“If only all women would think that way…” The Fine Line Between “Old Maid” and “Nymphomania I” 

Patient Records of Women from the Psychiatric Clinic at the University of Heidelberg 

by Steff Kunz (Universität Heidelberg, Geschichte und Ethik der Medizin, Forschungsprojekt “Zwischen Unsichtbarkeit, Repression und lesbischer Emanzipation – Frauenliebende* Frauen im deutschen Südwesten 1945 bis 1980er Jahre”)

Since the start of our project in March 2021, we have reviewed approximately 1300 records from the archives of female patients at the Psychiatric Clinic of the University of Heidelberg. These records date from the years 1925 to 1939. In this article, I would like to provide a brief overview of our work with this material and share some preliminary observations concerning their significance in shaping norms of femininity.

“Thus, the ‘medical perspective’ is by no means the sole perspective offered by these records.”¹

Each of the grey boxes in the inventory contains approximately 40 green cardboard folders labelled “Psychiatric (Neurological) Clinic Heidelberg.” These folders display the following information: name, marital status, date of birth, place of birth, place of residence, diagnosis, date of admission, and date of discharge. The same details are immediately available on the first page, supplemented by occupation and religious affiliation. Following this, under the “Medical History” section, we mostly find descriptions of the patients’ circumstances and conditions upon admission, such as: “Accompanied by a sister-in-law, paramedics, and a nurse from the city hospital in Karlsruhe. Very loud, speaks, screams, yells”², or frequently just “Patient is temporally, spatially, and locally oriented.” These initial statements usually do not shed light on whether the individual could be a woman with non-heteronormative tendencies or someone who deviated from the traditional heterosexual norm. Therefore, the subsequent sections hold greater interest. Some of the records offer detailed life histories, while others are limited to a course of the illness. Some only contain results of intelligence tests. In most cases, the accompanying individuals are first questioned about the reasons for admission, family background, and special events. The most informative part of these records consists of the interview protocols with the psychiatrists. What do the women reveal about themselves when they are admitted to the clinic? How do they assess their situations, and what do they disclose about their social lives? Furthermore, the questions, written assessments, and comments from the psychiatrists provide insights into the topics deemed significant from an institutional standpoint concerning the social lives of women during that era and in that location. 

Navigating Female Roles in Society 

Special attention is given to the concept of femininity within its socially prescribed norms.³ As such, the records examine women’s interactions with one another and their attitudes towards employment, marriage, family life, and employers. Additionally, physical attributes, posture, facial expressions, gestures, and speech patterns are described in the examinations and expert opinions. It becomes evident that the psychiatrists’ perspectives were heavily influenced by social ideals of femininity. At the beginning of nearly every record, the women were queried about various topics, including their first menstrual period, its regularity, duration, and associated symptoms. Since the 19th century, psychiatric theory considered women especially vulnerable to “nervous conditions” and “mental illnesses” due to their reproductive capacity and the associated physiological functions. During the era of National Socialism, questions related to potential pregnancies must also be considered in the context of eugenics, forced sterilizations, and abortions, which were performed at the Heidelberg Women’s Clinic. However, we will not delve further into this aspect in this article. 

“Why Remain Unmarried?” 

Unmarried women, especially if they came into contact with the psychiatric system, were subjected to critical inquiries regarding their marital status. The question of why a patient did not marry was linked to the search for pathological reasons, seeking to identify what might be wrong with the woman. 

“(Why unmarried?) It was difficult. I had a good job. It was during the war years. When you have a job, you can support yourself. Most men were unemployed. I preferred it that way. We even went dancing, but I never thought about marriage. […] (If all women think like that now) If you’re that way. My parents didn’t approve.”⁴

“(Why unmarried?) I didn’t want to get married. No negative experiences. I can’t say anything about that. I was always alone. I have siblings with whom I get along well. […] According to her own statements, which, by the way, seem quite credible, the patient must have always been not only a reserved and introverted person but also very gentle and with little resistance in terms of willpower. This can be inferred from the way she discussed her past life and the reasons for remaining unmarried.”⁵

These excerpts from two records, dated 1934 and 1937, not only highlight the significance of the heteronormative notion of marriage in psychiatry but also emphasize the quest to uncover the reasons behind the women’s non-compliance with this norm. Psychiatrists frequently identified and pathologized psychological or social deviations as the underlying causes for non-marital status. Moreover, the patients themselves were cognizant of their deviation from the norm; the first patient mentions her participation in dancing, and the second example emphasizes the relationship with her siblings. If a woman preferred to live with her parents or devoted herself fervently to Christianity, engagement in a religious community, or lived independently as a single woman instead of becoming a wife and mother, this lifestyle was pathologized within the psychiatric context. The emphasis on participation in social and community life outside of marriage can be construed as a norm set in opposition to psychological or social non-conformity. This pattern recurs in many of the conversations surrounding why women did not marry. The consistent, standardized questioning of women regarding their inclination to marry and lead a life as wives can be seen as the routine performance of heteronormativity within psychiatry. Conversely, women who defied these social expectations were suspected of being “peculiar,” “wayward,” or even psychopathic. The extent to which the lifestyle of single women who deviated from the (hetero)norm was the primary reason for their pathologization and admission to psychiatry, as opposed to one of several “abnormalities,” is a subject to be further investigated in this research project.⁶

The German version of the text can be found here.

1. Radkau (1998): Das Zeitalter der Nervosität, S. 78 f., S. 78. [↩]
2. Universitätsarchiv Heidelberg (UAH): Bestand Patientenakten der Psychiatrischen Klinik der Universität Heidelberg, L-III-Frauen 1937/38. [↩]
3. We would like to refer to the article written by Claudia Weinschenk: Weinschenk, Claudia (2020): “Auch fühlte ich mich immer mehr zu meinem Geschlecht hingezogen”. Ein Forschungsprojekt zur Auffindbarkeit lesbischer Frauen während des Nationalsozialismus. In: Invertito 22, S. 46–76. [↩]
4. UAH: Bestand Patientenakten der Psychiatrischen Klinik der Universität Heidelberg, L-III-Frauen 1934/245. [↩]
5. UAH: Bestand Patientenakten der Psychiatrischen Klinik der Universität Heidelberg, L-III-Frauen 1937/356. [↩]
6. Thank you, Prof. Karen Nolte for the support during the research and for proofreading this article. [↩]

---

---