رحیم وکیل زاده

The paper explores the historical treatment of male homosexuality within psychoanalysis and its impact on modern talking therapies. It examines how homosexuality has been framed either as a pathological condition requiring intervention or as a legitimate identity deserving affirmation. Beginning with Freud’s psychogenesis of homosexuality, the study delves into how three American psychoanalysts reinterpreted the Oedipus complex to support the notion of homosexuality as a curable illness. This reinterpretation laid the groundwork for reparative therapy, which aimed to convert homosexual individuals to heterosexuality. A case study of reparative therapy is revisited to illustrate these methods. In contrast, the paper highlights Richard Isay’s progressive stance, which challenged the pathologization of homosexuality and advocated for its acceptance. Isay’s work paved the way for gay affirmative therapy, a model that promotes validation and support of homosexual identity. Freud’s theory that sexual orientation is shaped by the resolution of the Oedipus complex serves as a central reference point in evaluating both therapeutic approaches. The discussion addresses the broader implications of framing homosexuality as either a social transgression or a psychological disorder, emphasizing how these perspectives have influenced legal policies and therapeutic practices. The paper critically assesses the ethical and theoretical foundations of reparative versus affirmative therapy, using Freud’s ideas to trace the evolution of psychoanalytic thought on homosexuality. Ultimately, it concludes that psychoanalysis has played a pivotal role in shaping therapeutic responses to homosexuality, and that recognizing these historical shifts is essential for guiding contemporary ethical practices in mental health care.