The deviants who cannot "find adjustment" and a stable self-concept often continue in various states of neurosis and are probably the ones who most frequently seek psychological aid or "cure." These are probably in the minority, and many homosexuals in this category are undoubtedly in the process of transition to new self-concepts. These are all symbolic psychological processes, and there is probably no direct correlation with degrees of overtness or covertness in the larger social sense.

One possible, though tentative, conclusion which may be drawn from the foregoing discussion is that as society accepts the homosexual in spite of his deviation (leading the homosexual to accept himself, therefore), many of the "real" problems that now seem inherent in the deviation will "automatically disappear. It may even be that the actual incidence of homosexuality will decline. (It would undoubtedly be the case that as society accepts the homosexual, its attitudes toward all forms of sex will tend to be more enlightened.) "Deviation," in this sense, would become merely statistical, not evaluative. "Adjustment," then, works both ways-society "adjusts" to the homosexual, enabling the homosexual to adjust to society and to himself in turn.

The foregoing discussion has skirted the edge of a significant point. That is, of course, that the values, mores and laws of the larger society are ultimately the determinants of most behavioral patterns. The homosexual and his subcultures exist within the framework of the larger society and are not only formed in a large measure by that society, but also in reference to it.. That is to say, the individual homosexual is more basically and generally a 26-year old, male, "white," American. He is an accountant, his mother's son, a war veteran, a San Franciscan, a stamp-collector and so on....All of these other roles and relevant behaviors make up the individual, needless to mention. What may not be so readily granted, however, is that the larger society also determines to a great extent his attitudes and behaviors about his deviancies. Albert Ellis puts this in a way that seems to be worthy of quoting here:

"..... the enormous extent to which homosexuals in our culture are unconsciously influenced and limited by the idealogies and practices of the culture in which they reside (is implicit). For while all the proponents of homosexuality with whom I have had intercommunication in recent weeks have been quite understandably critical of the persecutory attitudes of heterosexuals, and while they consciously have declared themselves opposed to virtually all heterosexual views and acts towards the 'gay' world, they have also, most ironically, unconsciously espoused and upheld one after another sexual philosophy which can easily be traced to the firmly entrenched biases of heterosexual society.

mattachine REVIEW

"Take, for example, the question of sexual promiscuity—, I find that the majority of frank homosexuals are, in one degree or another, consciously disturbed about their own promiscuous desires or actual promiscuity-Take, again, the matter of romanticism in sexual relations. One would hardly expect that homosexuals who are hardly thought by the general public to be pro-puritanical, would have little use for this rather hypocritical romantic philosophy. But, on the contrary, one finds homosexual relations frequently on a super-romantic basis. Moreover, one finds that when such relations are thoroughly non-romantic, then the homosexuals themselves tend to feel extremely uncomfortable about them."22

Ellis goes on to cite a few more examples of this phenomenon. Monogamic fidelity is evidenced by frequent semi-enduring "homosexual marriages." Fights and jealousies over partners are common. Though, since there are no legal or economic and familial restrictions, they tend to be more impermanent on these grounds. Notions of beauty, good physiques and youth also pervade homosexual "culture.""Old Aunty” is a term often applied to the older, less attractive homosexuals.

This all goes to demonstrate, no doubt, that any individual's chances of thoroughly removing himself from the underlying forces of the particular culture of which he is a member are exceptionally slight indeed.

Cory 23 introduces a note of caution here, however. He states that very often the homosexual takes over the (sexual) norms of society only when they may be seen to benefit him clearly in some way. Prejudices such as nudity between the sexes, for example, simply do not apply to homosexual relationships. Cory continues:

"On the other hand, (some) homosexuals are motivated (towards)—gaining acceptance for themselves and their groups in society. He reasons (as do members of other minority groups) that to the extent that he can conform to the morals and mores of society, to that extent might he be successful in gaining acceptance within society. Therefore, instead of calling for re-evaluation of these moral concepts, he seeks strenously to abide by them, feels deeply frustrated by his failure to do so and pretends, particularly in communication with the outgroup, that he is as much a conformist as anyone.

1124

It should be kept in mind, however, that these "adjustments" often lead to the conflicts which were mentioned above. Obviously, not all heterosexual prejudices can be effectively rationalized by the homosexual.

22. Albert Ellis, "The Influence of Heterosexual Culture," in Homosexuality, a CrossCultural Approach, Donald W. Cory, ed., pp. 416-417.

23. Donald W. Cory, Homosexuality, A Cross-Cultural Approach, p. 423. 24. Cory, op. cit., pp. 424-425.