society sees, the stereotype. It is an unnatural course because it is primarily unconscious.

The more common, and more unnatural course, is motivated by protective coloration. These become so enwrapped in the desire to make the world believe they are no different that they succeed at least in making themselves believe it. This attitude provides, as I see it, the greatest pitfall for any group that would seek to help homosexuals.

It is this sort that would turn homosexual organization into a refuge for cowards. It is this sort that would so fear the spector of non-conformity, and the red tag that goes with it these days, that they would bend backwards with dishonest but popular slogans about "upholding the law," "sanctity of home, church and state," "loyalty to the American way of life," and such, even though they may admit in private that they don't mean a word of it.

It is this sort who will Puritanically attack the "swishes and fairies" insisting that they wouldn't think of associating with such trash, except perhaps for the very noble purpose of reforming them, teaching them to behave decently.

This sort will view the job of a Mattachine Society or a ONE Magazine as primarily a "public relations" job, the object being nothing more or less than to convince society at large that homosexuals are not different at all.

And finally, this sort will attempt to excommunicate any homosexual who belies their thesis that we aren't different. Neither rebels nor swishes, nor any others who fall short of their slightly personalized standards of respectability will be welcome in their society.

Which brings us back to the starting point.

now

We are all agreed that homosexuals have problems. And some seem convinced that such agencies as ONE and the Mattachine can do something. But agreement stops there.

one

Will we be called pollyannas or paranoids? Is our aim to pacify or to fight? Will we concentrate on activities that ignore the variance and demonstrate that we're just like any other civic group, putting the best face on things, with covert attempts to sidle up to judges. and police chiefs?

Or will we leave room for disagreement, but with the basic group energies. attacking the present laws and customs as unjust, developing ourselves as free individuals and joining a broad defense of liberty against the dead hand of conformity?

There is room in one organization for both views, but at the sacrifice of coordinated purpose. Only by allowing the free action of individual groups within the structure of an elastic society can such diverse philosophies work together. But such schizophrenia is hard to handle. With other minorities, racial and religious, similar dichotomies have forced into existence a variety of opposing organizations, each with its own clearcut program. For homosexuals as well, this must probably come, in time.

It should barely be necessary to state that I am interested in defending my right to be as different as I damn please. And somewhere, I've picked up the notion that I can't protect my own rights in that quarter without fighting for everyone else's.

Lyn Pedersen

page 6