this country puritanism...has been hostile to the expression of sexual feeling. But in recent years, these concepts are being re-examined by leading theologians. Some of them now argue that puritanism, when it insists that sex is evil, actually is a distortion of Chrictian doctrine. These thinkers have been influenced not only by recent biblical scholarship, but also by the findings of psychiatry, especially in the revelation of the psychic damage that may be done by sexual repression.

In England, the Anglican Church, some elements of the Roman Catholic Church, and the Quakers (Society of Friends) are all now outspokenly calling for a newer and more liberal sexual code for all adults, within responsible limits.

A recent Quaker report holds that pre-marital intercourse between young lovers who often ultimately marry is commonplace and not such a sin as we might think. "Where there is tenderness," the report states, "and openness to responsibility and the seed of commitment, then God is surely not shut out."

Then an Anglican, Canon D. A. Rhymes of Southwark Cathedral in England, stated, "Sex is unavoidably tainted by the traditional moral code." Yet, he said, there is no trace of this teaching in the attitude of Christ. "Christ does not exalt virginity over marriage, or marriage over virginity. He doesn't even suggest that sexuality, as such, is undesirable, or that marriage is the only possible expression of a physical sexual relationship."

Canon Rhymes went on to declare that the moral code of today is being ignored because it is outdated. We need to replace traditional code with a morality which is related to the person and the needs of a person. We must emphasize love and not an inflexible unfeeling morality."

These ideas are gaining ground with intelligent people. But they are a long way from universal in our culture. Instead, the advocates of chastity, myth, and unreality, and those who preach "curb your instincts" still get the loudest voice.

Parents who may have had pre-marital intercourse themselves and then married at 18, are today "shocked" when they learn their 19-year-old son is sexually intimate with his girl friend of the same age. They write to the "advice to the lovelorn" columnists, and whether it's Ann Landers or Molly Mayfield, the answers are always about the same:

It is not abnormal for your son to want to be intimate with his girl friend. The experience might heighten their chances for a successful marriage. But you should tell your son in plain language that he's playing a dangerous game, and that he can wreck his future as well as ruin the life of his girlfriend.

mattachine REVIEW

That's a typical reply, and it may have validity. But how inadequate are we going to remain-the prudery expressed above exacts much from our youngadults. And so many times it shows up in frigidity, impotence, heartbreak, frustration and so on.

This discussion has left many questions unanswered, except to advocate that in place of the restrictive and impossible traditional morals code, we must look at sexual behavior in terms of reality and nature instead of in terms of an eleventh commandment which seems to state "Thou shall not have sex and feel good."

Education in sexual matters is most important. It must start at ages earlier than the pussyfoot attempts at sex education do today. It must be more general, it must reach the fearful and emotionally reactionary middle class in our culture. Stressing the responsibility of one's acts must be there. And the belief that once one has engaged in a sexual act before marriage, or outside marriage, makes him changed, inferior, sinful, loathsome, shameful and disgusting-these ideas must be forever swept away. Too many facts prove that it just isn't so.

Let's start de-emphasizing what we comfortably call the "norm." Or at least, if we must cling to such a concept, let's start being realistic. Surely when 8 out of 10 males are having sex with persons other than their wives, and six out of ten females are doing the same thing with persons who are not their husbands, then the "faithful and so-called sexually pure" man and woman are NOT the norm in any sense.

Next let's start taking an unemotional look at some of our problems which result from our anti-sexual moral codes.

Dr. Albert Ellis has stated that the beautiful people in the world are the ones who have a lot of sex, and the ugly ones are those who do not. That sounds pretty apt, and while it was meant with some flippancy, we all can see that there are a lot of not-so-pretty people about. But his statement didn't refer so much to the physical attributes of beauty, as it refers to the beautiful things about a person-development of individuality, acceptance of the reality of nature and life about us, an awareness of responsibility, a manifestation of joy in living, and a lot of other things, like kindness, appreciation, sensitivity, understanding of others and so on.

Those are easy concepts to kick around, but for many of us, they are difficult to achieve, and, as I have been trying to point out, the problem of accepting our sexual natures is often at the bottom of the maze of symptoms-symptoms which in so many cases hold us ensnarled and miserable. True enough, there are not easy answers to the problems of divorce, suicide, abortion-and with it, birth control-and so on. The perplexity of these problems breed others which tend to compound the massive total of