Transvestia

of research along all productive lines including the neural field as I indicated in my #44 Virgin Views. But I don't consider gathering bits and pieces of other people's research and pasting them together and then drawing conclusions from the combination as being true research. Numbers may prove it but use- ful numbers are no less likely in the psycho-social than in the chemical-neurological area. So far there are very few of any kind and certainly they are not piling up on the side of "Nature" at least in the way Sheila claims.

* * *

Again as in #44 I want to make it clear that though the words and phrases used in Sheila's and my statements are direct and pointed they do not in- dicate any rift between us on a personal basis. We are still good friends and expect to remain so. We are both trained as research chemists and we both like to exercise our respective mental abilities like athletes exercise their muscles--it keeps our brains healthy.

At the same time debates such as this are not indulged in just for Sheila and myself to see our views in print. It is the desire of both of us to offer these opinions and information to start some of the rest of you thinking and to stimulate some dialog on this and other subjects involving TVism. TRANSVESTIA should not be just a magazine of vicar- ious living of fiction stories or someone else's experiences, fascinating as either of these may be. TVism involves some pretty deep aspects of a per- son's life and personality and he will be better able to handle them as he comes to understand something of the factors involved. Thus, debating, question- ing and thinking out the subject should be of benefit to all TVs. Again the door is left open for intelli- gent interesting and perceptive contributions of others who may want to get into this or other acts relating to the matter of TVism. Controversy is stimulating

80