The observation of Westphal, that the consciousness of one congenitally defective in sexual desires toward the opposite sex is painfully affected by the impulse toward the same sex, is true in only a number of cases. Indeed, in many instances, the consciousness of the abnormality of the condition is wanting. The majority of urnings are happy in their perverse sexual feeling and impulse, and unhappy only in so far as social and legal barriers stand in the way of the satisfaction of their instinct toward their own sex. The study of contrary sexual feeling points directly to anomalies of the cerebral organization of the affected individuals. Gley (_Revue philosoph._, January, 1884) believes that he is able to solve the riddle by the theory that the individuals have a female brain and male sexual glands; and, further, that pathological brain conditions determine the sexual life, while normally the sexual organs determine the sexual functions of the brain. One of my patients offered me an interesting theory in explanation of original contrary sexual instinct. He started with the actual bi-sexuality shown by the fœtus anatomically up to a certain age. While normally the organs which attain complete development exclusively condition and determine the sexual type, and the influence of the opposite organs, which remain rudimentary, is _nil_, it is conceivable that, under the influence of a factor inimical to the normal development of the brain (hereditary taint, etc.), these rudimentary organs likewise exercise an influence which, under certain circumstances, may be even greater than that of the fully developed organs which determine the external sexual type. In a similar manner, Kiernan (_Medical Standard_, 1888) and G. Frank Lydston (_Phila. Med. and Surg. Reporter_, 1888) attempt to explain a part of the cases of congenital sexual paranoia. Magnan, too (_Ann. méd. psychol._, 1885, p. 458), writes, in all earnestness, of the brain of a woman in the body of a man, and _vice versâ_.[110] The attempted explanations of congenital urnings are not less superficial; for instance, that of Ulrichs, who, in his “Memnon,” 1868, speaks of an “anima muliebris virili corpore inclusa (virili corpori innata),” and thus tries to explain the congenital origin and the female character of his abnormal sexual instinct. The idea of the patient, the subject of Case 124, is original. He supposes that when his father begat him he thought to beget a girl, but, instead of a girl, a boy resulted. One of the strangest explanations of congenital contrary sexual feeling is made by Mantegazza (_op. cit._, p. 106, 1886).