Decision-Making

Hack in mid-March, when members of the Gay Students Association (GSA) first prepared to go before the Faculty Council to urge that the University adopt a formal policy forbidding discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. GSA officials had reason for optimism.

The student-faculty Committee on Houses and Undergraduate life (CHUL) had recently approved the proposal by a resounding vote of 23-5, with four abstentions. Nine of Harvard's 11 schools--all but the College and the Business school--already had similar non-discrimination statements on their ledgers. And early indications from some of the council's 18 voting members suggested that the proposal had a chance.

But the GSA's hopes, and its five month quest for approval of the proposal, died last week when the council solidly rejected the non-discrimination clause in an informal vote during its fourth meeting to discuss the measure.

The council did, however, decide to issue a statement condemning the harassment that GSA members told the council they often experience on campus.

A week earlier, the council had agreed to require admissions officials to affirm in material sent to potential applicants that it does not discriminate on the basis of sexual preference in admissions. Admissions material already includes such a statement, but until now the director of admissions has been empowered to decide whether to include it.

Those two steps, council members said after the vote, should effectively counteract the twin problems of harassment and insecurity about admissions policy that GSA members cited in meetings with the council.

GSA leaders, however, did not agree, and pledged to step up pressure on administrators.

Charging the council with sidestepping the GSA request because accepting a formal non-discrimination clause might discourage potential alumni contributors. GSA leaders announced plans to distribute at commencement 10,000 copies of a letter urging alumni to withhold contributions until the University accepts the statement.

GSA officials also sent a letter yesterday protesting the decision to Presidents Bok and Horner. Dean Rosovsky, and all council members.

Few council members chose to discuss the decision, which only a handful of members voted against. Council policy strongly discourages members from disclosing details of discussion, and at last week's meeting, several members--including Rosovsky--urged their colleagues to be silent until the statement against harassment is complete.

But several members vigorously denied that possible effects on contributions swayed the council's decision. Several did say, however, that doubts about the legal implications of formally including such a statement may have influenced some members, including Rosovsky.

Even if their Commencement protest fails to bring action. GSA leaders say they'll resume pushing for the proposal in the fall.