54

There has always been a tendency among psychoanalysts to account for homosexuality in psychological terms, to clarify the nosological context. Metapsychology over time has distinguished between acted homosexualities (which are seen as fixations on primary narcissism, in the context of pre-Oedipal issues), and mental homosexuality (seen as a fixation on secondary narcissism related to oedipal issues).The latest studies have focused on the role of masculinity and femininity in men and women, the meaning of homosexual and objectal libidinal attachment in homosexuality, archaism in neurosis, and Oedipal prefigurations in borderline cases, and they have made the psychoanalytical examination of homosexuality more complex, focusing more on finer clinical details. The observation of a therapy case in which a patient displays a neurotic organization, a bisexual behavior and a homosexual form of object attachment illustrates two arguments: firstly, manifest homosexuality on the one hand does not necessarily imply a structural narcissistic organization or a failure of symbolization; secondly, neurotic homosexuality cannot be considered just as a regressive response to Oedipus and genital heterosexuality, but it may activate early pathological fixations (which nonetheless cannot be confused with manifestations of narcissistic pathology). This paper concentrates on the analysis of the modes of transfer between psychic and acted homosexuality in neurosis, in other words between act-as-symptom and intrapsychic conflict. Current theorizations of homosexuality in neurosis should clearly distinguish between representations of the relationship with the pregenital fatherly figure (as organized by the phallic symbol in the narcissistic triad of the anal stage), and with the genital fatherly figure (as expressed by the phallic symbol in the object triangulation of the Oedipal stage).