Does not genuine leadership necessarily imply social responsibility? The shock tactic crowd (more nude nudes), the campy giggle set and even the gray flannel coat-and-tie appeasers of society hardly seem to many thoughtful homophiles to have the answers. So it is that those who seek dependable progress for the Homophile Movement dedicate themselves to the painfully slow task of learning what leadership truly is, what its goals might be and how responsible persons should best go about attaining these goals.

It seems more likely that in the long run responsible individuals will for themselves find the responsible leaders whom they may trust and upon whose judgment they may depend. As usually happens in human affairs, like attracts like. Despite some scurrying this way and that in pursuit of the mad ones and the wild ones, when things settle down the picture clears. Leaders are then judged for their aims and achievements rather than for their personalities.

This saner focus can be achieved only as the problem of leadership is given much study by each of us for clear thinking must precede sensible action. Choosing intelligently does not come easily for most people. Rather it is the outcome of mature reflection and trained observation, of learning how to judge correctly between the genuine article and the false. Is it not the urgent task of each participant in the Homophile Movement today to address himself to this task?

Richard Conger, EDITOR

OCTOBER 1

by Yves Bourguignon

When Angelos and I play,

we are two stones in a Greek temple, seeing,

watching,

firmly planted together.

The idle worshippers pass us

on sandal-strapped feet,

the scorners of stones.

We do not care.

Our corners meet,

the flat of our existence pressed

against each other,

fitted tightly,

watching,

seeing.

When Angelos and I play,

we know the gods catch us with a smile.

5