March 28, 1996
Harry R. Lewis,
Dean of Harvard College
University Hall
Cambridge, Mass. 02138
Dear Mr. Lewis:
I am writing as Co-Chair of The Harvard Gay & Lesbian Caucus regarding several current matters: our Annual Commencement Dinner, the BGLSA Resource Office, ROTC commissioning ceremonies, the selection of housemasters, and our proposal for a study of bisexual, gay and lesbian student needs at Harvard College. The Caucus, as you may know, is composed of over 1,700 gay, lesbian and bisexual alumni/ae, faculty and staff of Harvard College and the Harvard Graduate and Professional Schools. I am myself a 1971 graduate of the College and a 1974 graduate of Harvard Law School.
First let me express my warm thanks for your agreement to speak at our Annual Commencement Dinner on the evening of June 6. This will be a busy and tiring day for you, so we particularly appreciate your willingness to conclude it with us. We will talk further as the date nears to bring into focus the format of your remarks - a brief introductory talk followed by questions sounds right. I trust that you will find our company interesting and our questions courteous even when searching.
I would also like to thank you for approving the proposal by the Bisexual, Gay, Lesbian and Supporters Association to create a Resource Office in the basement of Holworthy Hall. We appreciate that the long delay in implementing this plan has been due to Dean Epps' illness and not to any lack of goodwill, though I am sure you realize how frustrating this has been, both for the students and for us. Now that funding from The Open Gate has been approved we trust that the remaining administrative hurdles will be swiftly cleared so that the office can open as scheduled early in April, staffed by a part-time work-study student. The Caucus is committed to assist the students as needed to make this office a success. [Dean Lewis' reply]
Next I would like to address the question which has been raised by the Undergraduate Council about use of Harvard premises for the commissioning ceremonies for graduating Harvard students who participate in the ROTC program. This issue is rendered more difficult for us by our involvement in the discussions in late 1994 and early 1995 which resulted in the current arrangement. While we find it awkward for this issue to arise again so soon, we nevertheless feel that the questions posed by the Undergraduate Council raise fundamental issues which must be addressed on their merits. Our own discussions have lead to several questions, and we would appreciate your thinking on these points at your earliest convenience: [Dean Lewis' reply]
1. What use of Harvard premises by the ROTC program is contemplated during Commencement week this year and in what ways, if any, does Harvard propose to participate in or publicize those activities?
It is one thing if the ROTC cadets will perform their own ceremony, spatially and temporally separate from any official Harvard function. It is another matter entirely if the commissioning will be coordinated or integrated with official Harvard ceremonies. Similarly, it is one thing if reunion classes list the commissioning in their class materials and something else again if the ceremony will be listed in the official Commencement program or in the Commencement Guide published by Harvard Magazine.
2. Would Harvard grant similar use of its premises to an alumni group which discriminated against women, or persons of a particular racial or religious minority?
If you can assure us that Harvard makes no inquiry into the policies of independent alumni groups which use its premises during Commencement then the use by ROTC implies no special slur against gays, lesbians and bisexuals. The general question of the circumstances in which Harvard allows use of its premises would remain, but gays, lesbians and bisexuals would have no particular complaint. If, on the other hand, Harvard would bar a group which discriminated against another minority, but allows a group which discriminates against us, we would, as you can imagine, be very much troubled and aggrieved.
3. May the Caucus conduct a non-disruptive demonstration in the vicinity of the commissioning ceremonies, along the lines of the Colin Powell protest, and would Harvard permit the demonstration to be listed, with similar prominence, in the same publications in which notice of the commissioning ceremonies appear?
We have not reached a decision whether or not to mount such a protest, but we assume that our organization - which welcomes all who support our purposes regardless of gender, race, religion or sexual orientation - would be afforded the same privileges as one which formally excludes gays, lesbians and bisexuals.
We realize that these matters are not wholly, or even primarily, within your jurisdiction. We ask, however, that you give us your own thoughts, and furnish us with the information which is available to your office. We may of course wish to say and do more depending on your response to these questions.
Next, I would like to urge you to consider the appointment of a same-sex couple as housemasters of either Cabot House or Pforzheimer House, or both. The presence of a gay or lesbian couple as masters of a House would go a long way towards normalizing the status of homosexuality at Harvard. The absence of such a couple sends a powerful message that gays may be tolerated but they are not admitted as full participants in the life of the College. [Dean Lewis' reply]
Finally, I would like to ask your response to the Proposal for a Study of the Needs of Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Students at Harvard College which we submitted to you, via Dean Mackay-Smith, on January 2, 1996. There is an urgent need for Harvard to assess and mitigate the adverse effects of randomization before they arise. Many lesbian, gay and bisexual students already do not find Harvard a safe and supportive environment which enables to grow personally as well as intellectually. This number will increase dramatically under randomization. Incidents such as "Barney Fag" last spring, "Sodomy=Death" last fall and "KKK" in the past few weeks evidence a potent strain of racism and homophobia among many Harvard undergraduates. The cost of continued benign neglect is not just the occasional suicide or breakdown but, in many students, needlessly delayed maturity and a failure to take full advantage of Harvard's offerings. It is critical that Harvard take appropriate steps to learn about and meet the needs of its gay, lesbian and bisexual students now, while havens such as Adams House are still largely intact. [Dean Lewis' reply]
Thank you for your attention to our concerns. We look forward to your reply.
Very truly yours,
/s/ Robert W. Mack,
Co-Chair,
Harvard Gay & Lesbian Caucus
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Robert W. Mack
Harvard Gay & Lesbian Caucus
PO Box 381809
Cambridge, MA 02238-1809
Dear Mr. Mack,
I am responding to your letter of March 28 concerning various issues. First let me say how glad I am to be able to join you and others on commencement night. I am sure it will be an interesting and enlightening event for everyone, and I look forward to seeing several old friends and former students who have already told me they will be there.
As you know, we agreed in December of 1995 -- quite promptly after the matter was first raised with us -- to provide office space for the undergraduate organization, BGLSA. Since that time, representatives of that organization have discussed with Deans Flatley, Epps, and Mackay-Smith furnishings for the office, including bookcases and furniture, and arrangements for a work-study student. It is my understanding that the office is fully supplied with College-donated items and that recently the Caucus approved the budget (excluding the computer, which we understand will be donated). The only outstanding item is the arrangement for the work-study student, for whom we understand that the Open Gate will be providing the funding and whom the BGLSA officers will be supervising. These arrangements are being worked out directly between the Dean of Students and the BGLSA officers.
The role of the Caucus in its advisory and fund-raising activities has been very helpful in moving this project forward. At the same time, I hope you will understand how important it is to maintain the general principle that the activities of alumni/ae advisory groups are to be distinguished from those of the student organizations with which they are associated; in this case, between the roles of the Caucus and of BGLSA. We have from the beginning been proceeding on the understanding that the space has been assigned to the undergraduate organization, BGLSA, for student use; consequently the work-study student should be supervised by the undergraduate officers. I know that everyone is proceeding towards common goals in this venture and that any uncertainties about details can be resolved if the student leaders remain in close touch with the office of the Dean of Students. [Our next query]
On the matter of the ROTC commissioning ceremony, we have been proceeding on the understanding that everything would go forward in the same way as last year. The ceremony will be the day before Commencement in Tercent[en]ary theatre; it is organized and conducted by the ROTC alumni/ae group and by the units themselves. The College has no official role in the ceremony, which is not listed in the official program. You mention Harvard Magazine's Commencement Guide. The Magazine is editorially independent of the University and the University does not control its policies or what it prints. I did as a courtesy to you ask the editor of the Magazine, John Rosenberg, how the Commencement Guide was put together, and he described the criteria for inclusion of items as "catholic." You should be in touch with him if you want further clarification on that, but in any case, those listings carry no official blessings from the University. (For your information, I enclose a copy of the letter I recently sent to the Undergraduate Council concerning these matters.)
On the question of what Harvard would do in the case of a group with other discriminatory policies, I am reluctant to speculate on the hypothetical (of which I personally can't think of any actual cases), since use of the Harvard premises would not automatically be granted or denied on the basis of any single criterion. Certainly we do not regard use of the Harvard Yard at Commencement as an indication of university approval of a group's policies, and it would also not be necessary for a group to fail any single test in order to be denied use of the Yard. In the case of ROTC, as you know, Harvard has stated its opposition to the policy of discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, and it has almost entirely eliminated its association with ROTC because of that policy. It has been our practice in making decisions about the retained association with ROTC to consult the faculty. This was done in the case of the commissioning ceremony and I would be glad to pull together the background documents for you if you do not have them.
I don't think I could provide any assurances, on the basis of what you have said, about approving a demonstration, or certainly about providing it any special publicity (you will recall that such notice as is given of the ROTC commissioning ceremony is in any case not through official university channels that I could control). As you know, the status of the commissioning ceremony was closely reviewed in cooperation with members of the Caucus to allow it to continue for the convenience of the graduating seniors and their families. Once again, I would stress that we accommodate a large number of alumni/ae groups during Commencement, without implying by such accommodations approval or endorsement of the policies of any of them. I would hope that if the Caucus (which we do, of course, accommodate at Commencement time) wishes to mount a protest, it will stay in touch with us concerning its plans. (I am sure that I do not need to point out to you that the graduating seniors and their families to whom the commissioning ceremony belongs are not the people responsible for military policies regarding gays and lesbians.) [Our next query]
On the matter of inviting a gay or lesbian individual to be Master of a House, I personally have never considered sexual orientation to be either disqualifying or an important positive qualification in filling the positions. The jobs are complex and finding the right combination of personal and professional characteristics (in both individuals, when a couple is involved) is difficult enough without excluding qualified persons for irrelevant reasons, or narrowing the field by imposing extra constraints of primarily symbolic significance (as powerful as I know symbols can be). [Our next query]
Finally, you ask also about the study you proposed this winter of the needs of and resources for our bisexual, gay, and lesbian undergraduate students. As you may know from your conversations with Dean Mackay-Smith, we have already made progress on this front. For instance, this spring we will continue the practice Dean Mackay-Smith began last year of surveying the Resident Deans (Allston Burr Senior Tutors and Assistant Deans of Freshmen) and the Designated Tutor/Proctors on Sexual Orientation. This detailed survey provides first-hand information on availability and use of educational/information outreach programs, advising or counseling services, and social or entertainment-oriented activities offered in the Houses and the dorms. In addition, the survey of graduating seniors, conducted annually by the Office of Instructional Research and Evaluation, will again this year gather some information about experiences relating to sexual orientation. I will certainly consider in the future urging expansion of this survey, which has a very high response rate, to include more questions concerning experiences and attitudes surrounding sexual orientation, though I would want to work carefully with both the B/G/L and straight communities in phrasing any questions that would ask students to identify their sexual orientation, even on this anonymous questionnaire.
These two surveys between them provide both the administration (deans and advisors) and the student perspectives -- both necessary to a full and accurate understanding. Finally, the Office for Coeducation and the Designated Tutors/Proctors have been compiling an index of resources and programs geared to the B/G/L undergraduate community. This along with the survey results should provide a solid basis for determining what information is both useful and accessible for a study such as you proposed.
Let me comment on two related issues you mentioned in your letter. First, I trust you were as heartened as I was at the immediate outpouring within the College community of opinion condemning the hate-filled and insulting graffiti in one of the Houses recently. The College continues to strive for respectful and enlightening exchange of ideas, rather than cowardly and ignorant anonymous invective. Secondly, the "randomization" of the freshman housing lottery has provided the College with an opportunity to highlight and expand the work of the Designated Tutors in each of the Houses, as no one can any longer pretend that "most" of the B/G/L students are in one or two of the Houses and thus having resources in just those Houses would be sufficient.
One note in closing, which I hope you will understand is not meant in any way to be diversionary. As Dean of Harvard College, I have responsibility for the experience of undergraduates and, through the Dean of Students, for support and standards for undergraduate organizations such as BGLSA. To the extent that your concerns extend across the entire University, or deal with matters beyond the College's sphere of influence (such as use of the Yard at Commencement), it would probably be more proper for you to be in discussion with the Secretary of the Corporation.
I do look forward to meeting you in June.
Sincerely yours,
/s/ Harry Lewis
[From the Spring, 1996 issue of The Harvard Gay & Lesbian Newsletter]