there was nothing mad about it. The poor dude was
gay, pure and simple. Not stupid, not cruel, not frivolous, not mean or ill-natured--just gay. And it's not as if there were no mounting evidence, towards the end of the 19th century, that a
lot of people, most of them male, were gay. At least as many as there were dipsomaniac, left-handed, color-blind and crippled people. So why did the powers and institutions that, in the 19th century
were (beginning, say, with the Austro-Hungarian Empire) with all the interests they had in finding out just what would constitute a fairly descriptive, over-all objective demographic of the exceedingly various peoples they expected to form into countries in their own right, if not democracies, (which everyone, I think, admits that at least the Austro-Hungarian Empire did an exhaustive job of
trying to do) so insist, contrarily to the evidence, on the abnormality--indeed the criminality--of male homosexuality?
The answer, I fear, is not edifying, and point to the conclusion that the Emperor Franz-Josef, like the Tsar, and like the majority of Englishmen, was, in normal matters, an idiot.