are not known to that society and constitute a special "in" group unto ourselves. There are certain real consolations to being part of such a society within, though out of, society, and camp is the special language of our in-group.

It may well be that there are many homosexuals suffocating on farms or in suburbia or small towns. I once did myself. My advice is simple:move. Let us flock together in ore or several key areas. Let us come to constitute a majority in these key areas and effectively "take them over," revise the laws, elect our own to government posts, local, state, and national, and by our example of self-help, self-respect, creativity, and genuine tolerance compel recognition and tolerance from others. I recommend New York-as the largest, most important self-governing city in the nation, internationally prominent. New York, or whatever other place we choose could become for us what Quebec is for French Canadians:stronghold, spokesman, champion. The voiceless would have a voice, a powerful voice backed by an example of a successful, harmonious and tolerant society, to press our case and give homosexuals everywhere more self-respect and confidence.

I advocate also that we end the senseless splits in our ranks through merging the various homosexual organizations-ONE, the various Mattachine Societies, etc.-into one (with separate male and female branchesafter all, this is what homosexuality is all about). I am a political activist and believe that if we are to gain the freedom to be ourselves, we must take practical actions in the political field.

Dear ONE:

Mr. S.

New York, N.Y.

The enclosed $500 is the best I can do at the present. It will help, I know, but I wish it could be the whole thing.

Would like very much to visit you all and see the ONE "operation." As for the lawsuit, I'm sure that you'll win it-no doubt in my mind about that.

Dear Mr. Rothman:

Mr. W. Sandusky, Ohio

Your very emotional article on the Homophile Movement appearing in the December issue of ONE Magazine made many interesting points, and evaluation is often helpful. However, as Chairman of the Board of Directors of the National League for Social Understanding, I can see no reason for you to get so carried away with tearing apart organizations other than ONE that you need change their their name as you did with the League.

It has always been difficult for two or-

ganizations to work peacefully together in the same city. I was one of the leaders who pushed the concept that working with ONE built the confidence of the majority of homosexuals for both organizations. Your article, and ONE's willingness to print it, with its mistake, have led several of the staff to question the Board's decision. I hope the future will vindicate my personal position. Dr. Harold Fielder

National League for Social Understanding Los Angeles, California

Dear ONE:

It is pleasing to note that you are making progress despite the great difficulties you experienced last year. If the other group wished to separate, let them. Apparently they are going ahead with their "Tangents." In my opinion they and the new magazine published, I think, in San Francisco can't hurt. you if you continue to put out a good ONE. The market is flooded with competing magazines. There is such a great number of homophiles that you have a tremendous field to work on, even though other organizations compete.

I make one small suggestion. Since the other outfit has seen fit to call their magazine "Tangents," drop the title, Tangents, in that section of ONE. It was a good title for the section, but now I would have nothing which corresponds with anything they have.

Re: the 1-21-66 TIME Magazine Essay (also material on the same subject published earlier in LIFE)-I don't know why, but I just have the feeling that there are homosexuals in the TIME-LIFE organization. It seems to me that references are sometimes made in various issues, and in various contexts, which did not necessarily have to be made. I gain the impression that someone is triying to give the homosexual a "fair shake," although when there is an outright discussion of the subject, as in the recent TIME, they take a miserably weak stand.

As you face a new year, I sincerely hope and wish for ONE much success. You are doing a fine job for people who desperately need such help. My best regards to my friends at ONE.

Dear ONE:

Mr. P. Riverside, Calif.

Regarding the Rothman diatribe in your December, 1965 issue of ONE Magazine, the very fact that you would print such denigrations of East Coast homophile activities proves that ONE has slipped far out of the mainstream of the homophile movement in recent years. I feel that this is to be regretted. A continued attitude of aloofness will only reinforce this.

Mr. K. Washington, D.C.