police had agreed not to interfere with this function, but on the actual occasion of the ball, turned out in droves, making several arrests. several arrests. "The police have engaged in a systematic policy of discrimination against San Francisco's homosexual community, and those interested in their rights and welfare," the suit charges.

HOMO-EXPLOSION IN BERKELEY

Not quite so spectacular as Mt. Pelee's 1902 eruption, which destroyed several towns and took the lives of 35,000 persons, the eruption of publicity last November in the DAILY CALIFORNIAN on male homosexual activity on the U. of C. Campus merely buried So. Cal. and other parts of the country with tons of newsprint on the subject, a bale or so of which eventually wound up at ONE's headquarters. The 5part "expose," conducted by Fea-

ture

Editor Konstantin Berlandt, was so flamboyant and the public comment so emphatic and widespread, that further remarks will necessarily be anti-climatic.

In the course of events. ONE's Bureau of Public Information (doubtless other sources also) was obliged to advise the D.C. editor that England had most definitely NOT yet altered its laws against homosexual behavior (D.C. for 12/8 said it had). Also, homosexuals at Berkeley and elsewhere registered shock at the lurid and unrealistic way in which the "expose" was begun-making the local men's restrooms appear as the major, if not the sole, focus of homophile interests.

In sending us the final two installments, one of our Berkeley correspondents wrote:"These last articles are an improvement . . . for good reason. The first article, relying on the restroom incidents, was

24

recognized by the entire campus community as being both misleading and irresponsible. A flood of letters has been sent to the newspaper, questioning the purpose of presenting the most sensational and least desirable aspects of homosexuality." Both student and faculty groups "condemned the articles for not giving an objective treatment of a social controversy in the context of University life. Added to this, 48 fraternities and the Athletics Dept., which were slurred by a statement from a homosexual, have sent letters of protest (as a result of which) several apology notices have been issued. These articles have generated a lot more interest than anyone originally anticipated."

In all of this, neither the D.C. itself, editorially, nor the articles (however unbalanced) actually adopted a condemnatory view. During the furore, the paper printed a number of indignant letters either from homosexuals or from

those supporting their cause, criticizing the nature of the reporting. Anent the initial report that campus police had removed the door of every other cubicle in a men's restroom on campus, with which information the CALIFORNIAN led off (printing a photo as proof), one sociology grad wrote in to question the effectiveness of this Administrative measure as a means of curbing or stopping homosexual activity. After remarking that homosexuals could always remove to the privacy of dorm or frat, and, if this were invaded, to the sanctuary of private apartments, he reached the inevitable conclusionthat U. of C. must campaign for the removal of all doors (windowshades too, maybe?) in the entire community. "Surely THAT will solve the problem," said he.