questions immediately relate the problem of moral evaluation to the field of psychology that field which attempts to trace external stimuli through the labyrinths of mind and motivation to their outcome in actual behavior.

In a "Report on Pornography" published a few years ago by The Los Angeles Daily Journal, Dr. D. F. Rendinell was quoted as Chief Psychiatrist at Los Angeles County's Juvenile Hall. He had this to say:

"Of course, we are all against pornography. The only question is that of definition. Those who wish an even more strict censorship of sexuality in literature, cinema and the arts would describe as 'pornographic' or 'obscene' something which a more liberal-minded citizen might accept as a natural and adult expression of human emotion.

"It would be just as harmful for a society to become ultra-Puritanical as to become overly permissive or promiscuous. Each society must draw its own lines between these extremes. And the decisions are properly made by the courts, the legislature and, ultimately, the electorate.

"It is easy to become emotional about this subject and lose sight of the great principles of legal justice which distinguishes our society from the Police State. Yet we see our courts severely criticized for not 'backing up' the police-whenever they rule in favor of a defendant in an 'obscenity'

case.

"Censorship in America is lopsided; most of it is leveled against sex. Our criticism of the more liberal sexuality in the art of other nations is nothing compared to their criticism of the sadistic brutality of ours.

"Psychologically, the abnormal use of pornography is a symptom, not a cause. The individual is almost always suffering from an emotional

conflict which interferes with normal sexual functioning. Through the use of pornography, he retreats into sexual fantasy and avoids sexual reality which he actually fears. Like the pervert he is not as popularly supposed -enjoying a special and exotic sexual experience; he is settling for a poor substitute, since his emotional conflicts do not permit genuine sexual gratification.

"Pornography does not cause abnormal sexual attitudes. The child learns basic attitudes toward sex in the home before he learns to read!

"The elimination of pornography will not cure abnormal sexuality any more than the closing of all stores will cure kleptomania. It is not enough to legislate against abnormal behavior the individual should also be directed to obtain help for his problem. The Legislature should also concern itself with preventive and treatment measures. The great need for research and mental hygiene clinics is disregarded in the stampede to punish the offender.

"If society's attitude toward sex were wholesome, we would have no pornography. Sex is-or should bea dignified human relationship. Censorship is necessary but should be sensible. It should not be controlled by a fanatical Puritanical fringe any more than by the promiscuous. Both of these extremes are alike because each looks upon sex as something evil, foul and nasty."

Since Dr. Rendinell's remarks are typical of what other eminent scientists and practitioners in this field have to say on the same subject, it can be safely concluded that "obscenity" in literature and the arts contains no intrinsic or necessary moral aspects. For persons who can consider erotic material objectively, and to whom "obscenity" is merely bad taste or disproportion in the representation of sexual subjects, there