Tip: To see papers related to the one you are viewing…
PEP-Web Tip of the Day
When there are articles or videos related to the one you are viewing, you will see a related papers icon next to the title, like this: For example:
Click on it and you will see a bibliographic list of papers that are related (including the current one). Related papers may be papers which are commentaries, responses to commentaries, erratum, and videos discussing the paper. Since they are not part of the original source material, they are added by PEP editorial staff, and may not be marked as such in every possible case.
For the complete list of tips, see PEP-Web Tips on the PEP-Web support page.
Hoffman, L. (2000). Sexuality as Compromise Formation. J. Clin. Psychoanal., 9(3):301-305.
(2000). Journal of Clinical Psychoanalysis, 9(3):301-305
Sexuality as Compromise Formation
Dr. Leon Hoffman, M.D.
In response to a statement by Mme. Chasseguet-Smirgel, the editors of this Journal noted their belief that in America, psychoanalysts are “losing their freedom” to discuss issues of homosexuality in a reasoned manner, in contrast to a lack of inhibition of discussion in France. The editors of the Journal therefore ask the question, “What, in your opinion, is the place of Homosexuality in current psychoanalytic theory, practice, and training?”
In order to address this question cogently I will repeat the quote by Mme. Chasseguet-Smirgel, which the editors found commendable in its openness with regard to the topic of homosexuality. An analysis of this statement is critical because the editors seem to assume that this statement reflects a positively framed psychoanalytic approach toward homosexuality in particular, and sexuality in general. My brief comment reflects a point of view that by conceptualizing the issue as she does, Mme. Chasseguet-Smirgel inhibits reasoned discussion and provokes counterpassions and does not foster a psychoanalytic discussion of the topic.
Chasseguet-Smirgel in her article states,
We, in France, are not until now, so thoroughly dominated by the “politically correct” that it would be impossible for psychoanalysts to raise doubts about the existence of “normal” homosexuality. Of course, nobody is silly enough to consider a heterosexual as being per se more “normal” than a homosexual. However, it is permissible to think that each homosexual individual presents, as with Mr. B, but not always to the same extent, a deficiency in his sexual identity, i.e., in his identity as a whole.
[This is a summary or excerpt from the full text of the book or article. The full text of the document is available to subscribers.]