the problems of a person who is misunderstood."

Dr. Baker thanked us for the honor of letting her attend the panel and added that although she had been advised by both doctor and friends not to attend because of the state of hor health, that she would have come against all odds. There could be no doubt in the audience's mind as to the serious physical handicap which Dr. Baker was working against in attending the Instituto and it broke into spontaneous and wild applause for this great and courageous friond of the homophile and the homophile movement. After that there was no hope for the chairman's plea that no individual speaker be applauded.

Dr. Vida Sommers said that her work was of a clinical nature with special groups of homosexuals who would like to change. Sho said that she did not necessarily feel that homosexuality was a clinical entity. It had various forms of expression. She said that she came to the Institute to learn from the homophiles there rather than to speak to them.

W. Dorr Legg asked the question, "Is homosexuali ty a defense mechanis necessarily or can it be a healthy, important part of society? Society noods the homophilo and if it doesn't have him in a recognized, constructi ve role, society will go down to the destruction of previous civilizations," Kr. Legg

continued.

Mr. Julber directed the question to Dr. Bessent: "Suppose society's attitude changed towards homosexuality over the next 10 to 20 years; would this cure much homosexual anxi oty?"

Dr. Bessent answered, "No, not for those who have their own inter jected foelings against homosexuality." A porson asked Dr. Besant from the floor how this could be when the person would then be raised in an accepting environment? Dr. Bossent said that such a case could only exist many steps forward in the process. He cited the instance of many cases of "mas-

9