Mather Residents Debate Gay Issues

The outward manifestations of the debate are easily sighted: witness the pink triangles and blue squares posted in students' windows all around the Mather House courtyard.

The pink triangles--a traditional sign of gay rights activists--and the blue squares--"if you're feeling square and a little bit blue"--have moved the Mather House debate about its acceptance of the gay community into the symbolic realm.

But beneath the surface of brightly colored geometric figures, the house has experienced a week of conflict, as residents divided over the best ways to express the community's tolerance of different sexual orientations.

First, there was the "kiss-in," staged by members of Defeat Homophobia in the Mather dining hall last Friday. That protest, the outgrowth of an alleged harassment of a gay student the Sunday before, resulted in a Saturday house meeting during which students argued over the appropriateness of the dining hall kiss-in.

Since then, the pink triangles and blue squares have appeared. And the conversations have continued--in the dining hall, in rooming groups, in the elevators and hallways.

Two central--and very different--issues are at stake in the current Mather House debate. First, many residents have taken sides about an alleged incident of harassment in Mather two weeks ago, in which a gay student claims he was verbally and physically assaulted by non-Harvard students but other witnesses say the harassment went both ways.

And the other issue is the kiss-in, and the type of protest used by gay and lesbian students to expose what they say is homophobic sentiment.

Since the details of the alleged harassment remain unclear, debate continues about the facts of the case. House officials have maintained throughout the week that they could not discuss the issue, saying only that some disciplinary action may be taken.

And the Mather resident who hosted the alleged attackers says that his friends were actually harassed by the gay student. "There is guilt on both sides," said the host, Brian J. Buckley '90. "I feel that my friend was harassed, too."

Separate from the incident, but somehow connected to it, is the issue of the kiss-in and whether it was an appropriate form of protest.

"If the kiss-in brings out a lot of latent bigotry, then at least it's something we can deal with," said Bisexual, Gay and Lesbian Students co-chair Kelly M. Dermody '89-'90 before the protest in Mather House dining hall last Friday.

At the time of the kiss-in, members of Defeat Homophobia said that they were pleased that a student was finally willing to come forward with a complaint. They said they had difficulty in the past, because although there had been several incidents of sex-orientation harassment at Harvard, few students were willing to make their complaints public.

But while organizers say the protest was not in reaction to the February 19 incident, many residents connected the two and this connection increased opposition to the protest.

In a special meeting called by Mather House Master Jeffrey G. Williamson, residents filled the dining hall in what was described as a heated debate with students objecting both to the characterization of Mather as intolerant and the manner and timing of Defeat Homophobia's protest.

Many said they felt that the timing of the kiss-in was inappropriate because the details of the incidents on February 19 were unclear. Others in the meeting said they found the kiss-in offensive, saying that the dining hall was not the right place for such activities.

"Not everyone is at the same level of maturity. A lot of people were just shocked by it," said Mather resident Mathew J. DeGreef '89.

And instead of subsiding, the discussion heated up once again after the Saturday meeting, with the appearance of the pink triangles.

Over 50 people hung the triangles in their windows, but again there was opposition within the house. Some students said they felt that by posting the triangles, the organizers were labelling those who did not hang the triangles up as intolerant.

And some said that because the February 19 incident is the root of the debate, they did not feel it was appropriate to post the triangles.

"We could compare it to hanging National Rifle Association posters in your window the week after a shooting," said one student.

"This public display is not a good idea at a time when tensions in the house might be high," said Daniel N. Zuckerman '89 in an open letter to house residents.

But members of the gay community continue to say that the debate over the events of February 19 has obscured the real question, which is the extent of homophobia in the house and at Harvard.