Beware — witch hunt in sessio

Beware, Witch Hunt in Session
“On March 1, 1950, The New York Times reports that…John E. Peurifoy, in charge of the State Department security program, was asked by a Senate Committee how many department employees had resigned while under investigation as security risks since the beginning of 1947. “Ninety-one persons in the shady category…most of these were homosexuals.”
“On April 19, a Times news story is headed: Perverts Called Government Peril…Guy George Gabrielson, Republican National Chairman, asserted today that “sexual perverts who have infiltrated our Government in recent years” were “perhaps as dangerous as the actual Communists.”
“On May 5, the Times reports that New York State’s Republican Governor Dewey accused the Democratic national administration of tolerating spies, traitors and sex offenders in the Government service.
(Katz, 91-93)
At work you completely avoided people. If you did make friends, you had to be sure never to bring them home, never to tell them who and what you really were. We were all terrified in those days.
Lyn on new York in the 60’s.


When I was arrested and being thrown out of the military, the order went out: don’t anybody speak to this woman, and for those three long months, almost nobody did; the dayroom, when I entered it, fell silent till I had gone; they were afraid, they knew the wind would blow them over the rail, the cops would come, the water would run into their lungs. Everything I touched was spoiled. They were my lovers, those women, but nobody had taught us to swim. I drowned. I took 3 or 4 others down when I signed the confession of what we had done together.
No one will ever speak to me again.
Judy Grahn on the military in the 1950’s (Faderman, 130)
Thus began the decade of the 1950’s. A time in our history when paranoia concerning national security ran high and feelings of fear ran deep. The threat of Communism to the American way of life became top priority to certain government officials. Certain groups of people were targeted as deviants, national security risks and social outcasts. This was a time when cold war tensions dominated our political institutions and sexuality fell under public scrutiny.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

Homosexuality became a controversial, effective political tool used by a powerful rightwing political machine to discredit a democratic administration and emphasize to the American public that homosexuals, like Communists, were an imminent threat to moral, domestic tranquility. Homosexuality became enmeshed in the public’s mind with communism. It became the top destroyer of the family structure and created weak links in an otherwise solid impenetrable government structure.

Why and how did a society of free people tolerate, accept and even encourage the public and private humiliation of and discrimination against a specific group of American citizens? In order to examine these questions, we need to look at the social, economic, political, and sexual mindset of our society.

The Depression Era created vast impoverishment, economic dislocations, fewer marriages and fewer births. The traditional family structure received a severe blow, whereas some families banded together, many broke up or never began as a result of the economic climate. One of our basic institutions was in jeopardy of being lost in the despair of poverty.

World War II was devastating to the young male populations (i.e. separation from family, loss of life) it brought about some radical changes in the area of gender norms, whereby women entered the labor market in mass numbers, working in all types of factories and shipyards. Their contributions to the war effort were numerous and vital to a successful American military war effort. For the first time in modern history, women were working in more male dominated roles than ever and making more money than they ever had. Women were participating in previously restricted public spheres and becoming economically independent, women were now more than mothers and housewives, they were productive members of an ailing labor force, which gave them a sense of power and autonomy that was threatening to a white, male patriarchy.

“…Families endured prolonged separations, divorce and desertion occurred more frequently, and the trend toward sexual permissiveness accelerated. Juvenile delinquency emerged as a perplexing social problem, and the rate of premarital pregnancy and illegitimacy rose.” (D’Emilio, 233)
While the public was being presented with radical gender and social changes, the government began utilizing the field of psychiatry as a credible tool in analyzing what they considered to be the breakdown of the traditional nuclear family, and more importantly, the breakdown of the patriarchal system.

The physical war itself contributed to specific allotments of space. The companies of men and women fighting the hard battles found themselves in sex-segregated situations that may have been a factor in creating more opportunity for homosexual individuals to band together. In the field and the labor market, there was more opportunity for same sex friendships to develop and sexual intimacy between the same sex was more possible.

In the post war years, there is not doubt or lack of evidence to support the notion that a gay subculture was emerging. “The evidence to support this contention is accumulating as the exploration of the social history of the gay subculture progresses.” (D’Emilio, 234) The networks and communities of gay men and lesbians were emerging, as the need for identification, validation and social rapport grew increasingly stronger in light of government and public oppression. These networks were necessary if gays and lesbians wanted to survive, even thrive in a hostile society.

Another factor contributing to the willingness of gays to surface on a public level was the 1948 publication by Alfred Kinsey on human sexual behavior. Kinsey’s findings, particularly his portrait of the sexual identity of the American male must have been extremely alarming for moral conservatives.

According to Kinsey, “The homosexual has been a significant part of human sexual activity since the dawn of history, primarily because it is an expression of capacities that are basic in the human animal.” (Bergher, 179) Kinsey’s survey introduced many foreign ideas to the American public. There were more gay men than previously thought and homosexuality was a basic human instinct. This was a frightening, almost heretical, concept to introduce in a society undergoing radical gender changes. In summary, out of the 1930’s and 1940’s came many factors that created specific social, economic and political needs that clamored to be met. Some of the factors included:
? The economic and social realities of the depression.

? World War II.

? Emergence of a gay subculture.

However, these are not inclusive, but only some of the factors that help make up the complex political and social structure that emerged in the 1950’s.

How and in what way was the government helping to meet the public’s needs for a safe environment, a booming economy, family stability, the opportunity to achieve the American Dream? According to D’Emilio, the government “…set their minds on achieving a stable international order and prosperous domestic economy…policies that political leaders pursued in the international arena helped to condition their response to domestic instability. The rhetoric about Communist aggression abroad inevitably fed concerns about subversion at home and justified extraordinary measures.” (D’Emilio, 235) The Cold War was underway, Communism was the enemy of American ideals, it held the potential to completely destroy the American way of life, thereby reducing our society to lawless, godless robots who either bowed down to a terroristic body of government or lost their life. To many Americans, the thought of this happening to Washington and Jefferson’s country was justification for fighting the Red Menace by any means necessary, even if some of those methods resembled their communist counterparts. America was beginning an ill-fated crusade against anyone thought to be Communist or anyone that presented a threat to American values, including homosexuals. “The pens of right-wing ideologies transformed homosexuality into an epidemic infecting the nation, actively spread by Communists to sap the strength of the next generation.” (D’Emilio, 232)
The federal and state governments enacted legislation, held hearings and prosecuted individuals on heresy, thereby trampling the constitutional rights of homosexuals and those thought to be homosexual. The FBI, policy departments and the military gathered information, harassed, and coerced people into identifying themselves as homosexuals and naming others, ruining careers and lives in the process. Even the post office was part of the conspiracy, tampering with and tracing the mail of private individuals for the purpose of identifying homosexuals.

Who and why were the powers of Government so bent on weeding out gays? Was it just in order to make the public feel safe at home due to the post war changes or were there more sinister and unethical schemes at work?
One of the leading and most powerful figures representing the crusade against the spread of Communism was Joseph McCarthy, a Wisconsin Republican Senator whose relentlessness and cruel attack toward homosexuals were reminiscent of Hitler. To McCarthy, communism and homosexuality were synonymous with enemies of America. He not only felt justified in his actions but felt it was his duty as an American politician to define. He wielded unsubstantiated information against hundreds of so-called homosexuals in the federal government but never revealed or proved any individual of being communist. Unfortunately, it is at vulnerable times in history that charismatic, fanatical, fear driven demagogues posses their greatest level of power. Several Republicans jumped on the bandwagon seeking to discredit a democratic administration and gain political points for future re-election and provide public assessment for a suspicious nation.

Senator McCarthy, in conjunction with the U.S. House Committee on Un-American Activities, in 1950 sought to destroy any hint of what determined was subversive activity detrimental to the welfare of this country.

“On March 9, 1950, the Times reports a Senate subcommittee inquiry into Senator Joseph McCarthy’s changes that the United States government employed red sympathizers. McCarthy was the first witness, and homosexuality as well as Communism was an issue. McCarthy had earlier declared in the Senate that a flagrantly homosexual State Department employee, discharged as a security risk in 1946, had had his job restored under pressure from a high State Department official.” (Katz, 91)
“On April 26, 1950, the Times reports: Senator Kenneth S. Wherry of Nebraska, the Republican floor leader, told the Senate that he had just been advised by the ‘head of a Government agency’ that a man accused by Senator McCarthy of being a pervert, though not a Communist had resigned.” (Katz, 91)
“On May 20, a Times news story is based on the testimony of police Lieutenant Roy E. Blick: Inquiry By Senate On Perverts Asked Hill and Wherry Study Hears There are 3,500 Deviates in Government Agencies. The inquiry was proposed on the basis of a priority preliminary study made by Senators Lister Hill…Kenneth S. Wherry…during which a Washington police vice officer said is was his ‘own judgment’ that 3,500 perverts were employed in Government Agencies…he thought 300 to 400 of these persons in the State Department.” (Katz, 93)
“On June 15, the Times reports: Pervert Inquiry Ordered…A Senate subcommittee was ordered today to investigate police reports that about 3,500 sex perverts held federal jobs, some of them in the State Department…The subcommittee intends to make ‘every effort to obtain all the pertinent facts,” but it will not ‘transgress individual rights’ or ‘subject any individual to ridicule,’ he asserted. Mr. Hoey further promised that he would not ‘allow his investigation to become a public spectacle.” (Katz, 94)
“On July 13, the Times reports that the House of Representatives, by a vote of 327 to 14, had passed a bill designed to permit department and agency heads to deal 3wi3th persons who are bad security risks because they drink too much, talk too much, are perverts or have similar failings.” (Katz, 95)
These excerpts are important in presenting a scenario of what activities were transpiring within the U.S. government against homosexuals. However, one of the most crucial documents in understanding the link between Communism and homosexuality and the subsequent vehement attack by the government towards homosexuals is the unabridged version of the 81st Congress Senate Document 2nd Session No. 241, “Employment of Homosexuals and Other Sex Perverts in Government”. (See Appendix A)
This document is an accurate compilation of the personal biases prevailing, psychological and medical views on homosexuality, and the discrimination acts and political paranoia that existed within our government institutions.

How was the government able to successfully carry out the types of discrimination and public harassment of certain individuals unscathed?
The government employed several tools in ferreting out homosexuals in order to exact the political and social punishment they deemed was necessary.

The FBI, headed by Edgar J. Hoover, began a massive investigation into the private lives of others, using intense surveillance and often disregarding constitutional rights. The FBI, charged with investigation the loyalty of all current and prospective government employees, initiated a widespread system of surveillance to keep homosexuals off the federal payroll. (D’Emilio and Freedmen, 293) The FBI was instrumental in creating an atmosphere of terror and fear in the hearts of many who were living gay lifestyles or those that fell under suspicion because of an association with someone who might be gay. The extent to which the FBI went to, left no stones unturned and the harm in which they inflicted on innocent American citizens was grievous and long felt. The FBI, responsible for supplying the civil service commission with information in government employees and applicants, established liaisons with public departments throughout the country. Not content merely to screen particular individuals, it adopted a preventive strategy that justified widespread surveillance. Cooperative vice squad officers supplied the bureau with records of morals arrests, regardless of the disposition of a case, regional FBI officers clipped press articles about the gay subculture, gathered data on gay bars, compiled lists of other places frequented by homosexuals. One former federal government employee knew first hand just how cruel and methodical certain FBI agents could be. The FBI harassed him for over 10 years until he left his job. They revealed his sexual preference to “employees and co-workers” and when he became disabled due to an arm injury he was denied any assistance by the State of Illinois due to his sexuality. This is just one man that suffered untold humiliations, anguish and discrimination at the hands of the FBI, an institution that is supposed to protect our citizens.

The police forces across the nation were an integral part of a huge sting operation. Local police departments harassed and hunted down homosexuals at bars and nightclubs. “These venues were often raided by police, however. Patrons were arrested, and in many cases, their names were published in local newspapers. For individuals who had managed to secure employment, such public disclosure could prove ruinous.” (Wiley, 153)
During this time the military was also conducting their own witch-hunts. Trying to gather information and evidence, either real or imagined, in order to lock gays and lesbians out of the armed forces. “…Lesbians who enlisted in the military at this time were at grave risk, regardless of their patriotism or their dedication to their tasks.” (Faderman, 150) If you were a WAVE in the Navy you were told that “homosexuality is wrong, it is evil…an offense to all decent and law abiding people…” (Faderman, 151) The images and myths that were presented by the navy to their women recruits painted a gruesome picture of lesbianism. “Lesbians were presented in the clich of sexual vampires who seduced innocent young women into sexual experimentation that would lead them, like a drug, into the usual litany of horrors: addiction, degeneracy, loneliness, murder and suicide.” (Faderman, 151)
Some women were asked to leave the service if the women they associated with happened to be lesbian or appeared to be lesbian (i.e., mannish women).
The tactics used by the military were just as degrading, intrusive and sometimes illegal as those of the FBI and police departments. The rest of military personnel were encouraged and often pushed to inform on friends and weed out the enemies (queers). One particularly harrowing and brutal crime took place in Japan in 1954. “…an Army nurse…says that when she and her lover were accused of being lesbians the intelligence officer assigned to the case raped her lover” to teach her how much better a man was than a woman. When she contacted a higher officer she got his promise of protection from future harassment only in return for her agreement to leave the Army without fighting the case. Nothing was done to punish the intelligence officer.” (Faderman, 153)
Gay men were hunted, interrogated and ousted from the military as well. “On August 31, the Times reports: Navy Ousts Sex Offender, Accused Officer Resigns — 24 Sailors Also Being Dismissed.” (Katz, 10) These men were convicted in the eyes of the navy for being homosexual or having had a homosexual experience.

Many gay men and lesbians had to band together within their own military communities, looking out for each other and making it look as though they were heterosexual by conforming to societies views of masculinity and femininity in relation to appropriate gender norms. They always had to keep silent about their thoughts, feelings and private lives.

Why was it so easy for the government, the military and the rest of society to target the homosexual as a Communist, subversive, deviant and criminal? The medical community was one of the strongest proponents to the mass fear and anger perpetrated onto homosexuals.

Dr. Edmund Bergler was one of the leading anti-homosexual crusades of the 1950’s. His book Homosexuality: Disease or Way of Life? Casts the homosexual as a mental invert of great psychological and social deformity.

Bergler’s definition of a homosexual is someone that suffers from a neurotic disease. The gay male exhibits “10 unconscious factors” which create a psychological picture of who a gay man is. See Appendix B.

Bergler’s medical diagnosis and personality construct of the homosexual is filled with personal bias, archaic and nefarious notions of negative psychological formations of the homosexual based on the assumption that it is inherently masochistic.

Bergler further describes the homosexual nature as being one of dependeesim – which he defined as “a relatively rare neurotic occurrence in male heterosexuality; it is one hundred percent typical – or at least potentially typically in homosexuality…dependees cling to ideal of being supported, an irrational insistence on having things his own way, bitter, confused, and demanding.” (Bergler, 64)
Furthermore, Bergler breaks down specific types of dependeeism and specifically links homosexuals to a need to pursue subversive activities. “The ideological dependee is drawn from a side field. He may be found in sectarianism, in politics, in propaganda, and in a wide variety of crackpot movements. All leaders for a new ideal, provided they can collect enough followers, present their claims for support to their disciples in the holy name of the cause. The cause may change, but the claims remain. (Bergler, 67)
While Bergler’s view was certainly not the only medical view of homosexuality in the 1950’s, it was the most prevalent and most damaging. The opinions and ideas he expressed made it easy for certain political agendas to become successful and social factors to scapegoat gays and lesbians and become the focus of public scrutiny.

Bergler sums up his thoughts on what he feels are the homosexual characteristics, and their behavior: “Homosexuals are essentially disagreeable people, regardless of their pleasant or unpleasant outward manner. True, they are not responsible of their unconscious conflicts. However, these conflicts sap so much of their inner energy that the shell is a mixture of superciliousness, fake aggression, and whimpering. Like all psychic masochists, they are subservient when confronted with a strong person, merciless when in power, unscrupulous about trampling on a weaker person. The only language their conscious understands is brute force. What is most discouraging, you seldom find an intact ego (what is probably called a ‘correct person’) among them.”
While there was some positive medical opinions on homosexuality, Dr. Bergler’s exemplifies the harshest critique and sadly to say the type of opinion that the majority of the public held.

Perhaps the greatest medical support the homosexual community had at the time was the Kinsey Report that was published in 1948.

Alfred Kinsey, a noted scientist (and others) conducted a study o human sexuality that challenged the popular medical theories and public sentiment. A portion of this study dealt with the number of homosexuals in American society and their sexual behavior. Kinsey “found that 10% of the males in this sample were more or less exclusively homosexual for at least 3 years between the ages of 16 and 55. For women, the corresponding figure was between 2% and 6% depending on their marital status.””(Wiley, 153)
This figure was high enough for some medical and lay people to discount Kinsey’s findings, there was no way there were that many homosexuals in America where love of God and family are so strongly ingrained. The conservatives shouted it can’t be true, Kinsey is not a legitimate researcher and his findings are false. Furthermore, Kinsey refutes Burglar’s opinions as well as those of the American Psychiatric Association. Kinsey’s view on homosexuality are a stark contrast to Burglar’s homosexual who is a sexual deviant and social threat to public order. Kinsey elaborates on his version of sexuality has been one of a broader more open nature. “…Sexually, men cannot be strictly compartmentalized, divided into sheep and the goats, he claims; not all things were either black of white. Pigeonholes and classifications and devices constructed by the human mind, not accurate reflections of the living world, which is a continuum in each and every one of its aspects. The sooner we learn this concerning human sexual behavior the sooner we shall reach a could understanding of the realities of sex.” (Bergler, 181)
Prior to Kinsey’s report, Dr. Sigmund Freud, an eminent psychologist had these comments to make is a Vienna newspaper in 1903, concerning the trial of a man charged with homosexual practices, “…I advocate the standpoint that the homosexual does not belong before the tribunal of a court of law. I am even of the firm conviction that homosexuals must be treated as sick people, for a perverse orientation is far from being a sickness. Wouldn’t that oblige us to characterize as sick many great thinkers and scholars whom we admire precisely because of their mental health?” (Abelove, 382) While Freud doesn’t quite hold the same opinions as Kinsey, he definitely believes that one should not be treated as sick or criminal based on their sexual preference. However, Freud’s work on the subject has been discounted by the APA and the AMA.

How did homosexuals react to these witch-hunts, brutal crackdowns and life threatening political and social actions perpetrated on them by government officials?
Out of the 1950’s came the beginnings of the first revolutionary activity by homosexuals to right and fight the oppression which sought to destroy them. One such organization was the Mattachine Society, which was founded by Henry Hay, a music teacher and known Communist living in Los Angeles in 1951. Bob Hull and Chuck Rowland developed a mission statement expressing their concerns and goals. The mission statement is as follows:
? To Unify those homosexuals isolated from their own kind.

? To Educate homosexuals and heterosexuals toward an ethical homosexual culture…paralleling the emerging cultures of our fellow minorities – the Negro, Mexican, and Jewish peoples…
? To Lead the more…socially conscious homosexuals are to} provide leadership to the whole mass of social deviates and also
? To Assist our people who are victimized daily as a result of our oppression.

(Adam, 63)
“Mattachine originated out of a desire to create a positive social and political and the need to challenge the vicious attacks on their character in the midst of McCarthyism. The Mattachine society gave the gay community magazine for homosexuals titled “One” which the U.S. Post Office banned in 1954, however in 1958 the U.S Supreme Court ruled the ban unconstitutional, stating it violated First Amendment Rights to free speech. They also managed to win in acquittal for one of their members in court, brought up on sex charges.

Lesbians counter to the Mattiachine Society was the Daughters of Bilitis which began in 1955. It was founded by four couples in San Francisco and was the first post-war lesbian organization established to uplift lesbians and challenge the prejudices against them. Phyllis Lyon, the daughters of Billets, published a magazine titled “The Ladder.” DOB stated its objectives to be:
? Education of the variant.

? Development of a library on the “sex deviant” theme.

? Public discussions “to be conducted by leading members of the legal, psychiatric, religious and other professions.”
? Advocating a mode of behavior and dress acceptable to society.

? Participation in research projects.

? Investigation of the penal code as it pertains to the homosexual.

? Promotion of these changes through the sue process of the law in state legislation.
(Adam, 64)
While both these organizations may not meet the standards of present day politics and social equity for the gay and lesbian community, they certainly displayed courage and pride in a time when McCarthyism was the prevalent moral ideology on homosexuality. They were the forerunners of today’s political activists and contributed much in light of their consequences.

In conclusion, the 1950’s was a difficult and dangerous time for American homosexuals and they endured much humiliation and hardship, while the treat of financial, social, and physical security loomed large over their heads. The political actions by the government and the contributions by the medical societies created and encouraged an unjust, immoral and illegal treatment of a portion of America’s citizens based on prejudices, medical fallacies, political convictions, and religious dogma. The trials and tribulations suffered by the homosexual community during the era of McCarthyism reminds me of a poem.
Pastor Martin Neimoller, a German Protestant minister who was interned in Nazi concentration camps from 1937 – 1945, spoke so eloquently on behalf of his personal nightmare and warns society against any future genocide:
“In Germany they first came for the communists and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a communist. Then they came for the Jews and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics and I didn’t speak up because I was Protestant. Then they came for me – and, by that time, no one was left to speak up.”
Appendix A
Employment of Homosexuals and Other Sex Perverts in Government
? Introduction
? Sex Perverts As Government Employees
? Sex Perverts As Security Risks
? Extent of Sex Perversion In Government
Introduction
The primary objective of the subcommittee in this inquiry was to determine the extent of the employment of homosexuals and other sex perverts in Government; to consider reasons why their employment by the Government is undesirable; and to examine into the efficacy of the methods used in dealing with the problem…A number of eminent physicians and psychiatrists, who re recognized authorities on this subject, were consulted and some of these authorities testified before the subcommittee in executive session. In addition, numerous medical and sociological studies were reviewed. Information was also sought and obtained from law-enforcement officers, prosecutors, and other persons dealing with the legal and sociological aspects of the problem in 10 of the larger cities in the country…
In this investigation the subcommittee tried to avoid the circus atmosphere which could attend an inquiry of this type an sought to make a thorough factual study of the problem at hand in an unbiased, objective manner…
For the purpose of this report the subcommittee has defined sex perverts as ‘those who engage in unnatural sexual acts’ and homosexuals are perverts who may be broadly defined as ‘persons of either sex who as adults engage in sexual activities with persons of the same sex’…This investigation is concerned only with those who engage in overt acts of homosexuality or other sex perversion.


The subcommittee found that most authorities agree on certain basic facts concerning sex perversion…Most authorities believe that sex deviation results from psychological rather than physical causes, and in many cases there are not outward characteristics or physical traits that are positive as identifying marks of sex perversion…
Generally speaking, the overt homosexual of both sexes can be divided into two general types: the active, aggressive or male type, and the submissive, passive or female type. The passive type of male homosexual, who often is effeminate in his mannerisms and appearance, is attracted to the masculine type of man and is friendly and congenial with women. He exhibits no traces of femininity in this speech or mannerisms which would disclose his homosexuality. This active type is almost exclusively attracted to the passive type of homosexual or to young men or boys who are not necessarily homosexual but who are effeminate in general appearance or behavior. The active and passive type of female homosexual follow the same general patterns as their male counterparts…
Psychiatric physicians generally agree that indulgence in sexually perverted practices indicates a personality which has failed to reach sexual maturity. The authorities agree that most sex deviates respond to psychiatric treatment and can be cured if they have a genuine desire to be cured…Persons afflicted…should be considered as proper cases for medical and psychiatric treatment…However sex perverts, like all other persons who by their overt acts violate moral codes and laws and the accepted standards of conduct, must be treated as transgressors and dealt with accordingly.


Sex Perverts As Government Employees
In the opinion of this subcommittee homosexuals and other sex perverts are not proper persons to be employed in Government for two reasons: first, they are generally unsuitable, and second, they constitute security risks…
Perverts lack the emotional stability of normal persons…there is an abundance of evidence to sustain the conclusion that indulgence in acts of sex perversion weakens the moral fiber of responsibility…The presence of a sex pervert in a Government agency tends to have a corrosive influence upon his fellow employees. These perverts will frequently attempt to entice normal individuals to engage in perverted practices. This is particularly true in the case of young and impressionable people…One homosexual can pollute a Government office…
Sex Perverts As Security Risks
The conclusion of this subcommittee that a homosexual or other sex pervert is a security risk is not based upon mere conjecture. That conclusion is predicated upon a careful review of the opinions of those best qualified to consider matters of security in Government, namely, the intelligence agencies of the Government. Testimony on this phase of the inquiry was taken from representatives of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Central Intelligence Agency, and the intelligence services of the Army, Navy and Air Force. All of these agencies are in complete agreement that sex perverts in Government constitute security risks.


The lack of emotional stability which is found in most sex perverts and the weakness of their moral fiber, makes then susceptible to the blandishments of the foreign espionage agent. It is the experience of intelligence experts that perverts are vulnerable to interrogation by a skilled questioner and they seldom refuse to talk about themselves. Furthermore, most perverts tend to congregate at the same restaurants, night clubs, and bars, which place can be identified with comparative east in many communities, making it possible for a recruiting agent to develop clandestine relationships which can be used for espionage purposes…
Extent of Sex Perversion in Government
An individual check of the Federal agencies revealed that since January 1, 1947, the armed services and civilian agencies of Government have handled 4,954 cases involving charges of homosexuality or other types of sex perversion. It will also be noted that the bulk of these cases are in the armed services as is indicated by the fact that 4,380 of the known cases in Government involved military personnel and 574 involved civilian employees…The military services, unlike most other Government agencies, traditionally have been aggressive in ferreting out and removing sex perverts from their ranks and this is bound to make for a larger number of known cases in the services…Many of the civilian agencies of the Government have been either negligent or otherwise failed to discover many of the homosexuals in their employ…
Handling of the Sex Perversion Problem in Government
…The subcommittee has found that many civilian agencies of government have taken an entirely unrealistic view of the problem of sex perversion and have not taken adequate steps to get these people out of government…In many cases the fault stemmed from the fact that personnel officers and other officials…handled the problem in accordance with their individual feelings or personal judgments in the matter…There were those who adopted…the false premise that what a Government employee did outside of the office on his own time, particularly if his actions did not involve his fellow employees or his work, was his own business. That conclusion may be true with regard to the normal behavior of employees in most types of Government work, but is does not apply to sex perversion or any type of criminal activity or similar misconduct.


Conclusion
There is no place in the United States Government for persons who violate the laws or the accepted standards of morality, or who otherwise ring disrepute to the Federal service by infamous or scandalous personal conduct. Such persons are not suitable for Government positions and in the case of doubt the American people are entitled to have errors of judgment on the part of their officials, if there must be errors, resolved on the side of caution…This conclusion is based upon the fact that persons who indulge in such degraded activity are committing not only illegal and immoral acts, but they also constitute security risks in positions of public trust.


The subcommittee found that in the past many Government officials failed to take a realistic view of the problem of sex perversion in Government with the result that a number of sex perverts were not discovered or removed from Government jobs, and in still other instances they were quietly eased out of one department and promptly found employment in another agency…
Since the initiation of this investigation considerable progress has been made in removing homosexuals and similar undesirable employees from positions in the Government. However, it should be borne in mind that public interest cannot be adequately protected unless responsible officials adopt and maintain a realistic and vigilant attitude toward the problems of sex perverts in the Government…
(Duberman, 181-185)
Appendix B
The ten factors are:
? Personality Structure – he is an injustice collector (psychic masochist), aneurotic who constantly created by means of his own unconscious provocation in which he finds himself behind the eight ball. He is seeking some form of defeat and humiliation.

? Fugitive From Women – On the inside (not renouncing of women) he is deathly terrified of women and hates with the compensatory hatred of a fear ridden masochist.

? Secondary Elevation of the Antidote, Man Against the Fear Object, Woman – he takes flight from women, thereby elevating men to the status of sexual attraction.

? Constantly Dissatisfied, Hence Constantly on the Prowl – he is cruising for short term partners, 2 minutes or better. He craves variety, possesses insatiable sex appetites, He has a poor and unsatisfying sexual diet and because he cruises runs the risk of beating, extortion attempt, VD or jail.

? Husband and Wife Camouflage – gay men claim biological femininity, every passive feminine is paired with active, masculine. They can be recognizable or not.

? Unfounded Megalomaniac Convictions of Superiority and Ubiquity of Homosexual Trends – They believe that at the bottom everybody has some homosexual inclinations. They cite historical examples of know or thought to be homosexuals like Walt Whitman to prove their legitimacy.

? Inner depression and Exorbitant Malice – Scratch a homosexual and you find a depressed neurotic. They use the term gay to ward off masochistic depression.


Malice is pseudo aggression not normal aggression. Some pseudo aggression characteristics are:
1. Used indiscriminately when an infantile pattern is repeated with an innocent bystander.

2. Object of aggression is any enemy in fantasy only; is an artificially created enemy.

3. Feeling of guilt always present.

4. Slightest provocation – greatest aggression.

5. Pseudo aggression often used to provoke the enemy’s retaliation in order to obtain.

6. Timing: Inability to wait, since pseudo aggression is used as defense mechanism against inner reproach of psychic masochism.

7. Easily provoked.

8. Element of infantile game present; combined with masochistic pseudosadistic excitement, usually repressed.

9. Defeat unconsciously expected.


? Inner Guilt arising from perversion – psychiatric meaning of perversion denotes infantile sex encountered in an adult and leading to orgasm. In short, a disease.

? Irrational Jealousy – irrational and violent jealousy unparalleled in heterosexual relationship.

? Unreliability as an Element in Psychopathic Trends – homosexuals live in conspiratorial atmosphere, utilize unsavory short cuts and detours or conspiracy (I’ve suffered so much).

(Bergler, 54)
Bibliography
Abelove, Henry, Barle, Ana Michele & Halperin, David, (Eds.) (1993) The Lesbian and Gay Studies Reader. New York: Routlegde.


Adam, Barry, D. (1987) The Rise of a Gay and Lesbian Movement. Boston: Twayne Publishers.


Bergler, Edmund, Dr. (1951) Homosexuality: Disease or Way of Life?
Corsini, Raymond. (1994) Encyclopedia of Psychology. V.2, John Wiley and Sons, Inc.


Duberman, Martin (1986) About Time Exploring the Gay Past
D’Emilio, John. The Homosexual Menace: The Politics of Sexuality in Cold War America.


Faderman, Lillian. (1991) Odd Girls and Twilight Lovers. New York: Columbia University Press.


Katz, Jonathan. (1976) Gay American History. New York: Thomas Y Crowell.