There is a very distinctive homosexual method of speech, quite aside from the choice of words (that is, the argot of the group and the deliberate change of gender). Neither has this anything to do with the choice of topics of conversation, nor with the viewpoints being espoused. It is a matter involving tonal modulation, and once again effeminacy has been confused with this phenomenon. It is closer to the speech of the actor, consisting of over-distinctive pronunciation of consonants, and lengthy pronunciation of vowels, particularly at the end of words and even more particularly at the end of sentences. It is used, quite unconsciously, I daresay, as a means of recognition; it is like a secret sign of members of some fraternal order who seek each other out of mutual aid, but who wish to avoid being known to those outside their own order.

And thus I could continue. There is a homosexual walk, quite aside from the effeminate swagger which is the gait of the obvious few. It is so far from effeminate that it is, on the contrary, almost militaristic, consisting as it does of a bringing of the heels down in a sharp, clacking, almost Prussianistic manner. It is possible, in a few extreme cases, to close one's eyes and hear a gay person walking down the street; it is certainly possible for another gay man to spot the person when he is so far away that his face is not yet in view.

These characteristics are but a few, and add to them the sign of recognition through the "homosexual reflex," the automatic, uncontrolled turning of the head to notice a male passing by, the almost invariable failure to take note of the female. There is the homosexual male-to-male stare, of which so many of us are unconscious. Let us not overlook the handshake that never parts quite as quickly as in the outer world. This is not a handshake that is soft, or a hand that is flabby, for that is again the stereotype, false for all but a very small few. In fact, it may be vigorous, masculine, hard, strong, but not as rapid in the break as would be expected were the homosexual component absent.

Effeminacy in an extreme form, which acts as a label for a person's sexual inclinations, is quite another matter. It is beyond doubt uncommon in the homosexual group, and is a source of great dismay therein. Among the homosexuals, it is a phenomenon that has attracted little sympathy and less understanding.

But it is of the majority of the homosexuals, men who have little or no signs of such effeminate characteristics, that I am now writing. It is their group, particularly in the big cities, that develops characteristics of their own. The important factor about such group traits, however, and the factor hitherto overlooked, is that they are neither masculine nor feminine, but specifically and peculiarly homosexual.

Donald Webster Cory

page 11