Letters

does the person have an idea at the outset. what his partner has in mind; does he like. him enough before hand to be willing? Mr. B.

New York, N. Y.

UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES DO THE EDITORS FORWARD LETTERS FROM READERS TO OTHER PERSONS NOR DO THEY ANSWER CORRESPONDENCE MAKING SUCH REQUESTS.

Editors of ONE:

The article "Between Consenting Adults," by Didgeon (May, 1959) raises several important issues which its author slurred over. In the first place, complete sexual liberty,' defended to its ultimate point, does NOT logically entail Sade's thesis. To think only of one's own pleasure, own pleasure, disregarding the partner's feelings altogether, is not sexual liberty, it is a pathological split between sensual and tender feelings. (Cf. Ephesians 5:22-24.) In sexual health this split does not exist; rather, the partner's own response intensifies one's own satisfaction, and conversely.

In the second place, the issue is not whether liberty must be restricted and how far, but whether a logical basis exists for restraining a sick individual from damaging someone else. Leaving aside for the moment whether a sexual advance to a seventeenyear-old constitutes damage and therefore "molestation", the question of restraining a sadist is comparable to that of restraining a delirious or drug-crazed individual individual knocking down an innocent bystander.

from

Jail terms surely are not more appropriate in the one case than the other; sadists (Exhibitionists, and those few pedophiles who seek only pre-puberal children who presumably don't know what it is all about) are undoubtedly driven by some irresistible impulse, which itself involves the above-mentioned split between sensual and tender feelings.

This split is probably the one most signficant symptom to look for in ascertaining whether a sexual relationship is pathological or not, regardless of the ages of the partners. Sleeping with strangers about whom one does not care twopence" (Donald Webster Cory) might be re-examined in this light. And here might be the hoped-for criterion for consent, whether one's partner is a teen-ager or someone old enough to be your father:

Gentlemen:

My house was raided by Customs officers and copies of ONE for the last six months or so taken for consideration of obscenity to the Collector of Customs. Would you please therefore cancel my subscription immediately.

Dear ONE:

Mr. B.

South Yarra, Australia

Bravo! At last someone has the "intestinal fortitude" to speak out for us. Although I know your Magazine has been going for years it has just come to my attention. I find myself cheering aloud your straightforward and frank attitude toward the trials of the Gay Set. Your Editorial (March, 1959) was particularly grand. Thanks, for me-and for all the people who only say it and don't write you. Keep right on!

Dear Editor:

Mr. W.

Dallas, Texas

"The Halloween Party" (May, 1959) tells of a sad, horrible state of justice. If this story were circulated to the public, is it possible' that it would educate people to the true facts of life?

Dear Mr. McIntire:

Mr. G. New York, N. Y.

I was pleased to see my article on the Charleston murder published. It is too bad, though, that some copy reader or proofreader changed the "twice" to "thrice" in my sentence Did the cock crow twice?" Peter denied Christ thrice, but the cock crew only twice. I readily understand how such errors creep into print despite all efforts to keep them out, but I thought I had better point out the error before some of your readers do. Charleston Reporter Charleston, South Carolina

Dear Sirs:

I have been criticized and censured by many of my fellow clergy, but I believe that Love was given to us by the Almighty-and Love, being a gift from the Almighty is a beautiful thing; also, all the gifts given to us were meant to be used.

I believe this so strongly that I have al-