done, the REVIEW-with its reading lists-is merely one of those interests. We hope that none of our readers limits his reading to the REVIEW or to the books we list.

We are interested in the problems and welfare of all people with whatever orientations. If our magazine artwork and content, and our booklists, make us appear "boy-crazy" to some, it is because male homosexuals happen to be our primary audience, and their interests must be ours. And after all, "good" literature, music and art are advertised and extoled everywhere, while material dealing directly with homophilic life is not so easily found. Mr. Mous goes on to urge the addition of departments where the pro's and con's of deportment, mannerisms and dress could be discussed. He seems especially touchy about jewelry, hairdressing, and "girls" tennis shoes" (how does one tell girls' tennis shoes from boys' tennis shoes?). He argues that "the kids" must identify with society before society will identify with them.

To some degree that's true. But on the whole, Mr. Mous's approach to mutual identification is based on a demand for sameness, for conformity. Certainly white society identifies the humanness of Negroes with their own -their emotions, desires, etc.-despite the differences in appearance.

If homosexuals must be completely identified with the heterosexual majority in order to be allowed decent human treatment, then we might as well forget all this analysis and argument and advise homosexuals simply to be heterosexuals, as a good many people always have.

Carrying the question of conformity to the extreme, we might solve it by agreeing on a heterosexual "uniform" as the mark of "normality" and insist that it be worn by all who would be "acceptable." What would it be? White shirt and tie, gray flannel suit, genuine cowhide briefcase in right hand? Ah, but then there would always be some nut who would complicate things by going without a hat!

"Baths, bars, public parks, the incredible increase in V.D. in the past five years these are the windmills you should tilt a lance at," continues Mr. Mous.

Well, I can only assume that he does not read the REVIEW thoroughly or consistently enough. Where it tries to influence or instruct its readers, these are some of the problems at which it does tilt a lance.

The REVIEW does not underestimate the value and desirability of either good morals or good taste. But it recognizes that these things cannot be dictated, either, and we would like to see and help develop-a more tolerant attitude in the larger society toward those small infractions which, while they may discredit the individual, do not make him a criminal or a nonhuman. The old gentleman who wears a purple polkadot tie with a red plaid (concluded on page 31)

22

mattachine REVIEW

GUILT

by THE REVEREND NORMAN BENSON This is the second in a series of three ar ticles by a Protestant minister. Comments from readers about this series are invited.

The tragedy of the homosexual's life is not in being homosexually oriented. From all we can observe this is merely a matter of degrees. Biologists insist (and understandably so) that there is no such thing as a pure race, and now the best of psychiatrists I know insist that there is no such thing as a pure homosexual or pure heterosexual. There are two theoretical extremes and all men and women fall somewhere in between those two extremes. The problem of the American Negro is not in his color as such, but in his color being sufficient that he can be detected and thus labeled "colored" by his society and thus isolated or discriminated against. His brother, whose • color is sufficiently less to allow him to pass as a "white," obviously has no race or color problem. But what, then, really makes the one brother's life tragic and the other's not so? It is simply society's attitude toward him. So with the homosexual. It is not his homosexualism as such which is tragic. There are many evidences that this is part of nature's plan (or if you wish, of God's plan). It is not his idea. It is God's idea. "God" is the name we give to the Creative Mind and Power of Life and many examples of homosexualism exist all through God's creation.

I have minister friends and outstanding members of my church who obviously have a heavy degree of homosexuality, yet they are heterosexually oriented, and they are "respectably" married. So, again, the tragedy of the homosexual is not his homosexuality but society's wholly unnatural, false attitude toward his homosexuality.

Because the erring attitude of society is so extreme-the homosexual inevitably feels guilty. Society, both directly and indirectly, and with the heavy sanction of the churches, tells the homosexual that he is a sinner. If need be, it quotes one of the great but most neurotic leaders of all time, 23