KANSAN COMMENT
Homosexuality: Understanding
The Lawrence Gay Liberation Front, which recently was refused recognition for the second time, faces a mammoth task.
The goal of the organization and others like it throughout the nation is to promote understanding of homosexuality and to obtain full civil rights for homosexuals in the United States.
Its obstacle: the American public's ignorance, bias and fear.
Researchers only recently have begun to fill the void of knowledge about homosexuality, but many psychologists have been sufficiently impressed with the evidence to urge reform in the attitudes of society and the courts toward the homosexual.
The National Institute of Mental Health, headed by psychologist Evelyn Hooker, states in a report to the federal government:
"The extreme opprobrium that our society has attached to homosexual behavior has done more social harm than good, and goes beyond what is necessary for the maintenance of public order and human decency. Homosexuality presents a major problem for our society, largely because of the amount of injustice and suffering entailed in it, not only for the homosexual but also for those concerned about him."
A similar conclusion was included in the Wolfender report in England three years ago. As a result, in England it is no longer a crime to engage in homosexual acts in the privacy of one's home.
Yet in the United States, the law against what statute books delicately refer to as "the crime against nature" remains rigid, with two exceptions. Illinois passed a law in 1961 permitting homosexual acts between consenting adults. A similar law will become effective in Connecticut in 1971.
In all other states—although it is not illegal to be a homosexual—it is illegal to engage in homosexual acts.
The reasons for the lack of reform are predictable. A Louis Harris poll released late in 1969 showed that 63 per cent of the nation considered homosexuals harmful to American life. Innumerable misconceptions, oversimplifications and irrationalities color the issue.
The majority of American citizens have passed judgment against homosexuals, classifying them as "sick" or "mentally degenerate," even in the face of clinical evidence to the contrary. Psychologists agreed that many of the homosexuals who sought psychiatric care were "sick" mentally. But until researchers began their investigations, little was known about the larger group of homosexuals who did not consult doctors. Studies showed that most of those "secret life" homosexuals were well adjusted and quite happy—or as happy as society and the law would permit.
The laws against homosexual acts suggest that the United States is more concerned with enforcing the private morality of its citizens than with protecting their rights as individuals.
For this reason, most homosexuals—nearly 90 per cent according to one study—are compelled to conceal their homosexuality. If they are "found out," they risk losing their jobs and being censured by a society that is ignorant of the facts of homosexuality. Homosexuals are barred from the armed services and, if discovered while serving, may be dishonorably discharged.
Such discrimination, aside from being a moral injustice, wastes talent that might be working for society. No correlation has reliably been found between homosexuality and productive capability.
The Gay Liberation Front in Lawrence has said its purpose was to promote understanding of the homosexual condition by "informing and enlightening the public about homosexuals and homosexuality" and by "securing for the homosexual as a human being the right to develop
and achieve his full potential and dignity and the right, as a citizen, to make his maximum contribution to the society in which he lives."
The Front's constitution asks that a homosexual have "equality under the law, equality of opportunity and equality in the society of his fellowmen."
Surely those ideals are no less noble, and probably more so, than the ideals of other University organizations.
Saturday's denial of recognition was an unfortunate error by the University's administration in view of the latest information about the homosexual. The administration's position is indefensible unless it reflects pressure from higher forces.
The decision in effect, forces the issue back underground and denies society the enlightenment it needs. To the individuals involved, the decision adds insult to injury.
Franklin Delano Roosevelt said, "Caution is the refuge of cowards." The cautious attitude of the administration reflects a cowardice toward facing the issue squarely. Refusing recognition to the Lawrence Gay Liberation Front will not "wish away" the organization nor will the disappearance of the organization mean the disappearance of homosexuality.
The administration and those who have influenced their decision, must realize that the problem is not so much that of homosexuality in society as it is society's refusal to recognize homosexuality.
Cass Peterson Assistant Editor
WASHINGTON WINDOW
Taming Real Outrage, When Prudence Dissolves
By LOUIS CASSELS UPI Writer
WASHINGTON (UPI)—At more that 2,000 colleges across the nation anxious educators are wondering whether the new academic year that begins this month will be as turbulent as the one that staggered to a conclusion last spring.
Although leery of going on record with flat predictions,
some college administrators hope things may be a little quieter this term.
In support of their cautious optimism, they offer such facts or opinions as these:
Mass outbreaks of violence seem to have an immunizing effect on people directly exposed to their excesses. Students, who witnessed campus destruction and bloodshed last
year, will be reluctant to repeat the experience—just as many urban blacks dread a renewal of ghetto rioting.
A substantial number of students came out of last spring's riots believing they had been manipulated by extreme radicals who deliberately provoked clashes with police and National Guardsmen.
- College administrators
have learned a lot from their own mistakes in handling campus protests. Most now better understand where to draw the line between reasonable concessions and abject surrender and how to deal firmly, but not provocatively, with incidents that might lead to violence.
- Some faculty members who were formerly sympathetic toward student protests are having second thoughts.
This hopeful reasoning seems sound as far as it goes. But it
overlooks one tremendously important consideration.
If President Nixon or the Congress or a governor or university administration outrages students as much as Cambodia did last spring, there will be more trouble—bad trouble—on the campus.
When human beings — whether they are students or black people or hard hat construction workers—are genuinely outraged they are apt to toss prudence to the wind and express their anger irrationally
$ \textcircled{C} $David Sokoloff 1970
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
An All-American college newspaper
Kansan Telephone Numbers
Newsroom--UN 4-4810 Business Office--UN4-4358
Published at the University of Kansas daily during the academic year except holidays and examination periods. Mall subscription rates: $6 a quarter, $10 a year. Second class postage paid at Lawrence, Kan. 66044. Accommodate goods, services and employment advertised offered to all students without regard to color, creed or national origin. Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of Kansas or the State Board of Regents.
... make.