not be attracted to a queen if he wants some one masculine, but to say that the queens queens are "disgusting"-this would seem to indicate a secret envy of their lack of inhibitions.

I've noticed, too, actual disgust of some lesbians toward dykes. This isn't quite as prevalent as the men's feeling toward the queens, however. Perhaps this is because women can be outwardly more masculine without entering the category of dyke-they can wear pants, have short hair and still be feminine. Thus their inhibitions are not as strong as the fellows' and therefore their dislike doesn't fall in that direction. In fact many lesbians of my acquaintance admit that they find boyish dykes quite attractive. But like Dorothy, they have no respect for the dyke as a person. Frequently they just don't want to be seen in public (or private) with someone so obvious.

For people like Drew who just can't afford to be seen with the obvious ones

well, as I see it, Drew can't afford to be homosexual, either. His job is not in jeopardy over his associating with effeminate men, but it is every time he performs a homosexual act. Yet I never hear of anyone like Drew ever giving up his sex life for the sake of his job. To me, Drew appears to be afraid not for his financial security-but, rather, he seems to be fearful of what people will think of him as an individual. This is an understandable attitude, I suppose, but to me one that is deserving of much less respect than I would give to an honest queen.

I agree that it is unfortunate that most people equate the queen and dyke with homosexuality since the majority of homesexuals don't fit into those categories. But have people like Tom and Dorothy realized that it is precisely because people do have a stereotype in mind that Tom and Dorothy are able to "pass"? It is sad

one

that the situation exists where people feel they must pass, and that those who don't share this feeling must be persecuted. But rather than condeming the people who are taking the brunt of the jeers and contempt which belong to all of us, people like Tom and Dorothy should at least be tolerant if not grateful, instead of looking down from their throne of pseudo-normality which I call plain hypocrisy.

I think the queen and dyke are, in a sense, emancipated. They are doing that which many of us would like to do proclaiming their feelings and desires to the world. They are not bound to the facade of normality which most of us erect to make it easier to live and get along in this world. They have virtually said, "Here I am. Take me for what I am or not at all."

I'm not naive about the queen and dyke as individuals. Some dykes are pimps or just plain lazy childish people who don't want to work. Too, I think the queens can be very annoying with their often shrill speech and their constant obvious search for sex, and of course I realize there is plenty of prostitution among the queens.

I'm not saying that the queens and dykes are the elite of the homosexuals. But I do think that their particular quality of honesty about their sexuality and their lack of inhibitions should be understood. Certainly it is more respect-worthy than the hypocrisy displayed by us "more acceptable" homosexuals. I can see the reasons for Tom's and Dorothy's facade to the world, and these fronts of heterosexuality serve many purposes. But for the Dorothys and Toms to claim their attitude is better, and to look down upon the queen and dyke? NO! This is prejudice the wailing complaint of all homosexuals-and the Dorothys and Toms of this world have no right to acceptance if they themselves cannot accept.