EDITORIAL

"The voice of U.S. homosexuals" was the title given to ONE a number of years ago by a popular magazine. It is true that the Magazine's pages have always been open to the diverse, even conflicting, viewpoints found among "U.S. homosexuals."

They have submitted for publication short stories and poetry written in that vein of futility and despair affected by the very young who wish to appear very wise. They have sent sweetly sentimental stories which would have been quite at home in the women's magazines, save for the subject matter. There have been the manuscripts of Deep Meaning, poetry especially, although one could never feel entirely sure that the authors themselves knew just what they had in mind. Mercifully, there have been a few stories and poems that said what they had to say, simply, directly-and briefly.

The articles published have been fully as varied. So readers have charged the Editors with being inconsistent, saying, "One month you tell us we should swish if we wish; the next month you tell us that is what causes all the trouble." Likely enough neither of these represents ONE's editorial policies, aside from its stated mission as a forum for the wide range of opinion which exists in the Gay World.

Then there have been the articles from "outsiders," those writing about homosexuality from the sidelines. These have ranged from the true scientists, to the man in the street, to the crack-pots. The Editors have felt it their duty to publish these things, without labels and judgements. The letters then pour in. "How can you afford comfort to the Albert Ellises and the Berglers?" they complain.

It may be that the time has come when, in self defense, the Editors need to make clear that only in the Editorials, in certain of the book reviews and the mercilessly candid work of the Art Director may their own convictions be discovered.

What have these been over the years? Simply that the Editors have always felt, and do today, that:

1. Homosexual acts between consenting adults are neither anti-social, nor sinful;

2. Legal attempts to regulate such behavior violate American principles of personal freedom, are therefore immoral;

one

Cont. on p. 31

4