Crimson Should Not Print Vitriol

I am writing in response to your decision to print the letter by G. Brent McGuire that ran in The Crimson ("Ho, Perspective Are Hypocritical," Nov. 2, 1994), and to warn you to stop prostituting yourselves for the sake of controversy.

McGuire's argument is that even though Perspective editor Derek He was "OSTENSIBLY" criticizing the Philippine Forum for argument's sake, he is really prejudiced against Filipino culture and that Perspective is implicated in his insensitivity. While I expect such idiotic opinions from McGuire and the rest of the Peninsula gang. I had thought that the Crimson would know better than to actually print them.

Let me be clear. "Ostensibly," my ass! In response to the legitimate and expressed concern of the chairs of Philippine Forum, Derek made explicit the intent of his original letter. This intention was, to repeat, to show that David Lat's editorial "Those Happy Homos" was hypocritical in light of Lat's support for Filipino cultural pride. Derek made a public apology for any misunderstanding that may have occurred when readers of his letter failed to make the connection between his ironic language and the real opinions of Lat. He did so while maintaining the integrity of his original point--Lat's inconsistency.

In other words, the issue raised by McGuire was settled previously on the Crimson's own pages. In printing McGuire's letter, your very clear motive was to allow Peninsula to take an unsubstantial cheap shot at Derek and Perspective and thus to evoke a response that would make your newspaper a little more interesting. Well, here's the response. You are a bunch of shameless whores who sold your integrity to a bunch of jerks. You printed a completely unfair attack on a Harvard student who is among the most progressive, sensitive, and understanding people I know. Derek Ho firmly supports the celebration of Filipino culture, and Perspective firmly supports Derek.

My suggestion is that you be a little more selective in what you print. The right to free speech does not imply the obligation to print every piece of trash that comes your way. This includes Lat's original nonsensical column ("Those "Happy Homos," Oct. 18, 1994), the only function of which was to make a few more people a little less happy about being at Harvard. Lat has proved himself capable of valuable insight in the past, as you have proved yourself worthy of your powers as editors in the past. I sincerely hope that all of you start living up to your responsibilities and to your potential. Your desire to remain respectable demands no less. Joshua A. Feltman '95   President, Perspective