Does "Sexually Insane" Mean Homosexual?

[Chris Scott]

A perennial point that surfaces from time to time has appeared again in the "Druitt, cricket and other statistics" which, in my opinion, deserves its own thread. This is the thorny problem of what exactly is meant by the phrase "sexually insane" as applied to Druitt?
Let us remind ourselves of what was written in the the Macnaghten memorandum, where the phrase in question occurs.
(1) A Mr M. J. Druitt, said to be a doctor & of good family -- who disappeared at the time of the Miller's Court murder, & whose body (which was said to have been upwards of a month in the water) was found in the Thames on 31st December -- or about 7 weeks after that murder. He was sexually insane and from private information I have little doubt but that his own family believed him to have been the murderer.
Now, the much discussed question is this:
Does Macnaghten mean by this phrase that Druitt was, or was believed to be, homosexual?
Although male homosexuality was at this period completely illegal, (the Oscar Wilde trials occurred the very year after the Macnaghten memo was written) and would very probably be described at the time as unnatural and a perversion, was the phrase "sexually insane" an accepted euphemism for homsexuality?
Very pertinent to this is a supplementary question. Is there any other known contemporary or near contemporary instance of the phrase "sexually insane" being unequivocally used to indicate homosexuality?
The issue is important in that it has produced ramifications. The much discussed reason for Druitt's "serious trouble" and his apparently precipitate dismissal from Valentine's school, has been often explained as inappropriate conduct with his pupils. But on this aspect two important points need to be stressed:
1) There is not ONE SHRED of evidence to support this interpretation of events and there are other perfectly viable alternatives.
2) The mention of Druitt being sexually insane, and this phrase being interpreted as his being homosexual, would seem to suggest that in the interpretation of events involving his pupils, that there could be some causal link between homosexuality and child molestation. All evidence suggests that there is no such link and the vast majority of child molesters would be classified as heterosexual.
The interpretation that Druitt was homosexual seems to have entered the Ripper mythos and I have seen numerous instances where it is stated as though a given and proven fact. In fact, of course, it is nothing of the sort. There is NO evidence of any sort regarding Druitt's sexuality.
The point I think of most interest is that of any other known instance where the phrase "sexually insane" is used to definitely indicate homosexuality.

[Paul]

Chris,
Macnaghten gives a fairly clear (albeit over simplified) definition of what he meant by sexually insane in Days of My Years and in essence it meant somebody who killed for the love of killing, or who was aroused by the sight of blood:

"MOTIVELESS murders, are, from a detective's point of view, of very exceptional interest, and the two most remarkable of these, within the last generation, were unquestionably those known as " The Lambeth Poisoning Case " in 1892, for which the notorious Neil Cream suffered the extreme penalty of the law, and the Camden Town murder in 1907, for which no one was ever made amenable. Both of these murders were committed by sexual maniacs, by men who killed for the joy of killing, but their types were wholly different."

"Students of history, however, are aware that an excessive indulgence in vice leads, in certain cases, to a craving for blood. Nero was probably a sexual maniac. Many Eastern potentates in all ages, who loved to see slaves slaughtered or wild beasts tearing each other to pieces, have been similarly affected."

The term as interpreted and applied by Macnaghten therefore does not imply homosexuality, but is a motive for killing simply for the sake of killing, though it embraced "in many cases a hatred of woman as woman" and "Not infrequently the maniac possesses
a diseased body."

[Phil Carter]

Hello Chris,

This is a decisve post of yours, thank you.

1) There is no shred of evidence against Druitt being a murderer.
2) There is no shred of evidence of him having been violent, either towards men or women.
3) No qualified doctor has pronounced Druitt as insane.
4) No qualified doctor has ever brought Druiit's sexuality in question.
5) There is no shred of evidence of him having been seen nor recognised in the area of Whitechapel by anyone.
6) There is great doubt of literary evidence that "sexually insane" means homosexual.
7) MacNaghten was not a qualified Doctor. He was therefore not in any position to declare anybody sexually insane, on the presumption that it does not mean homosexual.
8) There is actually no evidence of insanity of any sort except from Druitt himself in his own suicide noted where he feared he would go the saem way as his mother.
9) Hereditary insanity does not mean a doorway to homosexuality.
10) There has never been a serial killing cricketer in the entire history of the game, at the level of Druitt nor above.
11) Sexual insanity is a terminology that has a medical background.
12) There is no evidence for Druitt actually being homosexual.
13) There is no evidence that he ever laid a finger on any schoolboy.
14) He was a successful Barrister and had no apparent money worries.
15) The West of England MP was not a qualified doctor either, and cannot possibly have been in a position of authority to have influenced MacNaghten on any medical terminology.
16) That from private information the family or friends or aquaintances of Druitt believed him to be the murderer is in actual fact, a waste of time and a red herring. There were very many other people who "believed" "x, y or z" to have been the murderer. Being a family or person of position in society doesn't mean that they should be warranted any more weight of opinion on labelling someone a murderer than a poor family's opinions.
17) If Anderson was completely right.. then MacNaghten wasn't. If MacNaghten was completely right, then Anderson wasn't. It cannot be both ways because then we have two murderers. And if those two are BOTH correct, Abberline is wrong. Unless you have three murderers. And if they are right, Reid is completely wrong saying there wasn't a piffle of evidence against anyone. And if Reid is right... then Anderson, MacNaghten and Abberline are all wrong. So the label of sexually insane by a policeman without any evidence weighed up against Reid, is logically underweighted. Likewise Anderson, likewise Abberline.

All of the above, or even HALF of the above, suggests the whole thing is complete supposition and one single person's hunch... and don't you think Abberline, Reid, Arnold and Co would have dearly loved to have said ..yes, we got him?

People can argue until they are blue in the face about this.. but until some piece of paper turns up from somewhere (if it does, be sure it will be for the 125th)... Druitt is a dead duck in terms of being a suspect. There just isnt the evidence, whether sexuallly insane means homosexual or not. And if it did..

it still doesnt make him a killer. Homosexual, straight, bi-sexual, tranvestitite or even hermaphrodite. It doesn't make him a killer.

Thanks for posting this Chris.

kindly

Phil

[Phil Carter]

Hello Paul,

I hope you are well.

The term as interpreted and applied by Macnaghten therefore does not imply homosexuality, but is a motive for killing simply for the sake of killing, though it embraced "in many cases a hatred of woman as woman" and "Not infrequently the maniac possesses
a diseased body."

Ok.. if you wish to argue that point, then where has MacNaghten the evidence of Druitt having a "hatred of woman as woman" come from, and the "evidence of a diseased body"? The word of "private info? That is nowhere near enough qualified to label a person as a murderer, based on an interpretation of a line "sexually insane".

No known fact about Druitt allies to either of these points. There is no evidence that Druitt even crushed a fly, let alone mutilated a bunch of unfortunates. Even his supposed insanity only actually comes in written form from his own fear of going the same way as his mother.

kindly

Phil

[Jeff Leahy]

Originally Posted by Phil Carter

Hello Paul,

I hope you are well.



Ok.. if you wish to argue that point, then where has MacNaghten the evidence of Druitt having a "hatred of woman as woman" come from, and the "evidence of a diseased body"? The word of "private info? That is nowhere near enough qualified to label a person as a murderer, based on an interpretation of a line "sexually insane".

No known fact about Druitt allies to either of these points. There is no evidence that Druitt even crushed a fly, let alone mutilated a bunch of unfortunates. Even his supposed insanity only actually comes in written form from his own fear of going the same way as his mother.

kindly

Phil

I dont see how this can be argued without knowing the nature of McNaughtens 'Private info'

It's all supposition and can be argued to both suport and dismiss Druit as a possible Jack.

"We dont know" , is a perfectly reasonable position

Yours Jeff

[Paul]

Originally Posted by Phil Carter

Hello Paul,

I hope you are well.



Ok.. if you wish to argue that point, then where has MacNaghten the evidence of Druitt having a "hatred of woman as woman" come from, and the "evidence of a diseased body"? The word of "private info? That is nowhere near enough qualified to label a person as a murderer, based on an interpretation of a line "sexually insane".

No known fact about Druitt allies to either of these points. There is no evidence that Druitt even crushed a fly, let alone mutilated a bunch of unfortunates. Even his supposed insanity only actually comes in written form from his own fear of going the same way as his mother.

kindly

Phil

I am not arguing any point. The question Chris posed was whether or not "sexually insane" equated with homosexual, and I am providing Macnaghten's definition of it, from which it seems clear that it didn't, but meant killing for the pleasure of killing. Nowhere do I say or does Macnaghten say that Druitt hated women as women or that he had a diseased body, only that sexual maniacs "in many cases" and "not infrequently" possess such traits. Macnaghten in fact makes it clear that sexual maniacs came in Protean forms.

As for your other comments, I am not aware that Macnaghten labeled anyone a murderer simply on a line "sexually insane".

[Rob House]

Hello Paul,

Maybe I am misreading something here, but it seems you are equating "sexually insane" with "sexual maniac." I am not entirely convinced that the two terms are equal. They might be, but I don't know.

Rob H

[Rob House]

This source describes sexual insanity as "adults mentally disordered through sexual continence or abuse." I think the idea is to "become" insane through "sexual irregularities", and this would probably include masturbation, a.k.a "abuse".

http://books.google.com/books?id=Bx6...ity%22&f=false

This book mentions "mania of lactation and other forms of sexual insanity." Mania of lactation perhaps being postpartum depression(?). It also mentions "nymphomania" as another form of sexual insanity.

http://books.google.com/books?id=B0o...tation&f=false

This book mentions "sexual insanity especially among masturbators" - http://books.google.com/books?id=LAo...ity%22&f=false


This source mentions a letter written by Oscar Wilde in which he asks his sentence be commuted "on the grounds that he was not criminal, but a man suffering from sexual insanity." This would perhaps support the idea that one of the forms of sexual insanity was homosexuality.

http://www.oscholars.com/TO/Appendix...y/Robbins.html

"These words mimic, in a very different tone, another letter which Wilde wrote in prison, this time to the Home Secretary. This second letter is humble, scientific and legalistic. Wilde asked for his sentence to be commuted on the grounds that he was not criminal, but a man suffering from sexual insanity. He borrows the register of contemporary sociology and criminology, and insists (as Ackroyd’s Wilde does with satirical intent) that he is a case study, not an evil man. His crimes are ‘diseases to be cured by a physician rather than crimes to be punished by a judge’ (Selected Letters, 142)."

This source equates "sexual insanity" with "erotomania" and refers to "satyriasis" and "nymphomania."
http://books.google.com/books?id=-tJ...ity%22&f=false

Under the entry for erotomania - "Suppressed nature, however, demands her rights, and the unnatural life of monks often leads to erotic insanity; in such cases we see in the same individual mystic ideas associated with irresistible sexual appetite provoking wild excesses."

Moreover, I think Psychopathia Sexualis was essentially a "medico-legal study of sexual insanity" in its various forms.

RH

[Paul]

Hi Rob,
I was perhaps being over-simplistic in taking "mania" to be synonymous with "insanity". Macnaghten says Jack the Ripper was a sexual maniac and he proceeds to define a "sexual maniac" as someone who kills for the pleasure of killings, though, as said, he acknowledges that this takes many forms, and it seems that his primary concern was to make it clear to his readers that killing could be and sometimes was the sole purpose of the murderer. It seems that mental health definitions were and to some degree still are fairly fluid. Anyway, the main point was whether or not Macnaghten used "sexual mania" as a euphemism for homosexual, and it seems that he didn't.
Paul

[Chris G.]

Originally Posted by Paul

I am not arguing any point. The question Chris posed was whether or not "sexually insane" equated with homosexual, and I am providing Macnaghten's definition of it, from which it seems clear that it didn't, but meant killing for the pleasure of killing. Nowhere do I say or does Macnaghten say that Druitt hated women as women or that he had a diseased body, only that sexual maniacs "in many cases" and "not infrequently" possess such traits. Macnaghten in fact makes it clear that sexual maniacs came in Protean forms.

As for your other comments, I am not aware that Macnaghten labeled anyone a murderer simply on a line "sexually insane".

Hi Paul

You did not in your answer talk about Littlechild but it would seem that in his letter to G. R. Sims of 1913 Littlechild was equating sexually deviancy and hatred of women with the type of man the Whitechapel murderer might have been.

Chris