and it deprives us of our objectivity about the whole matter. What should our attitude be? I believe it should be somewhere between the, "I don't want any part of the gay world" attitude and complete frater- nization. The former tends to deny that gay people are also human beings, that they can be friendly, intelligent, interesting and pleasant to be with. This is not to say that there are not some very obnoxious types in the gay world, but in case you had'nt thought of it these types are obnoxious to the better type of the homophile set too. In other words any minority has its screwball, far out characters, and this goes for femmepersonators too. However, the best should not be judged by the worst. On the other hand complete fraternization tends to blur the lines between the two forms of behaviour and to make it increasingly difficult to seggregate the two in the public eye. To the extent that society does not understand either group and condemns both,

we have

the common problem of promoting understanding, but to the extent that the motivations and satisfactions are different we must keep the two separate in order to build up the identity of femme personation as unique pattern.

a

A word about the primary distinction is in order at this point. But first it is necessary to distinguish between sex and gender. In common parlance they are lumped together and this makes for a great deal of confusion and misunderstanding. Sex. Is a matter of anatomy

and physiology and gender is a matter of psychology and sociology. The key sex words are male and female and the key gender words are masculine and feminine. Sex is an aspect of animal life and of the animal side of human life. Gender is not animal in origin and is al- most exclusively a human manifestation (with a few primative patterns in the higher apes). Further, sex is from the belt down, gender is

from the belt up.

•

Since homosexuality by definition has to do with preferential sex- ual orientation and satisfaction, it is properly called a sexual deviat- ion. Femmepersonation, however, in the sense I use it does not in- volve any variation in the biologically normal heterosexual orientat- ion. It cannot then properly be called a sex deviation. If it must have a catagory at all it should be termed a gender deviation.

I realize that some do not see this as I do and point to various intermediate types. However, I maintain that the existance of inter- mediates does not invalidate the distinction made. Exceptions do not "prove" the rule right, they "test" its validity. (Check this with Webster).

Homosexuals primarily identify with the sexual activities of fem-

73.