tain, I can already find in existence so far as the homosexual minority is concerned.

3: The segmentation of the populace into mutually antagonistic ethnic groups causes certain divisive influences within the homosexual minority. First, some homosexuals (although the proportion is smaller than among heterosexuals) reflect the antagonistic attitudes toward some ethnic groups, and hence a unified minority is difficult to fuse. Secondly, some members of the Jewish-homosexual and the Negro-homosexual double minorities fear to conduct a struggle on behalf of their sex group because it might, they reason, vitiate their struggle on behalf of their ethnic group. The latter is usually considered by these people to be their first loyalty, their original and their lasting group identification. They are furthermore unconvinced of the propriety of the struggle for sexual rights on the same level and with the same righteous vigor as the struggle for ethnic rights.

4: Nevertheless, most homosexuals do participate in a greater amount of inter-ethnic mingling than do heterosexuals, and this, too, is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, it aids the unity within the homosexual group, but it creates an antagonistic attitude toward homosexuals on the part of many individuals who, still under reactionary influences so far as minorities are concerned, look upon the Negro-white alliances as further proof, not of liberalism and emancipation, but of degeneracy.

The current status of the American homosexual is characterized by the following main phenomena: (1) increasing awareness of the existence of the group, and of the widespread adherence to its practices, on the part of the large masses of people; (2) increasing expressions of support of and sympathy for the group by leadership in psychological, sociological, and other areas of American thought; (3) tendency to accept the existence of the group as an unfortunate necessity, a problem that cannot be erased, but a continued unwillingness to accept the individual members who become adherents of it or identified with it; (4) tolerance toward certain group activities so long as they remain anonymous and hide behind a facade of respectability, no matter how thin the veil; (5) a tendency within the group to feel that (a) this status is not unbearable, (b) a better one is not deserved, and (c) the struggle for change may bring down the wrath from law-makers and other authorities.

These are characteristics that differ considerably from the situation that prevailed some thirty or forty years back. At that time, the manifestations of homosexuality were carefully hidden, the word unspoken and unknown save in medical circles, the members of the group concealing their activities in the most complete and utter fear. The problem could not be mentioned in newspapers or

page 5