further, when members of the same sex employ lovers' language, and
indulge in the imitation of lovers' endearments, there is something
sickly about the whole business which healthy instinct condemns. I do
not mean, of course, that when girls link arms or even embrace each
other in moments of excitement there is anything mistaken. To some
people such expressions of emotion are as natural as breathing. But
_grandes passions_ lead to much more than that sort of thing, and so
become a serious evil.

It is in connection with this problem that psychologists have brought
into use the rather ugly word "homosexuality", though it means nothing
more dreadful than this tendency to put a member of one's own sex into
the place that should be occupied by a member of the other sex. But I
find a certain amount of talk going on which assumes that some people
are of the homosexual type, and that it is natural and right for them
to express themselves in this way. As a matter of fact homosexuality
_is always a sexual perversion_ and is fraught with great danger of
nervous disorder. Dr. Crichton Miller says in _The New Psychology and
the Teacher_: "From the point of view of psychological development
homosexuality in the adult is a regression.... Clinical experience
confirms the view that in the long run the man or the woman of the
intermediate type is bound to pay the price of regression in one
way or another" (p. 120).

Of course the essential defect of these passionate attachments between
two women is that they can never fully satisfy. They cannot give a
woman children, and they leave the mother heart in her starved. For
this reason it is a primary obligation on each of the two to resolve
that so soon as a man enters the life of the other she will at all
costs make room for him, The cost of this may be very great, but love