concept that homosexuality was either a mental illness or a symptom of a mental illness. As to her personal views, she said that she had a very tentative "no" in mind as she felt that she had concrete evidence to disprove the concepts. However, she continued, her evidence was only a pioneer kind of evidence and tho wanted other researchers to bring in all the evidence, to research it from all levels and viewpoints. She said that in her work she searched for non-psychotic, non-maladjusted homosexuals. To find one, sho said, would serve hor purpose of Jogging other researchers in the social scionoos to investigate this field from different promises than heretofore. Actually, however, she

had found many who were non-psychotic and non-maladjusted to society.

Dr. Baker concurrod completely with Dr. Hooker. In medical practice naturally one found all types of maladjusted homosexuals because they were seeking help. However, in her social life and contacts she said sho know so many who were not disturbed or maladjusted.

Dr. Bossent felt that ho had already co verod the matter, but he stated again that he felt the re was no necessary connection between homosexuality and mental illness; that it was a mattor of cultural demands and prejudices which cause our anxieties.

Dr. Sommers also concurred but said that "adjustment to what?" had to be considered. After all, this is a heterosexual society; if you are not heterosexual, by heterosexual standards you would be considered maladjusted. She added that there was also a large group of maladjusted heterosexuals.

Dr. Hooker wasn't looking for concurrence and she didn't want her "tentative no" to be interpreted as the final answer in lieu of conclusive proof on the mattor.

Hr. Logg asked, "What is heterosexuality a defonse against?" This question didn't sound quite so rid-

11