gay bars here. Quite a stink was raised, but as usual, "justice" triumphs. One was SUSpended for a few months and then, I think, re-hired with back pay due from his suspense date. The others didn't even get a slap on the

wrist.

It would seem that crime is a matter of opinion-if it's blackmail or coercion upon a social minority it really doesn't count as such, so long as it can be backed up with a badge and a gun. Of course all this is done in the traditional American concept of fair play. Mr. R.

Dear ONE:

San Francisco, Calif.

I'm filling out the questionnaire for the Bill of Rights. I never did give you any details when ONE Confidential extended the invitation. It's easier to It's easier to answer questions than to compose an autobiography.

Dear Don:

Mr. L.

Brooklyn, New York

I enclose the questionnaire, even though it will reach you after the Midwinter Institute. The whole idea of the Bill of Rights, the ambitiousness, the scope, has electrified me. Horizons are surely in sight. Succeed or fail, it will go down in history as our very first move for public recognition.

Mr. B.

Melbourne, Australia

O, THOSE PRETTY PICTURES!

To Lambert and others of ONE:

ONE must be getting better-once again. I'm reacting (January, 1961). First, to Lambert: you might have balanced your editorial about the nude photo question by remarking that both Greeks and Romans thought that images of nudes (mostly of males) should be a part of the public scenery. Their statues of men were decidedly phallic. If we can't have such beauty in public places, I see no reason why we shouldn't have private collections of photos-Freud notwithstanding. Actually, i can't afford such photos and have seen very few that pleased me much.

Yes, some of the Minority live in a dream world, but taking photos away from them won't change that I see the points of your editorial and have no serious quarrel with you on that score.

Let me praise you for publishing Jemison's "Know Your Bartender," an amusing, informative article, and daring. Even his photo! There is an extraordinary amount of selfadvertisement in the article which gives the strong coloration lacking in some of the Magazine's pieces. I consider this article something of a landmark in your publishing ventures. O yes, I'll praise Jemison for confessing the kiss the readers were waiting for -even one kiss can do wonders for an article.

Edward Denison Texas

Dear fellows:

Let me thank you for the opportunity of taking part in the program of the Midwinter Institute. As so often happens, the rewards I received were so great compared to the work performed (and I didn't loaf) that I shall forever feel a debt of gratitude to you. The crowd may have been smaller than usual and the group divided, but the results were terrific.

Dear friends:

Mr. H.

Calif.

I was particularly interested in the mention in "Tangents" (January, 1961) of the trouble in Washington, D. C. concerning Detective Fochet. I formerly lived in D. C. and had the unfortunate experience of tangling with this so-called "arm of the Law." In my opinion he is just as queer as anyone could be. I really have no use for anyone who will turn on his own kind in this way. I am not acquainted with the other detectives mentioned, but am glad to note that Fochet has new running mates. Maybe eventually they will all manage to hang themselves.

Mr. R. Spokane, Wash.

Dear Sirs:

I am inclined to agree with your editorial (January, 1961) and would emphasize the fact that physique photos are readily available in many forms to those who desire them. ONE holds a unique place here in the United States and should not lose itself in already crowded and often misguided fields.

It is agreed that Dr. Baker will be regretfully missed. We are indeed grateful for her

services.

Dear Editors:

Mr. L. Brighton, Mass.

To advance the Freudian view of sex deviation as stated on your editorial as a reason for rejecting physique photos is to endorse it, by implication at least. Does ONE, in fact, endorse the Freudian theory? Does interest in physique photos in fact imply lack of satisfactory sex adjustment?

Conversely, does an overt homosexual adjustment, if accompanied by interest in pictures, imply that homosexuality is an unsatisfactory adjustment? When, in fact, it frequently does accompany it?

What does this editorial get us into?

Mr. H.

Los Angeles, Calif.

one

30