to convey the idea of gradation from masculinity to femininity. The quantity and quality of sex characteristics in an individual vary with age and opportunities for their expression. A boy reared in an exclusively feminine environment will almost certainly suffer a masculine-feminine imbalance; the personality of a girl frustrated in feminine pursuits and dominated by ideals of masculinity will likewise be distorted; Furthermore, to the extent that adult modes of sexual adjustment are thwarted, there is a tendency to revert to preadult sexual habits."

On the following page Dr. Henry makes several profoundly interesting comments: "Sexual maladjustment and immaturity underlie almost all emotional disorders, but most sex variants have found ways of living which do not require the escape and defense of a neurosis or psychosis. Only a small proportion of sex variants need the help of an emotional disorder to deal with internal conflict."

Dr. Henry makes it clear just what he means by sexual maladjustment and emotional immaturity in the following passage: "Bodily form is not a reliable indication of sexual competence; many persons capable of engaging in sexual relations are incapable of assuming responsibility for marriage and parenthood. More specifically, many can adjust as mar ital partners; fewer can share their affection with a child; and still fewer are able to sacrifice themselves for the common interests and needs of a family."

The conclusions arrived at in the Introduction seem to be a clear and eloquent summary of Dr. Henry's findings. They are in themselves more important than anything I could say of them: "Sexual vitality is so irrepressible that it has always found a variety of outlets with or without social approval... Standards 14

for judging sexual conduct vary with each cultural group, and with different periods in the life of that group. Social sanctions range from almost complete license to prohibition enforced to the point of annihilation; from required sexual conduct, to that which is eternally damned. A few scientists have begun to glimpse the possibility that sex variance may be part of the natural evolution of human beings."

What to do about it? Dr. Henry recommends the following outlook and program: "Thus far there is no hint that the psychosexual development of an individual can be radically altered, and even if this were possible, it would seem highly undesirable to mould all persons to any arbitrary pattern. Nevertheless, each person and each society has characteristic needs, and the satisfaction of these needs may be assisted in many ways... Each person should seek personal satisfactions in a manner acceptable to his social group; the groups should be informed of the needs of the individual so that he may receive maximum assistance in his adjustment. Such a compromise may seem an inadequate solution of the problem, but the attitude maintained by society is most important. Surely some sort of compromise is an improvement on the almost universal treating of sex variance with levity or repugnance, and of putting the onus on the individual when society may be chiefly at fault."

Most of the bulk of ALL THE SEXES is the result of Dr. Henry's use of case histories, which he shuffles into groups to illustrate certain patterns as a card-player arranges the pasteboards in his hand. The same. "characters" appear again and again throughout the book, and each time some new facet of their natures is displayed. I found this method rather confusing.

Now, if the tone of the entire book

mattachine REVIEW

was that of its introduction, I would have no fault to find with it. But the bulk of the book contains a mixture of conventional religious and social evaluations with psychiatric theo-. theories and concepts, and the result is inconsistent. The unwary reader may have difficulty in disentangling the science from the moralizing. My feeling is that because Dr. Henry's science is so deeply influenced by his morals, with no attempt made to differentiate between the two, the book forfeits its right to acceptance as a scientific work, in spite of Dr. Henry's distinguished position in the scientific world.

Dr. Henry tells us, "Legal systems clearly define prohibitions against certain forms of sexual expression, but the laws themselves are derived from moral and religious codes. These codes represent the accumulated experience of mankind." Dr. Henry does not take the trouble to point out that if the ancient codes sometimes pass on to us "the wisdom of the ages", as often as not they perpetuate the ignorance of primitive ancestors, the codified errors of the past.

Throughout the book Dr. Henry

pays lip-service to tolerance, but in reality when he gets down to cases his judgments are remarkably severe,and conventional in their basis. For example, and there are dozens of similar examples scattered through the book, although on page 150 he can write, "THE GRATIFICATION OF SEXUAL DESIRE IS AN INTEGRAL PART OF LIVING, and it can be as readily associated with health as with mental illness," in discussing promiscuity on page 84 he had written, "Much has been said in favor of sexual experimentation before marriage... IN MOST INSTANCES THE CLAIMED ADVANTAGES ARE RATIONALIZATIONS FOR THE GRATIFICATION OF SEXUAL DESIRE." Here it seems to me the implication is that the gratification of desire is "bad". In writing of the Don Juanon the same page-he says, "He is a narcissist who seeks women for personal gratification," Do men normally seek women as objects of sexual charity work? Don't most women,. en take pride in the fact that they are personally gratifying to men? Likewise, in writing of homosexuality on page 72, Dr. Henry has said, "Theoretically, homosexuality repre-

ORIGINS OF HOMOPHILIC ARGOT By Donal Norton

QUEER: Perhaps the commonest term in use in the United States at the present time. This word with a homophilic connotation came into general use in the 1920s through the theatrical profession, having appeared as early as 1925 in VARIETY, bible of that profession.

Stemming from 15th-16th century Scotch, where a "quire" (choir) referred to a group of prisoners, it passed through the Elizabethan jargon and came to mean "one outside the law." By the 19th century it came to mean "different," "odd," or "peculiar;" and the phrase, "a queer one," meant one who was not as conventional as those around him, with just a hint of something "mentally wrong." It is possible that the word transferred to the homophile in the wake of a popular phrase "Queer as a three dollar bill."