Peterson and others in the Bok administration appear to be overly concerned with the possible effects a change in the male-female admissions ratios could have upon alumni contributions. Having taken office in a time when alumni were generally upset with both the students and the administration, the new generation of administrators do not seem to understand several fundamental principles of alumni relations: that alumni see the key to Harvard's greatness as its ability to change and adapt with progress, that they usually defer to those in power, and that their faithfulness to an institution and an ideal cannot be severely altered by any but the most cataclysmic changes.
But if Bok and others in his administration do not understand that the big money supporters of Harvard are far too loyal to be dissuaded from giving because they disagree with a decision that has been judiciously and carefully made, those who actually make the approaches for Harvard and who themselves have shown absolute devotion to Harvard do understand it.
Everyone agrees that if there has been any event over the last half century that could have dissuaded past supporters from keeping up the money flow to Harvard, it was the expulsion of ROTC in 1969. Yet, friends of Harvard--many of whom attended the College as ROTC students--though they may speak bitterly of this affair, generally say that it did not significantly affect the long-term giving patterns of more than a few alumni. The current discussion of sex ratios among the undergraduate population, while a topic of concern for many alumni--especially those with sons nearing college age--does not appear to have created a furor, Schuyler Hollingsworth '40, the new assistant secretary to the Corporation, says. "So far the discussion of sex ratios haven't caused the storm that the events of 1969 caused. As director of the Harvard College Fund in 1969, I spent an inordinate amount of time answering complaint letters. I never have gotten more than one or two letters about ratios," Hollingsworth says.
Traditionally, the alumni at Harvard have preferred to follow the leads set by the administration and support most decisions that are made--even though they may disagree personally. Douglas Mercer '40, former vice chairman of the Harvard College Fund, praises the enormous loyalty of Harvard alumni. "Over the years if the administration went in one direction after careful study, the alums have said 'aye, aye, sir,' even if it might be something that is not in their best interests or desires. The interests of donors have never been a factor in Harvard giving. The supporters of Harvard know that one of the great things about the University is the spirit of pioneering. They maintain a spirit and a desire to give toward progress, even if they might not wholly agree with the changes that are happening," Mercer says.
Mercer also claims that he has never heard the question of changing numbers of men and women seriously discussed as a fundraising issue among his classmates: "If I personally were to write a descriptive letter about the good things going on at Harvard today, this [increasing numbers of women] is one of the things I would affirmatively state. This is not a factor in discouraging giving. I look at the big donors--some of them my friends--and I count them all up as being heavily in favor of more women at Harvard."
Those who prefer to believe that Harvard's alumni will refuse to support an effort to provide equal access for men and women--even if it requires a reduction in men--are hurting, unwittingly, the university they love so dearly. Conant was fond of showing guests to his office the plaque on his desk. "Behold the Turtle. He Maketh Progress Only When His Head Sticketh Out," the plaque read. Harvard's alumni appear to understand better than many administrators that if Harvard is to continue its progressive path, it must discard the myths that have persuaded it to withhold equal access from women.