This makes it possible for their inner worlds to come much closer to each other, and as in the phenomena of sympathy and empathy, they will begin to feel each other's needs as being their own.

These individuals have not yet reached a state of love, however. This comes about only when one sees his partner as being the object, which is necessary in his life if he is to achieve what he has been taught is essential in order to be fully living. It is no wonder that the other person may be valued so highly as a consequence, for without him there would be no special someone to build this special future with, share the most pleasant and meaningful experiences with, work and play with, and the like. It is this process of psychological communication enabling one to feel the needs of the other as being his own plus the feeling of gratitude for the other person (for without him, the one could not live the full meaningful life he has learned he must have) which causes one to love him.

In regard to the conception of meaningfulness the individual tries to live in accord with, he engages in interplay with another chosen individual in hopes that his goal will be realized. He may even go so far as to tell himself that he is falling in love.

It is probably possible for an individual to fall in love with another person or at least develop a feeling of caring for the other person's needs simply by imagining himself to be engaging in intimate relationships with the other person to the extent that the other person is incorporated into himself. Thus, the desire of a homosexually inclined adult to help an adolescent boy is not seen as sublimation. It is, instead, seen as a result of the psychological communication process. What occurs is that the man, consciously or unconsciously, thinks of having some type of romantic or sexual intimacy with the boy. This intimate relationship, even though it may exist only in fantasy, brings the two individuals so close to each other, at least in the man's mind, that the man thinks of the boy's needs as being his own; he develops the desire to satisfy the boy's needs as if they were his own. It is because of this that the adult may desire to take care of the youth. (This example is given because the more obvious examples will automatically occur to the reader.)

Obviously, additional elements are involved in love than in narcissism. So, when referring to homosexual love, it is quite inaccurate to speak of it as being a quality of love that is half way between narcissism and heterosexual love. An individual may appreciate himself, but he can only love others.

The various methods of eradicating one's existential anxiety through an attempt to live a meaningful existence have been considered in this

mattachine REVIEW

article. Of all the methods which accomplish this feat, love has been suggested as being the most potent. The individual's salvation is best accomplished by investing himself, his time, and his energy in other individuals. This is the essence of parental love. By investing the best part of one's self into another person, he is actually expanding himself. (In such situations, one is doing the opposite of expanding himself by, for example, making more of himself by taking knowledge out of books. and putting it into his mind.) Consequently, the individual is actually more alive; he has more awareness and has less fear of the extinction of his personal life which will eventually come.

This makes it easier to understand why, among other things, the homosexual requires the existence of homosexuality in others. He wants others to be this way because he wants this kind of life to go on, thus extending the meaning of his own life beyond and after his own personal existence. It is likely that he will not admit this, however. This is another example of uncritical acceptance of the teachings of society. (It is just the same as uncritically accepting the belief that a portrayal of sex in photographs is somehow "bad." Such "common sense" freezes an individual's rational facilities.)

CONCLUDING REMARKS

The dynamics of homosexuality and heterosexuality are similar. The basic difference is derived from a difference in the content of the fantasy life of the two kinds of people. Thus, any desire to believe that one way of life is superior to the other can best be understood as an attempt on the part of an individual to maintain his own concept of a meaningful existence. Heterosexuals frequently accuse homosexuals of finding it necessary to argue that homosexuality, is desirable, whereas the obvious naturalness of heterosexuality makes it unnecessary for the, heterosexuals themselves to develop arguments for their way of life, so they believe. It is probably true that homosexuals do occasionally devise such arguments. The heterosexuals are not without their arguments, however, The argument presented most frequently by heterosexuals is that homosexuals cannot achieve the ultimate pleasures in life because they are unable to have the natural genital union. Cleckley says, for example:

The obvious anatomical fact that homosexuals cannot have literal and complete sexual relations must not be overlooked. No genital intercourse in the true sense of the word can occur. Their final physical intimacies must necessarily be culminated in acts that are substitutive and biologically artificial. ...A basic unnatural-