The following statements show his contradictions on the subject: “Here too it has been contended that all these deviations from the sexual type during childhood and puberty do not conclusively lead to the diagnosis of homosexuality, that the earlier periods of life are undifferentiated with respect to sex, that boys as well as girls, young men as well as young women, often become eventually fully heterosexual in spite of pronounced androgyny and sexual incongruities; even the transvestites of both sexes show early traits inharmonious with their respective sex, and certainly many passivists, succubists, or masochists show themselves already as boys somewhat lacking in ‘mannish’ traits while female activists, incubists and sadists lack certain womanly traits already in their girlhood, though all retain the capacity to love the opposite sex and therefore prove themselves later heterosexual.... “At any rate one thing is certain. If a child is a urning, it grows up a heterosexual person with the same unconditional certainty with which the ‘normal’ child becomes heterosexual. Thus the special character of the urning looms forth as something fundamental having its roots in the depths of personality.” (_Hirschfeld, Homosexualität_, p. 121.) Naturally, _Hirschfeld_ adopts a safe method of excluding all cases which do present a history of heterosexuality. He calls such cases “pseudohomosexuality” thus placing them in a category apart from the genuine urning. _Bloch_ also calls the heterosexual inclination of typical homosexuals a sort of “pseudoheterosexuality.”[1] This method of dealing with the subject admits of no proofs. _Bloch_ suggests the test that a genuine theory of homosexuality must be capable of embracing all cases. The _Hirschfeld_ theory of “the third sex” cannot do so. It is neither founded nor proven either on organic or on psychologic grounds. But why is it that the homosexual shifts so completely away from the sexual partner? _A. Adler_ has conceived in these cases the hypothesis of a “_fear of the sexual partner_.” This observation certainly holds true in the case of many homosexuals, but is not true of all cases. Nature does not operate in such simple ways and a single key does not unlock the riddle of homosexuality. In accordance with the results of our investigation thus far we may conclude: the homosexual finds closed for him the path which leads to the other sex, and the barrier is psychical. Anxiety, disgust and scorn support the forces of homosexual love. These feelings do not exhaust the range of inhibitory factors and we shall presently turn our attention to others. But we must take up the psychogenesis of these inhibitions in a thorough and systematic manner. May fear of the sexual partner drive a person into homosexuality? We must answer this question in the affirmative inasmuch as we are able to trace that fear in a number of cases.