms: "sapphism" and "lesbianism" (after the ancient Greek poetess Sappho and the island of Lesbos where she lived). However, gradually all three terms broadened their meaning, and it became customary to call all sexual behavior between women either "tribadic", or "sapphic", or "lesbian". Finally, in our own century, the word "lesbian" replaced the two others, and today it is also used as a noun meaning "female homosexual". Thus, "lesbians" have now emerged as the female subgroup of the general category "homosexuals", i.e., as a special minority within a minority. (In Greek and Roman antiquity the terms "Lesbianist" and "to lesbianize" had already been well known, but had referred exclusively to the sucking of the penis ["active" and "passive" fellatio]. Thus, they had most often been applied to men.)
|
|
| Icons of the early Lesbian movement | |
| The ancient Greek poetess Sappho (630-570 B.C.) had assembled a circle of female disciples on the island of Lesbos. Most of her poetry is lost. It was considered to be of the highest rank by all of her contemporaries. | The English writer Radclyffe Hall (1883-1943) wrote the first popular novel about love between women "The Well of Loneliness" (1928). The book was banned as "obscene" in her home country. |
In the meantime, of course, "homosexual" women do have special problems, because, in addition to being sexual deviants, they are females in a male-dominated culture. If, in general, their sexual behavior is more easily tolerated by the criminal law, it can nevertheless provide a pretext for other forms of official harassment. To cite only one example, in many American courts "lesbianism" is still considered sufficient ground to deny mothers the custody of their own children (although lately there has been some progress in this regard). Needless to say, in housing, employment, military service, etc. they are subject to the same injustices as all "homosexuals". However, in all of these cases their plight is aggravated by the fact that they are female. In short, they suffer a double discrimination, and thus many of them feel that their struggle for sexual liberation is different from that of "gay" males.
It seems that our society is still dominated by fear of same-sex eroticism. Neutral observers have often described this fear as a manifestation of the widespread, irrational fear of physical love in our culture, i.e., as a form of "erotophobia". In fact, recently some writers have used the term "homoerotophobia", or "homophobia" for short, to refer specifically to the irrational fear of love between partners of the same sex. That many people are obsessed with this fear cannot be doubted. Typically, they do not know any homosexuals, do not want to meet them, see them, or hear about them, but would like them to be controlled, contained, put away, locked up, or eliminated. If they discover homosexuals in their own family, they disown them. Very often, however, they live for years very closely with homosexuals at home, at school, or at work without recognizing them. This can happen, because homophobia first creates and then feeds on a stereotype of the dreaded enemy that is completely unrealistic. For instance, in America today the"typical" male homosexual (queer, faggot, sissie, pansy, etc.) is believed to be effeminate, weak, "artistic", and immature. However, in actual fact this type of person is rare among homosexuals. The majority are simply "average", i.e., they look and behave like everyone else, and thus, if they wish, they can remain undetected. Many of them, in fact, make that choice. They either "stay in the closet" or lead an elaborate double life. As a result they are never available to challenge the popular misconceptions.
We should understand, however, that this "straight" masquerade and enforced hypocrisy takes its toll on both the oppressed and the oppressors. The former must waste a great deal of energy on dissembling, and the latter are haunted by foolish fantasies and superfluous apprehensions. This, in turn, forces everyone into a stifling sexual rigidity. Such a state of affairs cannot be- considered moral or wholesome by anyone's definition. Many thoughtful observers have therefore long advocated the emancipation of homosexuals. Indeed, in the meantime some vigorous "gay" civil rights organizations and lobbying groups have been formed which try to further this goal. In addition, a growing "gay" press is educating its special audience and the public at large about the realities of "gay" life. In some parts of the country homosexuals have also developed some political power as a voting block that can no longer be ignored. As a result of these and other efforts, much progress has already been made, at least in the Western industrialized countries. In Great Britain for example, anti-homosexual laws had punished even very prominent citizens until just a few decades ago. Oscar Wilde in the 19th century and Alan Turing in our own century are perhaps the best known examples. Today, the new British government boasts an openly gay cabinet member. There has also been progress in the United States. A significant number of its 50 states have repealed their sodomy laws, the Civil Service no longer bars homosexuals from federal employment, and some local governments have even adopted civil rights ordinances protecting homosexuals against discrimination in housing, jobs, insurance, and other areas. A further boost to the homosexual civil rights struggle has been the 1973 decision of the American Psychiatric Association to remove homosexuality from its list of mental disorders. This decision alone undercut much of the popular rationalization of homophobia.
It is to be hoped that, in the future, all discrimination against homosexuals will end. Sexual orientation, like sex, race, religious belief, and national origin, should not be grounds for denying anyone equal rights. Therefore, the civil rights struggle of homosexuals, like that of other oppressed people, deserves to succeed. However, it would be unfortunate if, in the course of this struggle a "gay" minority became more clearly defined and permanently established as a separate social group. A continued sexual separatism, even on the basis of full equality, would still be oppressive in itself, because it creates artificial lines of division and forces people into false alternatives. The ultimate liberation of both homosexuals and heterosexuals can lie only in the abandonment of all labels and in everyone's freedom to explore his own sexual potential, whatever it may be.
Note: Our directories depend on the input of interested readers. For corrections,
additions, and suggestions, please contact: HaeberleE@web.de