Impotence in the depth-psychology corpus is far from a simple clinical symptom; it serves as a crossroads where libidinal theory, archetypal imagery, somatic experience, and cultural mythology converge. The classical psychoanalytic tradition, represented chiefly by Karl Abraham, treats impotence and its female counterpart frigidity as consequences of libidinal arrest rooted in the castration complex — the genitals become sites of anxiety rather than pleasure, and the developmental trajectory toward full object-love is blocked. Stanislav Grof reframes this dynamic transpersonally, arguing that impotence derives not from libidinal deficiency but from an excess of volcanic perinatal energies that the ego cannot safely mobilize. James Hillman’s archetypal reading is the most radical: within the Saturnine-senex constellation, impotence is not pathology in the normative sense but a condition that arises when sexuality is withdrawn from biological function and confined to the purely imaginal register. For Moore, the ‘Impotent Lover’ names a shadow configuration of the masculine psyche in which erotic vitality, vision, and sensory presence collapse together. Nietzsche indexes priestly impotence as the engine of ressentiment and slave morality. Across these registers — clinical, transpersonal, archetypal, cultural-philosophical — impotence functions as a marker of arrested power, a figure of the conflict between instinct and inhibition, and, in its most searching readings, a portal into imaginal rather than generative sexuality.