The head of a College gay-rights coalition and the leaders of Dartmouth's homosexual students organization yesterday told Trustee Chair E. John Rosenwald that the Reserve Officer Training Corps contradicts the College's statement of equal opportunity.
The Board will decide in April whether President Bill Clinton's partial lifting of the gay ban in the military is sufficient reason to maintain the ROTC program, which the Board has threatened to remove if the gay ban is not lifted by April.
Originally the Trustees had threatened to end the ROTC program by last April but they postponed any action for a year because they said they were optimistic Clinton would lift the ban.
The President's "don't-ask don't-tell" policy does not lift the ban entirely and has further clouded the issue for the Trustees, who are primarily concerned with whether the military policy contradicts Dartmouth's equal opportunity principle.
Rosenwald asked administrative librarian John Crane '69, the co-founder of the Coalition for Gay, Lesbian and Bisexual Concerns, and seniors Trevor Burgess and Shimi Subramaniam, the co-presidents of the Dartmouth Area Gay and Lesbian Organization, to write a letter to the Board explaining their position.
Crane described the meeting with Rosenwald as "informal" because "no one was in a position to make any decisions."
The meeting was arranged at the request of the coalition and DaGlo, Rosenwald said.
"We discussed our views on the disparity between the College's Equal Opportunity Principle and the ROTC program," Crane said.
"It was a very good informational session," Burgess said. "We will continue working with the Board to find a resolution" to the matter.
Last night, as part of an effort to increase community awareness about the issue, the coalition and DaGlo sponsored a panel discussion about the future of ROTC at Dartmouth.
History Professor Annelise Orleck, a coalition member and one of the six panelists, said, "It would be unconscionable to accept the compromise of the Clinton administration" because "to continue to have ROTC on campus is a violation" of the Equal Opportunity Principle that prohibits "discrimination based on sexual orientation."
Burgess, who also sat on the panel, agreed. "The first message that having ROTC here sends to gay students is that there are things 'you are not allowed' to do," he said.
The second message of keeping ROTC under the "don't ask, don't tell" policy is telling homosexuals "to go into the closet and hide what you are," Burgess said.
Subramaniam said the presence of ROTC on campus "is one of the many things that make life difficult for homosexual students here" because it contributes to their feelings of discrimination.
Lawrence Radway, government professor emeritus, opposed this position and expressed his desire to see ROTC maintained at the College.
"In striking against ROTC, such actions may be counterproductive to your cause and to mine," he said. If ROTC were terminated here, Radway said, the focus of such programs would continue to shift away from the Ivy League schools and will move toward "areas where David Duke and the moral majority get support."
According to Radway, this change would prevent better educated individuals from affecting the policies of the military, while serving only to augment existing prejudices.
Master Sgt. Terry Damm, who trains students enrolled in the College's ROTC program, presented the perspective of a military employee who is required to adhere to military policies.
Damm said the point of contention is "homosexuality ... not the people," meaning that homosexuals are permitted to serve, but homosexual "acts cannot be performed in the military."
Damm also explained that commitment to the military "entails accepting restraints of rights and privileges" and surrendering certain freedoms granted to civilians.
Education Professor Andrew Garrod, who served as moderator, said the presentation of the opposing views was the purpose of the panel. "This is not a debate but a consciousness raising opportunity."
Crane said the discussion achieved its objectives. "There was an honest exchange between people with all viewpoints," he said.
Subramaniam said "this was an encouraging panel. At least we got to explore the complexities of the issue."
Though the Coalition and DaGlo have not devised a detailed strategy for future action, Burgess said the groups will submit a letter to the Trustees sometime in November.
"Our hope is that this year there are many opportunities for the community to look at this issue, because actually it is a heterosexual issue as well. We are all in society together. The issue is not about separateness, but rather one of the principle of community," Crane said.
