










































“What Am I?”: Nineteenth-
Century Medical Science, 
Intersexuality, and Freakification 
in the Life of Karl Hohmann

The gender and sex binary 
have existed in Western 

culture for centuries. Western 
societies attempt to classify 
biological sex and gender as 
either male or female. However, 
this binary does not include 
any space for people who do 
not fit, such as a person who 
has external male genitalia but 
internal female genitalia. The modern medical term for this phenomenon 
is “intersex;” before the twentieth century, however, intersex was called 
“hermaphroditism.” Because the current medical term is “intersex,” we will 
use the term “intersex” instead of “hermaphrodite” where appropriate, 
unless directly quoting from a text.
 During the nineteenth century, there was an intense medical 
examination of intersex individuals. Scientists were searching for a physical 
state they called a “true lateral hermaphrodite,” referring to a person 
who has intact male reproductive organs on one side of their body and 
female reproductive organs on the other (Munde 615, 629). For many, the 
fascination of this “true lateral hermaphrodite” was the idea that the intersex 
individual could maintain both sexes simultaneously, which supported the 
notions of the gender and sex binary.
 Their search for the “true lateral hermaphrodite” eventually led 
doctors and scientists to Karl Hohmann, an intersex man whom doctors 
endlessly poked, prodded, and examined in an effort to determine whether 

  -  Jessica Carducci, Allison Haste, and Bryce Longenberger, Ball State University

Abstract
This paper explores the life of Karl Hohmann, an 
intersex individual who lived in Germany in the 
mid-1800s. Hohmann was examined as a medical 
specimen throughout his adult life as doctors at 
the time believed he was a “true lateral hermaph-
rodite.” The authors examine the way that cultural 
beliefs about gender and sex intersected in the 
nineteenth century.

32

Digital Literature Review, vol. 3 (2016). © Ball State University. All Rights Reserved.
Please direct all requests for permission to photocopy or reproduce critical edition to dlr@bsu.edu.



he had both a testicle and an ovary. Because his body was a site of so much 
medical attention, these scientists eventually turned Hohmann into a mere 
medical specimen and robbed him of his humanity.
 This essay is divided into three sections. First, it presents the life 
of Karl Hohmann and his interactions with nineteenth-century doctors. 
Second, it situates that history within the context of ideas about gender 
and sex during the same time period. Finally, it provides five artifacts 
from the time period that address both Karl Hohmann and the cultural 
context. Together, this essay illuminates how Karl Hohmann’s freakification 
reinforced the social creation of gender and sex as a binary system and 
supported the normalcy of heterosexual culture.

INTRODUCTION
“What am I? In my life an object of scientific experiment, and after my death an 

anatomical curiosity?”—Karl Hohmann
 Before we discuss Karl Hohmann’s life, we should clarify our 
references to his gender and the pronouns we use to refer to him. Many 
sources on Hohmann refer to him as “Kathrina/Karl Hohmann” and 
alternate between using masculine and feminine pronouns. In this paper, 
we will refer to Hohmann as Karl and use masculine pronouns. Although 
Hohmann was designated female at birth and lived most of his life 
identifying as a female, when he moved to the United States, he legally 
changed his name to Karl. Although we do not have much documentation 
on Hohmann’s gender identity, we feel it is best to speak of him with the 
identity that he chose (to the best of our knowledge) throughout this essay.
 Karl Hohmann was born in Mellrichstadt, Germany in 1824. When he 
was thirty-nine years old, he visited a doctor because he was experiencing 
pain from a hernia on his left side. His physician, Dr. Reder, wished to 
examine Hohmann more thoroughly because he believed that it was 
possible that Hohmann’s hernia actually contained a testicle (Mak 65). At this 
time, Hohmann identified as woman, and the presence of a testicle would 
have placed him outside of the sexual binary. For some time, Hohmann 
resisted being subject to a thorough examination but eventually agreed. 
Hohmann was brought to a hospital where he was observed for two months. 
The doctors who examined him kept him almost completely isolated from 
other patients or visitors, and the examinations that Hohmann experienced 

Carducci, Haste, Longenberger

33



were very invasive. Measurements were taken of his genitalia, and his bodily 
fluids were collected and studied as well. In addition to inspecting his body, 
the physicians examining Hohmann asked him invasive questions about 
his personal life. Hohmann admitted to having sexual intercourse with a 
woman and consequently impregnating her. Hohmann’s claim was met 
with incredulity by several doctors who then requested that Hohmann 
demonstrate how he was able to have intercourse with a woman while a 
group of physicians observed (Munde 624). This clearly shows the lack of 
privacy that those who were exhibited experienced. Not only would people 
on display lack personal privacy while being exhibited, but they were 
expected to allow others to observe their private moments.
 After this initial examination, Hohmann was examined by doctors 
across Europe from the 1860s through the 1870s; when he moved to New 
York, he was inspected by two other physicians (Mak 66). Because there was 
so much shame and stigma surrounding intersex individuals, it was difficult 
for doctors to get people to agree to these medical examinations. Hohmann 
was one of the most famous “hermaphrodites on show” in the medical 
community (Mak 66).
 As a “true lateral hermaphrodite,” Hohmann was especially interesting 
to the doctors at the time because they believed he had male and female 
reproductive organs in his body—one type on each side—which would 
confirm a binary notion of gender. The biggest reason that the doctors 
believed this was possible was that Hohmann appeared to have at least one 
testicle, but also experience a menstrual-like discharge about once every 
month (Munde 624). Because of this, several of the doctors that examined 
him speculated that Hohmann had at least one ovary. This was significant 
because the doctors felt unable to determine if Hohmann was a “true lateral 
hermaphrodite” without physical evidence of an ovary, which would require 
an autopsy.
 The doctors who examined him seemed preoccupied with 
determining how to categorize Hohmann and wanted to find a “true” 
answer to what his identity was. One physician even noted that his identity 
could only be discovered “post-mortem” because they would need to do an 
autopsy in order to determine whether or not he had an ovary (Mundé). An 
autopsy does not allow intersex individuals to define themselves; rather, it 
only provides physical evidence for a doctor to examine.

Carducci, Haste, Longenberger

34



 These examinations of Karl Hohmann brought up many questions 
that challenged the idea of a gender or sexual binary; as a result, medical 
categorization and the search for “true lateral hermaphrodite” provided an 
answer to these challenges. In Western culture, the idea of a gender binary is 
still common today. At the time Hohmann was living, this model of sex and 
gender was even more prevalent than it is today. Nevertheless, people had a 
hard time imagining how someone outside of this rigid binary could exist, 
and therefore intersex individuals often lived in shame.

CULTURAL ANALYSIS
 Intersex individuals have long held a strange place in the freakshow 
culture of the Western World. Even amongst the types of bodies considered 
aberrant by mainstream society, the accounts of these individuals are 
underreported. There is not a wealth of information made widely available 
about them, and many texts of the nineteenth century that speak of 
intersexuality are medical texts which examine the bodies of various 
individuals as specimens to be examined, drawn, photographed, and 
autopsied. What, then, do these medical reports and papers reveal about 
the lives of intersex individuals, and what can these individuals’ lives reveal 
about gender, sex, and sexuality in the nineteenth century?
 To answer these questions, we must first begin by seeking to define the 
differences between sex and gender. Sex is held to be the biological fact of 
one’s body determined by several indicators such as chromosomes, internal 
reproductive organs, and external genitalia (American Psychological 
Association 11). Gender, however, describes categories of cultural 
expectations that are constructed around the labels of sex. The traditional 
labels of Western culture in both cases have been the male and the female. It 
seems like a fairly simple dualism—sex is a scientific and medical fact while 
gender is a social construction—but these widely held definitions do not 
address the socially constructed nature of science and therefore of sex.
 It would be a mistake to say that sex is a purely objective measure 
of the human body. This is not to say that the human body cannot be 
measured or physical phenomena observed, but instead that these 
observations are interpreted through the lens of cultural and historical 
context. For example, we can safely say that some human bodies possess 
ovaries while some others possess testicles, but the actual labels of female 

Carducci, Haste, Longenberger

35



and male are constructed categories that we assign to these different types of 
individuals. This is why the sex binary we often put faith in— that there are 
male bodies and female bodies—fails to account for intersex individuals.
 These labels of male and female are important in Western society 
though. Prior to the nineteenth century and its focus on medicine as 
a science, sex and sexuality were regulated by the prominent religious 
doctrines of the time. They held that sexual intercourse should only be 
practiced in an effort to produce children and that any other types of 
intercourse were sinful (Fausto-Sterling 11). This produced a need for labels 
that would reflect the ability to reproduce; the two involved would need 
to be a man, someone who could sire a child, and a woman, someone who 
could carry a child. This also explains the importance of heterosexuality 
as it appeared later; heterosexual intercourse was seen as the only kind 
which would produce a child, so it became the default and “natural” sexual 
orientation.
 Then, as medical science developed in the nineteenth century, it 
sought to provide scientific justifications for these long held ideas of male 
and female. But this distinction is not so easily made, and through much 
of the nineteenth century—and even into the present—there is no one 
characteristic or set of characteristics that is universally held as an indicator 
of someone’s “real” sex (Dreger 16). Many point to the external genitalia as a 
good indicator of sex, the method which is still used to categorize newborn 
infants by doctors, but this does not account for any number of hormonal 
disorders or other differences which might occur in the development of 
the human body (Fausto-Sterling 45). The several different factors which 
can be indicators of sex — the number and type of sex chromosomes of 
an individual, their hormonal profile — do not even have to agree with 
each other. As a result, the individual in question might never know that 
their body is intersex, as modern medical practices require the infant to be 
assigned to a sex category within twenty-four hours of birth.
 Instead, scientists of the nineteenth century worked to understand the 
human body through the preexisting idea of a gender and sex binary. They 
confirmed in many cases that women possess a uterus, ovaries, and other 
physical characteristics, while men have testicles and a penis. But there is a 
range of difference between individuals in these categories, and there is a 
range of difference that exists outside them as well—a continuum of human 

Carducci, Haste, Longenberger

36



difference that does not fit into two separate boxes. Those who exist outside 
the limits of the gender/sex binary are intersex individuals; their bodies 
cannot be classified as male or female, either because they possess markers 
of both sexes or because they possess neither. But, when viewed through 
the idea of a gender/sex binary, the intersex individual becomes inherently 
abnormal.
 The idea of the abnormal intersexual is very important at this time 
period. Because human bodies can vary so widely and because medical 
science cannot neatly divide between male and female, the debate then 
becomes one of normal versus abnormal. Alice Dreger notes in her work 
on nineteenth-century “hermaphrodites” that “we assume that the normal 
(in this case the ’normal’ sexual anatomy) existed before we encountered 
the abnormal, but it is really only when we are faced with something that 
we think is ‘abnormal’ that we find ourselves struggling to articulate what  
‘normal’ is” (6). The existence of individuals outside the gender/sex binary— 
outside the “normal”—forced medical practitioners and scientists of the 
mid-nineteenth century to question what really defined male and female 
bodies.
 But they could not escape the idea of a gender/sex binary, even in 
their examination of intersex individuals; medical scientists began to look 
for a “real” lateral hermaphrodite, or an intersex individual who is male on 
one side of their body and female on the other, such as Josephine Joseph of 
the film Freaks. This was often labelled a “true” type of hermaphroditism as 
the individual possessed both male and female reproductive organs (Dreger 
143). However, the medical finds of the time more often showed a mixed 
or “false” type of hermaphrodite—an individual who possessed only male 
or female reproductive organs, even if their outward appearance might be 
otherwise misleading. For example, notes on Guiseppe Marzo’s autopsy 
in 1865 indicate that his feet and hands were feminine while his head and 
body hair were distinctly masculine in appearance (Delle Piane 1211). Even 
here, the gender/sex binary is influencing medical practice and observation, 
though it falls short of actually describing the realities of human variation.
 There must be significance, then, to the gender/sex binary if scientists 
continued to cling to it despite its inaccuracy. This ties back to the pre-
Victorian religious views on sex — ones that encourage only heterosexual 
intercourse. The gender/sex binary is necessary to defining heterosexual 

Carducci, Haste, Longenberger

37



relations versus homosexual relations. Sex must exist in order to define 
these categories of sexuality, and therefore to define the acceptable types 
of sexual intercourse. The intersex individual is a threat to this system 
and to heterosexuality itself. In fact, many medical scientists of this time 
emphasized the need for a clear sex indicator in order to prevent accidental 
homosexuality and homosexual marriage (Dreger 76).
 It became a noted practice that someone suspected of homosexuality 
should be examined to ensure that their biological sex was not misdiagnosed 
(Dreger 111). In the middle of the nineteenth century, when the word 
“homosexual” was first coined (Fausto-Sterling 13), the most reasonable 
explanation for this deviant behavior was that it was merely a type of 
heterosexual intercourse. Unfortunately, this works to not only reinforce 
the gender/sex binary but to also erase the experiences of homosexual 
individuals of the time. Looking at the accounts of many individual cases, 
there appears to be no actual correlation between biological sex and 
sexuality, or between the intersexual body and homosexual experience 
(Dreger 126). But, even so, the fear of homosexual intercourse—or any 
manner of non-heterosexual intercourse—led many people of the 
nineteenth and early-twentieth century to cling to the gender/sex binary.
 Karl Hohmann’s own case falls squarely into the center of this 
scientific confusion and controversy. His story was especially noted 
because of the claim that he had impregnated a woman while living as a 
woman himself—a blurring of not only the biological sex binary but also 
of heterosexual and homosexual intercourse as well. In this tempestuous 
cultural climate, Hohmann became an item to study and display, subject 
to aggressive and invasive medical examination, because he defied easy 
classification by means of biological sex, gender, and sexuality. His life 
experiences and anatomy fell outside of the defined “normal,” and this 
condemned him to be an object of speculation before the burgeoning 
medical community that sought to force the world into matching their own 
beliefs.
 Today, this need to categorize the sexes into pre-existing categories 
and to justify those categories with scientific research, has led to a false 
belief in the absolute “reality” of the male and female bodies as distinct 
entities. This belief appears in the current discussions on sex and sexuality 
that pertain to transgender individuals and their rights to use public 

Carducci, Haste, Longenberger

38



restrooms. Many opponents to transgender rights argue that allowing 
transgender men into women’s restrooms would endanger the women who 
use them. However, this argument relies on the notion that gender is split 
between male and female and that biological sex determines a person’s sex 
at birth and cannot be changed.
 As the fight over transgender rights demonstrates, there is no 
more clear distinction between the sexes now than there was during Karl 
Hohmann’s lifetime. Research into chromosomal sex and hormonal sex has 
only complicated the factors which medical professionals must observe, 
while common medical practice still relies upon the visual examination of 
genitalia to determine an infant’s sex. This belief is misleading and has the 
potential to distort any situation where the labels of male and female are 
used, such as scientific studies, the division of male and female sports and 
public restrooms, or even the laws regarding marriage and identity. The 
distinction between sexes is a socially organized and constructed line that 
holds itself up as scientific fact, and the root of this un-truth lies amongst 
the medical field of the nineteenth century.

ARTIFACTS

Artifact 1
This excerpt comes from 
a scientific encyclopedia, 
published in 1901, 
called the Anomalies and 
Curiosities of Medicine; this 
encyclopedia discusses 
a large number of 
medical “abnormalities.” 
In this excerpt, the 
authors, George M. 
Gould and Walter L. 
Pyle, discuss the ways 
in which the sexual 
attraction experienced 

Carducci, Haste, Longenberger

There is an account of a person in Germany who, for the 
first thirty years of life, was regarded as feminine, and 
being of loose morals became a mother. At a certain period 
she began to feel a change in her sexual inclinations; 
she married and became the father of a family. This is 
doubtless a distortion of the facts of the case of Catherine 
or Charles Hoffman, born in 1824, and who was considered 
a female until the age of forty. At puberty she had the 
instincts of a woman, and cohabitated with a male lover 
for twenty years. Her breasts were well formed and she 
menstruated at nineteen. At the age of forty-six her sexual 
desires changed, and she attempted coitus as a man, with 
such evident satisfaction that she married a woman soon 
afterward. (207)

39



by Catherine/Charles Hoffman (or Karl Hohmann) changed over time. 
At first, he is described as being female and having “sexual inclinations” 
toward men early in life. When he is older, they describe his sexual desires 
as “changing,” which also correlates with a change in his gender and 
classification from a “mother” to a “father.” Because his gender and sexuality 
change simultaneously, his gender always aligns with his sexuality so as to 
make him heterosexual and not homosexual. In framing the description of 
Hohmann in this manner, Gould and Walter reinforce the aversion toward 
homosexuality and non-heterosexual intercourse at the time.

Artifact 2
The following excerpt is from 
a short article published by A. 
Flint in the Boston Medical and 
Surgical Journal in 1840. In Flint’s 
article, he describes a patient 
who is admitted to an almshouse 
who had the appearance of 
an intersex person, but whom 
he calls a “hermaphrodite.” In 
this excerpt, Flint describes 
the physical appearance of the 
supposed hermaphrodite. One 
significant aspect of the man’s 
appearance is that, at first sight, 
his physical characteristics are 
conflicting enough to hinder 
the doctors from deciding in 
which ward (male or female) 
to place the individual. Also, 
the blend of feminine and 
masculine physical traits (such 
as his feminine complexion and 
hairstyle coupled with masculine 
feet and a beard on his chin and 
lips) demonstrates the existence of traits of both genders in the individual’s 

Carducci, Haste, Longenberger

The following curious case of imposture came un-
der my observation in the month of March, 1840.

An individual was received into the Erie County 
Almshouse, who was represented as being a her-
maphrodite. I was requested to examine him, the 
superintendent being at a loss whether to place 
him in the male or female department of the insti-
tution. His external appearance was as follows. 
Hair, black and long, arranged after the feminine 
mode. Face, having a masculine coarseness, 
but with a fair, feminine complexion. Some beard 
on the chin and upper lip, which had evidently 
never been shaven. Ear-rings in the ears. Hands, 
delicate but large. Feet, large and masculine. He 
was dressed in pantaloons and a frock coat. His 
voice and manner of walking resembled those of a 
female. The former in tone was not peculiarly fem-
inine, but the air and manner of speaking strikingly 
so. The gait, in walking, was so peculiar, that no 
one could avoid the suspicion that the individual 
was a woman in male attire. (145-146)

40



appearance. Altogether, this description of this patient’s physical appearance 
sheds light on the importance of physical characteristics and appearance to 
the construction of a gender and sex binary in the nineteenth century.

Artifact 3
This excerpt was published in an article in 1876 in The American Journal 
of Obstetrics and Diseases of 
Women and Children. Paul 
F. Mundé, the author of “A 
Case of Presumptive True 
Lateral Hermaphrodism,” was 
one of the physicians who 
examined Karl Hohmann. 
In this brief excerpt, Mundé 
claims that Hohmann could 
indeed be a true lateral 
hermaphrodite. This excerpt 
demonstrates how ideas of 
a concrete gender binary 
were imposed upon the 
scientific understanding of 
human bodies. Scientists conceived that the hermaphrodisia vera lateralis 
would have a testical on one side of the body and an ovary on the other 
side, both separate yet simultaneously existing in the same body. This shows 
the constricted ways in which the gender and sex binary affected the ways 
in which scientists viewed the human body. It also explains how scientists 
resolved the ambiguity of intersex individuals by focusing instead on a 
“true” form of intersex that fit inside their notions of gender.

Artifact 4
The following artifact is a brief newspaper article titled “Case of 
Hermaphrodism” published in the Medical and Surgical Reporter on 
December 12, 1868. The subject of the article is Catharina Hohmann (Karl 
Hohmann). The newspaper article demonstrates the extent to which Karl 
and other intersex people sought after medical examinations of their bodies 
and how they advertised for medical doctors. Also, the latter half of the 

At the meeting of the New York Obstetrical Society, 
held October 5th, 1875, I exhibited before the Society 
an individual in male attire, who claims to possess – 
with what right it is partly the object of this paper to 
show – the characteristics of both the male and the 
female sex united in her person, and to be a unique 
instance of that anomaly known as hermaphrodisia 
vera lateralis, true lateral hermaphrodism (one lateral 
half of the body containing the germinal gland of the 
female, the ovary, and presenting female peculiarities; 
the other half containing the germinal gland of the 
male, the testicle, and showing male attributes). (615)

Carducci, Haste, Longenberger

41



article represents cultural fears instilled in nineteenth-century society. The 
tale of loving both sexes but belonging to neither is evidence of the cultural 
fears of blending genders and sexes. Finally, Hohmann’s last statement is 
indicative of the predicament of intersex individuals at the time: their lives 
were full of scientific inquiry and probing while their deaths were slated for 
postmortem dissection.

Artifact 5
The following excerpt is taken from a collection of lectures written by 
George Washington Burnap in 1854 concerning the duties and sphere of 
women. In this excerpt, Burnap explains how God’s creation of man and 
woman as separate entities correlates with the existence of separate spheres 
for the two sexes. Also, the excerpt discusses the existence of a necessity of 

Catharina Hohmann, who presents in her (his?) own person a remarkable case of 
hermaphrodisia vera lateralis, which has been described by Prof. Rokitansky and others, is on 
her travels in Germany exhibiting her unique malformation. She complains, however, that in 
Vienna the authorities put a stop to her turning an honest penny in this way, ‘aus sittlichkeits-
rucksichten.’ So she advertises in the Wiener Medicinische Wochenschrisft that she can be 
examined at her own rooms by those interested in her case.

A journalist who saw her writes to Vienna Presse: ‘I pitied the poor creature. Although in good 
health, and of robust, and even beautifully shaped form, she sat before me in deep distress 
and wept. And she has wept already a great deal in her joyless life. She loves a man for 
twelve years; he loved her, too, and even proposed to her to go with him to America, where 
nobody would know of her misfortune; he would live with her there and be happy with her. 
But she refused to accept his generous offer, saying she would not make him unhappy. And 
then she loved, dreadful to say, for seven months – a young girl. Both of them were greatly 
attached to each other until the young girl finally turned from her and married. ‘Form this time 
for ward,’ says the poor hermaphrodite, ‘I could no longer look at the girl; I hated her.’ The most 
conflicting feelings always surge in her breast and torment her heart. She feels love for both 
sexes, and does not belong to either. ‘What shall I do here on earth!’ she exclaimed. ‘What am 
I? In my life an object of scientific experiment, and after my death, an anatomical curiosity!’ 
(487)

Carducci, Haste, Longenberger

42



two distinct identities in society: “perfect humanity is made up of both the 
sexes.” This idea demonstrates the nineteenth-century belief that two sexes 
were integral to the functioning of society. They believed that the mixing 
and blurring of gender lines would not only go against God’s creation but 
would also have negative consequences on society. Thus, this shows why 
people in the nineteenth century struggled with conceiving of an intersex 
identity that was not defined by the male/female binary.

Carducci, Haste, Longenberger

But whatever may be the original equality of the sexes in intellect and capacity, it is evident that 
it was intended by God that that they should move in different spheres, and of course that their 
powers should be developed in different directions. They are created not to be alike but to be 
different. The Bible with a noble simplicity expresses in few words all that can be said upon this 
subject. “God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him, male and 
female created he them.” As much as if the lawgiver of the Jews had said; “Perfect humanity 
is made up of both the sexes. One is not complete without the other. They are therefore 
counterparts of each other.” They must be different, and in many respects the opposites of 
each other, to fill their different spheres. This difference runs through the whole of their physical, 
moral, and intellectual constitution. This radical and universal difference points out distinctly a 
different sphere of action and duty. The God who made them knew the sphere in which each of 
them was designed to act, and he fitted them for it by their physical frames, by their intellectual 
susceptibilities, by their tastes and affections. (45-46)

43



WORKS CITED

Primary Sources
Burnap, George Washington. The Sphere and Duties of Woman: A Course of 

Lectures. Baltimore: John Murphy, 1854. Archive.org. Web. 13 Nov. 2015.

“Case of Hermaphroditism.” The Medical and Surgical Reporter Vol. 19 ( July-
Dec 1868): 487. HathiTrust. Web. 11 Nov. 2015.

Flint, A. “Hermaphroditis.” Boston Medical and Surgical Journal. Vol 23.  Ed. J. 
V. C. Smith. Boston: n.p., 7 Oct. 1840. Pp. 145-147. Google Books. Web. 9 
Nov. 2015.

Gould, George M. and Walter L. Pyle. Anomalies and Curiosities of Medicine. 
Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders & Company, 1901. Hathi Trust. Web. 9 
Nov. 2015.

Mundé, Paul . “A Case of Presumptive True Lateral Hermaphrodism.” The 
American Journal of Obstetrics and Diseases of Women and Children Vol. 8 
(May, Aug, Nov. 1875 – Feb. 1876): 615-629. Hathi Trust. Web. 14 Nov. 
2015.

Secondary Sources
American Psychological Association. “Guidelines for Psychological Practice 

with Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Clients.” American Psychologist (2012): 
10-42. Web. 13 Nov. 2015.

Delle Piane, Luisa, Walter L. Miller, and Paolo F. Rinaudo. “150 Years of 
Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia: Translation and Commentary of De 
Crecchio’s Classic Paper from 1865.” Endocrinology 156.4 (2015): 1210-
1217. Web. 9 Nov. 2015.

Dreger, Alice Domurat. Hermaphrodites and the Medical Invention of Sex. 
Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1998. Print.

Freaks. Dir. Tod Browning. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, 1932. Film.

Carducci, Haste, Longenberger

44



Fausto-Sterling, Anne. Sexing the Body: Gender Politics and the Construction of 
Sexuality. New York: Basic Books, 2000. Print.

Mak, Geertje. “Hermaphrodites on Show. The case of Katharina/Karl 
Hohmann and its Use in Nineteenth-century Medical Science.” Social 
History of Medicine 25:1(2011): 65-83. Web. 12 Nov 2015.

Carducci, Haste, Longenberger

45


