It may be months, or years, before lawyers, publishers and newsdealers arrive at a working understanding of these latest decisions in terms applicable to daily operation of their own affairs under what appear to be some very new ground-rules indeed.
It is quite likely that the hysterical panic indulged in by some commentators, The New Republic, for instance, calling Ginzburg's sentence "an outrage" (April 3/66) will gradually subside, Ginzburg's attorneys already having appealed for a rehearing. Principal ray of hope emanates from the fact that, concerning the three cases, eleven of the Supreme Court Justices felt impelled to write separate and dissenting opinions, and some withering sarcasm directed at the legal reasoning behind each of the three widely split decisions.
Past experience suggests that narrow decisions are sometimes reversed the next time around, but how long until that next time? Meanwhile, Ginzburg's five years could have gone by and still others could have been attacked under cover of the March 21st decisions. So, as it ever has been, the law and the courts which administer it tend to be riddles wrapped in Churchill's famous enigma. Were it all so simple, who would need an attorney?
"NORMAL VS. ABNORMAL SEX"
Everyone interested in moral evaluation of sex behavior should read the article under the quoted heading by Dr. W. B. Pomeroy in SEXOLOGY Magazine (Feb., 1966) Dr. Pomeroy, renowned former field director at the Kinsey Institute, and co-author of its famed reports, discusses the question in terms of the five frames of reference within
which "normality" is capable of being defined:the statistical, the zoological, the moral, the legal, and the social. His essential conclusion is that any particular sex act would be considered normal in some of these contexts of value, and abnormal in others, and that "it makes more sense to banish the entire concept from our vocabulary and our thinking."
ADVICE TO TEENAGERS
The Dulaneys, columnists for the DETROIT FREE PRESS, early in February authored a 2-part article to teenagers on what they should know about deviates-mainly, on how to react if a friend turns out to be homosexual and they don't feel like going along. Some highlights-Homosexuals are not necessarily: Effeminate, Arty, Bache-
lors,
Child Molesters, Monsters from Mars. But the homosexual "way of life" is: Furtive, Hazardous, Lonely, Assured of No Permanent Relationships, With Risk of Arrest, Blackmail, Violence, and Venereal Infections. Teenagers are advised that, if that, if a homosexual friend makes a pass, "it is wise not to let curiosity lead you to accepting preliminary intimacies. The time to tell a homosexual 'Thanks, but no thanks' is at his first move." But no harm in staying friends on this basis, if you can. (Not bad, really, in ONE's opinion. This probably could never have been published in the general press even a year ago.)
THE SEX MOLESTER AGAIN
In a feature article (TODAY'S HEALTH, Jan/66) Beatrice Schapper discusses this problem in much detail, and with remarkable balance and fairness-especially towards the homosexual, who very seldom indeed is found in this unsavory
20