Statement Needed

To the Editors of The Crimson:

At the most recent meeting of the Radcliffe Union of Students (RUS), the following resolution was unanimously passed:

The Radcliffe Union of students opposes discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. we recognize that this is an issue which requires the attention of the entire University community. Therefore, we ask the Committee on College life to discuss the tenuous situation of gay men and lesbians on campus with an aim towards strongly urging the Faculty of Arts and Sciences to adopt a statement of non-discrimination which includes the words "sexual orientation.

The fact that this resolution was proposed by a male student who is not a member of RUS reflects a concern about this issue which is not confined to any one interest group. This student has also approached the Undergraduate Council with a similar resolution.

Because there are gay men and lesbians in every sector of the University community--as undergraduates, graduates students, faculty, administrators, and other University employees--it is not enough for the Undergraduate admissions office to adopt a policy of non-discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. After all, only a small part of the larger University community is comprised by undergraduates. Currently, students applying to the Graduate School of Arts and sciences have no guarantee that their sexual orientation will not become a factor when the application is considered. The argument that no student is asked, in the course of GSAS application process, to state his or her sexual orientation is misleading. Yes, there is not explicit question concerning sexuality. However, the question may be raised impicitly when the applicant lists undergraduate organizations of which he or she was a member: If the name of one of those organizations happens to contain the word 'gay" or "Lesbian" (as, for example, Harvard Radcliffe Gay and Lesbian Student Association), then the mere mention of participation in such an organization may be as statement of sexual orientation.

The conspicuous absence of a clear statement of policy that the University will not discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation is also an issue in the area of faculty and administrative hiring. The current equal opportunity in hiring policy does not contain the words "sexual orientation." If, as has been argued, these words are omitted because the University does not discriminate against gay men and lesbians then there are we to assume that the University does discriminate against all of the groups explicitly mentioned in the current equal opportunity statement? Obviously, the contention that absence of policy means absence of proment is spurious.

Another area which deserves attention is undergraduate housing. There is not now any comprehensive statement which addresses the homophobia many gay students face in residential houses. Instead, house master and tutors handling complaints from students about anti-gay hostility now deal with these cases on an individual basis. Additionally, understanding of and sympathy for the unique problems faced by gays and lesbians (and indeed, other minorities) varies widely from house to house.

RUS urges the Faculty of Arts and Sciences to join its counterparts at the Law School and the Divinity School (where the faculties have already added the words sexual orientation to the non-discriminatory clauses) and adopt a clear policy of non-discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in admissions, hiring, and housing. At this point, it is important to add that the cities of Boston and Cambridge already have a comprehensive human rights ordinance which prohibits discrimination in the areas of community services, employment, and housing on the basis of a number of criteria--among them, sexual orientation. The Faculty of Arts and Sciences would do well to look beyond its ivy gates and learn from community example. Ann Pellegrini '86   president, RUS