Bigotry And Research

To the Editors of the Crimson:

In his recent "Brass Tacks" editorial ("A Question of Tolerance," May 3, 1982). Paul Engelmayer strays from his usually cogent and well-reasoned style. The piece contains a number of factual errors concerning GSA's petition drive in response to the suggestion of E.L. Pattullo (Director, Harvard University Center for the Behavioral Sciences) that homosexuality be eradicated through the application of "negative social pressures" and, in addition, entirely ignores the chilling effect of such views on research in the three departments Pattullo overseas.

First, to correct the factual errors. It is not only GSA members who are upset--alumni, professors, staff, and non-gay students are also concerned and have signed the petition Nor is it true that Pattullo was "clearly speaking as a layman" by signing his title and using the first person plural ("we would think [the discouragement of homosexuality] a good thing"), he suggests that his views reflect the policy of the Center.

Further, in referring to Pattullo's letter as "the divergent views of a lone individual. "Engelmayer overlooks that "lone individual's" oversight of research facilities (so his job description states) in the departments of Sociology. An-thropology, and Psychology and Social Relations. Unfortunately, it is also true that his views are anything but "divergent," as anyone who has dealt with University Hall knows.

In addition, Engelmayer claims GSA sought to "silence [its] critics" and "corner the market of ideas." Perhaps Mr. Engelmayer has not carefully read the GSA petition--its first request is that Pattullo clarify his position, an invitation for further dialogue that Pattullo has not responded to. Nowhere does the petition call for silence. As for Engelmayer's suggestion that the appropriate respond to the Pattullo letter would be for Dean Rosovsky to affirm the Faculty's commitment to diversity--well, this suggestion would seem more aptly directed to the Dean himself.

Far more disturbing than the factual errors is Engelmayer's one-sided discussion of chilling effects. Although he worries that calling for an investigation might inhibit candid discourse. Engelmayer neglects the effects of unchallenged digotry on academic research and personal freedom Given Pattullo's publicly stated anti-gay stance, the past performance of the professions involved, and the case with which support for "negative social pressures" might interfere with professional conduct in running a research center, it is not surprising to find people afraid to be open about their sexual orientation, nor would it be surprising to find people afraid to propose lesbian-or gay-related research.

Doesn't Engelmayer think that someone considering lesbian-or gay-related research would "think twice" (his phrase) before approaching the Center? Might not a researcher wonder if "negative social pressures" would include denying a proposal to study lesbian mothers or alcoholism among gay men? We wonder. We think the threat to academic freedom is made all the more chilling by the failure of responsible administrators to publicly disavow Pattullo's position.

Curiously, Engelmayer would have us excuse Pattullo's bigotry by thanking him for his honesty. This suggestion we reject as thoroughly as we do Pattullo's condescending, pity. Considering the precarious position of lesbian and gay students, research, and teaching--how many gay studies courses are there at Harvard?--Engelmayer's concern would be more justifiably focussed on the chilling effects of unrefuted bigotry than on the pitfalls of discouraging future bigots from revealing themselves. J. French Wall '83   GSA President   Lenathan I. Handel '83   GSA Vice President