Issues of central concern to queer-identified people in communities of color came up in your article on Spectrum (Oct. 24), and I would like to comment on some of those issues. While I understand that reporting always has to simplify in some sense, I do want to emphasize that what Spectrum intends to address is a complex issue and merits some clarification.

First, one of the guiding tenets of Spectrum is the conviction that there are unique circumstances in communities of color that do not mix well with the model of coming out and assuming a public gay identity.

Spectrum is insistently non-doctrinaire about issues of identity-labeling and wants not only to advocate for out people of color but also to be supportive and understanding of the pressures and pleasures of those (whether we know them or not) who choose to remain sexually undefined. To ignore the latter group is to ignore many immensely important concerns such as the correlation of socio-economic privilege and racial background. It is undoubtedly harder to come out when you do not have a trust fund in your name. People have stronger ties in different cultures and communities that are traditionally harder to break with in the name of individualism--not to mention the basic fact that many simply do not wish to come out and are no less deserving of support or attention for that reason.

I mention this in direct response to the definitional assumptions implicit not only in the Crimson article but also in a question asked of me by many well-intentioned Harvard students after the article appeared: Why do you want to further alienate yourself within the Harvard community by claiming separation from both the Bisexual, Gay, Lesbian, Transgendered and Supporters Alliance (BGLTSA) and various ethnic groups?

Let me clarify that Spectrum is not, in any way, separating from the BGLTSA and is, on the contrary, very much in accordance with the BGLTSA's changing outlook toward contemporary sexuality concerns. Likewise, we hope that the various racial and cultural groups on campus understand that Spectrum seeks not separation but complete cooperation in addressing the changing concerns around what it means to have a certain racial or sexual identity. We think those days are thankfully gone when one could easily essentialize what it meant to be a man or woman, straight or gay, white or colored, when, more importantly for Spectrum, who one was became the simple matter of checking off lists in the mutually-independent categories of sex, race, sexual orientation and national origin.

Our hope in forming this organization is to spread awareness of, precisely, a spectrum that stresses not only the importance of color but also the necessity of overlap, where different aspects of who one is do not stand discrete and separated but blend together and harmonize in unique and occasionally wonderful ways. Through discussion and expression, cooperation and protest, this is the purpose that Spectrum intends to serve in the Harvard community. --Nish Saran '98, board member of Spectrum