SOME IMPLICATIONS OF

HeterosexualISM

as `Dogma

A friend of Mattachine contributes the following commentary on con. temporary sociological manifestations. American society, today, is perhaps the most heterosexualistic society that the world has ever known. The writer points out some grave dangers that arise when "Heterosexualism" becomes a doctrine so strong that morality, itself, loses significance-and it becomes more important to be heterosexual than it is to be honest.

Although addressed to William J. Helmer, writer of an article, "New York's Middle-class. Homosexuals," in the March issue of HARPER'S, because of his "courage and equanimity in considering this emotionally explosive subject," it is also of great interest to all readers.

•

I HAVE BEEN MOST FAVORABLY IMPRESSED with the article, "New York's 'Middle-class' Homosexuals," in the March issue of Harper's. For a few days I considered writing to the author, William J. Helmer; and then, for a number of reasons determined that my purposes might be better served by addressing Mr. Helmer through the channel of your columns.

Thank you, Mr. Helmer. You have done all of society a very substantial service. Your courage and equanimity in considering this emotionally explosive subject speaks a very great deal of you, yourself.

I hope that this article may lead to a second one: one which will pursue the line that society, in the best interests of society-probably self-defense, might be wise to consider this subject carefully. There is a very serious threat to the welfare of society in this subject: but it does not arise from the homosexual-it arises from the extreme sanctions which society has imposed against manifestations of homosexuality, which in turn lead many men to conform to the heterosexual pattern, outwardly, thus doing violence to their most

4

mattachine REVIEW

intimate feelings; and then, in turn, revenging themselves upon 'society for this outrage.

Some individuals of this category revenge themselves against other individuals; others revenge themselves against society as a whole. It seems rather astonishing that most informed people recognize that Hitler was a seriously deranged person; a small number of the well informed recognize that among other mental-emotional maladies, he suffered from paranoia. Many of these well informed are aware that paranoia is caused by disturbances resulting from conscious or unconscious homosexuality and/or the guilt associated with such factors.

It is not unreasonable to observe that paranoia has become institutionalized in our society, i.e. those who are not too ill of paranoia can find a way of partially stabilizing their anxiety and tension through seeking and wielding power, and society has come to accept and approve of such careers. It is only when an individual is wildly "off-beat," as in the case of Hitler; or only somewhat less so as in the case of a recent United States Senator-it is only in these exceptional conditions that anyone at all becomes concerned about the subject.

Even then, almost no one recognizes that paranoia is so commonplace that it must be met with social procedures akin to widespread public health measures: that is, the social climate must be modified to the extent that the true homosexual can be relatively free of guilt for being what he is, and modified sufficiently so that fewer bisexual men will need to conceal their homosexual component, oftimes even from themselves.

I urgently suggest, Mr. Helmer, that you read the three following

books:

Why Was Lincoln Murdered by Otto Eisenschiml, 1937. A fascinating interpretation of the mass of material relating to this subject. The author suggests that Stanton quite possibly was fully informed of the Booth plot, and aided this plot for purposes of his own. Lincoln, A Psychobiography by Leon Pierce Clark, Scribners, 1933. One of the themes of this interpretation of the life of Lincoln is that Lincoln had a substantial, yet secondary tendency toward deviation which he had suppres sed and sublimated: his ability to sublimate this aspect of his personality appears to account for his great love of his fellow men. It must also have made him exceptionally attractive to the aggression of men who had the same component of personality, and whose component had not been resolved in benevolent fashion.

Stanton, B. P. Thomas and H. M. Hyman, Knopf, 1962. No book on Stanton could completely ignore the book of Otto Eisenschiml; but biography of Stanton dismisses Eisenschiml in a footnote which

5