had been revoked by that state's Liquor Authority, the action being "based on findings that the premises had become disorderly in that homosexuals were allowed to congregate within."

There is no reason, however, why California officials should not take the lead in the attempt to solve this ever-growing social problem. If they were to accept the existence of the "gay" bar and acknowledge the civil right of the homosexual to socialize while eating or drinking in a public place, but still make it clear to the bar management and its clientele that immoderate behavior will not be tolerated, we believe that a workable solution to the problem would result.

THE HOMOSEXUAL'S RESPONSIBILITY

Whether or not the bar management or law enforcement agencies agree with our basic premise or comply with our suggestions concerning "gay" bars does not lessen tho responsibility of the homosexual in any way. Since the average homosexual does not identify himself as such in his daily contact with the public, it is only on the basis of conduct in "gay" bars that an entire segment of the population can be judged. If immoderate behavior exists in the so places, who can blame those who would assume that this is the criterion of the entire group? For there is no other measuring rod available to the public at large.

In the closing brief prepared by the Amici Curiae for the Vallerga caso, there is this reference:

"In passing, it should be noted that it is a fact that most Lesbians do not dress in male attire and cannot be identified as Losbians by their attire. It may also be granted that those who do dress in male attire probably do so as a gesture of defiance to society for imposing sanctions on a way of life over which they have no control. In fact, the Lesbian organization in San Francisco known as the Daughters of Bilitis, described elsewhere in this brief, is presently carrying on an educa-

(Continued on page 24)

13