Homosexuality and Paranoia PDF

This article was downloaded by: [5.55.165.
223]
On: 17 February 2013, At: 10:57
Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number:
1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street,
London W1T 3JH, UK
The Scandinavian
Psychoanalytic Review
Publication details, including instructions
for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rspr20
Homosexuality and
Paranoia
a
Lis Lind M.D.
a
Smedjevgen 12, S-131 33, Nacka, Sweden
Version of record first published: 21 Jan
2013.
To cite this article: Lis Lind M.D. (1982): Homosexuality and Paranoia, The
Scandinavian Psychoanalytic Review, 5:1, 5-30
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01062301.1982.10592407
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/

terms-and-conditions
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study
purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution,
reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make
any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate
or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug
doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The
publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings,
demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused
arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the
use of this material.
Downloaded by [5.55.165.223] at 10:57 17 February 2013
Scand. Psychoanal. Rev. (1982) 5, 5-30
Homosexuality and Paranoia
Lis Lind
The problems of manifest homosexuality and paranoia in men and, more

specifically, of their relations to each other awakened my interest when a
homosexual man and another man with a classical paranoid psychosis

applied to me for treatment at almost the same time. The prospect of
carrying out psychoanalysis proper with a manifestly homosexual person
is generally considered rather poor. As for paranoiacs, most authors are
of the opinion that they are unanalysable. As both men gave the impres-
sion of being highly motivated and able to cooperate, I nevertheless
decided to start analysis with both of them.
The reason why my findings and provisional conclusions (neither of the
analyses is terminated as yet) may have some interest is my observation
of a certain void in the scientific discourse of Scandinavian analysts.
During recent years the psychoanalytic notion of perversion - which
includes manifest homosexuality - as a specific category of personality
organization seems to have virtually faded away. It may be true that it is
rather rare that perverse or psychotic persons undergo analysis, but this
should not lead us to believe that we may forget all about their existel!ce
without considerable loss to our conceptions about human character in
other areas. Psychosis and perversion are types of personality organiza-
tion to be placed side by side with neurosis, even if the latter most often
serves as the prototype in our theoretical thinking.
First a very brief presentation of the two analysands I am going to use
as examples.
H, as I will call the homosexual analysand, is 25 years old and

lives alone. Since he was 13 he has led an active homosexual life
with a great number of occasional sexual contacts and a few
Paper read to the Swedish Psycho-Analytical Society. November 30. 1981.
5
more lasting relationships, mostly with men somewhat older
than himself. He has no formal education and has maintained
himself by varying unqualified employments, but aesthetic and
creative work is what he is really interested in.
P, as I will call the paranoid analysand, is 36 years old and lives
together with two daughters who are in their teens. He has an
academic degree and holds a relatively high appointment in a
Government office. He married at an early age. After having
divorced his wife some years ago, he developed a severe perse-
cution mania. The paranoid ideas soon toned down, but they
have reappeared periodically and are still latent.
THE IMPUCATIONS OF A HOMOSEXUAL WISH
Ever since Freud (1911) wrote his paper on president Schreber, unmask-
ing the homosexual wishful fantasy inherent in paranoid ideas, it has
been well-known, at least to psychoanalysts, that the paranoiac directs
his libido first and foremost towards homosexual objects. Evidently, the
paranoiac shares this peculiarity with the manifestly homosexual person.
In the case of H it was an unmistakable fact, whereas P was totally
unaware of any homosexual impulses until he started his psychoanalysis.
However, during the first weeks of his analysis they appeared abundantly
and, for a time, wholly dominated material. It was soon possible to grasp
Paper read to the Swedish Psycho-Analytical Society, November 30, 1981.
the events that had led to his first psychotic breakdown 3 or 4 years
before.
When P started working in a new office he was received in an

unexpectedly warm and personal way by his new director.
Moreover, the name of the director was strikingly like P's own,
and he looked rather like a certain man, who had been living in
P's home for several years when P was a small boy. Within a
few months P began imagining that he was persecuted by an
international gang of drug-dealers, who wanted to destroy his
brain and make him a helpless victim liable to be manipulated
by some sort of machine. The gang was organized by some of
the directors at his work.
6
The main question which I have been asking myself and which I am
going to discuss, is why H and P keat their homosexual impulses so
differently. How is it possible for one of them to accept his homosexuality
and to act it out, apparently without experiencing serious conflicts, while
the other seems compelled to avoid becoming conscious of it at any price,
even at the price of a manifest psychosis. Which differences in their
representational worlds are reflected in such different solutions?
The first answer to the question, and the most superficial one, is of
course that H and P must have different fantasies about the consequences
of a man having sexual intercourse with another man.
H feels exhilarated, invigorated and confirmed in his manliness

by every homosexual contact. Periodically, when he has
decided or been constrained to live in abstinence, he has been
seized with depression and apathy.
On being confronted with his homosexual wishes in the begin-
ning of his analysis, P became panic-stricken. He feared that his
already fragile masculine identity might give way totally and
leave him a helpless, wavering nothing without any will of his
own. He felt as if his constitution was changing into something
more like a female body.
What terrifies P is obviously that he might be degraded to the condi-

tion, to which president Schreber (1903) referred by the terms 'soul
murder' and 'unmanning' in his famous autobiography. Schreber is
describing a kind of relationship between two beings, one of which is
entirely subjected to the will of the other, as a (defenceless) woman in the
presence of a (sadistic) man. No matter if he is a neurotic, a pervert or a
psychotic, a man's fantasy of being the love object of another man always
contains an intricate ambiguity. On the one hand, the father is the posses-
sor of the phallus, and consequently the one who can grant it. On the
. other hand, a man who accepts the paternal phallus is debased, i.e. he is
castrated on an oedipal level, enslaved on an anal level or annihilated on
an oral level. The homosexual man manages, by means of a shrewd trick
which I am going to discuss later on, to evade the castrating potentiality
of the father imago without renouncing its phallus-strengthening effect.
But the paranoiac has got to put up with the ambiguity. Schreber, with
his remarkable gift of self-observation, divided God, i.e. the father, into
7
two parts: a lower God Ahriman and an upper God Ormuzd. Freud
(1911, p. 53) supposes that his cleaving of God in two, reflects the fact
that Schreber's father imago included the imago of his elder brother as a
'lower God'. This may be true, but in my view a wider understanding of
the text is attained by interpreting the two Gods as a reflection of the
inherent doubleness of a phallic father imago. In Schreber's (1903, p. 74)
words: "The rays of the lower God (Ahriman) have the power of produc-
ing the miracle of unmanning; the ravs of the upper God (Ormuzd) have
the power of restoring manliness when necessary". In Schreber's
psychosis Ahriman comes off victorious. The 'male protest' gives way to
the feminine wishful fantasy at the same time as Schreber notes that the
function of Ormuzd has dissolved in that of Ahriman. Schreber solves his
homosexual conflict by grandiosely accepting himself as the chosen mis-

tress of God. Strindberg arrived at a similar solution at the end of his
'Inferno-crisis' (Chasseguet-Smirgel, 1971a). But my analysand P never
got so far in his psychotic process, and he is consequently left lingering in
the battlefield between Ormuzd and Ahriman.
Let us return to the main question. In the fantasy world of the homo-
seXual man the positive aspect of the contact with the father's phallus is
prevailing, whereas the fantasies of the paranoiac are entirely dominated
by the negative one, at least as long as the conflict has not been subjeeted
to a psychotic elaboration. The next step will be an investigation of what
is hidden behind this divergence with regard to fantasies. Should we
assume a difference in the character of the drive or in its fixation points?
Or might everything be explained by the fact that homosexuals and para-
noiacs use different defence mechanisms?
CHARACIERISTICS OFTIIE HOMOSEXUAL LffiiDO
Most psychoanalytic authors seem to agree that male homosexual libido

is always passive by its nature, no matter if it appears in the unconscious
wishes of a paranoid man or is put into action by a homosexual man.
Expressing it more precisely: the homosexual wish is of a receiving,
submissive, feminine kind, even if the homosexual action is not necessar-
ily so. Ferenczi (1914) presented the hypothesis that the group of manif-
estly homosexual men may be divided into passive homosexuals, 'sub-
ject-homoerotics', whose aims are feminine, and active homosexuals,
'object-homoerotics', whose aims are masculine. Most authors who have
discussed the subject in recent times, however, have doubted the exist-
8
ence of the 'object-homoerotic', e.g. Freeman (1955). If we turn to an
extra-psychoanalytic expert in the vicissitudes of homosexual drives,
Marcel Proust, who wrote his main work at about the same time as
Ferenczi conceived the theory just mentioned, we are unambiguously
informed that there is only one genuine male homosexual wish, i.e. the
feminine one. A homosexual man, Proust (1921) states, is a woman in the
disguise of a man. He belongs to "a race ... whose ideal is masculine, just
because its character is feminine". Baron de Charlus, who is from the
beginning depicted as a caricature of a masculine man, is impiteously
unmasked in the process of the novel- and of life - and ends up by taking
that shape of a lovable elderly lady which expresses his deeper nature.
Many overt homosexuals are, like Proust's baron, able to alternate bet-
ween passive and active behavior in their sexual relationships. This, how-
ever, does not necessarily imply a change in the underlying fantasy.
In most of his previous sexual contacts H had played a passive

role in relation to an older partner. After some time in analysis
he approached a man who was younger than him and now took
the active, penetrating role himself. During the sexual act he
fantasized that he was in the partner's situation, thus enjoying a
feeling of surrender.
Lengthy speculation might be spent on the question of whether the

homosexual's predilection for passive pleasures should be attributed to
some innate 'passive disposition' or to his being excessively fixated on
oral and anal-masochistic gratifications. But it is certainly more consis-
tent with a psychoanalytic viewpoint to suppose that the passivity of the
homosexual, like most other exaggerated character traits, may be a reac-
tion formation that covers a conflict. Anna Freud (1952) is of the opinion
that the fate of a boy's passive drives is finally settled only in the phallic
and the oedipal phase, when he is compelled to take his choice between
standing up for his masculinity, or leaving it to another man in the hope
of getting back some of it by taking the role of this man's passive partner.
Gillespie (1956) too, in his survey, views the exclusive passivity of the
homosexual man as a solution of a conflict on the oedipal level, or, more
precisely, as a flight from aggressive impulses (oedipal aggression against
the father calls forth castration anxiety, which motivates a regression to a
pre-oedipal level that in turn leads to an increasing amount of sadistic
impulses and, therefore, to a need of new defences against aggression).
9
H declares that he is always longing for a state of passiveness.
He spends a good deal of his spare time lying alone at home in
his bed. He has made little practical use of his artistic talents
but, secretly, he has compiled a solid professional knowledge.
He is phobically afraid of being offensive and avoids even the
slightest dispute with his friends. To H, masculinity and activity
are synonymous with brutality. Still, as a partner he wants an
active and masculine man, properly speaking, preferably a
heterosexual man.
Even if male homosexual libido is defined as libido with passive aims, it is

very likely that it draws a good deal of its energy from repressed aggres-
sive impulses and that the exaggerated passivity serves as a reaction
formation against them. As to the seemingly active homosexual man
(Ferenczi's 'object-homoerotic'), who displays an extreme masculinity, it
can be assumed that he has made another turn in the spiral of impulses
and defences and is actually defending himself against the usual
homosexual feminine-masochistic wishes by means of an exaggerated,
sadistic masculinity.
P, who is a psychotic, lacks stability in his defensive structure.

When the father transference is conspicuous in his analysis,
every now and then his associations are interrupted by painful
exclamations like "Ugh, now I get that sensation in my penis!",
alternating with "Ugh, now I get that sensation in my anus!",
expressing his fluctuating unconscious fantasies about penetrat-
ing sadistically and being masochistically penetrated.
The dogma of the obligatory passivity of the aims of male homosexual

libido is, as already mentioned, just as valid with regard to the paranoiac
as to the overt homosexual. The writings of both Schreber and Strindberg
bear evidence of this fact.
P thought that his persecutors wanted to inject narcotics into

his body and that occasionally they were successful. His ideas
about drugs focus on a fantasy that morphine turns man into a
slave of sexual excitement: "You will behave like a rabbit!".
10
LffiiDINAL FIXATIONS
If the character of the homosexual drives are thus identical, we may ask if
the difference in their manifestations in homosexual and paranoid men is
due to their being fixated at different phases in the development of the
drives. As is well known, Freud made an attempt to associate different
types of neuroses and psychoses with different phases of the development
of the libido. In the model of evolution we most often refer to, including
oral, anal, phallic and genital phases, the division of phases reflects
changes in the sources of the drive. In his analysis of Schreber's text
Freud (1911) is instead talking of a development through the phases of
autoerotism, narcissism, homosexuality and heterosexuality, i.e. a
development of the object of the libido. He states that the paranoiac has
his specific and decisive fixation at the stage of narcissism. A smaller part
of the future paranoiac's libido progresses to the stage of homosexuality
and is sublimated in various ways. Later in life, however, any marked
increase in libidinal impulses may lead to a breakdown of sublimations
and a re-sexualizing of the homosexual object. It is in order to protect
himself from homosexual temptations that the paranoiac is liable to
regress to the narcissistic stage. The withdrawal of the libido from the
object world leads to a hyper-cathexis of the ego, manifesting itself in
delusions of grandeur.
Ever since he was a child, P has believed that he was predestined to
become a remarkable person: a new Jesus, or at least a Jussi Bjorling. At
the beginning of his persecution mania he launched into a frantic detec-
tive work and, before long, .he was convinced that he had got on the track
of an international gang of drug-dealers. He managed to obtain an audi-
ence with a chief of police whenever he wanted, giving lengthy reports on
his discoveries (a combined satisfaction of homosexual and omnipotent
wishes!). Even during analysis, when homosexual impulses are on the
verge of becoming conscious, he occasionally resorts to the rOle of a
private detective, thus providing himself with a feeling of omnipotent
control. Or else he develops grandiose fantasies about the new race of
'psychoanalysed man' who see through everything and should rule the
world.
I have not observed defensive regressions of a similar kind from
homosexuality to narcissism during the analysis of H. Thus we might
conclude that the homosexual has his main fixation at the homosexual
stage of development, and consequently does not run the same risk as the
11
paranoiac of regressing to the narcissistic stage. In actual fact, manifestly
homosexual men usually do not become psychotic. But this is not neces-
sarily due to a relatively milder degree of narcissistic fixation. The
homosexual has other methods at his disposal to escape the dangerous
implications of infantile homosexual wishes and therefore does not need
to regress when confronted with them. By and large I have the impres-
sion that H is just as much at home in narcissistic and autoerotic fantasies
as P. The difference is that H's deep dives into early developmental
stages are less self-destructive and less compulsive than those of P. H
never quite looses sight of reality. So we may, after all, suppose that a
greater part of the libido of H than that of P has reached more mature
developmental stages.
Occasionally H indulges in a special kind of monologue that

seems to be directed to his own image in the mirror. When this
phenomenon was pointed out to him, he enthusiastically con-
firmed my observation and added that this way of talking gives
him great pleasure. Since he was a boy of 6 or 7, he has been in
the habit of spending hours making infinite, ingeniously prop-
ortioned, abstract constructions, either on squared paper or,
nowadays, more often in his head. Or else he amuses himself
with focusing his eyes altematingly on the window of his room
and on a window of the opposite house, in order to watch how
the patterns overlap and get displaced on his retina.
Rather peculiar occupations, but to H they are calming and pleasur-

able.
Since P was a child, he has had the fixed idea that it is extremely
important to keep his hair impeccably cut and combed. Periodi-
cally he spends day and night in front of the mirror, cutting his
hair in great excitement. It is of no less than vital importance to
him that every hair on his head ends up with having exactly the
same length. In order to achieve this he pulls the hairs and
measures them, one by one. Some hair will, of course, always
tum out to be too short, and so he has to start all over again and
cut the rest of them to the same length. Usually he finishes by
being so short-haired that he feels ashamed of his appearance.
12
P's hair-cutting mania has a number of symbolic meanings. Among
others the act is, of course, a masturbation equivalent. As such it strikes
me as being of little enjoyment.
If we try instead to determine the fixation points of the typical
homosexual and the typical paranoiac on the usual developmental scale
ranging from the oral to the oedipal phase, we find once again that it is
not easily settled if they really differ from each other. In a footnote,
added in 1915, to his Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality Freud
(1905, p. 146) states that anal fixation is a characteristic feature in male
homosexuals. Later experts in homosexuality (Bychowski, 1954) have
stressed oral dependency as another characteristic., In the paranoid per-
sonality too, both oral and anal features are usually outstanding; the
degree of various libidinal fixations is certainly not measurable, but if we
compare the character of pre-oedipal drive derivatives in H and P, an
unmistakable distinction comes into sight.
H obviously delights in accusing me of manipulating and forc-

ing him (as did his mother) or humiliating and hurting him (as
did his brother). His most vivid erotic daydream is about being
raped and beaten to death by a brutal man.
The masochistic mode of anality has gained the upper hand. Moreover,
in H's collection of masochistic fantasies, aggression has entered into a
rather stable liaison with libido. The stability may partly be ascribed to a
propensity for sexualizing aggression, specific for the perverse personal-
ity. The anality of P is of a less enjoyable kind. The sadistic mode pre-
vails, clearly manifesting itself in a magnificent control system, adaptable
to everything and everybody in the surroundings. In a paper on the
Schreber case, Chasseguet-Smirgel (1966) has pointed out that the para-
noiac's conspicuous anal defensive system with all its systematization,
intellectualization, rationalization an,P general rigidity is fundamentally
mobilized with the purpose of keeping persecutors at bay - an impossible
undertaking because every evil that has been projected will inevitably
find its way back to where it belongs. secondarily, however, the anal
character traits will furnish narcissistic supplies, i.e. anality enters into
the service of narcissism. What P is trying to remedy with anal means is
actually very often oral misery.
13
P spends much time planning his economy for years to come.
Before he started his analysis he used to get anything he wanted
from his parents; a new car did not cost him more than a tele-
phone call. At that time he did not bother himself about keep-
ing accounts. When he decided to renounce his parents' gifts,
he was overcome with severe anxiety. Unconsciously he experi-
enced the change as a loss of omnipotence shared with his
parents, and dreaded starving to death. The scrupulous plan-
ning served to keep anxiety in check.
H and P make use of primary and secondary process thinking to a

different extent. Even here one gets the impression that P is moving at a
considerably more primitive level than H, who thinks and talks according
to the laws of secondary process most of the time. Nevertheless H has a
confusing tendency to contradict himself without discovering it. Espe-
cially when delicate matters are brought op, he may show strange defects
in logical thinking; the pleasure principle wins the victory and primary
processes come to the fore. If someone else points out his logical error he
does not, like most neurotics, show any surprise or need of clarification.
As opposites do not exclude each other according to his logical code, they
can be left side by side. This perversion of an ego-function (i.e. thinking)
is no doubt connected with his special, perverse solution of a basic con-
flict, to which I shall return later. P, on the other hand, thinks and talks in
analysis according to the primary process almost all the time. Connec-
tions are established in the same way as in the unconscious, by means of
similarity and contiguity, and they are easily destroyed on the request of
the pleasure principle. The human body with its organs, especially the
lower ones, is amply represented in thoughts and vocabulary.
The varying use of primary process thinking is, together with the diffe-
rent amount of free, not neutralized aggression, responsible for a very
different atmosphere in the analytic hours with H and P. In the analysis
of H a playful mood is prevailing. During the hours with P the atmos-
phere is gloomy.
H has the coquettish air of a seductive little boy. He creates an

imaginary theatre around us and tries to entice me into acting
one of the parts in his play, which is sometimes cynical, some-
times sentimental. Not infrequently I can hardly suppress a
laugh.
14
Fear, suspicion, hatred and desperation mingle in the emana-
tions of P. The analytic dialogue is turned into a lawsuit without
mercy. Every intervention on my part, including occasional
noises of an empty stomach, are pondered over and scrutinized
as potential proofs of my untrustworthiness. In me, P's efforts
of sadistic control awake counter-transference fantasies that are
at times amazingly cruel.
After all we seem to have some evidence for believing that the mind of
a paranoiac is tuned in to an 'earlier' or 'more primitive' way of function-
ing than that of the typical homosexual, even if it is difficult to define the
difference with reference to the well-known phases of libido develop-

ment. If the difference is real, it seems to provide an easy answer to my
question of why the homosexual seeks, while the paranoiac flees
homosexual gratifications. In the paranoiac, with his earlier fixations,
aggression and a tendency to project this aggression on to the object can
be expected to prevail over the capacity for libidinal attachment. It is
consequently quite natural that to him the destructive aspect of the
father's phallus overshadows the libidinous one. In the overt homosex-
ual, whose aggressive drives are bound and neutralized to a greater
extent, libidinal strivings get the upper hand more easily. But unfortu-
nately this explanation is too simplified. If it were sufficient, we should
expect the latently homosexual neurotic, who has presumably neutralized
his aggression still more effectively than the overt homosexual, to
embrace his father with confidence. As we all know, he does not do so.
The neurotic runs away from his homosexual impulses just like the para-
noiac. Castration anxiety seems to have the power to mobilize the max-
imum fear of which a man is capable, no matter if his fantasy world is that
of a neurotic or of a psychotic.
1HE OEDIPAL SE1TING
So far I have been dealing with pre-oedipal features, which are pro-
nounced in both the paranoid and the homosexual personality. Still, as is
well-known, many symptoms and character traits are formed after a
regression and in order to escape a conflict on a higher level. To Freud it
was self-evident that all analytic material should be examined from the
oedipal viewpoint. As far as I know, he never asked himself if some
individuals might perhaps get stuck in earlier phases and never advance
15
as far as to the oedipal conflict (with the possible exception of women,
with regard to whom he had his doubts in later years (Freud 1931, p.
226)). Concerning the paranoid president Schreber, Freud (1911, p. 55)
plainly states: "Thus in the case of Schreber we find ourselves once again
on the familiar ground of the father-complex", meaning that Schreber's
passive homosexual attitude to his father is in fact one of the common
and typical solutions of the oedipal conflict in men. Schreber was no
common neurotic, to be sure, but according to Freudian theory his para-
noid psychosis was not a consequence of the weakness of his Oedipus
complex, but rather of the strength of his fixation at the stage of narciss-
ism, with its correspondingly primitive defence mechanisms. The analysis
of the 'Wolf-Man', who might be classed either as a compulsive neurotic,
a homosexual or a paranoiac, is another example of how Freud (1918) did

not hesitate to take aim at the Oedipus complex.
Psychoanalysts of a later date have objected that Freud made a mistake
in paying no attention to the role of the pre-oedipal mother. In his papers
on homosexuality (Freud, 1910, 1922) she comes more to the fore, with-
out the importance of the father-complex thereby becoming neglected. In
"Attachment to the mother, narcissism, fear of castration" (Freud, 1922,
p. 231), Freud summarizes the decisive factors in the etiology of
homosexuality. Certain theoreticians, like Socarides (1968), advocate the
hypothesis that overt homosexuality is an entirely pre-oedipal problem,
due to a disturbance in the separation-individuation phase. Personally I
am more inclined to think that Anna Freud (1952) is right in arguing that
the manifestly homosexual man may show greater or lesser disturbances
on all levels, but not until the oedipal phase will he be confronted with a
choice between homosexuality and heterosexuality, and conflicts at this
stage will at all events strongly influence the outcome of his choice.
It seems reasonable to pay some attention to the oedipal constellations
of my two analysands in order to see how they differ.
Consciously, H loves his mother and hates his father. Uncon-

sciously, the opposite is true. He believes that his first three or
four years of life were very happy, his mother wholly devoting
herself to him. After that time he felt outrivalled by his 10 years
older brother. Nevertheless H suspects that his mother really
needs his love and would be disappointed if he showed prefer-
ence for any other woman. After the age of five, H identified
himself with his mother. He became interested in domestic
16
duties and indoor equipment, and started a long, masochistic
(Platonic) love-affair with his elder brother. His father, who
was successful in professional life, but somewhat withdrawn at
home, is considered by H to be a complete zero.
H substituted his brother for his father, probably because the brother
was, after all, felt to be a less overwhelming rival. Otherwise it is an
oedipal drama of the well-known type: a play for three persons about
hatred and love, men and women. H is cognizant of the rules of the
game, even though his solution was deviant.
Consciously, P hates his mother and despises his father. Uncon-

sciously, he is afraid of his mother and feels deserted by his
father. When he was a child his mother exposed him to sadistic
manipulations in order to satisfy her ambition. He was
expected to look like a pretty little girl and, at the same time, to
substitute for her husband. The father was, in the eyes of P, a
poor figure and an echo of his wife, oscillating between out-
bursts of uncontrolled rage and a ridiculous, childish behavior.
Rivalry between P and his father hardly occurred. P submitted
himself to his mother until he got the chance of fleeing into a
hastily arranged marriage.
The oedipal drama of P bears the imprint of the dyad. The possibility
of making a choice was blurred so as to make it look like a play for two
persons, i.e. P and one single parental figure, plus a vague hope for an
alternative one. The solution of his oedipal conflict was in fact post-
poned. Apparently P had arrived at a positive solution, but some 30 years
later, when he had divorced his wife, the longing for the missing third
person took fire in the shape of a homosexual wish, and it was in fact not
until the time of his psychosis that he arrived at his final (negative)
solution of his Oedipus complex.
THE OEDIPUS COMPLEX OF THE PARANOID PERSONALITY
In her papers on Schreber and Strindberg, Chasseguet-Smirgel (1966,

1971a, b) presents a theory about what she regards as the typical anomaly
of the oedipal situation of the future paranoiac. Because both parents are
felt by the child to be sadistic and equally bad, their images will merge
17
into one another and the child remains unable to discern more than one
single parental figure. In the cases of Schreber and Strindberg, the
fathers seem to have been vigorous, exacting personalities, whereas the
mothers were submissive and colourless. In the case of P the opposite is
true, but the final outcome is the same; one single phallic-sadistic parent
imago dominates his early representational world. According to Chasse-
guet-Smirgel, the lack of a triangle means that the boy, who has from the
beginning projected his hatred on to the phallic mother, will find no
alternative in the form of a benevolent oedipal father, upon whom he
could project his narcissism or his ego-ideal. Thus he misses the first step
towards the development of his capacity for sublimation. His future
efforts at sublimation - notably of his homosexual libido - are therefore
liable to be insufficient. "The paternal penis remains a penis (i.e. a sexual

object), without also becoming a phallus (i.e. an ideal)" (Chasseguet-
Smirgel, 1966, pp. 51-52) (my translation). Instead of cathecting the
paternal phallus, the future paranoiac invests the greater part of his libido
in his own ego, thus laying the foundation of the megalomania charac-
teristic of paranoia.
Furthermore Chasseguet-Smirgel (1966) points out that a hyper-
cathexis of narcissistic libido in the ego will in turn be made use of as the
paranoiac's most important defence against homosexual temptations.
The paranoiac behaves according to an unconscious fantasy of already
possessing a uniquely powerful and perfect phallus, by far superior to
that of his father, which he consequently does not need or want. P seems
to have created such an internal 'phallus magique autonome' for himself
whenever libidinal forces, i.e. essentially homosexual impulses, have
tended to increase beyond control.
When P was in his late oedipal phase, he was a soloist in a

children's choir, performing occasionally on the radio. He was
expected to grow into a world-famous singer. During adolesc-
ence he put a great deal of effort into obtaining a pilot's licence
at the youngest possible age, and he flew solo for the first time
on his 16th birthday. About the time of his divorce, P
developed a magnificent Don Juan identity, driving a sports car
and making numerous conquests of attractive women. When
recovering from his first episode of manifest psychosis, he
learnt riding amazingly quickly and had daydreams about
becoming a famous jockey.
18
Because all P's attempts at pha111c display were only fragile defensive
maneuvers against homosexuality, and not the results of real sublima-
tions, all of them have fallen flat and he has lost every interest in them as
soon as he no longer needed them as defences.
TIIE OEDIPUS COMPLEX OF TIIE PERVERSE PERSONALITY
When considering what a heavy task it has been for P to remain unaware
of homosexual impulses for so many years, one cannot help thinking that
life should have been comparatively much easier for H, who acknow-
ledged his homosexuality as an adolescent and has lived as a homosexual
ever since. But this is hardly the case. The pervert does not correspond to
the idea of a happy savage who manages to stick to some infantile satis-
faction because, for some reason, he has not discovered that it is forbid-
den. He too, is trying to avoid something. Manifest homosexuality is a
symptom serving to keep an unconscious conflict at bay. Unfortunately
unstable defence mechanisms are used to such an extent that the
homosexual, in the words of McDougall (1972, p. 379) can be likened to
a person "trying to repair a crumbling wall with scotch tape - it has to be
redone every day".
The dominance of homosexual over heterosexual libido is a conspicu-
ous, common feature in the homosexual and the paranoiac. But if the
function of homosexuality in the individual's system of drives and
defences is examined a little more closely, the resemblance becomes
almost non-existent. The paranoiac defends himself against homosexual-
ity, because it arouses fears of castration, humiliation and annihilation.
The overt homosexual defends himself by means of homosexuality
against other instinctual impulses and anxieties, the nature of which
requires further discussion.
Freud (1905, pp. 145-146) certainly mentions pre-oedipal phenomena
(the operation of narcissistic object choice, a retention of the erotic sig-
nificance of the anal zone and an intense, but short-lived fixation to the
mother) as being important factors determining the future homosexual
man's ceaseless flight from women, but as usual he lays the main stress on
experiences in the phallic and the oedical phase. The sight of the female
sexual organ evokes disgust and castration anxiety in a boy in his phallic
phase, who sees it as a castrated male organ. How the neurotic manages
to overcome his uneasiness is outside the scope of this paper. The fetish-
ist resorts to his fetish as a substitute for the missing organ. The homosex-
19
ual takes refuge in a homosexual object choice in order to escape facing
the existence of creatures without a penis. The psychotic simply denies
his observation, preserving his infantile fantasy of a phallic mother.
P's ideas about the correct distribution of the different sexual

organs between the sexes are at times somewhat vague. He is
aware of having a penis, but sometimes he also has a sensation
of something like a clitoris being located in the front wall of his
rectum. On one occasion I interpreted a dream about being
bitten by a dog to the effect that he was afraid of his wish to
have a female sexual organ, because it means that he would
have to give up his penis. P exclaimed in blank dismay: "What
do you mean? Can't one have both?".
Let us return to the manifestly homosexual man's basic conflict and his
way of solving it. In recent years some French psychoanalysts, notably
McDougall (1972) and Chasseguet-Smirgel (1971b, 1974, 1978) have
developed a theory of perverse personality, according to which perver-
sion is formed as a defence against a narcissistic injury in the phallic-
oedipal phase. A boy, who has till then believed that he was his mother's
most important love object and an entirely adequate and satisfying part-
ner to her, discovers at this stage the difference between the sexes and
between the generations. He begins to understand that the female and
the male sexual organs complement each other, and that it is not he but
the father who possesses a male organ of the right size for the mother.
This discovery is to some boys tantamount to a severe narcissistic blow.
The very first information H supplied in analysis about his fam-

ily situation was bitter complaints about his experience of
humiliation, connected with being the youngest and smallest.
His mother was always more impressed by his elder brother.
When his father took the family out for some outdoor activity
like skiing, H would have to stay at home because he was too
small.
I disagree with Chasseguet-Smirgel's exclusive emphasis on narcissistic

injury. McDougall mentions that the boy's discovery of his own insuffi-
ciency also evokes fears of being castrated by the mother, who suddenly
threatens to deprive him of the illusion of being her favourite partner,
20
which she herself has helped him to create. I think, however, that it
should be added that fear of being castrated by the father will probably
also arise, as soon as he is experienced as a rival. It is informative to
compare the ideas of McDougall and Chasseguet-Smirgel with those of
Rank (1923), who sketches a theory on perversion not too dissimilar to
the French theory of the 70s. Only, according to Rank, a boy's funda-
mental reaction to oedipal rivalry is guilt, not shame. Perverse behavior,
he thinks, is a way of denying a sense of guilt due to infantile masturba-
tion, and to 1,1ggression against the oedipal father. According to the
psychoanalysts of those days, most conflicts belonged to the object-libidi-
nal sphere and gave rise to guilt rather than shame. Narcissism as a
problem was considered to pertain mainly to psychotics, not - as now- to
all of us.
No matter whether the essential motive is guilt or shame, the future
pervert reacts to the trauma of the oedipal setting by idealizing one or
some of his pre-oedipal component instincts (the homosexual his
homosexual libido) at the expense of genitality. The 'correct' solution of
the dilemma would have been idealization of the father, leading to
further sublimations of drives through identifications with changing
father figures. What happens instead is that sublimation processes are
short-circuited, when the homosexual takes himself, i.e. his component
instinct, as his ego-ideal.
H virtually lacks the capacity of admiring anything he might not

have accomplished himself. His social life is confined to a com-
munity of young homosexual men, who have in common that
they hold the same opinions on everything worth discussing,
i.e. gay-life and aesthetics.
The idealization of the component instinct implicates a disdain of geni-

tal sexuality, in so far as it is the prerogative of the father, and of the
process of procreation implying that one generation must engender the
next one and so on.
H prefers to believe that the life of the heterosexual majority is

fundamentally dull and mediocre. He and his friends consider
themselves a sort of secret elite, in most respects superior to
'straight' people. H finds the awareness of being somebody's
child most disturbing. Old age is a nuisance to him, and he
21
attempts to arrest the passing of time by behaving like an eter-
nal boy of 18. Past and present hardly exist. The only thing that
counts is the future, which he tries to monopolize by incessantly
transferring his interest to whatever happens to be on the verge
of coming into fashion.
The complementary relationship between the sexes is effaced by the

homosexual, who refuses to take advantage of it. He is aware of the
difference between the sexes, but makes it insignificant by proving again
and again that every sort of closeness is possible between persons having
identical sexual organs.
The weakness of the pervert's defence is demonstrated by the fact that

he will never quite succeed in convincing himself that his behavior really
expresses the triumphant masculinity he is pretending. The fear of castra-
tion and the need to possess an indestructable phallus are never far away.
A man, who has forbidden himself to recognize and wish for a genital
phallus like that of his father, may compensate himself by creating an
anal penis - or rather, an infinite number of anal penises. The anal penis
borrows its characteristics from the faeces. It is produced from nothing, it
never ceases to reappear and it is brilliant and shining like a coin (Chasse-
guet-Smirgel, 1978).
H has started making use of his artistic talents in arranging

homes and offices professionally. He creates shining milieus of
exceedingly exact proportions and with a perfect finish. At
times he is seized by uneasiness because everything, contrary to
his will, becomes too 'precious' and lifeless to look at. He has a
favourite fantasy about a house for himself consisting of one
single, tunnel-shaped, entirely empty room with glass-walls at
both ends. The toilet, bathroom etc., are placed in an excava-
tion under the floor. The problem is that he cannot possibly
imagine people staying in the room without destroying the
serenity of the proportions.
As every anal penis - like H's aesthetic accomplishments, and like the
false nightingale of the emperor of China (Chasseguet-Smirgel, 1971b)-
is doomed to failure because of its factitiousness, the homosexual man is,
after all, in his sexual life compelled to hunt the idealized paternal phal-
lus, which can put an end to his feeling of being castrated. According to
22
McDougall (1972) the homosexual act symbolizes a drama of castration
in which the partner, who offers a substitute for the paternal phallus, is at
the same time castrated and repaired. But this castration is controllable
and does not hurt.
To sum up, the homosexual's answer to the oedipal conflict is that
there is no difference between the sexes, no difference between the gen-
erations and no such thing as danger of castration. For very obvious
reasons this is really no solution, but an evasion of the conflict. In fact,
the homosexual rushes through life with the overthrown chess-men
always close on his heels. Freud (1927) writes about the fetishist who
reacts to the discovery of the risk of castration by producing a disavowal
('Verleugnung'), later on manifesting itself in a divided attitude ('zwie.s-

paJ.tige Einstellung'). The homosexual knows- in accordance with reality
- that creatures without a penis do exist, and at the same time he 'knows'
- in accordance with his wish-fu1filling fantasy - that creatures without a
penis do not exist. This strange capacity of holding two contradictory
opinions simultaneously without feeling confused is, as I have already
mentioned, characteristic of H, also in matters more trivial than the
crucial one about the possibility of castration.
H regards himself as superior to heterosexual men. At the same

time he expresses longing for sexual contact with a non-
homosexual man, because all homosexual men are, after all,
'defect'. H asserts that no other difference exists between men
and women than "that negligible anatomical detail", and con-
tinues by stating that for his own part he really feels to be more
like a woman in attitudes and ideas, and that is why he under-
stands women far better than men, who are brutal by nature.
HOMOSEXUAL WISHES AND MANIFEST PARANOID PSYCHOSIS
The homosexual's division of his ego into two parts, one of which follows
the pleasure principle, the other the reality principle, does not establish a
very stable defensive system, but it does, nevertheless, offer, some
advantage as compared with the psychotic's disavowal of the risk of
castration. In the words of McDougall (1972, p. 382): "The psychotic
must recover in delusional form the projected knowledge whose links
have been abolished. The pervert makes a considerable advance on this
position in that he too recovers from the outside what has been lost, but
23
by means of an illusion which he controls and delimits". By means of a
compulsive repetition of his ritual, the homosexual usually manages
pretty well to keep his castration anxiety in check, whereas the future
paranoiac, who has neither managed to solve nor to by-pass his oedipal
conflict, approaches adulthood carrying with him a packet of dynamite,
which is bound to detonate whenever the temperature of his homosexual
libido rises too high.
What then happens when the postponed oedipal conflict is resuscitated
and urges a solution during a paranoid psychosis? As long as the instinc-
tual pressure is kept reasonably low, the latent paranoiac is able to subli-
mate his homosexual libido to "friendship and comradeship, to esprit de
corps and to love in mankind of general", as Freud (1911, p. 61) writes in
the paper on Schreber. In the case of P "the love of mankind in general"

was always rather poorly represented, but Schreber, the 'Senatspriisi-
dent', was probably active and estimated above the average in his social
context. It is of course possible that his choice of jurisprudence was also
motivated by the suitability of this profession for canalizing a kind of
sadistic instinctual energy, to which I have already referred in my descrip-
tion of P.
P's object relations are all elaborated on the model of a lawsuit.

Every single object is prosecuted- for egoism, wickedness and
desire for power - and P's argumentation will, sooner or later,
inevitably lead to the pronouncement of a sentence of lifelong
rejection. The whole process is usually carried out without the
delinquent becoming aware of what is going on.
Because of the paranoiac's defective capacity for sublimation, friend-

ship and altruism become insufficient as disguises when the pressure of
homosexual libido increases too much, and this is where manifest para-
noid psychosis starts. The paranoiac reacts to homosexual temptation by
withdrawing libidinal cathexes from the outer world where the objects
are. During this stage Schreber felt like the only survivor of some great
catastrophe, and the people around him were seen as only 'fleeting-
improvised-men'. The liberated libido becomes attached to the ego and is
used for an aggrandizement of the ego. The withdrawal of object-libido
means a disavowal ('Aufhebung') of outer reality.
When P was hospitalized in a psychiatric ward, he was sure that every-
thing around him was only coulisses, made in order to deceive him. His
24
fellow patients were simulating their symptoms, and the drugs given to
him by the nurses were just placebo. During this time he was troubled by
mysterious bodily sensations; palpitations, nervous impulses and paroxy-
smal toothache. He suspected that there was something wrong with his
brain too.
P's withering interest in the outer world was, as could be expected,
accompanied by a flourishing occupation with his own body.
At the next stage, i.e. during a fuQy developed psychosis, the para-
noiac has rebuilt the outer world, but he has falsified it by projecting his
homosexual wishes on to the objects in various ways. The original wish
has not vanished, but it is no longer recognizable to himself as his own.
Freud (1911, p. 63) shows how the three typical forms of paranoia are
interpretable as the paranoiac's endeavour to contradict the unbearable

fact that 'I (a man) love him (a man)'. P has had psychotic episodes of all
three types.
In delusions of persecution the following unconscious statement is
expressed: "I do not love him - I hate him, because HE PERSECUTES ME"
(Freud, p. 63).
P consulted a male doctor who had previously taken great inter-

est in his case and had also recommended psychoanalysis to
him. The doctor now expressed his satisfaction to learn that P
was feeling better, and added that he had in fact been afraid
that he might have had difficulties in finding a psychoanalyst. P
immediately interpreted his remark to the effect that the doctor
had obviously only wanted to hurt him and fool him by suggest-
ing a remedy which he himself thought was unattainable. On
realizing that the doctor was an intriguer, P was filled with
sadistic triumph because he had in fact managed to start analy-
sis and thus get the better of his presumed antagonist.
The episode illustrates one of the basic patterns of P's psychotic reac-
tions. He is unconsciously in love with the doctor, fancies that his kind
words mean a sexual invitation, instantly changes his love into hatred,
and ends up by feeling persecuted by his love object.
A second way of contradicting the original proposition manifests itself
in erotomania. The paranoiac tries to convince himself that "I do not love
him- I love her, because SHE LOVES ME" (Freud, 1911, p. 63).
25
P imagines that he is extremely attractive to some women.
Many of them start desiring him ardently at first sight. When
his unconscious homosexual feelings were awakened by the
new director, P started a frantic love-affair with a woman who
told him that she needed him tremendously, because two or
three children of hers had died, and because she herself was ill
with cancer and had only a short time left to live. She spurred
him to superhuman sexual performances. P lost his sense of
reality, feeling like the male actor in a new "Love-story".
A few weeks later the erotomania changed into regular delusions of

persecution. P began to suspect that his partner had been sent to him as a
decoy by the gang of drug-dealers organized by the head of his office.
The third prototype of paranoia is delusions of jealousy, expressing the
unconscious formula: "It is not I who love the man - she loves him"
(Freud, 1911, p. 64).
A couple of years after his first psychotic breakdown, P remar-

ried. Shortly afterwards he began suspecting that his wife was
interested in a man living in the house opposite to them, and
was careful to keep the blinds down. A little later he conce-
trated all his energy upon imploring his wife to describe a cer-
tain sexual experience she had had with a foreigner before their
marriage. He forced her to repeat the story again and again in
minute detail. P was aware of the procedure being most distres-
sing to her, but thought that he was right in being jealous of the
other man.
During this period, which came to an end only when the marriage was
annulled, P had no delusions of persecution. The forced confessions of
his wife seem to have provided sufficient nourishment to his homosexual
libido, thus helping him to abstain temporarily from his persecutors.
THE CONCEPT OF PROJECTION
So far, I have stressed the theoretical differences of the personality struc-

tures of the paranoid and the homosexual man. In reality the differences
are, of course, often less marked, as every psychoanalyst, used to dis-
cerning a little of everything in every analysand, knows. In the literature
26
the existence of transitory types is repeatedly affirmed, e.g. (Nunberg,
1938; Freeman, 1955). Certain manifestly homosexual men make use of
projection as a defence mechanism to a considerable extent, and a few of
them develop something like a paranoid psychosis. 'Projection' and
'paranoid reaction' are often carelessly used as if the terms were synony-
mous, but probably one should distinguish between 'simple projection'
on one side, and the mechanisms leading to delusions of persecution on
the other (not to speak of the other main types of paranoid psychosis,
which are the results of still other patterns of projection). What I under-
stand by 'simple projection' is the act of ascribing one's own character
traits, thoughts, wishes etc. (or their sources) to someone else according
to the motto: what I like is me (or something I do)- what I dislike is you
(or something you do). This concept corresponds roughly to what Freud
means by projection, when he differentiates the purified pleasure ego
from the reality ego (Freud, 1915); see also Laplanche & Pontalis, (1971,
p. 347, 111, 2).
P avoids seeing himself as the author of any urges or feelings

whatsoever. If he finds the water tap in my toilet dripping, he
immediately suspects that I have postponed repairing it in order
to test his reaction. When he lies on the couch talking about
sexual matters, he will listen carefully to my respiration and get
the impression that I am excited, which leads him to suspect
that I am masturbating.
Instead of perceiving an aggressive or a sexual impulse within himself,

he discovers it in me. My analysand H often acts in exactly the same way,
only that his suspicions concerning me are usually of a milder character.
In fact, most neurotics will occasionally project their mental acts in a
similar way. It is my impression that the mechanism of 'simple projection'
has its roots in the earliest relationship with the mother in both sexes
alike, and that it would be wiser to keep it apart from the projection
found in paranoia proper, which has a different genesis.
The type of projection inherent in delusions of persecution is, accord-
ing to Freud (1911), more complicated. It comprises two components: a
reversal into its opposite plus a transfer to the object of a drive deriva-
tive. Another characteristic of paranoid projection is that what is pro-
jected is always a homosexual wish, which means a wish that is funda-
mentally connected with the parent of the same sex.
27
At any rate there seems to exist a formal as well as a genetic difference
between the 'simple projection', of which H as well as P make ample use,
and the more complicated and specific one leading to paranoid psychosis.
H has related one single event, which took place one or two years before
he began his analysis, which seems rather similar to a short-lived persecu-
tion mania, indicating that he too may temporarily make use of the more
complex mechanism of projection.
During a trip alone to an Arab country, H was exposed to - or

exposed himself to - a homosexual rape by an unknown man
armed with a knife. Next year he returned to the same place
. with a half-conscious wish of a repetition. Unexpectedly he was
seized by panic as soon as he arrived at his hotel. He imagined

that every man in town knew about his arrival, and feared that
he would be killed if he left the hotel. He stayed in his room for
the whole week. When he was back home, suspicions and fear
dissolved.
It is somewhat bewildering that a manifestly homosexual man should

suddenly react to a homosexual wish with a transitary paranoid psychosis.
One possible explanation is that what motivated H's return to the place
of the crime was the wish for total, masochistic surrender to an uncon-
trollable brute. As I have already mentioned, this wish determines the
contents of many of H's fantasies, but he takes care not to act it out in his
usual sexual relationships, where everything is ritualistic and controll-
able. On suddenly realizing that fantasy was approaching reality, H was
seized by panic, leading to regression and loss of his usual system of
defences. Deprived of his perverse trick enabling him to change castra-
tion threat into a play, His placed on an equal footing with P, i.e. the
castrative aspect of sexual contact with the father becomes overwhelm-
ing. Further analysis may reveal if this interpretation is correct or not.
This brings us back to where we started, to my initial question of why
the paranoiac and the manifestly homosexual man react so differently to
their homosexual libido. The discussion has, however, made the question
rather pointless, because their basic problems turned out to be so funda-
mentally different that there is in fact no reason why these two people
should behave in a similar way. The question of why they behave in one
way or another has been gradually replaced by descriptions of what they
are really doing, and reflections upon the meaning of their different
28
reactions. After all, this seems to be the most adequate approach to any
psychoanalytic problem of this type. Outer or inner conditions are not
the causes of an individual's psychic development or behavior. They
influence his choices in an unpredictable way. Consequently we should
not ask why a person acts in a certain way, but rather try to understand
how his actions make sense within his world of fantasies and representa-
tions.
REFERENCES
Bychowski, G. (1954). The structure of homosexual acting out. Psychoanal. Q., 23: 48-61.
Chasseguet-Smirgel, J. (1966). Notes de lecture en marge de Ia revision du cas Schreber.

(Marginal notes on the revision of the Schreber case). Rev. Franc. Psychanal., 30: 41-61.
- - (1971a). A propos d'Auguste Strindberg: contribution a l'etude de Ia paranoia.
(Concerning August Strindberg: contribution to the study of paranoia). In Chasseguet-
Smirgel, J. Pour une psychanalyse de I'art et de Ia creativite. (Psychoanalysis of art and
creativity). Paris: Payot.
- - (1971b). Le rossignol de l'empereur de Chine. (The nightingale of the emperor of
China). In Chasseguet-Smirgel, J. Pour une psychanalyse de l'art et de Ia creativite.
(Psychoanalysis of art and creativity). Paris: Payot.
- - (1974). Perversion, idealization and sublimation. Int. J. Psycho-Anal., 55: 349-357.
- - (1978). Reflexions on the connections between perversion and sadism. Int. J.
Psycho-Anal., 59: 27-35.
Ferenczi, S. (1914). Zur Nosologie der miinnlichen Homosexualitiit (Homoerotik). (About
the nosology of male homosexuality (homo-eroticism)). Int. Zeitschrift f. iirtztl. Psyc-
hoanal., 2: 131-142.
Freeman, T. (1955). Observations on male homosexuality. Int. J. Psycho-Anal., 36: 335-
347.
Freud, A. (1952). Studies in passivity. In Freud, A. Indications for Child Analysis. London:
Hogarth Press, 1969.
Freud, S. (1905). Three essays on the theory of sexuality. S.E. 7.
- - (1910). Leonardo da Vinci and a memory of his childhood. S.E. 11.
- - (1911). Psycho-analytic notes on an autobiographical account of a case of paranoia
(dementia paranoides). S.E. 12.
- - (1915). Instincts and their vicissitudes. S.E. 14.
- - (1918). From the history of an infantile neurosis. S.E. 17.
- - (1922). Some neurotic mechanisms in jealousy, paranoia and homosexuality. S.E.
18.
- - (1927). Fetishism. S.E. 21.
- - (1931). Female Sexuality. S.E. 21.
Gillespie, W. H. (1956). The general theory of sexual perversion. Int. J. Psycho-Anal., 37:
396-403.
Laplanche, J. & Pontalis, J.-B. (1971). Vocabulaire de Ia psychanalyse. (The language of
psychoanalysis). Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
McDougall, J. (1972). Primal scene and sexual perversion. Int. J. Psycho-Anal., 53: 371-
384.
Nunberg, H. (1938). Homosexuality, magic and aggression. Int. J. Psycho-Anal., 19: 1-16.
Proust, M. (1921). Sodome et Gomorrhe. (Sodom and Gomorrah). Paris: Gallimard, 1954.
Rank, 0. (1923). Perversion and neurosis. Int. J. Psycho-Anal., 4: 270-292.
Schreber, D.P. (1903). Denkwiirdigkeiten eines Nervenkranken. (Memoirs of my nervous
illnes). In Daniel Paul Schreber. Memoirs of my Nervous Illness, Eds. & Transls. I
Macalpine & R. Hunter. London: Dawson, 1955.
Socarides, C. (1968). The Overt Homosexual. New York: Grune & Stratton.
Lis Lind, M.D.

Smedjevagen 12
S-131 33 Nacka
Sweden

Homosexuality and Paranoia PDF

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Homosexuality and Paranoia PDF

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

This article was downloaded by: [5.55.165.

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01062301.1982.10592407

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/

Homosexuality and Paranoia

The problems of manifest homosexuality and paranoia in men and, more

homosexual man and another man with a classical paranoid psychosis

H, as I will call the homosexual analysand, is 25 years old and

Paper read to the Swedish Psycho-Analytical Society. November 30. 1981.

THE IMPUCATIONS OF A HOMOSEXUAL WISH

When P started working in a new office he was received in an

H feels exhilarated, invigorated and confirmed in his manliness

What terrifies P is obviously that he might be degraded to the condi-

homosexual conflict by grandiosely accepting himself as the chosen mis-

CHARACIERISTICS OFTIIE HOMOSEXUAL LffiiDO

Most psychoanalytic authors seem to agree that male homosexual libido

In most of his previous sexual contacts H had played a passive

Lengthy speculation might be spent on the question of whether the

Even if male homosexual libido is defined as libido with passive aims, it is

P, who is a psychotic, lacks stability in his defensive structure.

The dogma of the obligatory passivity of the aims of male homosexual

P thought that his persecutors wanted to inject narcotics into

Occasionally H indulges in a special kind of monologue that

Rather peculiar occupations, but to H they are calming and pleasur-

H obviously delights in accusing me of manipulating and forc-

H and P make use of primary and secondary process thinking to a

H has the coquettish air of a seductive little boy. He creates an

difference with reference to the well-known phases of libido develop-

1HE OEDIPAL SE1TING

a homosexual or a paranoiac, is another example of how Freud (1918) did

Consciously, H loves his mother and hates his father. Uncon-

Consciously, P hates his mother and despises his father. Uncon-

THE OEDIPUS COMPLEX OF THE PARANOID PERSONALITY

In her papers on Schreber and Strindberg, Chasseguet-Smirgel (1966,

liable to be insufficient. "The paternal penis remains a penis (i.e. a sexual

When P was in his late oedipal phase, he was a soloist in a

TIIE OEDIPUS COMPLEX OF TIIE PERVERSE PERSONALITY

P's ideas about the correct distribution of the different sexual

do you mean? Can't one have both?".

The very first information H supplied in analysis about his fam-

I disagree with Chasseguet-Smirgel's exclusive emphasis on narcissistic

H virtually lacks the capacity of admiring anything he might not

The idealization of the component instinct implicates a disdain of geni-

H prefers to believe that the life of the heterosexual majority is

The complementary relationship between the sexes is effaced by the

The weakness of the pervert's defence is demonstrated by the fact that

H has started making use of his artistic talents in arranging

('Verleugnung'), later on manifesting itself in a divided attitude ('zwie.s-

H regards himself as superior to heterosexual men. At the same

HOMOSEXUAL WISHES AND MANIFEST PARANOID PSYCHOSIS

the paper on Schreber. In the case of P "the love of mankind in general"

P's object relations are all elaborated on the model of a lawsuit.

Because of the paranoiac's defective capacity for sublimation, friend-

interpretable as the paranoiac's endeavour to contradict the unbearable

P consulted a male doctor who had previously taken great inter-

A few weeks later the erotomania changed into regular delusions of

A couple of years after his first psychotic breakdown, P remar-

THE CONCEPT OF PROJECTION

So far, I have stressed the theoretical differences of the personality struc-

P avoids seeing himself as the author of any urges or feelings

Instead of perceiving an aggressive or a sexual impulse within himself,

During a trip alone to an Arab country, H was exposed to - or

seized by panic as soon as he arrived at his hotel. He imagined