these reprints is to give REVIEW readers a partial picture of the show which placed Mattachine in the spotlight, and the faimess with which the responsible city press informed the public about the affair.

READERS write

REVIEW EDITOR: Enclosed is a year's subscription sorry it is not for 2 years or that I cannot afford at this time to become an "active" member at $10 the year. Your data re the Denver convention concerning publicity in the local papers makes very interesting news and shows that the editors of these papers are hep to the time liness of the problems which were to have been presented and were presented at the convention in September.

I probably would not be too interested in the affairs of the homosexuals and lesbians except that they seem to be so obviously discriminated against and for no sensible reason considering the knowledge educated people now have about behaviorisms and the so-called aberrations or abnormal-

ities of human behavior.

Obviously too, from the record of the past, homosexuals and those so oriented by choice or otherwise, have contributed greatly to human progress in all fields, from the most aesthetic down through the most ruggedly utilitarian and masculine. It is so too that many men who are essen. tially masculine in every way are also of

a homosexual or bisexual bent. And this should not be held against them. As the London "Listener" and "New Statesman" commented recently: "Listener", July 30, 1959, "Immorality & Treason" by H. L. A. Hart re the Wolfenden Report, it is high time that, despite what one may Individually think on the matter, it is only fair, sen⚫ sible, timely to amend laws so that sexual behavior between consenting adults is considered a private matter and not within the law's province. The only exception would be if there is grave public danger. As a student of human behavior with a master's degree in education and many courses in phases of behaviorisms, I feel greatly Interested in your magazine's programs for a decent and speedy discontinuance of discrimination against the homosexually orient ed of whatever sex. -Mr. J.M.P., Oregon. REVIEW EDITOR: Although I have not long been a subscriber to the REVIEW, I have followed the last several issues with Int 34

erest. One tendency that I find with a nur ber of the articles and letters to the edit is a regrettable one – several times it ha not been just a tendency but quite explici Many of these Individual writers seem to │ seeking license rather than sexual equalit before the law and within the mores of so lety. This would be, in my interpretatio of the Society's alms, a perversion of th purpose of the Mattachine Society.

When any person begins to consider ma ters that involve his emotions and passior he is not apt to think so soundly and lu cidly, even though apart from an actual si tuation that would directly provoke th thinking immediately. No one but a mor anarchist would seriously support the sul stitution of license for equitable, regula tion, acceptance and toleration. Not eve the Important philosophers of the ancien Greek world would give approbation to concept of this type.

One of the troubles with many homo philes is that being socially censured, the begin to feel that they are a "peculiar pec ple" in the sense of a special group and therefore, not bound to the ordinary re strictions and observances of the societ In which they live. Unfortunately, this at titude is too often transferred from the sphere of sexual activity to an irrespons Ible attitude toward the ordinary course o Ilving.

With any position comes responsibility and If the homophile wants a respected po sition within the community, he or she mus be willing to accept the responsibility tha Is justly placed upon any and every membe of the community. It may be because of the severity of contemporary attitudes towards the homophile, but all too often too many of them lead extremely self-centered live: quite apart (and in a world of their own from the community at large.

The members and supporters of the Mat tachine Society should take head lest they confuse consciously or unconsciously or substitute acceptance and legal equality with license. Unfortunately, too many peo

ple who do not understand the purpose o such groups as the Society are opposed to mattachine REVIEW

them because of this very fact. Let's make sure that there is no obscurity about the aims of this group.

In closing I might add that the views expressed above are equally applicable by and large to heterosexuals as well as homosexuals. Mr. R.P., Colorado.

REVIEW EDITOR: Why is it that the Mattachine REVIEW and ONE always warmly offer their pages to Dr. Albert Ellis when they would hardly do so to Dr. Edmund Bergler. If there's a substantial difference between the two, it's purely on a personal level: Dr. Ellis being a charming and warmhearted sort, Dr. Bergler cold and arogant and so hate-filled as to seem in greater need of psychiatric treatment than most of his patients.

But on the Impersonal level the level of their dogmas is there anything to choose between the two sets of prepos terous, counter-scientific tripe dogmatic ally repeated and repeated ad nauaeum? Dr. Ellis: There's positively no scientific evidence of congenital homosexuality. All homosexuals have an inherent capacity for enjoying heterosexual intercourse of which they stupidly deprive themselves by virtue of their being neurotic, and they're all neurotic. I can cure any of them who want to be cured and make them truly normal, i.e. spend half their sex life In bed with men and half with women. Dr. Bergler: There's positively no scientific evidence of congenital homosexuality but there is of my own favorite evil spirit — masochism. Homosexuals are all absolutely and simply masochists who have found that homosexuality pro vides the supreme outlet for their maso chism. I can cure any of them who want to be cured by getting to the root of their masochism.

Aside from the blatant asininity of both ogmas, they are both "backed up" by just lain lles: 1) The alleged lack of scientif c evidence of congenital homosexuality hich they both know perfectly well a ounds in the studies of hundreds of sexlogists and other professionals; 2) The lleged unfalling "cure" which many mongst your readers can probably expose or the lie it is from their own experience. Dr. Ellis has now added a new gimmick: the conclusions of a brilliant and widely ›spected sexologist.are contrary to Dr. llis', It is because this man must have Ben an active homosexual. Has anyone Ise aver made this allegation about Dr. agnus Hirschfeld presented by Dr. Ellis the June 1959, Mattachine Review? But ven if this startling revelation were

true, is it not a colossal piece of Impudence to assert that a brilliant sexologist who devoted a lifetime of worldwide research to the subject, who was in contact with thousands of homosexuals and thousands of leaders in medicine, psychology, sociology and ethnology, who wrote and edited scores of books, periodicals and articles, and established aworld-renowned Institution, that such a man should be less capable of reaching appropriate conclusions about homosexuality than a presumably active heterosexual like Dr. Ellis. This new twist of the "smear" technique serves only to further the gulf between the techniques of science and those of psychiatry.'Noel I. Garde, New York.

(Many letters were crowded out of this is. sue of the REVIEW. More will appear in December, including a reply from Allen Ginsberg to Dr. Karl Meninger's letter in our October edition.-Ed.)

COMING NEXT MONTH: special book reviews poetry supplement calling shots

regular articles & features -missed in this issuel mattachine REVIEW

VILLAGE BOOK SHOP issues regular lists of new and out-of-print books relating to the homosexual theme. If you would like to receive these lists at no charge as they appear, ask for our lat est list no. 21A, featuring an excellent reproduction of the cover of the novel, CHORUS OF WITCHES.

village book shop,

116 christopher street new york 14, new york