Henry Gerber: "In Defense of Homosexuality," June 1932

"In Defense of Homosexuality"

Copyright (c) 2008 by Jonathan Ned Katz. All rights reserved. Reedited by Katz from Gay American History (1976).

PROTECTED ENTRY: This entry by a named creator or site administrator can be changed only by that creator and site administrators, so they are responsible for its accuracy, coverage, evidence, and clarity. Please do use this entry's Comment section at the bottom of the page to suggest improvements. Thanks.

In June 1932, a periodical titled The Modern Thinker published on essay, "In Defense of Homosexuality," by "Parisex," a pan name of Henry Gerber. An introduction to the essay explains that it "is one of the numerous replies" attacking "The Riddle of Homosexuality" by W. Beran Wolfe, M.D., which had appeared in the April issue.

In his rejoinder, Gerber congratulates Dr. Wolfe for urging that laws against homosexuality be struck down, but notes that oppression by church and state are historical antecedents to the more insidious persecution by modern psychoanalysts. He charges psychoanalysts with constructing a new set of myths and taboos which rival the Sodom legend in their pernicious effects on homosexuals. He challenges the categorization of homosexuality as a neurotic symptom, and the popular notion of a "cure." Gerber rejects Wolfe's attribution of insecurity, antisocial behavior, and criminal tendencies to homosexuals. He argues that the homosexuals who are disturbed have been made so by societal oppression.

Wolfe is attacked for relying upon the concepts of Freud, Jung, and Adler; in rebuttal, Gerber approvingly cites Havelock Ellis and Magnus Hirsehfeld. This leads Gerber to discuss the "nature versus nurture" debate on the origins of homosexuality. Gerber refuses to align himself with either position, conceding that both inborn and social reasons may influence sexual object choice. Gerber further objects to Wolfe's single-minded focus upon sexual acts, and suggests that psychology should deal equally with purely affectional ties between members of the same gender. He argues that the institution of marriage, and even monogamy, is disintegrating under the impact of modern conditions, and, citing Edward Carpenter, Gerber envisions a future society which will fully accept the unique contributions of its homosexual members.

Gerber concludes:

After all, it is highly futile for Dr. Wolfe to worry about neurotic homosexuals when the world itself, led and ruled by the strong heterosexual "normal" men is in such chaotic condition, and knows not where to turn.

It is quite possible that if called upon, the homosexuals of this country would put up the money to send Dr. Wolfe to Washington to examine these great big "normal" men, who guide the destinies of millions, to find their "neurosis" and to cure it.

In 1934, Gerber is listed as circulation manager of a mimeographed literary magazine entitled Chanticleer, and twelve articles by him are included under his own name. Three are devoted entirely to homosexuality, the others contain passing references.

The February 1934 issue of Chanticleer includes Gerber’s review of "Recent Homosexual Literature," and his critical comments on the novels The Well of Loneliness, Twilight Men, and Strange Brother as "anti-homosexual propaganda." Gerber's introduction accuses a coalition of capitalists, clerics, and politicians of defending monogamy and suppressing sexual freedom of all kinds:

The 100% patriots are vociferously proclaiming that this is a Free Country; however, when asked if Love is free, or if they are for Free Love, they conveniently avoid the issue by retreating with sundry maledictions and such epithets as "Bolshevic, Libertine, Swine." In my last article, in the initial issue of "Chanticleer", I pointed out that politicians and priests clamor for bigger and better morons. They are in fact responsible for sex suppression in America. Capitalism, loyally supported by the churches, has established a Public Policy that the Sacred Institution of Monogamy must be enforced; and such a fiat is the deathknell to all sexual freedom. Monogamy is the ideal of this state and all deviations from this ideal are strictly suppressed, including free love in all of its forms, birth control, and homosexuality. For these forms of sexual freedom, if free to practice, would defeat the sacred institution of monogamy. In Russia, where the government is no longer capitalistic and is not bound to religious sex superstitions, sex is free. One may gratify one's sexual appetite as one may see fit, just as one may choose what to eat for supper. Sex only becomes a social concern there when children are born, in which case both parents are held mutually responsible.

Homosexuality has until recently been strictly taboo and no "decent" author or publisher considered it fit to mention in print. However, in the last decade, several medical works have appeared about homosexuality and recently a few books of homosexual fiction have dared to show themselves among the flood of heterosexual books.

Gerber disposes of The Well of Loneliness (he is quoted in the following history), and then goes on:

TWILIGHT MEN, by Andre Tellier, deals with a young Frenchman, who comes to America, is introduced into homosexual society in New York, becomes a drug addict for no obvious reason, finally kills his father and commits suicide. It is again excellent anti-homosexual propaganda, although the plot is too silly to convince anyone who has known homosexual people at all.

STRANGE BROTHER, by Blair Niles, is the story of a sensitive young man. The author causes him to go through as many mental sufferings as she can, then puts a pistol in his hand and lets him shoot himself and end the book. Again an ideal anti-homosexual propaganda, but no more logical than the book mentioned before.