Transvestia

An impressive sounding statement, until semantic an- alysis reduces it to the axiom "The whole equals the sum of its parts"!

2-In that form, I hope that you will recognize that your statement says exactly nothing relevant, since my hypothesis is that TV IS a congenital ab- normality. I cannot classify it as "physical" or "mental", since a brain circuit abnormality must in- volve both at once; if you do not like my "cerebro- neural", how about "bio-cybernetic"? I also see no proof of anything in the fact that YOU, on pages 88-9 feel "it seems almost impossible to find anything other than an environmental explanation", and respect- fully submit that this tells me more about your limit- ations than about those of my hypothesis, that be- havior so opposite to that acceptable in one's time and place may be organic in nature.

3-You make quite a point of your courage in facing a painful explanation, as opposed to my ob. vious pleasure in finding a mechanism which would free us of guilt. Hurrah for you, but as a means of validating a scientific theory it has very dubious antecedents. The fact that many scientists have suf- fered unpleasant personal results from their dis- coveries surely does not make such suffering a basic requirement! Many discoveries have been quite a lot more comfortable to live with than the fallacies they replaced but if you get satisfaction from the con- cept that TV is essentially a psychoneurosis, don't let me spoil your pleasure in this minor masochism!

•

4-Now, to straighten out a few mis-statements of fact in your rebuttal: On pages 70-1, you do quite a job of demolishing Fisher's work except for the detail that you are talking about FEMALE hormone, while Fisher (as I clearly stated) used MALE hormone to feminize his rats. Female hormones had no discernable effect. You seem to have missed the whole point anyway, because it was to demon- strate that chemical shock, like the encephalitis

67