The androgyne occupies a charged and contested position within the depth-psychology corpus, functioning simultaneously as cosmogonic symbol, alchemical operator, psychological ideal, and ideological problem. Jung treats the androgyne with the greatest theoretical weight, mapping it onto the hermaphroditic lapis of alchemy and the Gnostic Primordial Man, reading in Adam’s androgynous dual nature the prototype of Christ and the coniunctio oppositorum that structures the entire individuation telos. Neumann historicizes the figure developmentally, locating androgyny as a primitive, structurally undifferentiated condition characteristic of uroboric consciousness prior to the masculine-feminine split. Hoeller, following the Gnostic Jung, distinguishes sharply between unisex—a flattening distortion—and genuine androgyny, which he reserves as the ‘rare and precious’ apex of psychic transformation. Campbell treats the androgyne mythologically, tracing its appearance from Plato’s Symposium to Hebrew and Hindu cosmogonies as the symbol of primordial wholeness sundered by divine act and sought in reunion. Berry, from the archetypal wing, mounts the sharpest critique: androgyny as psychological concept is ‘clinically clean, straight, and sterile,’ a transcending abstraction that suppresses the flesh, pain, and inferiority essential to genuine soul-work. Samuels contextualizes Singer’s ‘androgyny’ within post-Jungian debates over gender essentialism, noting its proximity to Freud’s polymorphous disposition. The term thus marks a fault-line between those who use it as an aspirational symbol of wholeness and those who see it as a covert reinscription of binary thinking.