An Examen of “The Invention of ‘Heterosexuality’” Part Two.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
{... cont’d from before}.
• [Mr. Ambrosino]: The 1901 Dorland’s Medical Dictionary defined
heterosexuality{02} as an “abnormal or perverted appetite toward the opposite sex”.
{cont’d after next ...}.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
{02}Editorial Note: As the neoteric term “hetero-sexuality” made its English debut nine years
earlier, on page 169 of the authorised translation of the eminent medico-legal study “ Psychopathia Sexualis” (the seventh, enlarged and revised, edition from the Austro-German
neurology and psychiatry Professor Dr. Krafft-Ebing), published in November 1892 by the American neurology and psychiatry Professor Dr.
Chaddock—as the nounal form of the hyphenated adjective “hetero-sexual” (derived via affixing the ‘-ity’ suffix to that base-word) which itself appears on twenty-three occasions throughout the 432-page volume with the meaning
everyone is familiar with today fluently contextualised—it is noteworthy how the aspirant
logomach
instead deviously privileges a later entry in a fledgling medical dictionary edited by Mr. Ryland W. Green, ᴀʙ i.e., ‘Artium
Baccalaureus’; (i.e., Bachelor of Arts) which quite nonsensically “defined heterosexuality” in a manner casting the vast majority
of humankind into the rôle of ‘abnormal perverts’.
Speaking of dictionaries, it is also noteworthy how in lieu of presenting any of those various dictionary
definitions already re-presented (further above) for the then-specialist term “heterosexual”
from one hundred or so years ago—with the word “heterosexual” drawn from the “people had a very different idea of what it means to be heterosexual” [emphasis added] click-bait lede
positioned directly under the title—the author of this ʙʙᴄ-hosted essay craftily cherry-picks an anomalous entry for its nounal form
“heterosexuality” instead.
Nevertheless, as it is patently evident that the vast majority of humankind circa “one
hundred years ago” could not possibly have been ‘abnormal perverts’ in regards their sexual appetites—the very word “abnormal” is predicated upon there being a majoritarian “normal” to deviate from—it is well worthwhile
investigating just how such a non-sensical entry found its way into a medical dictionary.
Before proceeding, though, a point of order first: that medical dictionary—cited by the aspirant polemicist
as being the “1901 Dorland’s Medical Dictionary” above—is actually the 1901 “American
Illustrated Medical Dictionary” as it was not until over half-a-century later (upon the 1956 death of its senior author, the
obstetrics and gynaecology Professor Dr. W. A. Newman Dorland) that each revision of the
dictionary published thereafter was retitled to incorporate his name. Viz.:
• “The first dictionary in the Dorland’s line, the American
Pocket Medical Dictionary, edited by W. A. Newman Dorland, AM, MD, was first published in
1898 and was a small volume just over 500 pages long. It was followed two years later by the American
Illustrated Medical Dictionary. Both sprang from the fertile mind of Ryland W. Green, the
illustrious long-time editor-in-chief at the W. B. Saunders Company, who remained intimately
involved in their writing until he died in 1949 while at work on the 22nd edition of the big
dictionary. *Dr. Dorland died in 1956, at which time the dictionaries were retitled to
incorporate his name*, which was how they had generally come to be known. (...elided...). In 1900, while
he was Associate Professor [of Obstetrics] at the Polyclinic Hospital in Philadelphia, Dr.
Dorland was invited to participate in the compilation of *the first edition of what was
then the American Illustrated Medical Dictionary, which title the book bore until the
23rd edition*, the first following his death, when it was retitled Dorland’s
Illustrated Medical Dictionary...”. [emphases added].
The reason for this otherwise minor point of order is because it is
indicative of how the author of this ʙʙᴄ-hosted essay did not personally
verify the source of their (copy-&-paste) quotation—originally obtained from page 86 of
the 2007 reprint of Mr. Katz’s expanded “Socialist Review 20” screed entitled
“The Invention of Heterosexuality” where the same misnaming
occurs[*]—else that medical dictionary herewith cited by the aspirant controversialist surely would have been, as a matter of course, accurately titled the “American
Illustrated Medical Dictionary” as that is what is emblazoned on its title page in large black-and-red letters.
[*][Mr. Katz]: “In 1901, Dorland’s Medical Dictionary, published in
Philadelphia, continued to define “Heterosexuality” as “Abnormal or perverted appetite toward the opposite sex”. Dorland’s heterosexuality, a new
“appetite”, was clearly identified with an “opposite sex” hunger. But that craving was still aberrant. Dorland’s calling heterosexuality “abnormal or
perverted” is, according to the Oxford English Dictionary’s first Supplement (1933), a “misapplied” definition. But, contrary to the
OED, Dorland’s is a perfectly legitimate understanding...”. ~ (p. 86, “The Invention of Heterosexuality” by
Jonathan Ned Katz; 1995, Dutton; 2007, University of Chicago Press).
It is additionally indicative of how the author of this ʙʙᴄ-hosted essay, in like fashion, would not have
personally verified the source of their next definition of similar ilk which they quote immediately after this non-sensical entry (now much further
below)—featuring on page 92, of the same 2007 reprint as above, and therein quoted from a “ 1923
supplement” of the “Webster’s New International Dictionary (1909)”—so as to thereafter triumphally contrast it with the 1934 “Webster’s New International Dictionary (1909)” definition (more on this graceless exercise in futility, much further below, where the aspirant arguer’s next copy-&-paste quotation appears in sequence).
To continue: that very first “American Pocket Medical Dictionary” of 1898 is available online at the Open Library. There
is no entry for “heterosexuality”, however, but there is an entry for its antipodean adjective “homosexuality” on page 214. Viz.:
• Homosexual′ity. Sexual perversion toward those of same sex.~ (page 214,
“American Pocket Medical Dictionary”; 1st ed.; senior author, Dr. W. A. Newman Dorland; editor-in-chief Ryland W. Green, ᴀʙ; ©1898).
Considering how the word “hetero-sexual” was actually used 125-years ago—as per the further
above excerpt from the “Psychopathia Sexualis” and all the other primary source
material previously cited—then the click-bait lede for this ʙʙᴄ-hosted essay, situated strategically under its mala fide title,
would have obtained historical verity and shewn authorial integrity if it were phrased thisaway (for example):
• [example only]: “One hundred years ago, people had a very different idea of what it means to be *homosexual*.
Understanding that shift in thinking can tell us a lot about fluid sexual identities today, argues Brandon Ambrosino”.
[emphasis added].
Given how those “fluid sexual identities” the aspirant disputant wots of are *not* increated in peoples of the fecundous other-sex sexual predisposition it is more than passing strange—to the
point of being quite queer in fact—how the author of this ʙʙᴄ-hosted essay “argues”
about people having a very different idea of what it meant to be “heterosexual” one hundred
years ago when what those peoples thence demonstrably had a very different idea of was what it means to be
“homosexual” instead.
The very obverse, in fact, to what the aspirant eristic argues regarding
some shifty thinking they fabricated out of whole cloth!
Some background info: definitions of a similar “sexual perversion” nature, as in the above
1898 entry for those of an infecundous same-sex sexual persuasion, were standard 20th century practice until nigh on a centennium after 19th century
physicians specialising in psychiatry had first begun appropriating infecund same-sex sexualism from religious bodies
(thereby effectively transforming,
in an élan of pathologisation, carnal sin unto mental disorder) when, in 1973, the Board of Trustees of the American Psychiatric Association voted by a six-point margin to
authorise the removal of the “Sociopathic Personality Disturbance” diagnosis of infecund same-sex sexualism from the second edition of its
“Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders” (a.k.a. DSM-II)—albeit sequentially replaced by diagnoses of “Sexual Orientation
Disturbance” and “Ego-Dystonic Homosexuality” and “Sexual Disorder Not Otherwise Specified” (currently)—and which socio-politically
instigated ballot-box de-medicalisation has been jocularly characterised by an online wag as the first time in history that a disease was eliminated by the stroke of a pen.
To proceed: that very first “American Illustrated Medical Dictionary”, published on the 8th of December 1900, is available
online at Hathi Trust (the 1901 reprint which author of this ʙʙᴄ-hosted essay cited, further above, was published eleven months later
on November 16th). The 1898 entry for “homosexuality” was retained and that anomalous ‘abnormal perverts’ definition
for “heterosexuality” the aspirant polemicist quoted—which, the “Oxford English Dictionary Supplement” of 1933 attentively advised, was a “misapplied” definition[*]—had been added. Viz.:
• Homosexuality (ho-mo-sex-u-al′it-e) [Gr. ὁμός same + sexuality. Sexual
perversion toward those of the same sex.~ (page 303, The American Illustrated Medical Dictionary; senior
author, Dr. W. A. Newman Dorland; editor-in-chief: Ryland W. Green, ᴀʙ; ©1900).
• Heterosexuality (het′′er-o-sex-u-al′it-e). Abnormal
or perverted appetite toward the opposite sex. ~ (page
300, The American Illustrated Medical Dictionary; 1st ed.; senior author, Dr. W. A. Newman
Dorland; editor-in-chief: Ryland W. Green, ᴀʙ; ©1900).
[*]Heterosexual (he:tĕrose·ksiuăl), a. [See Hetero- and Sexual].
Pertaining to or characterised by the normal relation of the sexes: opp. to homosexual.
Also as substantive, a heterosexual person. Hence Heterosexuality. (Sometimes *misapplied*, as
in quot. 1901). 1901 Dorland Med. Dict. (ed. 2), Heterosexuality, abnormal or
perverted sexual appetite toward the opposite sex. a. 1909 Buck’s Handbk. Med. Sci.
V. 134 (Cent. Dict. Suppl.) Heterosexual. 1920 tr. Freud’s Coll. Papers (1924) II.
207. To convert a fully developed homosexual into a heterosexual. 1927 Scots Observer
ɪ Oct 15/3 A certain proportion of people...are as instinctively homosexual as the normal
individual is heterosexual. [coloured & italicised
emphasis added]. ~ (page 460, “A New English
Dictionary on Historical Principles: Introduction, Supplement, and Bibliography”;
Co-Editors: Prof. William A. Craigie (1867-1957) & Dr. Charles T. Onions (1873-1965); 1933
Oxford: Clarendon Press.).
As all it takes for that “misapplied” definition to be in accord with
those typical “sexual perversion” entries for “homosexuality”
is the simple substitution of the word ‘same’ for the word ‘opposite’ (as in “abnormal or perverted appetite toward
the same sex” that is) then the very existence of this anomalous entry itself is indicative of just how uninformed people
actually were one hundred or so years ago—which benightedness includes both the definition’s author and the dictionary’s consulters—about this neoteric specialist term.
In the “Preface” to this first edition the medical
dictionary’s 36-year-old senior author, Associate Professor of Obstetrics Dr. William
Alexander Newman Dorland, MD., lays out his general aim and his special intention in regards
the wording of these definitions (making them “clear, concise, and yet sufficiently
complete” he states) which special intention, oddly enough, does not include the word
‘accurate’. Viz.:
• “The aim of the author of this work has been to produce, in a volume of convenient size, an up-to-date Medical Dictionary, sufficiently full
for the varied requirements of all classes of medical men. Physicians and students have long felt the need of
such a work. (...elided...). Special attention has been given to the wording of the definitions, with the
intention of making them *clear, concise, and yet sufficiently complete*. Under the
more important headings a considerable amount of collateral descriptive matter has been
included...”. [emphasis added]. ~ (page 3, “The American Illustrated Medical Dictionary”;
1st ed.; senior author, Dr. W. A. Newman Dorland; editor-in-chief: Ryland W. Green,
ᴀʙ; ©1900).
Notwithstanding having published that “misapplied” entry in the first place, the “revised and enlarged” 4th
edition, published in July 1906, showed no change from the 1st edition of 1900 despite the “Preface
to the 4th Edition” on Page 3 advising that “ever since the appearance of the last edition (i.e.,
June 1903) the editor has been engaged in *a thorough
revision of the text*, and in making a careful search for the new words that are
constantly appearing...”. [emphasis added]. It was reprinted in 1907. Viz.:
• Homosexuality (ho-mo-sex-u-al′it-e) [Gr. ὁμός same +
sexuality]. Sexual perversion toward those of the same sex.~ (page 336, The American Illustrated Medical
Dictionary; 4th ed.; senior author, Dr. W. A. Newman Dorland; editor-in-chief: Ryland W. Green, ᴀʙ; ©1906).
• Heterosexuality (het′′er-o-sex-u-al′it-e). Abnormal or perverted appetite
toward the opposite sex.
~ (page 333, The American Illustrated Medical Dictionary; 4th ed.;
senior author, Dr. W. A. Newman Dorland; editor-in-chief: Ryland W. Green, ᴀʙ; ©1906).
By the time the 7th “revised and enlarged” edition was published, in September 1913, two matter-of-fact (i.e.,
non-judgemental) definitions for both “homosexual” and “heterosexual” had been
added. However, and despite that newly-scribed “heterosexual” entry being physically inserted by human
hand-&-eye into its alphabetical place situated immediately above that anomalous ‘abnormal perverts’ entry, it showed no change from the 1st edition
of 1900 even though the “Preface to the 7th Edition” on Page 5 advised how “the steadily increasing demand for this
dictionary has spurred on the editor and publishers to keep the work abreast of the times by *a complete revision*. During the past two years
the editor and his assistants have been engaged in *the work of revision* and enlargement.” (...elided...).
The *entire work has been carefully revised* (...elided...). Once again the editor wishes to record his
obligation to the hosts of friends of the Dictionary who have *aided with criticisms, suggestions, and lists of new words*...”.
[emphases added]. It was reprinted in January 1914.
Viz.:
• Homosexual (ho-mo-seks′u-al). Directed toward a person of the same sex.
• Homosexuality (ho-mo-seks-u-al′it-e) [Gr. ὁμός same + sexuality].
Sexual perversion toward those of the same sex. ~ (page 435, The American Illustrated Medical Dictionary; 7th ed.;
senior author, Dr. W. A. Newman Dorland; editor-in-chief: Ryland W. Green, ᴀʙ; ©1913).
• Heterosexual (het′′er-o-seks′u-al). Pertaining to the opposite sex.
• Heterosexuality (het′′er-o-seks-u-al′it-e). Abnormal or perverted appetite toward the opposite sex.
~ (page 430, The American Illustrated Medical Dictionary; 7th ed.; senior author, Dr. W. A. Newman Dorland;
editor-in-chief: Ryland W. Green, ᴀʙ; ©1913).
The 8th “revised and enlarged” edition, published two years later in August 1915, contained an unexplained volte-face entry,
displacing entirely the “misapplied” definition for “heterosexuality”
(which had sustained a prolonged presence, over fifteen years, through seven successively “revised and enlarged” editions), while the three other
entries remained the same as in the 7th edition of 1913. Viz.:
• Heterosexuality (het′′er-o-seks-u-al′it-e). Love or
sexual desire toward persons of the opposite sex.
• Heterosexual (het′′er-o-seks′u-al). Pertaining to the
opposite sex.
~ (page 440, The American Illustrated
Medical Dictionary; 8th ed.; senior author, Dr. W. A. Newman Dorland; editor-in-chief: Ryland
W. Green, ᴀʙ; ©1915).
• Homosexuality (ho-mo-seks-u-al′it-e) [Gr. ὁμός same + sexuality].
Sexual perversion toward those of the same sex.
• Homosexual (ho-mo-seks′u-al). Directed toward a person of the
same sex.
~ (page 445, The American Illustrated Medical
Dictionary; 8th ed.; senior author, Dr. W. A. Newman Dorland; editor-in-chief: Ryland W. Green, ᴀʙ; ©1915).
The 10th edition, published four years later, in August 1919, showed no
change from the ‘volte-face’ 8th edition of 1915 for any of the entries. Viz.:
• Heterosexuality (het′′er-o-seks-u-al′it-e). Love or
sexual desire toward persons of the opposite sex.
• Heterosexual (het′′er-o-seks′u-al). Pertaining to the
opposite sex.
~ (page 466, The American Illustrated
Medical Dictionary; 10th ed.; senior author, Dr. W. A. Newman Dorland; editor-in-chief: Ryland
W. Green, ᴀʙ; ©1919).
• Homosexuality (ho-mo-seks-u-al′it-e) [Gr. ὁμός same + sexuality].
Sexual perversion toward those of the same sex.
• Homosexual (ho-mo-seks′u-al). Directed toward a person of the
same sex. ~ (page 472, The American Illustrated Medical
Dictionary; 10th ed.; senior author, Dr. W. A. Newman Dorland; editor-in-chief: Ryland W.
Green, ᴀʙ; ©1919).
The 14th edition, published eight years later, in May 1927, also showed no
change from the 10th edition of 1919 for any of the entries. Viz.:
• Heterosexuality (het′′er-o-seks-u-al′it-e). Love or
sexual desire toward persons of the opposite sex.
• Heterosexual (het′′er-o-seks′u-al). Pertaining to the
opposite sex.
~ (page 543, The American Illustrated
Medical Dictionary; 14th ed.; senior author, Dr. W. A. Newman Dorland; editor-in-chief: Ryland
W. Green, ᴀʙ; ©1927).
• Homosexuality (ho-mo-seks-u-al′it-e) [Gr. ὁμός same + sexuality].
Sexual perversion toward those of the same sex.
• Homosexual (ho-mo-seks′u-al). Directed toward a person of the
same sex. ~ (page 551, The American Illustrated Medical Dictionary; 14th ed.; senior author,
Dr. W. A. Newman Dorland; editor-in-chief: Ryland W. Green, ᴀʙ; ©1927).
(And that is the last of the freely-available online editions).
All of which goes to show that sometime after the outbreak of “The
Great War”—as World War One was known as at the time—the fêted Mr. Ryland W. Green,
ᴀʙ, that “illustrious long-time editor-in-chief” at the “W. B.
Saunders Company” (the company notorious for publishing the ‘Kinsey Reports’ in 1948 &
1953), changed that “fertile mind” of his, or had it changed for
him ,
and radically transformed that “abnormal or perverted
appetite toward the opposite sex” medical dictionary entry into thenceforth meaning “love or sexual desire
toward persons of the opposite sex” with nary the briefest of notations to indicate that a miraculous makeover had occurred, during that
interval, for the approximately 1.79 billion ‘abnormal or perverted’ persons of the
fecundous other-sex sexual predisposition who had been alive on the planet back then (the
total world population for 1915 was an estimated 1,810,000,000).
Sacrébleu! What an incredible miracle it was! To have 1.79 billion
‘abnormal perverts’ become 1.79 billion ‘loving desirers’ shortly after the outbreak of “The War To End All Wars”—as World War One was also
known as at the time—is surely to have had a benefactive effect on human relations,
thenceforth, all throughout those slaughterous war years (circa 9 million military and 5
million civilian war-deaths) and the flapping 1920s decade which followed, as well as all the
way through the stagnating ’30s and frightful ’40s (circa 15 million military and 40
million civilian war-deaths), and each of the chillingly MAD decennia thereafter, n’est-ce pas?
More prosaically, though, is the likelihood that the initial definition (the “abnormal
or perverted appetite toward the opposite sex” entry) of 1900 was unwittingly derived from a category error for the word
“heterosexuals” published in a footnoted tabular format, on pages 198-199 of the May 1892 “Chicago Medical
Society Recorder”, by a prominent alienist of the era, Dr. Jas. G. Kiernan, in his 25-page essay entitled “Responsibility in Sexual Perversion”.
Viz.:
• [Dr. Jas. G. Kiernan]: “Sexual perversions being multiform,
classification for clinical forensic reasons becomes necessary. A classification I proposed nearly a decade ago is as follows: First: Those which originate in imperative conceptions.
Second: Those due to congenital defect. Third: Those which are incident to insanity, periods
of involution, or to neurotic states. Finally, those which result from vice. The last arise
from the fact that the nerves too frequently irritated by a given stimulus require a new
stimulus to rouse them. Those who have a neuropathic diathesis {i.e., ‘propensity’} and whose sexual
functions are not normally performed. Those who from birth are normal.
Finally the mixed cases. G. Frank Lydston classifies these cases as follows:
▪ I. Congenital and perhaps hereditary sexual perversion: (a.)
Sexual perversion without structural defect of the sexual organs; (b.) Sexual
perversion with defect of genital structure, e.g., hermaphroditism; (c.) Sexual
perversion with obvious cerebral defect like idiocy.
▪ II. Acquired sexual perversion: (a.) Sexual perversion from
pregnancy, the menopause, ovarian disease, hysteria, etc.; (b.) Sexual perversion from
acquired cerebral disease, with or without recognised insanity; (c.) Sexual perversion
(?) from vice; (d.) Sexual perversion from over-stimulation of the nerves of sexual
sensibility and the receptive sexual centres, incidental to sexual excesses and masturbation.
Krafft-Ebing divides the *abnormal* manifestations
of the sexual *appetite* into:
▪ I. Peripheral Neuroses: Sensory. (Anaesthesia. Hyperaesthesia.
Neuralgia); Motor. (Spasms. Pollutions. Paralyses. Spermatorrhoea); Secretory. (Aspermia.
Polyspermia).
▪ II. Spinal Neuroses. (Erection Disorders. Ejaculation
Disorders).
▪ III. Cerebral Neuroses: Paradoxal Neuroses.
Anaesthetic Neuroses. Hyperaesthetic Neuroses: (Nymphomania.
Satyriasis); Paraesthetic Neuroses: (Aberrant but normal appetite: (Sadism.
Masochism. Fetishism. Necrophilism);
Diminution or abolition of normal appetite: (Congenital sexual perversion. Acquired sexual perversion).
▪ Sexual *perversion* proper: Psychical hermaphroditism
*or heterosexuals*; Pure homosexuals.
Effemination or viraginity. Gynandry and androgyny. [emphases added].
From a medico-legal standpoint the first variety of sexual perversion
demanding attention is sadism. One of the most notorious cases of this is that of “Bluebeard”, thus described by
Chevalier.
Note well how the highlighted words “abnormal” and
“appetite” and “perversion” have an exceptional correspondence
with the words “abnormal” and “perverted” and
“appetite” in the medical dictionary definition (videlicet: “abnormal or
perverted appetite toward persons of the opposite sex” further above) first published eight years later in 1900.
Note also how the highlighted words “inclinations to both sexes occur”
in the small-print Footnote № 30 are *not* an apt categorisation of the medico-legal term
“heterosexuals” they are the footnote for (more on this further below).
Now, all definitions in medical dictionaries worth their salt have to be
sourced in articles published in reputable medical journals, by duly qualified physicians, and
the “American Illustrated Medical Dictionary” is no exception in this regard.
In fact, two years earlier, in the preface to its pocket dictionary forerunner, the
editor-in-chief, Mr. Ryland W. Green, ᴀʙ, specifically mentions both the “larger
dictionaries” and the “latest medical literature” as being the
source of that dictionary’s definitions. Viz.:
• ”This small volume is the outcome of a need for a pocket
dictionary which, though handy in size, should be so full and complete as to supply the wants
of the practising physician no less than those of the student of medicine. It is not the
editor’s intention to attempt to take the place of the larger dictionaries indispensable to
a thorough understanding of the language of medicine, but he has striven to develop the
possibilities of the pocket lexicon to a degree not heretofore attained. The chief aim has
been to make the selection of words as complete as possible. To this end *the larger
dictionaries have been freely used*, and *a systematic gleaning has been made through
the latest medical literature*, so that the vocabulary may be said to be strictly up to
date...”. [emphases added]. ~ (page 3, “American Pocket Medical Dictionary”; 1st ed.; senior
author, Dr. W. A. Newman Dorland; editor-in-chief Ryland W. Green, ᴀʙ; ©1898).
As there is no valid reason to presume the “Chicago Medical Society
Recorder” would not constitute “the latest medical literature”
to be systematically gleaned, so that the vocabulary in the 1900 “American Illustrated
Medical Dictionary” may be said to be strictly up to date, then it is more than
likely that the “abnormal or perverted appetite toward
the opposite sex” entry was indeed derived from that source.
Which implies, of course, that the editor-in-chief, Mr. Ryland W. Green,
ᴀʙ, neither read the “inclinations to
both sexes” small-print Footnote № 30 nor verified the citations by checking the
relevant material in Dr. Kiernan’s nominated source documents.
And, in regards to those nominated source documents, take particular note
of how Dr. Kiernan expressly cites “Krafft-Ebing” and how his corresponding small-print footnote—(videlicet: “[21]‘Psychopathia
Sexualis’, Chaddock’s translation” above)—specifically attributes Prof. Chaddock’s then-forthcoming November
1892 rendition of that German medico-legal study as the source material for his table of those categories, which, he says, Dr.
Krafft-Ebing “divides the abnormal manifestations of the sexual appetite into” on pages 197-198 above.
(Dr. Kiernan’s and Prof. Chaddock’s colleagueship is evidenced on page
viii of the “Translator’s Preface”, in that volume, where Prof. Chaddock explicitly expresses his gratitude to Dr.
James G. Kiernan, of Chicago, “For much encouragement in the work of translation” and depicts him, along with
Dr. G. Frank Lydston of Chicago, as “both well-known investigators in this domain of psychopathology”).
Equally noteworthy, then, is how nowhere in Prof. Chaddock’s translation
of the “Psychopathia Sexualis” is the hyphenated word “hetero-sexual” to be found either coupled
with and/or assigned attributes which properly pertain to what was known then as “Psychical
hermaphroditism” (a.k.a. bisexualism)—such as the patently erroneous “inclinations to both sexes” attribution in Dr. Kiernan’s small-print Footnote
№ 30—or classified under the title “Sexual perversion proper”
or any variation thereof.
What will be found in the “Psychopathia Sexualis”
medico-legal study, however, is the classification of two forms of infecund same-sex sexualism—therein
depicted as acquired and congenital “contrary sexual instincts”, with the
mildest form of the latter called “psychic hermaphroditism” and the more
marked cases called “urnings”
(i.e.,
“pure homo-sexuals”)—as
already quoted earlier, in that brief excerpt from the “Psychopathia Sexualis” (which is
worth re-reading with this classification in mind).
And this “acquired and congenital” classification is how Dr.
Allen Ross Defendorf, ᴀᴍ, ᴍᴅ, a lecturer on mental diseases at Yale
University, also delineates those two main forms on page 134 in Volume V of the “Reference
Handbook of the Medical Sciences” published in 1902 (i.e., the essay cited by the
“Century Dictionary and Cyclopaedia” in 1909) wherein he too cites “Krafft-Ebing”
as his source. Viz.:
• [Dr. Defendorf]: “According to Krafft-Ebing the disease {i.e., “contrary sexual instincts”} occurs in one of two forms, the acquired or the congenital, each of which
differs somewhat in mode of onset, character of symptoms, and prognosis. In the acquired form
patients early develop marked sexual feelings, which at first are purely hetero-sexual. Later,
either spontaneously or as the result of some accidental injurious influence, especially
masturbation, homo-sexual feelings appear. (...elided...). In congenital homosexuality, on the other hand, the
perversion of the sexual instinct exists from the first. In the mildest type, psychic hermaphroditism {i.e.,
‘bisexualism’}, there are alongside the homosexual feelings natural sexual feelings for the opposite sex, but
these are much weaker and are manifested only periodically. As in the acquired homosexuality
the contrary sexual instincts may involve only the sexual life, not affecting the personality
of the individual. In the more marked cases, called “urnings”{a.k.a. ‘pure homosexuals’}, there exhibits a
total absence of feeling toward and even an abhorrence for the opposite sex...”.
(Dr. Defendorf’s 1,114-word essay titled “Contrary Sexual Instincts” is
quoted
in full in this mouse-hover tool-tip ).
It becomes compellingly evident, then, that the footnoted medico-legal term
“heterosexuals” in question—which Dr. Kiernan
situated between the footnoted term “Psychical hermaphroditism” and the footnoted
words “Pure homosexuals” under that “Sexual perversion
proper” title in his categorical tabling of Dr. Krafft-Ebing’s classifications (further above)—should have been
the identically-footnoted medico-legal term “homosexuals⁽³⁰⁾” instead (whereby those
small-print footnotes then properly fit and the qualifier ‘Pure’
finally has referent coherence). For example:
[example only]:
▪ Sexual perversion proper: Psychical hermaphroditism or homosexuals; Pure homosexuals.
Effemination or viraginity. Gynandry and androgyny.
▪ Footnotes:
(...19-28 elided...).
[29]Traces of the normal sexual appetite are discoverable.
[30]In these inclinations to both sexes occur as well as to abnormal methods of gratification.
[31]The general mental state is that of the opposite sex.
(...32-35 elided...).
[end example].
Put succinctly: sufficient and proximate textual evidence shows the
medico-legal term “heterosexuals” to be either an overlooked
scrivener’s error
in the manuscript supplied to the printers, or an inattentive typesetter’s mistake,
and the medico-legal term “homosexuals”
should have been where “heterosexuals” is (erroneously) placed.
Besides which, were Dr. Kiernan to have indeed knowingly and/or
intentionally included peoples of the fecundous other-sex sexual predisposition in his table
of those categories which he says Dr. Krafft-Ebing divided the “abnormal manifestations of the sexual
appetite” into (bearing in mind that the word “abnormal” is defined, for example,
as “not normal, average, typical, or usual” in the Webster’s College
Dictionary) then no person of the fecundative other-sex sexual proclivity anywhere on the
planet—inclusive of Dr. W. A. Newman Dorland, the medical dictionary’s senior author, and
Mr. Ryland W. Green, ᴀʙ, his editor-in-chief—would have qualified as normal.
Which is just too silly for words.
Speaking of which silliness: as it took fifteen years and seven
successively “revised and enlarged” editions (even with the criticisms,
suggestions, lists of new words, and cooperation of the hosts of friends of the dictionary) to
change the ‘abnormal perverts’ definition into that ‘loving desirers’ entry—and
which sloth, by the bye, bears mute witness to the unprofessional way Dr. William Alexander
Newman Dorland conducted his senior authorship of the “American Illustrated Medical
Dictionary” during his reign—its paradoxically prolonged public presence
principally presents particularly problematic parapsychological permutations pertaining to his
long-living spouse, Mrs. Katharine Keehn Dorland, having endured intimate relations with an ‘abnormal pervert’ (as per the
definition he authorised) for those fifteen years.
Ha! ... all amusement actuating apt alliteration’s artful aid aside—and despite the inapposite ‘abnormal perverts’ entry being
just too silly for words—some fifty-odd years later a certain temerarious
forty-year-old—self-identifying as a “radical social constructionist” of the
“Karl Marx” variety and disadvantageously equipped with an
agenda born of an infecundous ‘queer-centric’ Weltanschauung (as in, a ‘rainbow-world’ ambit, that is)—expeditiously ignored
this 1915 ‘volte-face’ correction and zeroed in on both the misapplied 1900 “Abnormal or perverted
appetite” entry and the 1892 “Psychical hermaphroditism or heterosexuals”
category error, as if they alone represented the pot-o’-gold at that magnific rainbow’s end, and wrote meretriciously about the outrageous
outcome of that exclusory focus as follows. Viz.:
• [Mr. Katz]: “In the late 1970s and early 1980s, as I researched a
second book on homosexual American history, I was astonished to discover that the now common, unquestioned bifurcation of people, their
emotions and acts, into “homosexual” and “heterosexual” was a recent manufacture. (...elided...). The words
“homosexual” and “heterosexual”, I learned, were first printed in an American publication, a medical journal, in May 1892
(...elided...). In their debut appearance, I noticed, the terms “heterosexual” and “homosexual” defined two
kinds of sexual perversion, judged according to a procreative standard. A list of “Sexual perversions proper” included “Psychical
hermaphroditism or heterosexuals”. A note explained that “heterosexuals” were persons in whom occur “inclinations to both sexes” as well as
inclinations “to abnormal methods of gratification”. (...elided...). In 1901, a Philadelphia medical dictionary
was still defining “heterosexuality” as ”Abnormal or perverted appetite toward the opposite sex”...”.
(pp. 180-181, “‘Homosexual’ and ‘Heterosexual’:
Questioning the Terms” by Jonathan Ned Katz; 1997, NYU Press, New York).
As the above rainbow-hued red-herring has metastasised prodigiously both in books and online—such as this
ʙʙᴄ-hosted essay for instance—it is worth quoting from Mr. Katz’s original
1990 “Socialist Review 20” screed itself so
there be no misreading of the enormity of the deceit his exclusory focussing propagated. Viz.:
• [Mr. Katz]: “The earliest-known American use of the word “heterosexual” occurs in a medical journal article by Dr. James G. Kiernan of
Chicago, read before the city’s medical society on March 7, 1892, and published that May—portentous
dates in sexual history. But Dr. Kiernan’s heterosexuals were definitely not exemplars of
normality. Heterosexuals, said Kiernan, were deformed by a mental condition, “psychical
hermaphroditism” {i.e., bisexualism}. Its symptoms were “inclinations to both
sexes”. These heterodox sexuals also betrayed inclinations “to abnormal methods of gratification” (...elided...). Dr. Kiernan’s article of 1892 also included one of
the earliest-known uses of the word “homosexual” in American English. Kiernan
defined “Pure homosexuals” as persons whose “general mental state is that of
the opposite sex”. Kiernan thus defined homosexuals by their deviance from a gender norm.
His “heterosexuals” displayed a double deviance from both gender and procreative
norms. (...elided...). That same year, 1892, Dr. Krafft-Ebing’s
influential Psychopathia Sexualis was first translated and published in the United States. In
Krafft-Ebing’s book, “hetero-sexual” was used unambiguously in the modern sense to
refer to an erotic feeling for a different sex. “Homo-sexual” referred unambiguously
to an erotic feeling for a “same sex”. In Krafft-Ebing’s volume, unlike Kiernan’s
article, heterosexual and homosexual were clearly distinguished from a third category, a
“psycho-sexual hermaphroditism” {i.e., bisexualism}, defined by impulses toward
both sexes...”. (pp. 7-34, “The Invention of Heterosexuality”
by Jonathan Ned Katz; Socialist Review, Vol. 20, № 1, Jan-Mar 1990).
Despite that frank acknowledgement back then, in 1990, of peoples of the fecundous other-sex sexual
predisposition in “Dr. Krafft-Ebing’s influential Psychopathia Sexualis” being referred
to “unambiguously in the modern sense”, a more recent version seventeen years later (2007)—whilst
parenthetically admitting Dr. Kiernan “incorrectly” cited Dr. Krafft-Ebing as his source—has
that much-laboured “ abnormality of heterosexuals” transmogrified into appearing
“thrice that of homosexuals” such as to be so “absolutely
abnormal” as to then describe “an unequivocal pervert” no less! Viz.:
• [Mr. Katz]: “The earliest-known use of the word heterosexual
in the United States occurs in an article by Dr. James G. Kiernan, published in a Chicago
medical journal in May 1892. Heterosexual was not equated there with normal sex, but
with perversion—a definitional tradition that lasted in middle-class culture into the 1920s.
Kiernan linked heterosexual to one of several “abnormal manifestations of the sexual
appetite”—in a list of “sexual perversions proper”—in an article on
“Sexual Perversion”. Kiernan’s brief note on depraved heterosexuals attributed
their definition (incorrectly, as we’ll see) to Dr. Richard von Krafft-Ebing of Vienna.
These heterosexuals were associated with a mental condition, “psychical
hermaphroditism” {i.e., bisexualism}. This syndrome assumed
that feelings had a biological sex. Heterosexuals experienced so-called male erotic attraction to females and
so-called female erotic attraction to males. That is, these heterosexuals periodically felt
“inclinations to both sexes” {i.e., bisexualism}. The hetero in these
heterosexuals referred not to their interest in a different sex, but to their
desire for two different sexes. Feeling desire inappropriate, supposedly, for their
sex, these heterosexuals were guilty of what we now think of as gender and erotic deviance.
Heterosexuals were also guilty of reproductive deviance. That is, they betrayed inclinations
to “abnormal methods of gratification”—modes of ensuring pleasure without
reproducing the species. They also demonstrated “traces of the normal sexual
appetite”—a touch of the desire to reproduce. Dr. Kiernan’s article also included the
earliest-known U.S. publication of the word homosexual. The “pure
homosexuals” he cited were persons whose “general mental state is that of the
opposite sex.” These homosexuals were defined explicitly as gender benders, rebels from
proper masculinity and femininity. In contrast, his heterosexuals deviated explicitly from
gender, erotic, and procreative norms. In their American debut, the abnormality of
heterosexuals appeared to be thrice that of homosexuals. Though Kiernan’s article employed
the new terms heterosexual and homosexual, their meaning was ruled by an old,
absolute reproductive ideal. His heterosexual described a mixed person and compound urge—at
once sex-differentiated, Eros-oriented, and reproductive. In Kiernan’s essay, heterosexuals’
ambivalent procreative desire made them absolutely abnormal. This first exercise in
heterosexual definition described an unequivocal pervert. The new term hetero-sexual
next appeared early in 1893, in the first U.S. publication, in English, of Psychopathia
Sexualis, with Especial Reference to Contrary Sexual Instinct: A Medico-Legal Study, by
Richard von Krafft-Ebing, “Professor of Psychiatry and Neurology at the University of
Vienna”. (...elided...). Contrary to Kiernan’s earlier attribution,
Krafft-Ebing consistently uses hetero-sexual to mean normal sex”. (pp.
21-22, ‘The Debut of the Heterosexual’ by Jonathan Ned Katz, Ch. 1, Pt. I. of “Sexualities and Communication in Everyday Life: A
Reader” edited by Karen E. Lovaas & Mercilee M. Jenkins; 2007; Sage publications, Inc. California).
As Mr. Katz’s “depraved heterosexuals” have
apparitional habitancy only in that social constructionist’s rainbow-hued Weltanschauung then the above text provides significant insight
into just how the mind of a radical politico-organisational activist functions a couple of decades after having first lost touch with reality.
And the chutzpah required to publicly confect ‘bizarro-world’ bull of such magnitude out of one single solitary error—a never-repeated error on the part of Dr. Kiernan (a prolific medical writer
whose other essays, both before and after, show no evidence whatsoever of him ever referring to peoples of the fecundous other-sex sexual
predisposition generically as being ‘abnormal perverts’)—is of a vainglorious proportion.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch: at some stage over the period 1891-1909, and apparently not endowed with Mr. Ryland W. Green’s
“fertile mind” of previous note, Dr. Benjamin E. Smith, editor-in-chief of the 1909 expanded version of the
“Century Dictionary and Cyclopaedia”, had ensured the base-word “heterosexual” would be a matter of
physicianly determination—resulting in the matter-of-fact (i.e., non-judgemental) “relating to the opposite sex”
definition being duly preserved for posterity in 1909—by requiring the staff of ‘H’
department to consult page 134 in Volume Five of the 1902 revised and rewritten 2nd edition “Reference
Handbook of The Medical Sciences”, an eight-volume set (NB.: the “American
Illustrated Medical Dictionary” is a single-volume digest) compiled under the
professorial eye of Dr. Albert Henry Buck, ᴀᴍ, ᴍᴅ (1842-1922), and
then distil the above five-word profundity out of the 1,114-word essay featured thereupon
entitled “Contrary Sexual Instincts” (written by Dr. Allen Ross Defendorf,
ᴀᴍ, ᴍᴅ (born 1871), a Yale Lecturer on Mental Diseases and the
Assistant Physician and Pathologist at the ‘Hospital for the Insane’ in Middletown,
Connecticut), wherein that base-word appeared thrice in its generic or all-inclusive sense (as
per his “natural sexual feelings for the opposite sex” and his “normal sexual
desires” plus his “regular and natural intercourse” phraseology,
further below), making sure to thereafter cite it as being the doctoral source for that
new-to-the-dictionary adjective whereby an estimated 1.5 billion peoples’ fecundative
other-sex sexual proclivity could be readily referred to in contrast to approximately 15
million people whose infecundous same-sex sexual predilection was distinguished by a
differently-prefixed adjective[*]. Viz.:
• heterosexual (het′′ë-rō-sek′šū-äl), a. [Greek
ἕτερος, ‘other’ + Latin sexus, ‘sex’ + -al¹.] Relating to the opposite sex. (Buck,
Med. Handbook, V. 134) [emphasis added]. ~ (page 585, “The Century Dictionary and
Cyclopaedia”; Vol. XI.; editor-in-chief Benjamin E. Smith, ᴀᴍ, ʟʜᴅ; ©1909).
[*]homosexual (hō-mō-sek′šū-äl), a. [Greek ὁμός, ‘the same’ +
Latin sexus, ‘sex’ + -al¹.] 1. Of or pertaining to the same sex or to individuals of the same sex.—2. Relating to
homosexuality[†].
“In one of our [neurofibromatosis] cases, homosexual impulses were a feature of
degeneracy”. (Medical Record, Vol. 63, No. 24, June 13, 1903, p. 925). ~ (pp. 596-597, “The Century
Dictionary and Cyclopaedia”; Vol. XI.; editor-in-chief Benjamin E. Smith, ᴀᴍ, ʟʜᴅ; ©1909).
[†]homosexuality (hō′′mō-sek-šū-al′ï-ti), n. [homosexual + -ity.]
Perverted sexual desire for one of the same sex. (Charles H. Hughes, Ed., in “Alienist and Neurologist”, Feb., 1903, p. 74). ~ (page 597, “The Century Dictionary and Cyclopaedia”; Vol.
XI.; editor-in-chief Benjamin E. Smith, ᴀᴍ, ʟʜᴅ; ©1909).
There remains a possibility, of course, that the “fertile mind” of that
celebrated editor-in-chief of the “American Illustrated Medical Dictionary”, Mr. Ryland W. Green, ᴀʙ, took due note of that
five-word “relating to the opposite sex” entry whilst systematically gleaning the larger dictionaries (and
perchance even validating same by perusing the referenced 1,114-word essay by Dr. Defendorf in that eight-volume set so that the vocabulary in his
one-volume digest may be said to be strictly up to date) because—!Lo-and-Behold!—the similarly matter-of-fact (i.e., non-judgemental) and
virtually identical “pertaining to the opposite sex” five-word entry for “heterosexual”
was quietly added several years later, into his September 1913 edition of the “American Illustrated Medical Dictionary” (as already
fully-quoted much further above).
Subsequently, with two non-specialist dictionaries and a comprehensive medical dictionary defining the base-word “heterosexual” in the same matter-of-fact and generic way as employed in the 1,114-word medical handbook essay—being of the fecundous other-sex sexual predisposition
was quite obviously not being ‘abnormal’ or ‘perverted’,
appetitively, in its all-inclusive sense—it was evidently only a matter of time before an alert reader or an informed sub-editor had the derived noun
“heterosexuality” brought into line (videlicet: the unexplained ‘volte-face’ replacement in the 1915 edition) if
for no other reason than how some ninety-nine percent of the population, who instinctually felt a consistent intuitive attraction to the other sex—a
visceral desirability—by virtue of the inherent sexual attractability and allure of this complemental sex, could in no way be conscionably defined as
‘abnormal perverts’.
(End Editorial Note).
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
• An examen of “The Invention of ‘Heterosexuality’” Part Three.
• An examen of “The Invention of ‘Heterosexuality’” Contents.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Richard’s Text ©1997-. All Rights Reserved.
Disclaimer
and Use Restrictions
|