century, 2) Conformity, and 3) SocialnValues. Ironically, the chief value itnpreaches is the now-feshionable abolitionnof all values that might impede thensatisfaction of individual appetites. Yet itndoes not occur to people like John Sacknthat this chic, seemingly painless moralnanarchy, if taken seriously by many fornvery long, will result in the chaotic vs^arnof each against all, the very state of naturenposited by Hobbes, whose remedynfor the reign of unbridled impulses—theniron laws of absolute power—makesnHobbes one of this book’s archvillains.nSuch, however, is the blindness of theneternal spoiled children of a societynPernicious Pink PassagesnEnrique Rueda: The HomosexualnNetwork: Private Lives and PublicnPolicy; Devin Adair; Old Greenwich,nCT.nby Richard PetersnIt has been said that Sigmund Freudnand the Roman Catholic Church were innfull agreement about only one thing,nthat homosexuality is a perversion. Andnthat was said many years ago. More recently,nas another of the remarkablenfruits of the 60’s, we were told to turnnboth reason and language inside out,nand once again to stand on our intellectualnheads. A new word, not found in then1970 edition of Webster’s Unabridged,nhas appeared: homophobianOn the face of it, homophobia wouldnappear to mean fear of man, or men, ornmankind. Not so! It is used by the homosexualnmovement and its supporters tonmean fear of homosexuality. This term isnclearly and strongly pejorative, and itnmay carry either of two meanings: 1)neither the homophobic individual is sick,nphobic here having the clinical meaningnof an unreasonable fear, i.e., anxiety attack,nlike fear of heights, elevators.nDr. Peters is a practicing psychoanalystnwherein this sort of sophomoric narcissismnachieves reputable expression.nToday the trivia of the tabloid expandsnto become the material of the TV talknshow and then, in turn, inflates to an”biography.” With Fingerprint the balloonnreaches the bursting point: the cryngoes up against all civilization, evennagainst books denouncing civilization.nThe work is indeed a commentary onnour times, though not in the way its authornintends. And perhaps libraries shouldnstock it—as a collector’s item in the intellectualnshop of horrors we call, fornshort, the 60’s, but which, as Sack remindsnus, lives on as a chronic illness. Dnclosed-in spaces, and the like; or 2) it impliesna more rational and reasonable fear,none that is bom of false expectations. Thisnsecond definition means “prejudice,”nwhich we have been assured is unreasonable,nunconscionable, and responsible fornmany of the social ills of the world. Nownwe have arrived at the inversion of languagenand reason. A perversion, whichnused to be either a sin or an illness, certainlynnot normal behavior, has becomenan “alternative,” i.e., normal, “lifestyle”nor behavior; aversion to homosexualitynis thus either an illness or a sin or both.nThe heterosexual majority is nownhomophobic and needs curing or retraining.nThe above is an introduction to FathernRueda’s excellent and thoroughly documentednbook on the homosexual movement.nFor the uninitiated, this worknwould be scarcely believable were it notnfor the painstaking documentationndrawn from published sources, especiallynfrom the movement itself For cliniciansnand others who are already familiar withnhomosexuals and the details of theirndaily lives and activities the book is stillnsomewhat of a surprise. It is not the sexualninformation that will shock the sophisticated,nbut rather the militant orthodoxynof the movement’s ideologynnnand its systematic use of the tried-andtruentechniques of leftist political persuasion.nFor soflie readers it will be yetnanother galling discovery that, as taxpayers,nthey are financing another aliennsubculture’s attack on their value systemnand, worse, on their children’s value system.nFather Rueda’s careful scholarshipnhas provided a detailed descriptionnwhose implications go far beyond thenhomosexual movement. What he providesnis a textbook example of the techniquenfor packaging and selling a groupnas a “repressed” or “disadvantaged”nminority (Rueda points out that homosexualsnare, on the average, wealthiernthan “straights”). The strategy and tacticsnfor bringing that group into the servicenof the new left are clearly and at timesnexhaustively detaOed. Father Rueda’snbook is essential for anyone who wantsnto know how it all works, and every responsiblenvoter should know. The factsnare grim, however, and this is not a booknfor PoUyarmas. No point-by-point discussionnis attempted here. Rather, certainntopics raised by the book will bendeveloped.nrirst, the pejorative use of the wordnstereotype, particularly as it pertains ton”homophobia” needs examination.nWebster’s defines stereotypes as “havingna fixed or conventional expression . . .ncharacter, mental pattern, etc., havingnno individuality.” It is quite clear that angroup cannot be a group without havingncertain distinguishing and shared characteristics.nIn the case of some groups,nhomosexuals among them, there is notnonly a set of distinguishing characteristicsnbut an entire shared subculmre as well,nwhich includes language, preferrednmodes of dress, etc. With unknown individuals,none’s best guess about their futurenbehavior is based on whatever affiliationsnor memberships can be eithernrecognized or inferred. Membership innone of the more-developed groups—ancategory that includes homosexuals—nallows for a fairly high level of predictabilityncompared to someone with nonknown aflfiliation. “But you can’t judgen•^•^31nAugust 1983n