gram for sexual liberty, or perhaps he has some method of ensuring the elimination of "out-of-wedlock" progeny entirely by contraceptive devices. At any rate, it is a pity he did not discuss this subject definitively in Vol. I, since his failure to do so will tend to undermine his qualifications as both a psychologist and sociologist, in the eyes of informed readers. Meanwhile, Part II is entertaining, if you like to read endless citations of what people have done about sex from time immemorial-in and out of bed.

R. H. C. SUPPRESSED, by Albert Ellis, Ph.D., subtitled "7 Key Essays Publishers Dared Not Print." New Classics House, Chicago, 1965, paperback, 124 pp. 75c.

These rambles through Dr. Ellis' philosophic views on sexual morals and society are sufficient proof that he would be better off to stick with the juicy, down-to-earth facts of sexual behavior, and leave philosophy alone. In fact, this reviewer is inclined to wonder whether these essays were suppressed less because of his total candor in the former area than of his inept-

ness in the latter.

Dr. Ellis begins this series by taking a whack at the impressive-sounding subject, "Sex, Science & Human Values," which he romps through in something under 14 pages, in the course of which he gets himself hopelessly entangled in various semantic obscurities. At first it appears that humans would avoid all anxieties if they would avoid self-criticism—"if they would spontaneously or unselfconsciously be"-which seems to include also the avoidance of making any comparisons between themselves and others, and the avoidance of any concepts "of personal worth or worthlessness." But it turns

out that what is really meant is simply that one should not criticize oneself in pejorative terms. Thus, one is not a no-good bum because one has behaved

28

"wrongly." One should criticize one's behavior only in terms of whether it is or is not self-defeating or injurious to others though how this is to be done without comparing oneself with others, or without making some motivational connection between "being" and "doing," is nowhere made clear. Dr. Ellis seems to be saying that selfknowledge, self-confidence, and a constructive scientific approach to behavior and its consequences are essentials to a successful life-a splendid concept, but scarcely original, and barely even deducible from the terms he uses.

In the second essay, on "Sexual Permissiveness Today," Dr. Ellis reiterates his views that sexual permissiveness is increasing and should continue to do so, stopping somewhere short of having sex "in Macy's window." This will mean "less anxiety, less guilt, less conformity, and consequently greater emotional health on the part of those who are letting themselves go." But, "naturally, there can be some abuses," among which sado-masochistic orgies are described as "essentially self-punitive," and voyeurism as a substitute for "direct, healthy sexuality." He concludes that "the sex problem is still shall we say, the way of all flesh: tovery much with us. But it's going, ward freer and less guilt-ridden orgasms." And as a final philosophic touch, "What have we got to lose but our goddam puritanical chains?"

In essays three and four, on nymphomania and wife-swapping respectively, Dr. Ellis seems to be writing more in his natural literary element. Nymphomania? A very rare clinical condition, in which true sexual satisfaction is impossible-not to be confused with strong sexual desires. Wife-swapping? We-1-1... Dr. Ellis lists nine "sicksick-sick" neurotic motives for spouseswapping, discernable in "nutty," "looney," "off-their-rocker" individuals, (one is constantly impressed with Ellis' scientific language) but concedes