of Life? was written, according to which homosexuals were incapable of "achieving any peace of mind, any satisfying relations with other people, or any genuine artistic accomplishment." He wrote that of all psychoanalysts it was Bergler who waged "the most vigorous campaign against connecting homosexuality with creativity", with Homosexuality: Disease or Way of Life? being a continuation of Bergler's previous efforts. He criticized Bergler for his "insularity and imperviousness to criticism", giving as an example Bergler's insistence on the representativeness of his clinical experience. According to the historian Dagmar Herzog, no psychoanalyst challenged Bergler's negative generalizations about homosexuals. However, the psychoanalyst Richard Isay, who was also gay, criticized Bergler and other analysts for arguing that legal restrictions on homosexuality are necessary. He described their views as part of a set of outdated anti-gay attitudes. The psychiatrist Richard Pillard compared Bergler's views to those of Socarides, Lawrence Hatterer, and members of the New York Society of Medical Psychoanalysis. Tim Dean and Christopher Lane wrote that with his emphasis on using psychoanalysis as a "cure" for homosexuality, Bergler helped to bring psychoanalytic arguments about homosexuality in the United States into alignment with psychiatric treatment, a development that encouraged "increasingly severe clinical techniques" in the 1950s and 1960s. The psychoanalyst Jack Drescher described Bergler's comments about homosexuals as infamous. The psychiatrist William S. Meyer described Bergler as "the most outspoken, vulgar, and damaging" of those psychoanalysts opposed to homosexuality. Other evaluations Homosexuality: Disease or Way of Life? received a mixed review from John F. Oliven in the American Journal of Public Health and the Nation's Health. Oliven described the book as "only moderately well organized" and "heavily padded" with material on various literary figures. He wrote that Bergler engaged in "vigorous polemicizing", and that while Bergler showed "many flashes of brilliance", his opinions had become increasingly dogmatic over time. He noted that many "experienced students of sexual pathology" would disagree with Bergler's denial of the existence of bisexuality as a clinical entity. Bayer criticized Bergler for his use of aggressive and intemperate language. He wrote that Bergler's comments on homosexuals went beyond the conventional view of homosexuality as a psychiatric disorder. Max Scharnberg described Bergler's characterizations of homosexuals as an example of the absurdity of psychoanalytic propositions. Harry M. Benshoff argued that Bergler's claim that homosexuality had become more widespread through the "creation of new recruits as a result of the dissemination of