To Jenni Olson, Chris Worsnop, Lee Parpart, Jeff, Patricia Lewis, Charlie Harris, Khalid Halhoul, Ulf Dahlquist, Doug Jordan, and SCREEN-L colleagues: Thank you for your responses to our recent inquiry about films containing or in some way addressing 'perversion'. We especially thank readers who wrote us wishing to help, but who find the phrasing of our original inquiry over-general or too detached. The frustration you experience in aiming to help us is, unfortunately, par for those now actively re-examining the title topic. The idea and scope of 'perversion' are now undergoing remarkably complex debate, and no introduction brief enough to preface a short query among film people could ever serve our purpose very neatly---that of *not narrowing* nor prejudging what might be relevant. The 1998 topic for our annual psychoanalytic film series here in Boston will be "Gender, Identity, and Perversion," prompted in part by a discussion of Kaplan's recent book _Female Perversions_, and the 1997 film of the same name. While Kaplan takes up, as quite central, issues of gender in perversion, not everyone agrees with this move. Nor do all agree on the role of 'sexuality' in the construction of 'perversion,' as some of you noted. BTW, it wasn't the <category> 'perversion' we declined to defend, but any of the <specific movies> already suggested to us as pertinent, whose titles we felt it would be helpful to mention to readers in our query. Our principal concern is simply that our knowledge of movies _we_ consider relevant might be be too limited, and we wish to learn more by querying what _others_ might find pertinent in popular film. Respecting the diversity of our own debate, we anticipated as much from a knowledgeable larger audience such as this one. Many thanks, Bet MacArthur Cambridge MA ---- To sign off SCREEN-L, e-mail [log in to unmask] and put SIGNOFF SCREEN-L in the message. Problems? Contact [log in to unmask]