Sexual repression stands as one of the organizing concepts of depth psychology, its theoretical weight distributed unevenly across the major schools. For Freud, repression is not incidental but constitutive: the neurotic edifice is built upon desires barred from consciousness, above all those of a sexual character. The Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality and the Introductory Lectures document how infantile sexual impulses, when met by the barrier forces of disgust, shame, and moral prohibition—intensified at puberty especially in women—are driven underground, there to generate hysteria, obsessional neurosis, and the entire symptom-forming apparatus. Abraham extends this model to characterize the neurotic as one whose abnormally strong instinctual life is met by an equally pronounced tendency toward repression, the conflict between these forces being the engine of neurotic formation. Jung accepts repression as a clinical reality—crediting Freud’s discovery while insisting it is insufficient to account for the full contents of the unconscious—and in his later writings frames negation itself as repression’s intellectual delegate. Ferenczi’s Clinical Diary introduces a relational and traumatic inflection, locating repression in the withdrawal of love and the coercive enforcement of puritanical modesty upon the child. Hillman, reading through Norman O. Brown, subjects the entire body-as-base hypothesis to critical scrutiny, questioning whether psychic events such as repression should be subordinated to libidinal anatomy. Together these voices establish sexual repression as simultaneously a clinical mechanism, a developmental hazard, a cultural force, and a contested theoretical premise.