ion, and
listen to their bitter cry. But, in the meanwhile, supposing these
inverted instincts to be inborn, supposing them to be irrepressible and
inconvertible, supposing them to be less dirty and nasty than they are
commonly considered, is it not the plain duty of the individual to
suppress them, so long as the law of his country condemns them?" No,
rejoins Ulrichs, a thousand times no! It is only the ignorant antipathy
of the majority which renders such law as you speak of possible. Go to
the best books of medical jurisprudence, go to the best authorities on
psychical deviations from the normal type. You will find that these
support me in my main contention. These, though hostile in their
sentiments and chilled by natural repugnance, have a respect for
science, and they agree with me in saying that the Urning came into this
world an Urning, and must remain till the end of his life an Urning
still. To deal with him according to your code is no less monstrous than
if you were to punish the colour-blind, or the deaf and dumb, or
albinoes, or crooked-back cripples. "Very well," answers the objector:
"But I will quote the words of an eloquent living writer, and appeal to
your generous instincts and your patriotism. Professor Dowden observes
that 'self-surrender is at times sternly enjoined, and if the egoistic
desires are brought into conflict with social duties, the individual
life and joy within us, at whatever cost of personal suffering, must be
sacrificed to the just claims of our fellows.'[65] What have you to say
to that?" In the first place, replies Ulrichs, I demur in this case to
the phrases _egoistic desires_, _social duties_, _just claims of our
fellows_. I maintain that in trying to rehabilitate men of my own stamp
and to justify their natural right to toleration I am not egoistic. It
is begging the question to stigmatise their inborn desire as selfish.
The social duties of which you speak are not duties, but compliances to
law framed in blindness and prejudice. The claims of our fellows, to
which you appeal, are not just, but cruelly inequitous. My insurgence
against all these things makes me act indeed as an innovator; and I may
be condemned, as a consequence of my rashness, to persecution, exile,
defamation, proscription. But let me remind you that Christ was
crucified, and that he is now regarded as a benefactor. "Stop," breaks
in the objector: "We need not bring most sacred names into this
discussion. I a