I am familiar with a number of instances in which a man dressing like a woman, or the reverse, was the means of rousing sexual passion, or, at least, of increasing it enormously. Whenever this happens it is plainly a manifestation of latent homosexuality,—a condition of which _Blueher_ appears to have a very poor opinion. Although he seems to agree with my views otherwise (“today it is no longer possible,” he says, “to hold that homosexuality or heterosexuality is inborn; instead we must recognize that bisexuality is inborn in every individual, with a special predilection in one direction or the other,”), he makes a distinction between “healthful inversion” and an outbreak of latent homosexuality; one condition he considers aboriginal and in keeping with cultural development, while the other “arises out of the depths of the unconscious, through the removal of the inhibitions....” This view is also contrary to facts. _Blueher_, like _Hirschfeld_, is inclined to consider latent homosexuality as ‘pseudo,’ as something unnatural, and accordingly passes judgment upon it. The practical observations gathered in the course of my practice do not coincide with these theoretical assumptions. I know only one kind of homosexuality, and that is always inborn. Also, I find it always linked intimately with heterosexuality. Awareness of one’s own homosexual tendency or lack of it is not a reliable guide. If the number of consciously homosexual persons be estimated at 2 per cent., we may confidently assert that there are 98 per cent. of persons who know nothing of their homosexual traits, or rather that they do not want to know anything about them.