with the customers who were committing the improper actions.

The ABC would like to work itself out of a job, he said. The ABC would like to make all bars safe for the custoners from being bilked by "B" girls, prostitutes, or having to put up with indecent "passos" made to them by either heterosexual or homosexual people.

THE RIGHT TO SAY NO?

-

At this point Mr. Feinberg said that we were to ask questions as he went along rather than saving them up till the end. So, promptly, a member of the audience asked him a question. "Sir," tho man asked timidly, what is wrong with the person so approached saying 'no'?" Mr. Feinberg asked in thundering tones whether the young man realized what he was asking. He was implying that to be protected all anyone had to do was say "No." (Yes, it appeared as if that was what the young man was saying.) Such an implication seemed to inflame Mr. Feinberg greatly; certainly it was clear that such a thesis would put the ABC out of the job it said it wanted to be put out of. Mr. Feinberg expostulated that a man did not have to accept the proposition of a prostitute either, did the questioner mean to imply that there should be no repression of prostitutes? There was a sprinkling of affirmations from the audience of those who believed there should be no such repression, and Mr. Feinberg became oven more agitated. He stated in effect that if the audience did not even see eye-to-eye with the Law on something like that, that we would pursue two parallel lines in discussion and never come to any understanding.

DETERMINATION OF INDECENT' BEHAVIOR

Another queried, "Sir, would it be considered 'indecent' in a bar for men to be dancing together?" Mr. Feinberg opined that it would. The young man asked, "Why?" Mr. Feinberg said that such a thing was offensive. Another male member of the audience asked rather curtly, "Offensive to whom?" Mr. Feinberg became even more agitated, and the tension in the audience rose proportionately. "Offensive to the public." Someone else asked, "Who

17