'Coming Out Dinner' Misrepresented

To the editors:

It is difficult to know how to respond to the curious mlange of misrepresentation, inaccuracy and illogic that characterized "Foolishness on the Right" (Editorial, Dec. 7). The Crimson's thesaurus must have received quite a workout: in the space of a few paragraphs, the sponsors of last week's Conservative Coming Out Dinner are accused of "foolishness," "immaturity," "boorishness," "stupidity" and an "abhorrent disregard for the feelings of other students." Amid the vitriol, a few points warrant response.

First, The Crimson attacks the name of the "Coming Out Dinner," accusing us of mocking homosexuals who reveal themselves to their friends and families. Of course conservatives recognize that many gays find it difficult to "come out." To the extent that the Coming Out Dinner is mocking, however, it is meant to mock only those who feign oppression within the Harvard community, which remains tolerant to a fault.

"Coming out," the editorial goes on to inform us, is not "part of any radical political agenda." One wonders whether The Crimson remembersthe offensive onslaught of obscene and anti-religious posters that marked this October's "National Coming Out Day" celebration at Harvard, when coming out was given an undeniably political meaning. Radical gay activists, it seems, can plaster the Yard with profanity and pornography while avoiding a campus outcry--but when conservatives dare to poke gentle fun at this absurd display, we are accused of intolerance and hate-mongering.

Furthermore, the implication that the dinner was purposefully scheduled to coincide with World AIDS Day is at once silly and offensive. As has been repeatedly stated (in The Crimson's own article covering the dinner, no less) the coincidence was just that--a coincidence, not an intentional slap in the face to the gay community, or for that matter to anyone concerned with or suffering from the disease. Like most Harvard students, we plead ignorance to knowing the date of World AIDS Day. And what is The Crimson implying, anyway--that conservatives favor the spread of AIDS?

The Crimson editorial--along with the accompanying opinion piece by Michael Tan and Nicole Carbellano ("Debating the Meaning of 'Coming Out,'" Opinion, Dec. 7)--exemplifies the overblown rhetoric and name-calling that have replaced reasoned discussion and mutual respect in Harvard campus discourse regarding homosexuality.

Conservatives certainly do not object, as the Crimson staff asserts, to "homosexuals sharing their identity with others." Nor, as Tan and Carbellano outrageously claim, do we "question the validity of [gays'] right to exist." These sorts of groundless attacks echo the slanders of protesters at the Coming Out Dinner, whose posters denounced Ronald Reagan as a "genocidal bigot." There is no place for such puerile theatrics at Harvard.