To the Editors of the Crimson:

Perhaps I did not understand all of what Monica Wittig, lesbian advocate, was saying the other night at the Radcliffe Forum. Clearly enough, Wittig sees men as an oppressor class, women as oppresses. Clearly, too, Wittig believes women should "fight" to break free of oppression, even making use of "military bases."

I believe I heard Wittig say that heterosexuality itself is the source of oppression. Obviously enough, a lesbian's use for males is at best limited, even in reproduction, which these days can be accomplished with minimal male participation.

Nevertheless, one wonders what role mankind might be expected to play in any non-sexist order. Asked what help men might be to the new-woman's cause, Wittig answered, "Not much." Probably true.

But what about individual men? In lashing out at the male oppressor class, will the lesbian movement (whatever it may be construed to be) strike at persons regardless of their individual philosophies or potential?

If Wittig's object is to overcome oppression through heightened consciousness and personal sensitivity regardless of sex, that's one thing. But in setting up a class struggle scenario, any advocate risks prescribing an outcome where either once class of oppressor continues its oppression, or a new class of oppressor takes the reins. Is it possible that under some new system the male role in society could be limited strictly to sperm production?

I personally favor cooperative, educational efforts to improve social realities. --John Northrop, GSE